Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The Jharkhand High Court reiterated the object of Section 498-A of IPC to punish cruelty by husband and his relatives.
Jharkhand High Court rejected any justification on part of the State regarding delay of at least 50 days on the ground that the matter was ‘under the process’.
A party to a proceeding cannot be permitted to challenge the Award and abide by it at its own free will; garner benefit from it; get the opposite party to effectively alter its position; and then press its challenge after the passage of a considerable length of time.
The Jharkhand High Court made it clear that the stature of the person whose land grab was attempted is not important, but the situation is the reason that the Court took cognizance of the instant matter.
Jharkhand High Court commented that the State Police’s lackadaisical attitude to arrest anyone and put him in custody made the petitioner suffer humiliation, who was having a bright career and completed SSC exam.
Jharkhand High Court clarified that Section 233 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (‘IBC Code’) gives protection to a resolution professional from criminal prosecution for acts in good faith, and not where he has been apprehended red-handed with the bribe amount.
Justice Aniruddha Bose who celebrates his 64th birthday today, had served the High Courts of Calcutta and Jharkhand as a Judge prior to being elevated to the Supreme Court in 2019.
The Jharkhand High Court said that a show cause notice specifying grounds for the proposed action is mandatory in order to enable the other party to answer the case before passing blacklisting orders.
Jharkhand High Court quashed the communication by JBVNL rejecting electrical connection due to outstanding dues of the erstwhile owner of the premises.
Former Judge of Uttaranchal High Court, Justice Sanjaya Kumar Mishra was recently elevated as the Chief Justice of the Jharkhand High Court. At his swearing-in ceremony, Justice Mishra stated that his priority will be to impart justice to the poor and downtrodden while expediting old cases.
Jharkhand High Court concurred with the Trial Court’s decision and held that the prosecution has proved the charge beyond all shadow of doubt which cannot be said to suffer from an error.
Jharkhand High Court refused to disturb the findings of Trial Court and Appellate Court in a title suit for succession by an adopted son, whose adoption was questioned on the ground of customary provisions of Santhals.
While dealing with an appeal in a Title suit for partition, Jharkhand High Court considered the admissibility of disputed relationship of a mother and son through witnesses lacking ‘special means of knowledge’ as required under Section 50 of the Evidence Act, 1872.
Jharkhand High court held that amarried woman cannot invoke section 376(2)(n) of the IPC, after establishing a relationship with man other than her husband
Jharkhand High Court: Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J., while dismissing the writ petition dealing with a service matter preferred by the
Jharkhand High Court: Rajesh Shankar, J., while dismissing the present writ petition primarily for want of territorial jurisdiction held that even if
Jharkhand High Court: Rajesh Shankar, J., while dismissing the present writ petition primarily for want of territorial jurisdiction held that even if
Jharkhand High Court: S.N. Pathak, J., allowed the writ petition directing Central Coalfields Limited (‘CCL') to modify the monetary compensation
President appoints Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, to be an Additional Judge of the Jharkhand High Court, for a period of two years with
Jharkhand High Court: Sujit Narayan Prasad, J., addresses a very pertinent question of whether the Jharkhand Lokayukta Act, 2001 provides power for