Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
As the judgment is openly available on the Indian Kanoon and is also accessible through any web search on Google Search, the Court directed that the name of the petitioner must be masked on the Indian Kanoon portal.
Delhi High Court: In a case where revision petition was filed against the order passed by the Trial Court by
Supreme Court: In an appeal filed by the Food Corporation of India (‘FCI’) against the judgment of Tripura high Court
The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India has notified Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Professionals) (Second Amendment) Regulations,
“The facts of this litigation are quite heart-breaking and at the same time, more disturbing is the utterly incomprehensible impugned judgment of the High Court discharging the accused of the offence of rape essentially on the ground of delay in the registration of the FIR.”
Madras High Court: V Sivagnanam J. directed the State police to add the offences under Sections 417 and 420 Penal
Madhya Pradesh High Court: Anand Pathak, J. dismissed an application for bail which was filed by the applicant, who had been arrested
Madhya Pradesh High Court: Atul Sreedharan, J. decided on a petition which was filed by the petitioner who was aggrieved by the
Supreme Court: The Division Bench of R. Subhash Reddy* and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ., held that to determine State Monopoly for disallowance of
Central Board of Direct taxes notifies a clarification that the imposition of a charge on the prescribed electronic modes under Section 269
National Electronic Funds Transfer (NEFT) and Real Time Gross Settlement (RTGS) systems – Waiver of charges The Reserve Bank has since reviewed
Jammu & Kashmir High Court: A Single Judge Bench of Sanjay Kumar Gupta, J., dismissed a petition filed under Section 561-A of
Supreme Court: A 5-Judge Constitution Bench comprising of CJ Dipak Misra and R.F. Nariman, A.M. Khanwilkar, Dr D.Y. Chandrachud and Indu Malhotra,
Bombay High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of K.R. Shriram, J. decided an admiralty suit wherein it was held that the