INTRODUCTION Covid 19 affected the whole world adversely. Every country tried its maximum to fight against the disease but almost every country suffered a lot from its effects. Different methods and procedures were tried to reduce its impact which includes maintaining social distancing, personal hygiene, awareness classes, vaccines, improving hospital facilities, welcoming more youth for …
FACTS On October 14, 2020, petitioner No. 1 in this matter, Ms. Laxmibai Chandaragi, disappeared from her residence. When she went missing, her father reported her as missing in a First Information Report (FIR). Parents’ and relatives’ statements were recorded by the investigating officer. Santosh Singh Yadav, petitioner number 2, was identified by information found …
Laxmibai Chandaragi & Anr. V. The State of Karnataka & Ors Read More »
Citation: Civil Appeal No. Diary No. 32601 of 2018[1] Decided on August 11, 2020. Bench: Arun Mishra, S.Abdul Nazeer and M.R. Shah J.J. FACTS Smt.Vineeta Sharma, the plaintiff/appellant (hereinafter Plaintiff), filed the suit that gave rise to the appeal against her two brothers, Mr. Rakesh Sharma, Defendant No. 1, Mr. Satyendra Sharma, Defendant No. …
Case Name Manoharan vs State by Inspector of Police (2019) Equivalent Citation 7 SCC 716 Date Of Judgement 7 November, 2019 Petitioner Manoharan Respondents State by Inspector of PoliceVariety Hall Police Station, Coimbatore Bench Rohinton Fali Nariman, Sanjiv Khanna, Surya Kant Statutes Referred Sections 120-B, 364-A, 376, 302, 324 of the Indian …
Manoharan vs State by Inspector of Police (2019) 7 SCC 716 Read More »
AIR 1965 All 349 1. Facts The case revolves around Keshav Singh, a Gorakhpur resident who used to work for the socialist party. One day he and his two friends published a pamphlet which was against the Congress MLA, Narsingh Narain Pandey. The pamphlet circulated all over the region defamed Narsingh Narain and labelled him …
Facts: “This matter connects with the topic of General media recording u/s 161 Cr.P.C.”Furthermore, proclamations under section 161(3)[1] wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has constantly attempted to lessen the instances of custodial violence and keep away from abuse of abilities given to police work force. In the question of D.K. Basu vs. State …
Case Comment – Paramvir Singh Saini V. Baljit Singh, 2020 Read More »
Court – Supreme Court Citation – AIR 2020 SC 415 Appellant – Surinder Singh Deswal Respondent – Virender Gandhi Bench – Justice Ashok Bhushan, Justice M.R.Shah FACTS The appellants were partners at Bhoomi Infrastructure Co., now GLM Infratech Private Limited, when it was in business. The appellant issued a cheque to respondent No. 1 on …
Surinder Singh Deswal & Ors. V/s Virender Gandhi & Anr. Read More »
Case Caption. Google LLC and Another —————————————–Appellants. Competition Commission of India and Others——————Respondents. Case Number. Civil Appeal Number 229 of 2023. Case Citation. 2023 SC 88. Bench Hon’ble Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, Justice Narsimha and Justice J.J. Pardiwala. Introduction. A market is said to run in a free and fare manner when there exists competition …
Citation: (2019) 9 SCC 1 Appellant: M. Siddiq (D) Thr. LRs. Respondent: Mahant Suresh Das & Ors. Bench: Hon’ble Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Hon’ble Justice Sharad Arvind Bobde, Hon’ble Justice Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, Hon’ble Justice Ashok Bhushan, Hon’ble Justice S. Abdul Nazeer Order Date: November 9, 2019 Facts: 1. The dispute centered around a site …
Title: M. Siddiq (D) Thr. LRs. v. Mahant Suresh Das & Ors. Read More »
Introduction: The Manoharlal Sharma v. Narendra Damodardas Modi & Others case is a notable legal issue that captured the public’s interest and brought up fundamental issues with relation to constitutional law, political accountability, and the authority of elected officials. Manohar Lal, a citizen, was pitted against Narendra Modi, the Indian Prime Minister at the time, …
Manoharlal Sharma v. Narendra Damodardas Modi & Others Read More »
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 980 OF 2019 Decided on 4 March 2021 Supreme Court Bench: Hon`ble Justice A.M Khanwilkar, Hon`ble Justice Dinesh Maheshwari & Hon`ble Justice C.T. Ravikumar Facts: This case revolved with the same subject matter as dealt in the holding of N Krishna Murthy Vs. Union of India, which laud down that the …
CASE COMMENTARY – Vikas Kishanrao Gawali vs The State of Maharashtra Read More »
Bench : Justice Hima Kohli and CJI D.Y.Chandrachud Case No. : Criminal Appeal No.1441 of 2022 Appellant : State of Jharkhand Respondent: Shailendra Kumar Rai @ Pandav Rai Appellant’s Advocate : Madhusmita Bora Court: Supreme court of IndiaJurisdiction: Criminal appellate Judgment Date : 31 october, 2022 Facts of the case ISSUES CONTENTIONS Based on a …
CASE NAME- “M Siddiq (D) Thr Lrs v. Mahant Suresh Das & Ors” COURT- SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DECIDED- 9TH NOVEMBER, 2019 APPEALED FROM- ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT JUDGES – Ranjan Gogoi (CJI), Sharad Arvind Bobde, DY Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan, S. Abdul Nazeer CITATION- CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10866-10867 OF 2010. Appellant – “M Siddiq (D) Thr …
In the Supreme Court of India Civil Original Jurisdiction Citation- Civil Appeal No(s). 4987 of 2022 Appellant- Rohith Thammana Gowda Respondent- State of Karnataka & Ors. Bench- A.M. Khanwilkar, C.T. Ravikumar Facts In this case, Rohith Thammana Gowda, who is the father of the child for whose custody case is being fought, wants …
Case: – Rohith Thammana Gowda Vs. State of Karnataka & Ors. Read More »
CASE COMMENT M SIDDIQ (D) THR LRS. VS MAHANT SURESH DAS & ORS. Equivalent Citation: 2020-1 SCC 1 Date of Judgement: November 9, 2019 Case Number: 10866-10867 of 2010 Petitioner: M Siddiq (deceased) Respondent: Mahant Suresh Das & Ors[1] FACTS This case, which has one of the earliest beginnings in the background of the Indian …
M SIDDIQ (D) THR LRS. VS MAHANT SURESH DAS & ORS. Read More »
SUPREME COURT OF INDIACIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTIONWRIT PETITION(C) No.682 OF 2021 PETITIONER: SG VOMBATKERE RESPONDENT: Union of India DATE OF DECISION: 11 May 2022 BENCH: 3 judge bench constituted by Hon’ble CJI NV Ramana, Ms. Justice Hima Kohli, Mr. Justice Surya Kant LEGAL PROVISION: Section124Aof Indian Penal Code 1860 (IPC) INTRODUCTION :- The case deals with …
Case Comment Court: Supreme Court of India Equivalent Citation: 2022 SCC Online SC 1494 Criminal Appeal: 1441 of 2022 Appellant: The State of Jharkhand Respondent: Shailendra Kumar Rai @ Pandav Rai Date of Judgment: 31st October, 2022 Bench: Dr D.Y Chandrachud and Hima Kohli FACTS According to the prosecution’s case, on the afternoon of November 7, 2004, the …
(2022) 8 SCC 352 Civil Appeal No. 4633 of 2021 FACTS: The appellant company VIPL is an electricity generating company registered under section2(28) of the Electricity Act, 2003. The company has setup a 600 MW coal fired thermal power plant in Nagpur area. VIPL was awarded the contract for the implementation of the Group Power …
AIR (2019) 4 SCC 17 University of Petroleum & Energy Studies Facts Under the careful eye of the Supreme Court, a few writ petitions and exceptional leave petitions were filed in an effort to scrutinise the sacred legality of several Code provisions. The judgement did not take into account the unique circumstances of any case …
This Legal case commentary focuses on Olga Tellis and Ors. Vs. Bombay Municipal Corporation and Ors[i] (“Olga Tellis”). It focuses on specific legal issues regarding Article 21, the constitutional validity of some provisions in the BMC Act, 1888, the right to livelihood, and the validity of the rule of estoppel followed by the conclusion and …
Case Brief of Olga Tellis and Ors. Vs. Bombay Municipal Corporation and Ors. Read More »
Court: The Supreme Court of India Suit Type: T.P.(C) 1249-1250/2020 Petitioner: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay; Shahida Quraishi Respondent: Union of India Bench: Hon’ble Justice D.Y. Chandrachud (CJI), Hon’ble Justice P.S. Narasimha, Hon’ble Justice J.B. Pardiwala Petition Filed on: October 26th, 2020 Last Hearing: February 20th, 2023 Legal Provisions: Facts of the Case: In the case of …
——————————————————————————————————————————————- Case Brief ——————————————————————————————————————————————- The petitioner is permanent resident of Delhi, originally from Manipur. B.A graduate having 5 younger siblings and farmer parents. The petitioner had consensual relationship and conceived pregnancy of single intrauterine which came to her knowledge on June 5, 2020 having near to Twenty-Two weeks term completed. The Petitioner was looking for …
Appellants : DAV College Trust and Management Society & Ors. Respondents: Director of Public Instructions Court : Supreme Court of India Bench: Deepak Gupta , Aniruddha Bose Citation : (2019) 9 SCC 185 Date of Judgment: September 17, 2019 INTRODUCTION: Right to Information act,2005 was enacted for providing transparency to people in their social life …
CASE: DAV College Trust and Management Society & Ors. Vs. Director of Public Instruction Read More »
Court: Hon’ble Supreme Court of India Date: October 13, 2022 Judges: Justice Hemant Gupta and Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia FACTS: The Karnataka Education Act, 1983 passed by government of Karnataka, specifies that all student studying in schools and colleges within the state ought to conduct themselves in brotherly manner, outstrip their group identity and enlarge inclinations …
PETITIONER- The Animal Welfare Board of India & Ors RESPONDENT- Union of India & ANR DECIDED ON- 18th May, 2023 BENCH- K.M. Joseph, Ajay Rastogi, Aniruddha Bose, Hrishikesh Roy, C.T Ravikumar FACTS Jallikattu, a bull-taming sport in Tamil Nadu, and bullock cart racing in Maharashtra were deemed unlawful by the Apex court in the case …
Case Comment Citation(s): AIR 2020 SC 3717, (2020) 9 SCC 1 Date of the case: 11 August, 2020 Appellant: Vineeta Sharma Respondent: Rakesh Sharma & Ors. Bench/Judges: Justice Arun Mishra, Justice S. Abdul Nazeer and Justice M.R. Shah Legal Provisions: Hindu Succession Act (30 of 1956) S.6(1)(a), Proviso, Expln.1 (as amended by Act 39 of …
INTRODUCTION: One can safely assume that the menace of money laundering has been prevalent ever since the origin of money, such is the nature of a crime itself. It takes its first breath as soon as society lets it. In India and almost every other country, money laundering has been responsible for plaguing the state’s …
Case Comment: “Vijay Madanlal Choudhary Vs Union Of India”Judgment-27th July 2022 Read More »
Case Comment: “Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil v Chief Minister, Maharashtra” Writ Petition ( civil) No. 3123 of 2020; LL 2021 SC 243. Introduction The Maratha Community constitutes a significant percentage of Maharashtra population and has long been demanding reservation in employment and education. The government, acknowledging their demands, provided a 16% quota in the state’s …
Case Comment: “Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil v Chief Minister, Maharashtra” Read More »
Judgment date: 15 June 2023 Citation Criminal appeal No. 1089 of 2011 Bench: V. Ramasubramanian, Pankaj Mithal MOHD.MUSLIM …………………………………………………APPELLANT STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH (NOW UTTARAKHAND) ……RESPONDENT Mr. Prafulla Kumar Behera, ……… learned advocate for APPELLANT Mr. Jatinder Kumar Bhatia, ……… learned Advocate-on-Record for RESPONDENT. Statutes & Provisions referred – Introduction: In the murder case of …
CASE COMMENT: Mohd. Muslim vs State Of Uttar Pradesh Read More »
Abstract The Indian Constitution is said to be the supreme law of the land, which enshrines the separation of power between the executive, legislature and the judiciary. The constitution of India also gives the judiciary its independence from the other two powers, executive and the legislative. It is hence considered that the judges appointment in …
ANALYZING THE JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS: NJAC VS. COLLEGIUM SYSTEM IN INDIA Read More »
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.793 OF 2017 Date of Judgement: 08-04-2021 Petitioner: MOHAMMAD SALIMULLAH AND ANR. Respondent: UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Bench: Chief Justice S.A. Bobde, Justice A.S Bopanna, and Justice V. Ramasubramanian. INTRODUCTION The rights of Rohingya refugees in India, as well as their imprisonment and probable deportation, are at the centre of the …
MOHAMMAD SALIMULLAH AND ANR v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Read More »
Writ petition (civil) no.961 of 2018 decided on December the 3rd, 2020 INTRODUCTION Throughout history, gambling has been a widespread activity with roots dating back to ancient times. The earliest known evidence of gambling can be traced to China’s ancient civilization, where the first form of gaming originated. References to a wooden drawing in the …
Case Comment: “Skill Lotto Solutions Pvt. Ltd. V Union of India” Read More »
Facts of the Case Issues Raised Contentions of the Parties Rationale Decree Passed: The court was pleased to pass a decree of damages and costs in favour of the plaintiff to the tune of Rs2 million (US$28,100) jointly and severally against the defendants. Defects of Law The functionality doctrine’s subjective nature raises problems regarding its …
FACTS The current case was brought against Budhadev Karmaskar [the appellant] in the form of criminal proceedings for the atrocious murder of a prostitute who had refused to have sex with him. The case was concluded by the Calcutta High Court [HC] in 2004 when it issued a ruling declaring the appellant guilty of murder. …
BUDHADEV KARMASKAR V STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS 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 »
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 373 of 2006[1] Petitioner: Indian Young Lawyers Association Respondent: State of Kerala Pandalam Royal Family Chief Thanthri Travancore Devaswom Board Bench: Justice Rohintan Nariman, Justice A.N.Khanwilkar, Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, Justice Deepak Mishra, Justice Indu Malhotra Facts 1. In 1990, a plea was submitted to the Kerala High Court seeking a prohibition …
INDIAN YOUNG LAWYERS ASSOCIATION V. STATE OF KERALA Read More »
(Demonetization Case) COURT: The Supreme Court of India Writ petition (Civil) No. 906 of 2016 PETITIONER: Vivek Narayan Sharma RESPONDENT: Union of India BENCH: BR Gavai, S.A. Nazeer, A.S. Bopanna, V. Ramasubramaniam, BV Nagarathna DATE OF THE CASE: 2nd January, 2023 LEGAL PROVISIONS: Section 26(2) of the RBI Act, 1934[1] FACTS OF THE CASE: The …
Freedom of the press relating to Court proceedings IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Date of the judgement: 6 May 2021 Judge: Hon’ble Justice Chandrachud and Justice M.R. Shah Facts of the case • The AIADMK candidate in the Karur Legislative Assembly constituency, who is also the district secretary, has approached the …
The Chief Election Commissioner of India v. MR Vijaya Bhaskar Read More »
ABSTRACT Same -sex marriage is a new dimension of social realities in ,the Indian society which requires the attention of public at large. Homosexuality is a concept which is continued right from the Vedic period and was having a social acceptance until section 377 of the Indian Penal Code was introduced which made the …
Citation: Criminal Appeal No(s).135/2010 Appellate : Budhadev Karmaskar Respondent : State of West Bengal Bench/Judge : Justices L. Nageswara Rao, B.R. Gavai and A.S. Bopanna Abstract The heinous murder of a sex worker in the case of Budhadev Karmaskar v. State of West Bengal (supra) has paved a way for the struggles of sex workers …
Recognising Sex Work as a Profession – Budhadev Karmaskar v. State of West Bengal (2022) Read More »
DATE OF THE CASE: 22nd April, 2019 APPELLANTS: Arun Kumar, Srija RESPONDENTS: The Inspector General of Registration, the District Registrar of Tuticorin, the Joint Registrar No. II. BENCH/JUDGES: The Honourable Mr. Justice G. R. Swaminathan LEGAL PROVISIONS: The Constitution of India, 1949 (Articles 14, 19(1)(a), 21, 25, 39(f), 226), the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (Section …
ARUN KUMAR AND ANOTHER V. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION AND OTHERS Read More »
FACTS OF THE CASE The petitioner in this case is the Indian Young Lawyers Association, and the respondent is the State of Kerala. The case involves a clash between traditional religious practices and the constitutional rights of women. The historical background of the Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala case can be traced …
Indian Young Lawyers Association & Ors. v. The State of Kerala & Ors. (2018) Read More »
FACTS The current case was brought against Budhadev Karmaskar [the appellant] in the form of criminal proceedings for the atrocious murder of a prostitute who had refused to have sex with him. The case was concluded by the Calcutta High Court [HC] in 2004 when it issued a ruling declaring the appellant guilty of murder. …
BUDHADEV KARMASKAR V STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS Read More »
Facts On January 25, 2012, Santosh Maruti Mane, a private travel business bus driver, hijacked the vehicle he was driving in Pune, Maharashtra. Mane drove the bus for more than 50 kilometres, disobeying traffic lights and colliding with automobiles along the route. Mane’s careless driving killed nine people and wounded 37 more. Mane was finally …
Court: The Supreme Court of India Criminal Appeal No. 1441 of 2022 Appellant: State of Jharkhand Respondent: Shailendra Kumar Rai Bench: Hon’ble Justice D.Y. Chandrachud and Hon’ble Justice Hima Kohli Date Decided: 31st October, 2022 Facts of the Case From the dying declaration given by the deceased victim, the facts of this case were admitted. …
Case Comment – State of Jharkhand V. Shailendra Kumar Rai Read More »
Facts: Issues Raised: Contentions: Petitioner: Respondent: Rationale: Overall, the Supreme Court upheld the validity of the Rafale deal and dismissed the petitions seeking a probe into the procurement process, holding that there was no evidence of wrongdoing or irregularities in the decision-making process. The court emphasised that judicial review of a procurement decision is limited …
Introduction: Women have been denied many fundamental rights like- right to education, right to equality for a long period. In ancient times, no rights of women were considered. Though the time, the society, the period, the laws has changed, there is still need of reform in validating women rights. Nowadays, the situation for women has …
PETITIONER: ANURADHA BHASIN AND ORS. RESPONDENT: UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Bench: Hon’ble Justice N.V Ramana, Hon’ble Justice R. Subhash Reddy, and Hon’ble Justice B.R. Gavai INTRODUCTION: FACTS On August 4, 2019, all Internet communications were suspended in Jammu and Kashmir. The Government implemented a total blackout of communications, which included the suspension of landline, …
Anuradha Bhasin vs Union Of India (AIR 2020 SC 1308) Read More »
DATE OF THE CASE: 7th November 2022 APPELLANT: Janhit Abhiyan Akhil Bhartiya Kushwaha Mahasabha; Youth for Equality; SC/ST Agricultural Research and Education Employees Welfare Association; People’s Party of India(Democratic). RESPONDENT: Union of India; Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment; The State of Maharashtra; Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances, and Pensions. BENCH/ JUDGES: U.U. Lalit CJI, …
DATE OF THE CASE: 10 January, 2020 APPEALLANT: Ms. Anuradha Bhasin RESPONDENT: Mr. K.K. Venugopal, learned Attorney General for Union of India and Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General for the State of Jammu and Kashmir[i] BENCH/JUDGES: N.V. Ramana, V. Rama Subramanian LEGAL PROVISIONS: Constitution of India: Article 19(1)(a) Article 19(1)(g) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: …
FACTS The state of Kerala had started the construction of Kallada Irrigation Project in the year 1961.World Bank was financially aiding Kerala government on this project from June 1982 to March 1989. As required by the world bank, a special condition namely, the local competitive bidding specification (LCBS) as envisaged by the world bank authorities …
The Secretary to Government of Kerala vs. James Varghese Read More »
FACTS In this case Sh. Dev Dutt Sharma (Father) had three sons, a daughter and a wife. He expired on 11th December 1999. And one of his sons expired on 1st July 2001 who was unmarried. And then the daughter Ms Vineeta Sharma (Appellant) claimed for 1/4th share in her father’s property by filing a …
Petitioner: Common Cause ‘A’ Registered Society, etc Respondent: Union of India (UOI) and OR’s. Court: The Supreme Court of India Bench: Justice Dipak Mishra and Justice A.M Khanwilkar Decided on: 9 March 2018 Case No: Writ Petition (Civil) No. 215 of 2005 Equivalent Citations: 2014 AIR SC 1556 and 2014 SCC 5 338 FACTS OF …
FACTS In this case Sh. Dev Dutt Sharma (Father) had three sons, a daughter and a wife. He expired on 11th December 1999. And one of his sons expired on 1st July 2001 who was unmarried. And then the daughter Ms Vineeta Sharma (Appellant) claimed for 1/4th share in her father’s property by filing a …
Petitioner: Common Cause ‘A’ Registered Society, etc Respondent: Union of India (UOI) and OR’s. Court: The Supreme Court of India Bench: Justice Dipak Mishra and Justice A.M Khanwilkar Decided on: 9 March 2018 Case No: Writ Petition (Civil) No. 215 of 2005 Equivalent Citations: 2014 AIR SC 1556 and 2014 SCC 5 338 FACTS OF …
INTRODUCTION Dr. Siddaraju, a non-KAS cadre officer with a handicap, filed the petition. According to U.O. Note dated 02.04.2014, the Department of Personnel & Administrative Reforms of the Government of Karnataka announced six positions for promotion to the IAS, Karnataka Cadre for non-KAS officers without allocating three percent of the positions to people with disabilities …
Facts of the case “When historians in the future look back at the last 6 years to see how democracy has been destroyed in India even without a formal Emergency, On June 27, 2020, lawyer Prashant Bhushan twitter, “They will specifically mark the role of the Supreme Court in this catastrophe & more notably the …
Petitioner: Rambabu Singh Thakur v/s Respondent: Sunil Arora & OrsJudgment dated on: 13th February, 2020 – Bench: Hon’ble Justice R.F. Nariman, Hon’ble Justice S. Ravindra Bhat & Hon’ble Justice V. Ramasubramanian. Brief facts of the case In this case, the Supreme Court of India noted that the number of criminal politicians in India has increased …
DATE OF THE CASE: 20 July, 2021 APPELLANT: L. Raghumani Singh RESPONDENT: District Magistrate, Imphal West District, Manipur and Ans. BENCH/JUDGES: Justice D.Y. Chandrachud Justice M.R. Shah LEGAL PROVISIONS: The Constitution of India, 1949 (Article 21), The National Security Act, 1980 FACTS: Leichombam, a Manipuri activist was apprehended by the police on May 13, 2021 …
CASE: L. RAGHUMANI V. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE IMPHAL WEST DISTRICT MANIPUR.[1] Read More »
SCC ONLINE SC 660 (Criminal Appeal No.940-941 0f 2021) Facts- Gumansingh solemnized marriage with Tahera (deceased) on the date 27/04/1997, after that deceased was residing with GumanSingh and his family which includes his mother as well. Guman Singh was continuously asking his deceased wife about 25000/-rupees to bring from her father. GumanSingh wants to do …
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA GUMAN SINGH Vs STATE OF GUJRAT (2021) Read More »
Case Comment Court: Supreme Court of India Criminal Appeal No. 1919 of 2010 Appellant – Anversinh @ Kiransinh Fatesinh Zala Respondent – State of Gujarat Bench: N.V. Ramana, Surya Kant, Aniruddha Bose Decided on – 12 January, 2021 Facts: The complainant Kiransinh (PW1) when came back from work on the night of 14 May, …
Anversinh @ Kiransinh Fatesinh VS. State of Gujarat Read More »
CASE NO – Writ Petition (criminal) no – 102 of 2007 COURT – Supreme Court of India CORUM – Hon’ble Justice Madan B. Lokur and Hon’ble Justice Deepak Gupta. DATE OF JUDGEMENT – May 5, 2017. INTRODUCTION – Annually, scandals at orphanages in India have disclosed how orphan’s institutions are run. The workers at these …
Re Exploitation of children in orphanages in State of Tamil Nadu v/s Union of India Read More »
1. Facts 1-2 2. Issues raised 2 3. Contention 2-3 4. Rationale 3-4 5. Defects of law 4-5 6. Inference 5 Review of — Stephen L. Thaler [2021] APO 5 Date of judgement – 30 July 2021 Judgement of – BEACH J FACTS BETWEEN : STEPHEN THALER …
FACTS: A juvenile ‘X’, aged 16 to 18, is accused of committing an offense punishable under section 304 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), which carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment or up to ten years in prison and a fine in the first part and up to ten years in prison and …
SHILPA MITTAL V. STATE OF NCT DELHI AND ORS. (2020) Read More »