CASE COMMENT FACTS Satish, the accused, lived in the same neighborhood as the 12-year-old girl, who is the prosecution’s witness. On December 14, 2016, around 11:30 a.m., the girl went out to pick guavas. She didn’t return for an extended period, prompting her mother, who is the informant, to search for her. A nearby resident …
SATISH S/O BANDU RAGDE VS STATE OF MAH., THR. P.S.O. … ON 19 JANUARY, 2021 Read More »
Equivalent Citations Digambar vs. the State of Maharashtra Date of Judgement 28th April 2023 Court Supreme Court of India Case No. 221-222 Case Type Appeal Appellant Digamber Respondent State of Maharashtra Bench Justice B.R.Gavai Legal Provisions Section 302,34 of the Indian Penal Code, BACKGROUND OF THE CASE Pooja (deceased) was in love with Govind (deceased) …
CASE COMMENT DATE OF THE CASE: 15th December, 2020 APPELLANT: Smt. S. Vanitha RESPONDENT: The Deputy Commissioner BENCH/JUDGES: Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud (J), Indu Malhotra (J), Indira Banerjee (J) LEGAL PROVISIONS: Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and The Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 CIVIL APPEAL NO.: 3822/2020 …
SMT. S. VANITHA v. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU, URBAN DISTRICT & ORS. Read More »
COURT: Supreme Court of India DATE OF DECISION: 13 November, 2019 CASE NO.: Civil Appeal no. 10044/2010 FACTS: ISSUE RAISED: CONTENTION The appellants made the following arguments: The respondent made the following claims: RATIONALE: The summary of judgment is as follows: On November 13, 2019, the Hon’ble Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and ruled in …
CENTRAL PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, SUPREME COURT OF INDIA V. SUBHASH CHANDRA AGARWAL Read More »
Date of the Case: May 11, 2023Appellant: Government of NCT of Delhi (National Capital Territory of Delhi)Respondent: Union of IndiaBench: Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud, Justice M.R. Shah, Justice Krishna Murari, Justice Hima Kohli, Justice PS NarasimhaLegal Provisions: Constitution of India, 1949, Article 239, Constitution of India, 1949, Article 239 AACitations: 2023 SCC OnLine …
DATE OF THE CASE– 11th July,2022 APPELLANT- Satender Kumar Antil RESPONDENTS– Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) & Anr. BENCH/JUDGES– Hon’ble Mr Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Hon’ble Mr Justice M.M. Sundresh LEGAL PROVISIONS– S.41, S.41 A and S. 60A of The Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) CIVIL APPEAL NUMBER– 5191 FACTS ISSUE RAISED CONTENTION ON BEHALF …
Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. Read More »
CASE COMMENT: FACTS: In this case, a special leave petition has been brought in the Supreme Court of India. This petition was filed in response to a decree issued by the division of bench of the Madras High Court. That case had been initiated by an AIADMK candidate to investigate the covid 19 guidelines and …
Date – 29/03/2019 Appellant– Pattu Rajan Respondent- State of Tamil Nadu Bench – Justice N.V Ramana, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Indira Banerjee, JJ. Facts: Issue raised 1.Is the conviction of the accused (appellant) by the High Court of Tamil Nadu legally valid or not? 2. Weather Pattu Rajan actually murdered santhakumar or not? Contentions by Appellant …
Bench– Justice Ravindra Bhat and Justice Aravind Kumar Citation – APPEAL 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1089 FACTS The petitioner has filed a case under Article 32 of the Constitution, expressing grievance over the rejection of her application for a Post Graduate medical seat. This rejection took place after she had participated in the NEET (PG) …
Name of the Parties: Facts of the Case: Siva Industries had acquired shares of TATA Sons between years 1961 to 2001. In 2017, TATA Sons underwent a scheme of arrangement to convert from a public limited company to a private limited company. Siva Industries challenged this conversion. TATA Sons Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as …
Citation: 2022 SCC OnLine SC 704 Appellant: Budhadev Karmaskar Respondent: State of West Bengal Bench: Justices L. Nageswara Rao, B.R Gavai and A.S Bopanna Introduction In India sex work is considered to be a despicable profession and it is stigmatized by society. Despite the fact that every individual in India has right to life and …
Case Comment: Budhadev Karmaskar v. State of West Bengal and Ors. Read More »
Case: In Re Prashant Bhushan & Anr. (2020) Case Type: Suo Moto Criminal Proceeding Bench: B.R. Gavai J, Krishna Murari J, Arun Mishra J Citation: SCM (CRL.) No.000001 -/2020 FACTS OF THE CASE The case started when Prashant Bhushan made two tweets in June 2020 that were critical of the Indian judiciary. In one tweet, …
CITATION – Civil Appeal No. 7598 of 2021 DATE OF JUDGMENT- 11-07-2022 PETITONER- Satendra KumarAntil RESPONDENT- CBI BENCH– Justice Sanjay kishankauland Justice M.M Sundresh INTRODUCTION In accordance with Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a probe is finished when the investigative agency presents its final conclusions to the court once the police report …
SATENDER KUMAR ANTIL VS CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Read More »
DATE OF THE CASE: 12 February, 2020 APPELLANT: Shruti Vora RESPONDENTS: Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) BENCH/JUDGES: Justice M.T. Joshi, Dr. C.K.G Nair, Justice Tarun Agarwala LEGAL PROVISIONS: SEBI Act, 1992, SEBI (PIT) Regulation, 2015. APPEAL NO: 28 of 2020. FACTS OF THE CASE: ISSUES RAISED CONTENTIONS ASSERTION OF THE ADJUDICATING OFFICER ASSERTION …
Shruti Vohra vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India Read More »
Court: Hon’ble Supreme Court of India Date of the Case: May 28, 2021 Appeal Nos.: 17351736 of 2010 Appellant: Satbir Singh and Another Respondent: State of Haryana Bench/ Judge: N.V. Ramana (CJI), Aniruddha Bose, Surya Kant Facts of the Cases Issues Raised Contention on behalf of Appellant The appellant’s learned senior attorney argued that the …
Satbir Singh & Ors. v. State of Haryana (2021 SCC Online SC 404) Read More »
CITATION – SLP (Crl) No. 1132-1155 of 2022 DATE OF JUDGMENT – 29th July, 2022 COURT – Supreme Court of India APPELLANT – Daxaben RESPONDENT – The State of Gujarat BENCH – Justices Indira Banerjee and V.Ramasubramanian FACTS ISSUES CONTENTION DEFENDANT’S ARGUMENT PLAINTIFF’S ARGUMENT RATIONALE Justices Indira Banerjee and V. Ramasubramanian’s bench stated that inciting …
DATE OF THE CASE: 20 January, 2022 APPELLANT: Arunachala Gounder (Dead) by LRS. RESPONDENT: Ponnusamy and Ors. BENCH/ JUDGES: Justice S. Abdul Nazeer and Justice Krishna Murari LEGAL PROVISIONS: Section 14 and Section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. FACTS: Gurunatha Gounder had two sons, Marappa Gounder and Ramasamy Gounder. In 1938, Marappa Gounder …
CASE: ARUNACHALA GOUNDER (DEAD) BY LRS. V. PONNUSAMY AND ORS. (2022 SCC ONLINE SC 72) Read More »
CASE COMMENTARY Appellant: State of Jharkhand Respondent: Shailendra Kumar Rai Court: Supreme Court of India Criminal Appeal No. 1441 of 2022 Bench: Hon’ble Justice DY Chandrachud and Hon’ble Justice Hima Kohli Date decided: 31st October 2022 FACTS OF THE CASE The facts of this case were a dying declaration from the victim. The respondent raped …
CASE COMMENTARY CITATION: Criminal appeal no. 135/2010 DATE OF THE CASE: February 28, 2022 APPELLANT: Budhadev Karmaskar RESPONDENT: State of West Bengal BENCH/JUDGES: Justices L. Nageswara Rao, B.R. Gavai, and A.S Bopanna LEGAL PROVISIONS: Article 21 of The Constitution of India, 1949, Section 164 of CrPC, 1973 FACTS: ISSUES RAISED: CONTENTION: Arguments from the Petitioner’s …
CASE: BUDHADEV KARMASKAR V. STATE OF WEST BENGAL 2022 SCC ONLINE SC 704 Read More »
Citation: 2023 Latest Caselaw 723 SC Bench: Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Sanjay Karol Criminal Appeal No: 1012 of 2022 Date of Judgment: September 13, 2023 Legal Provisions /Acts: Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 436, 452 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of …
Javed Shaukat Ali Qureshi v. State of Gujarat, Supreme Court of India, 2023. Read More »
Introduction Marriage is considered as a scarcement of soul and lives. Among Hindus, marriage is a sacramental union of two people. Marriage is considered as a union by laying down that even death cannot put marriage asunder. A man is considered to be incomplete without his wife and it is the wife who completes him. …
Laxmibai Chandaragi B & Anr. V State Of Karnataka & Ors (2020) Read More »
YEAR OF THE CASE: 9th April 2021 APPELLANT: Farzana Batool and Mohammad Mehdi Waziri RESPONDENTS: Union of India and Others BENCH: Justice Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud and Justice M.R. Shah WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO: 375 of 2021 and 364 of 2021 INTRODUCTION Learning is the path to enlightenment. It encourages a man to grow. It …
Date: 04/03/2020 Court: The Apex Court of India Appellant: Internet and Mobile Association of India Respondent: Reserve Bank of India Judges: Rohinton Fali Nariman, Aniruddha Bose, V. Ramasubramanian Brief Facts: On the 6th of April, 2018, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), the nation’s central banking institution, issued a circular prohibiting RBI-regulated bodies, other individuals, …
Internet and Mobile Association V/s Reserve Bank of India (2020 SCC online SC 275) Read More »
2023 SCC OnLine SC 1129 In the Supreme Court of India (Before S. Ravindra Bhat and Aravind Kumar, JJ.) N. Ramkumar … Appellant Versus State Rep. by Inspector of Police … Respondent Criminal Appeal No. 2006 of 2023 Decided on September 6, 2023 Intention and knowledge are crucial in criminal law, as they focus on …
Case Comment – N. Ramkumar Vs State Rep. by Inspector of Police Read More »
DATE OF THE CASE: 5th January, 2023 PETITIONER/APPLICANT: Tata Sons Private Limited (Formerly Tata Sons Limited) RESPONDENTS: 1. Siva Industries and Holdings Limited 2. Mr C Sivasankaran, a resident of Seychelles BENCH/JUDGES: Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, C.J. and P.S. Narasimha, J. CASE TYPE & NUMBER: Miscellaneous Application No. 2680 of 2019 In Arbitration Case (Civil) …
SUBMITTED BY PAVITHRA K S – 200401417041 BA LLB (Hons.) Alliance University, Alliance School of Law, Bengaluru. FACTS The appellant/accused showed a strong interest in marrying PW1 (the complainant), even though she was already married to Santhkumar. 1.On 01/10/2001, the accused abducted the victim (Santhkumar) and his wife (PW1). There was another related case that …
PATTU RAJAN AND Ors. Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU, 2019 4 SCC 771 Read More »
(Criminal appeal no.98 of 2021) [Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 11616 of 2019] Facts: an unlawful act against a Professor in Kerala following the objectionable questions framed by him in B. Com examination. He was arrested by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) in 2015 since he was a member of Popular Front of India, a fundamentalist group under UAPA (Unlawful Activities Prevention …
Gender equality in India is most desired form, which our nation is craving for since long. Gender equality is no more a moral pressure or social issue but also a social, economic challenge. For overall development of the nation gender equality is very essential. In the era of full of opportunities india lacking in its …
INDIAN YOUNG LAWYERS ASSOCIATION & ORS. VS. THE STATE OF KERALA & ORS [2019 11 SCC 1] Read More »
Date of judgement: 10-01-2020 Petitioner: Anuradha Bhasin Respondent: Union of India and Ors Bench: N.V.Ramana, V.Ramasubramanian INTRODUCTION Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India is a landmark case in Constitutional Law as it ponders in depth into the ambit of Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression. On the eve of abrogation of Article 370, by …
ANURADHA BHASIN V. UNION OF INDIA WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2019 Read More »
Citation: CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3123 of 2020 Facts The case of Dr. Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil v. The Chief Minister centres around the intricate dynamics of India’s reservation policy, particularly concerning the Maratha community. The chronology of events paints a vivid picture: Issues raised The case brought forth these multifaceted issues, highlighting the intricate balance between affirmative action, …
Dr. Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil v. The Chief Minister Read More »
CASE COMMENT: – COURT: – SUPREME COURT OF INDIACASE NO: – Supreme Court Special Leave Petition (SLP) No. 71 of 2022STATE OF MAHARASTRA AND ANOTHER Vs. Dr. MAROTI (2023) Appellant: – The State of Maharashtra and Another Respondent: – Dr. Maroti CITATION: – (2023) 4 SCC 298 Date Of Judgement: – 02/11/2022 Justice Bench: – …
FACTS The ruling and decision made by the knowledgeable single bench of the High Court dismissing the revision petition, which was contested in the current appeal, which was submitted in opposition to the Hon. Session Judge’s order; as a result, they requested a stay of the conviction, which was denied. In 2019, Rahul Gandhi, a …
RAHUL GANDHI V. PURNESH ISHWERBHAI MODI AND ANR 2023 (SC) 598 Read More »
BACKGROUND OF THE CASE FACTS OF THE CASE ISSUES RAISED CONTENTIONS OF PARTIES RATIONALE OF THE CASE INFERENCE FOR THE CASE The Supreme Court issued the following ruling in response to the petition: This ruling serves as a reminder of the role that the media plays as the fourth pillar of democracy. Not only has …
VINOD DUA v. UNION OF INDIA 2021 SCC OnLine SC 414 Read More »
EQUIVALENT CITATIONS AIR SC 1501 DATE OF JUDGEMENT 11th MAY 2023 COURT Supreme Court of India CASE NO. WP(C) 493/2022 CASE TYPE Writ Petition PETITIONER Subhash Desai RESPONDENT Principal secretary governor of Maharastra BENCHJustice ce DY Chandrachud, Justice MR Shah Justice Heema Kolhi, Justice P Narasimah LEGAL PROVISIONS X schedule othe f constitution, Article 238, …
SUBHASH DESAI V. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY GOVERNOR OF MAHARASTRA & ORS. 2022 Read More »
INTRODUCTION AlokTKumarTVerma v.TUnion ofTIndia &TAnr. was a landmark case that dealt with the question of whether the CentralTVigilanceTCommissionT(CVC) and theTUnion ofTIndia had the power to divest theTCentralTBureau ofTInvestigation (CBI)TDirector of hisTpowers andTfunctions withoutTpriorTapproval of theThigh-poweredTcommittee, as mandated by SectionT4B of theTDelhiTSpecialTPoliceTEstablishment (DSPE)TAct,T1946. The case also involved the question of whether theTappointment of M.TNageshwarTRao as …
INTRODUCTION: The case of Novartis AG v Union of India revolves around a dispute over the denial of a patent for a drug called Glivec, which was manufactured by Novartis AG, a multinational pharmaceutical company. The case gained significant attention in India and internationally due to its implications for patent law and pharmaceutical innovation. Novartis …
NOVARTIS AG V UNION OF INDIA AND ORS [2013] 13 SCR 148 Read More »
DATE OF THE CASE: 7 October, 2020 APPELLANT : Amit Sahni RESPONDENTS: Commissioner of police and Ors BENCH/JUDGES : Honorable Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Aniruddha Bose and Krishna Murari LEGAL PROVISIONS : Constitution of India, 1949, Citizenship Amendment act, 2019 CIVIL APPEAL NO: 3282 OF 2020 FACTS ISSUES RAISED CONTENTION ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERS …
Bench – Justice Indu Malhotra and Justice Uday Umesh Lalit Citation- [APPEAL (CIVIL) 5124 OF 2019 (SC)] FACTS LOWER COURTS DECISIONS The Trial Court passed a decree in the favour of the Appellant while upholding that the suit property was ancestral coparcenary property. The appellant was held entitled to joint possession of the suit property …
WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO. 261 of 2020 DATE OF JUDGEMENT: 3.5.23 PETITIONER: BALWANT SINGH RESPONDENT: UNION OF INDIA BENCH: B.R GAVAI, VIKRAM NATH, SANJAY KAROL FACTS[1] This case revolves around the bomb blast that happened in Punjab, which led to the assassination of Chief Minister of Punjab Shri Beant Singh, and the deaths of 16 …
K.C THEATRE V. STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR Civil appeal no 77 of 2023 Dated :23rd January 2023 Court : The Supreme Court of India Case no: C.A No -000077-000077/ 2023 Bench: CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha Petitioners advocate : Abhinav Shrivastava Respondents advocate: Aditya Sharma Judgement by : Hon’ble The Chief Justice …
CASE ANALYSIS PAWAN KUMAR GOEL VERSUS STATE OF U.P. & ANOTHER SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Citation: 2022 Scc Online Sc 1598 Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Krishna Murari, Hon’ble Ms. Justice Bela M. Trivedi Type of Jurisdiction: Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction Advocates for Appellant: Manoj Swarup and Co. Advocates for Respondent: Advs. Vishwa Pal Singh, Shantanu Krishna …
NAME ABHILASHA v. PARKASH & ORS CITATION (2020) 11 S.C.R. 244 BENCH ASHOK BHUSHAN, R. SUBHASH REDDY AND M. R. SHAH, JJ. STATUTES Code of criminal procedure, 1973; Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act,1956 PROVISIONS Section 125- Cr.P.C., Section 20- Hindu adoption and maintenance act FACTS ISSUES CONTENTIONS BY APPELLANT CONTENTIONS BY RESPONDENTS RATIONALE Court referred …
FACTS OF THE CASE The sedition law [Section 124A[1]] has been criticised as a tool of restriction on the freedom of expression. In 2021, this criticism echoed and a petition was filed in the Hon’ble Supreme Court where the constitutional validity of the law was challenged by two journalist- Kishore Wangkhemcha (ISTV channel journalist based …
Case Comments on S.G. Vombatkere v. Union of India Read More »
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO… OF 2023 ARISING OUT OF SLP (Crl.) NO. 8584/2022 KASHIBAI & ORS. ….APPELLANTS VERSUS THE STATE OF KARNATAKA ….RESPONDENT FACTS In the present case, the judgement passed by the Karnataka high court by the Kalaburagi bench in criminal …
Supreme Court of India on 27 Nov 2019 Bench (Judges): Rohinton Fali Nariman, Aniruddha Bose, V. Ramasubramanian INTRODUCTION TO THE CASE FACTS OF THE CASE ISSUES RAISED IN THE CASE CONTENTIONS OF THE LEARNED ADVOCATES CONTENTION BY THE PETITIONERS: CONTENTION FROM THE RESPONDENTS: RATIONALE IN THE CASE DEFECTS OF LAW IN THE CASE INFERENCE DERIVED …
Hindustan Construction Company Ltd vs Union of India Read More »
CASE COMMENT COURT– The Supreme Court of India Criminal Appeals Nos. 1735-36 of 2010 CITATION– 2021 SCC OnLine SC 404 PETITIONER– Satbir Singh and Another RESPONDENTS– State of Haryana BENCH– 2 Judges: Chief Justice NV Ramana and Justice Aniruddha Bose DATE OF JUDGEMENT– 28 May 2021 LEGAL PROVISIONS– Application of Section 304-B of the …
Citation:- CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 98 of 2021 Bench:- JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA, JUSTICE SURYA KANT, JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA BOSE Facts:- In this particular case one Professor named TJ Joseph while framing the question paper of the B.com examination at Newman Collage, Thodupuzha mentioned something objectionable regarding a specific religion. The respondent and other members of the Popular …
CASE COMMENT Date of the Judgement: 27th April 2021 Appellant: Patan Jamal Vali Respondent: The State of Andhra Pradesh Coram: Justices DY Chandrachud and MR Shah Important Section: Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section- 376 & SC ST Act 1989 Section 3(2)(v) INTRODUCTION For women all over the world, the danger of violence is constant and is …
Patan Jamal Vali vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh 2021 JC (SC)2856 Read More »
DATE OF THE CASE: 13 October, 2022 APPELLANT: AISHAT SHIFA RESPONDENT: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS. BENCH/JUDGES: Justice Hemant Gupta and Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia LEGAL PROVISIONS: Article 14, 15, 21, 21-A, 25 in The Constitution Of India 1949 FACTS OF THE CASE: ISSUES RAISED: CONTENTIONS Arguments from the Petitioner’s side: Petitioners initially argued that wearing …
Case Analysis: Aishat Sifha v. State of Karnataka Read More »
(Criminal Appeal No. 2078 of 2023) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 560 Facts: The appellant filed an FIR against four persons. His elder brother, Vikash Panwar had been in an extramarital relationship with Nirma @Gudia who is already married to some other person and also had two children from that wedlock. But parents and parents-in-law of Nirma …
Facts: On January 5, 2022, when the Hon’ble Prime Minister visited Hussainiwala, District Firozpur, State of Punjab, there was a significant delay of about 20 minutes on a flyover, raising concerns about the adequacy of security measures for the Prime Minister’s safety. In response, both the State of Punjab and the Home Ministry initiated separate …
Abstract: Kesvananda Bharti v. State of Kerala[i]is a landmark judgementof Indian legal history that placed limited restrictions to the legislature’s amending powers. It used a balanced approach to the conflict between Article 368 and 13 and introduced the concept of basic structure doctrine. It’s also popularly known as the “Fundamental Rights Case”.[ii] The case provided a meaningful solution and a different …
Kesvananda Bharti v. State of Kerala: A50-year retrospective analysis Read More »
High Court of Allahabad Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 366 SCJudgement Date : 21 Apr 2023Case No : Crl.A. No.-001210-001210 / 2023 At, Supreme Court of India Bench : the honourable Mr. Justice B.R. Gavai & the Honourable Mr. Justice Aravind Kumar Respondent – State of U.P. and Others Appellant – ritu tomar FACTS The marriage of appellant’s …
Date of Judgement- September 15, 2020 Bench- Ashok Bhushan(J), R. Subhash Reddy (J), M.R. Shah (J) Citation:ICL2020(9)SC70 Facts of Cases Issues Raised Contention Argument from the Appellant’s The representative for the appellant argued strongly that Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. does not apply to this case. It is clear that the daughter is not married …
Facts: Over the previous fifteen years, the Supreme Court (SC) has heard a slew of legal cases, including special leave petitions, appeals, and writ petitions. In these cases, several parts of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) were challenged, including their constitutionality. Some of these cases originated as a result of orders issued …
COURT: Supreme Court of India DATE OF JUDGEMENT: 28/10/2021 BENCH: Justice Ajay Rastogi;Justice Abhay S. Oka APPEALLENT: Thwaha Fasal RESPONDANT: Union of India SUBJECT: Terrorism FACTS OF THE CASE: On 1st November 2019 three persons, now known as accused no.1(Allan Shuaib) of 20 years of age; accused no.2(Thwaha Fasal) of the age of 24 years; …
Case Commentary – Thwaha Fasal v Union of India on October 28, 2021 Read More »
APARNA BHAT VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH CITATION: 2021 SCC OnLine SC 230 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.: 329/2021 SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO.: 2531 of 2021 arising out of SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) DIARY NO.: 20318 of 20201 COURT: The Supreme Court of India BENCH: JusticeAM Khanwilkar and Justice S. Ravindra Bhat JUDGEMENT DATED: March 18, …
FACTS OF THE CASE The appellants were either owners or were operating restaurants and bars with the necessary license in an are where orchestra performances were already prevalent. To run orchestra, a licence is required under Licencing and Performance for Public Amusement, including Cabaret Performance, Melas and Tamashas Rule, 1960. The condition laid down in …
Hotel Priya, A Proprietorship Vs State of Maharashtra Read More »
1. Considering subsequent Constitutional Amendments, judicial decisions, and the evolving dynamics of society, there is a compelling argument for referring the Indra Sawhney judgment to a larger bench for a comprehensive review. 2. Does the Maharashtra SEBC Act, 2018 (as amended in 2019), which grants additional reservation of 12% and 13% for the Maratha community …
JAISHRI LAXMANRAO PATIL VS THE CHIEF MINISTER AND ORS. ON 5 MAY, 2021 Read More »
Citation:- Writ Petition (Civil) No. 793 of 2017 Bench:- Chief Justice S.A. Bobde, Justice A.S Bopanna, and Justice V. Ramasubramanian. Facts:- In the case of Mohammad Salimullah v Union Of India, a writ petition was filed before the Honorable Supreme Court Of India to challenge the decision of deporting Rohingya Refugees who have taken refuge …
Mohammad Salimullah and Anr. v Union Of India and Ors. Read More »
X v. Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare, Govt of NCT Delhi COURT: The Supreme Court of India Civil Appeal No 5802 of 2022 (Arising out of SLP (C) No 12612 of 2022) PETITIONER: X RESPONDENT (s): Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare, Govt of NCT Delhi BENCH:: Hon’Ble Dr. Chandrachud, Hon’Ble Ms. Kohli, Pamidighantam …
Case Comment – Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare, Govt of NCT Delhi Read More »
INTRODUCTION The conflict between the three Reliance Companies, recognised names in the Indian telecoms industry, and State Bank of India (SBI), a significant bank in the public sector for the nation, is centred on each party’s financial struggles. These companies, which are an element of the Reliance Group, were established and transformed by Mr. Anil Ambani, who …
RELIANCE COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED VS STATE BANK OF INDIA Read More »
Date of Judgement: June 20, 2023 Bench: Hon’ble Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Hon’ble Justice Manoj Misra Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 12294 of 2023 Facts of the Case: Issues Raised Based on the issues raised by both the parties, the following legal questions were formed: Contention Arguments by the Appellants: Arguments by the Respondents: Rationale …
Case: The State of West Bengal and Ors. v. Suvendu Adhikari and Ors. Read More »
DATE OF CASE: 29-03-2019 APPELLANT: Pattu Rajan RESPONDENT: State of Tamil Nadu BENCH / JUDGES: Justice N. V. Ramana, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Indira Banerjee, JJ. LEGAL PROVISIONS: FACTS ISSUE RAISED Is the conviction of the accused (appellant) by the High Court of T.N. Legally valid? CONTENTION BY APPELLANT 1. The appellants argued that the High …