Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The petition challenged the Trial Court’s order allowing the plaintiff to amend the plaint under Order VI Rule 17 CPC to include a claim for mesne profits at the rate of ₹50,000 per month.
“It is the duty of the Court to remove the chaff from the grain in its pursuit for truth. It is not open to the trial Court to throw out the entire prosecution evidence just because it was contradictory on certain aspects of the case.”
The Court acknowledged the grievance raised about the lack of recruitment for gazetted posts in Ladakh, issued notice and sought for the UPSC and Ladakh Government’s response.
The Deputy Solicitor General of India (DSGI), filed a status report on behalf of the UT of Ladakh, stating that a committee is formed to identify the actual number of transgender individuals in both Leh and Kargil Districts.
The Court stated that the presumption under Section 114-C of the Evidence Act regarding dowry deaths could not be applied without credible evidence of dowry harassment.
“There is no iota of doubt that the preventive detention of the petitioner is a sheer abuse of jurisdiction of preventive detention under the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978.”
The Court quashed the complaint, charge sheet, and charges framed by the Designated Special Court, Srinagar, under the PMLA.
“Communication means imparting to the petitioner sufficient and effective knowledge of the facts and circumstances on which the order of detention is passed and such communication in such language which the petitioner understands.”
“Right to fair trial, presumption of innocence unless proven guilty and proof by the prosecution of its case beyond any reasonable doubt are the fundamentals of our criminal jurisprudence.”
“In order to prosecute and punish a witness for offence of perjury, it must be established that the statement was made by him deliberately and consciously, which subsequently, was found to be false as a result of comparing it with other unimpeachable evidence on record”.
Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court: While deciding the instant petition wherein the Court was faced with the issue
“The State being a welfare State governed by the rule of law, cannot arrogate to itself a status beyond what is provided by the statute”
Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court: While deciding the instant appeal vis-a-vis compassionate appointment, the Division Bench of Tashi Rabstan and
Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court: While deciding the instant petition wherein the Single Judge Bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar deliberated
Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court: While deciding the instant appeal wherein substantial questions of law were raised vis-a-vis SectionS 80,
Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court: While deciding the question raised in the instant petition that, whether the classification
Supreme Court: The Bench comprising of Rohinton Fali Nariman and Indu Malhotra, JJ., delivered its order in regard to the allowance of