Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The Court stated that admittedly, the death is homicidal, and the doctor also found that the cause of death is injury, which was inflicted upon the deceased persons. Therefore, the ocular evidence corroborates with the medical evidence.
The Court stated that by delaying the disposal of the application filed by the petitioner, the District Magistrate is frustrating the intent of law, which should not be.
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.
The Court stated that allowing the proceedings to continue will amount to an abuse of the process of law.
The Court stated that when a decision of a coordinate bench of the same High Court is brought in notice, it is to be respected and is binding to the Bench of such co-equal strength. For taking a different view, it is required to refer the question to the larger bench, as it is the only course of action open to a Bench of a co-equal strength.
The Court stated that recovery of excess amount from the employee was not permissible, if there was no misrepresentation or suppression by the petitioner.
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.
The Court directed the Registrar General of this Court to send a copy of this Order to the Principal District Judge, Jamshedpur with a direction to impress upon the Judicial Magistrate concerned, not to pass orders in such reckless manner, without application of mind and unnecessarily enhance the burden upon this Court.
Supreme Court Collegium on 27-12-2023 recommended the appointment of Dr. Justice B R Sarangi, as next Chief Justice of Jharkhand High Court after the post fell vacant with the retirement of former Chief Justice, Justice Sanjaya Kumar Mishra on 28-12-2023.
The Court stated that even though the right to property is no longer a fundamental right and was never a natural right, it must be accepted that without the right to property, other rights become illusory.
The Court stated that overall conspectus of the case based on broad probabilities does not specifically or indirectly assign the petitioner to be involved in the acquisition and possession as well as concealment of 8.86 acres of land at Shanti Nagar connected to the “proceeds of crime”.
The Court stated that when the case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 was already filed by the petitioners, Respondent 2 had all the opportunity to defend in that pending complaint case, and without doing so, present complaint case was filed implicating the petitioners.
The respondent raised an objection to the maintainability of the present application on the ground that the petitioner being an agent governed under Section 48 of the Bihar Cooperative Societies Act, 1935, was required to approach the Registrar of the Cooperative Societies for initiating a dispute resolution proceeding.
The Court stated that to speak or not to speak has always been a dilemma for a person called for giving his statement before the Customs Officer, Central Sales Tax Officer, Police Officer etc, as the implications are serious.
The Court stated that the respondent took filmsy stand which was not acceptable and this was another glaring example of delay and laches on the respondents’ part for not extending the retirement benefits.
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.
The exclusion of one class of legitimate children from seeking compassionate appointment merely on the ground that the mother of the applicant was a plural wife of the deceased employee would fail to meet the test of a reasonable nexus with the objective sought to be achieved.
“The imposition of cost on the party which started litigation without any just cause or took false and frivolous defences is necessary to discourage the dishonest litigant.”
“An advocate has to fearlessly uphold the interest of his client by all fair and honourable means without regard to any unpleasant consequences to himself or any other, but he must exercise restraint in using intemperate language during arguments in the Court.”