Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of Ranjan Gogoi, CJ and Navin Sinha and KM Joseph, JJ has clarified that all pending criminal prosecutions, trials and appeals prior to the law laid down in Mohan Lal vs. State of Punjab, (2018)
Supreme Court: A Bench comprising of N.V. Ramana and M.M. Shantanagoudar, JJ. dismissed an appeal filed by the State of U.P. against
Delhi High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of C. Hari Shankar, J. allowed a criminal appeal filed against the judgment of the
Calcutta High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Md. Mumtaz Khan, J. allowed a revision petition against the order of the
Supreme Court: The Bench comprising of M.M. Shantanagoudar, J., delivering a judgment for himself and L. Nageswara Rao, J., disposed of a
Madras High Court: In a Single Judge Bench decision comprising of P. Kalaiyarasan, J., accused was acquitted of the charges under Section
Himachal Pradesh High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Chander Bhusan Barowalia, J., decided a criminal appeal filed by the State
Chhattisgarh High Court: The order of trial court acquitting the accused of rape charges was upheld in an appeal by the State before
Chhattisgarh High Court: The order of acquittal of accused persons passed by the trial court was upheld in an appeal by a
Himachal Pradesh High Court: A Division Bench comprising of Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Chander Bhusan Barowalia, JJ., dismissed a criminal appeal filed
Gujarat High Court: The present appeal was decided by the Bench of Akhil Kureshi and A.Y. Kogje, JJ., filed by the accused
High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan: The appellate court had allowed the appeal of the respondent-complainant under Sections 372 and 378 CrPC
Supreme Court: Stating the importance of medical evidence, especially in a murder trial, the Bench of P.C. Ghose and R.F. Nariman, JJ
Supreme Court: In the matter where the accused, along with a group of co-accused persons, each armed with deadly weapons fired a
Supreme Court: Holding that an accused was not entitled to acquittal on the mere ground that the investigation of the matter had