Case BriefsHigh Courts

Bombay High Court: G.S. Kulkarni, J., addressed an ordeal of a senior citizen who would be soon in her nineties and was

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Bombay High Court:  Division Bench of V.K. Jadhav and Shrikant D. Kulkarni, JJ., addressed a case of ‘Honour Killing’ by a brother

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Bombay High Court: Shrikant D. Kulkarni, J., decides whether the trial court’s decision mentioning the wrong provision pertaining to maintenance to the

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Bombay High Court: Division Bench of M.S. Sonal and Pushpa V. Ganediwala, JJ., quashed the charges of abetment of suicide and other offences

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Bombay High Court: The Division Bench of G.S. Patel and Madhav J. Jamdar, JJ., considered petitions which raised questions about the interpretation

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Bombay High Court, Bench at Aurangabad: Vibha Kankanwadi, J., while addressing a matter revolving around the property, observed that, Article 254 of

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Bombay High Court: While addressing a matter, Mangesh S. Patil, J., laid down significant aspects with regard to when a petition can

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Bombay High Court: Sandeep K. Shinde, J., dismissed a revision petition filed against the order of the lower court refusing to discharge

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Bombay High Court: Sandeep K. Shinde, J., held that an aggrieved person cannot choose to file a petition under Section 12 of

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Bombay High Court: Noting in case after case, complaints from senior citizens that their own sons and daughters are harassing them, Division

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Bombay High Court: A Division Bench of Sadhana S. Jadhav and Prithviraj K. Chavan, JJ. confirmed the death sentence awarded by the

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Bombay High Court: Sandeep K. Shinde, J., explained as to when a charge in the alternative can be framed against an accused

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Bombay High Court: While laying down the detailed reasons of bail in the infamous Aryan Khan case, Nitin W. Sambre, J., held

Case BriefsSupreme Court

“The reasoning in the High Court’s judgment quite insensitively trivializes – indeed legitimizes – an entire range of unacceptable behaviour which undermines a child’s dignity and autonomy, through unwanted intrusions.”

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Bombay High Court: Sandeep K. Shinde, J., reiterated the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Pradip Ram

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Bombay High Court: Anuja Prabhudessai, J., opined that where the witness is of tender age (as in the instant case before the

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Bombay High Court: Noting that the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Member did not properly determine just and proper compensation, V.M. Deshpande, J.,

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Bombay High Court: While noting the failure of State Machinery in securing the presence of a person for 13 years, Division Bench

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Bombay High Court: The Division Bench of Prasanna B. Varale and Madhav J. Jamdar, JJ., while addressing a petition expressed that, It

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Bombay High Court: G.S. Patel, J., granted ‘conditional’ liberty to Phonepe (P) Ltd. to withdraw its suit and an interim application filed