Statements or observations made by a judge in a judgment that are not essential to the decision — they are persuasive but not binding on lower courts, unlike the ratio decidendi.
Explanation
Obiter dicta (Latin: 'things said by the way') are judicial statements that are not part of the necessary legal reasoning for the decision. They may be: (a) hypothetical discussions — 'if the facts had been different, the result might have been X'; (b) analogies and examples used to illustrate a principle; (c) statements about related legal issues not directly in dispute; or (d) general comments on the law that go beyond what was necessary to decide the case. While obiter dicta are not binding on lower courts, they carry persuasive weight — particularly when made by the Supreme Court or a High Court — and are frequently cited and relied upon by courts and lawyers to argue for a particular interpretation.
Statutory Provision
No statutory definition — obiter dicta and ratio decidendi are judicially-created categories. Article 141 Constitution: 'law declared by the Supreme Court' is binding — obiter dicta are not 'law declared' in the binding sense; they are observations accompanying the law. The Supreme Court in <em>State of Orissa v. Sudhansu Sekhar Misra</em> AIR 1968 SC 647 distinguished ratio from obiter: 'The law of India, as declared by the courts, includes both the ratio decidendi and the decisions themselves, but the binding force of the pronouncements of superior courts falls primarily on the ratio decidendi.'
Any act or omission made punishable by any law for the time being in force, including a violation of any order made under such law.
Explanation
An 'offence' under Section 2(20) BNSS 2023 means any act or omission made punishable by any law for the time being in force, and includes any act in respect of which a complaint may be made under Section 20 of the Cattle Trespass Act. The definition is deliberately wide — it covers not only acts prohibited under the BNS and special penal laws but also omissions (failure to act where there is a duty to act). An offence requires both an actus reus (prohibited act) and usually a mens rea (guilty mind), except in strict liability offences.
Statutory Provision
Section 2(20), Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023: 'Offence means any act or omission made punishable by any law for the time being in force and includes any act in respect of which a complaint may be made under Section 20 of the Cattle Trespass Act, 1871.'
The Latin term for the burden of proof — the legal obligation resting on a party to prove the facts they assert, failing which the court will decide against them on that issue.
Explanation
Onus probandi is the Latin expression for 'burden of proving.' In Indian evidence law (Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023), the concept operates at two levels: (a) the general onus under Sections 101-102 BSA — whoever asserts a fact must prove it; and (b) the specific onus in criminal cases — the prosecution bears the burden of proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt, while the accused bears the onus of proving any general exception (Section 105 BSA). The onus may shift during a trial as evidence is adduced — when a prima facie case is established by one party, the evidential burden shifts to the other to rebut it. Distinguished from 'burden of proof' which is the broader term; onus probandi specifically refers to the initial allocation of the burden.
Statutory Provision
Section 101, Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), 2023: 'Whoever desires any Court to give judgment as to any legal right or liability dependent on the existence of facts which he asserts, must prove that those facts exist. When a person is bound to prove the existence of any fact, it is said that the burden of proof lies on that person.' Section 102 BSA: 'The burden of proof in a suit or proceeding lies on that person who would fail if no evidence at all were given on either side.'
A public offer made by an acquirer to all shareholders of a listed company — required under SEBI Takeover Regulations when an acquirer crosses specified shareholding thresholds — to purchase at least 26% of the total shares at a regulated minimum price.
Explanation
An open offer is the mandatory offer triggered under the SEBI Takeover Code when: (a) an acquirer crosses 25% voting rights ('trigger threshold'); (b) a shareholder already above 25% acquires more than 5% in a financial year ('creeping acquisition'); or (c) an acquirer acquires control directly or indirectly. The open offer must be for a minimum of 26% of total share capital. Key procedural steps: Public Announcement (PA) → Detailed Public Statement (DPS) → Escrow deposit (to secure payment) → Tendering period (10 working days) → Payment within 10 working days of tendering closure. During the open offer, the target company's Board is restricted from taking certain defensive actions that would frustrate the offer.
Statutory Provision
Regulation 7(1), SEBI Takeover Regulations, 2011: 'Subject to regulation 8 of these Regulations, the acquirer shall make a public announcement to acquire from all the public shareholders, as of the identified date, at least twenty-six percent of the total shares of the target company as of the tenth working day from the closure of the tendering period, at a price not lower than the price determined in accordance with the provisions of sub-regulation (1) of regulation 8.'
A law promulgated by the President (at the Union level) or Governor (at the State level) when Parliament or the State legislature is not in session, having the same force and effect as a legislative enactment.
Explanation
An ordinance is executive legislation — law made by the executive in the absence of the legislature. Under Article 123, the President may promulgate an ordinance when Parliament is not in session and there is an immediate need for law. Under Article 213, the Governor has the same power for State legislation. An ordinance has the same force and effect as an Act of Parliament, but it is temporary — it must be approved by Parliament within 6 weeks of reassembly or it lapses. The ordinance-making power is not unlimited; it is subject to the same restrictions as legislative power and cannot override the Constitution or fundamental rights.
Statutory Provision
Article 123(1), Constitution of India: 'If at any time, except when both Houses of Parliament are in session, the President is satisfied that circumstances exist which render it necessary for him to take immediate action, he may promulgate such Ordinances as the circumstances appear to him to require.'
The complete bundle of legal rights over a thing—including possession, use, enjoyment, and disposal—to the exclusion of all others.
Explanation
Ownership is the fullest legal relationship between a person and a thing. Salmond defined it as the relation between a person and any right that is vested in him, constituting his ownership of that right. In property law, ownership includes the right to possess, use, enjoy, alienate, destroy, and exclude others. It is protected by law against interference by third parties and even by the state (subject to eminent domain). Ownership may be absolute (complete control) or limited (subject to conditions, encumbrances, or co-ownership).
Statutory Provision
While no single Indian statute defines 'ownership,' the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 treats it as the full complement of rights in property. Section 55(1) imposes on the seller the duty to transfer ownership free of encumbrances. Section 8 provides that transfer of a thing transfers all rights thereto which the transferor has power to transfer.
