
Tripura High Court| 28-year-old woman to get Rs. 2.5 lakh compensation in custodial torture case
Tripura High Court: In a public interest litigation concerning custodial torture on a 28-year-old woman in the police lockup, the division bench
Tripura High Court: In a public interest litigation concerning custodial torture on a 28-year-old woman in the police lockup, the division bench
Madhya Pradesh High Court: Vivek Rusia, J. allowed an appeal which was filed seeking permission/ direction for termination of pregnancy. The petitioner
Supreme Court: Allowing the review petition in the 34-year-old road-rage case involving cricketer-turned-politician Navjot Singh Sidhu that resulted into the death of
Supreme Court of Canada: The instant matter revolved around a challenge to the constitutionality of Section 33.1 of the Criminal Code which
Kerala High Court: While explaining that inflicting corporal punishment on a Child by a parent or teacher is forbidden, Dr Kauser Edappagath,
Bombay High Court: The Division Bench of Sadhana S. Jadhav and Prithviraj K. Chavan, JJ., modified the conviction of a husband who
Karnataka High Court: H.P Sandesh, J. rejected bail as at this stage no offence can be attracted and the same is left
Bombay High Court: Convicting a person under Section 304 Part I of Penal Code, 1860 Division Bench of Sadhana S. Jadhav and
Supreme Court of the United Kingdom (UKSC): Bench of Lord Hodge, Lord Llyod-Jones, Lady Arden and Lord Kitchin, while unanimously allowing the
Supreme Court of India: The Division Bench of Navin Sinha and R. Subhash Reddy, JJ., reiterated the value of ocular evidence while
Madras High Court: The Division Bench of P.N. Prakash and R. Pongiappan, JJ., addressed a contempt petition filed under Section 10 of
Bombay High Court: Revati Mohite Dere, J., while addressing a very significant issue of assault, expressed that: “There is imbalance of gender
Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of RF Nariman, Navin Sinha and Indira Banerjee, JJ has held that it is not necessary that
Allahabad High Court: Suresh Kumar Gupta, J., while addressing the present jail appeal held that, “…in cases involving sexual assault/rape, it is
Bombay High Court: A Division Bench of S.S. Shinde and M.S. Karnik, JJ., partly allowed an appeal by reducing the sentence of the
Delhi High Court: Rajnish Bhatnagar, J. while conducting a hearing through Video Conferencing, addressed a very pertinent matter with regard to bail of
Calcutta High Court: A Division Bench of Abhijit Gangopadhyay and Joymalya Bagchi, JJ. allowed an appeal and set aside the conviction and
South Africa High Court, Free State Division, Bloemfontein: A Division Bench of S. Chesiwe and P.E. Molitsoane, JJ. set aside the order
Kerala High Court: B Sudheendra Kumar J., allowed a bail application and relieved the accused person from the custody. In the instant
Uttaranchal High Court: A Division Bench of Sudhanshu Dhulia and R.C. Khube, JJ. entertained an appeal filed against the impugned judgment and