Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The Karnataka High Court strictly admonished the petitioner for abusing every jurisdiction of law but refused to impose exemplary costs as the same would only increase the agony of the petitioner, whose marriage was annulled albeit with consent.
Absence of cross-examination of witnesses resulted in gross miscarriage of justice. The omission of fair and proper trial is not only a violation of fundamental principles of judicial procedure and constitutional mandate but is also a violation of mandatory provisions of Section 304 CrPC
The Supreme Court expressed its displeasure by the attempts made by parties to invoke jurisdiction of criminal courts, by filing vexatious criminal complaints by camouflaging allegations which were ex facie outrageous or pure civil claims.
In the case at hand, the date of birth of both the petitioners showed them to be major and they claim their decision live together to be based upon voluntarily will/option.
Bombay High Court remarked that they have come across at least three such cases in last three weeks wherein the statement of the prosecutrix has been totally disbelieved in the grave and a serious offence under Section 376 IPC by not following the law enunciated by the Supreme Court in its catena of decisions. It is the second case in this week wherein Police did not adhere to the basic principles of investigation.
The Bombay High Court came down heavily on the law firm for revealing the identity of a rape victim. The Court, while allowing the firm’s application to mask the name of the victim imposed a cost of Rs. 5,000 on it.
The accused had argued that the complainant and her family, out of ill will, had orchestrated the complaint and were extorting the petitioner for their own means and benefits. Rajasthan High Court, however, did not appreciate the fact that the previous complaints filed by the prosecutrix was closed on account of being frivolous and a closure report was also filed in the matter.
Metropolitan Magistrate, 70th Court, Mazgaon, Mumbai: In a case filed against the accused for offences punishable under Section 324, 354, 504, 509
Delhi High Court: In a case where revision petition was filed against the order passed by the Trial Court by
Allahabad High Court: In an appeal against the judgment passed by Special Judge convicting the accused under Section 376 of
A child marriage compromises the growth of the child to her full potential. It is the bane of society.
Allahabad high Court: In a second anticipatory bail application for offences under Sections 363, 366, 376 of the Penal Code,
Delhi High Court: In an appeal challenging the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge convicting the Father (Appellant) under
Delhi High Court: In a case where a Nepalese citizen moved the bail application in relation to FIR registered under
by Shashwati Diksha*
by Sucheta Sarkar†
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — S. 31(7) and Ss. 17, 21, 23(3), 24(1), 25, 26, 29 and 85(2)(a) —
Income Tax Act, 1961 — Ss. 260-A, 269 and 120 — Appropriate High Court for filing appeal or reference against