Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
EBC in collaboration with The Law Forum hosted a discussion on “Commercial Disputes Resolution — Challenges and Strategies.”
Amid ongoing Indo-Pak tensions and in light of Operation Sindoor, the Supreme Court underscored the paramount importance of safeguarding the dignity and morale of women officers serving in the Indian Army.
Earlier, the Court stayed his arrest in two FIRs registered in Maharashtra and Assam, subject to his cooperation in the investigation, while barring him from doing any further shows.
The homebuyers’ case was that almost 70-80% of the loan amounts under subvention schemes were disbursed by the banks to the builders-cum-developers as ‘first tranche’, without due diligence, despite project milestones not having achieved.
Earlier, the Court had permitted him to attend a ‘Fatiha’ ceremony of his father Mukhtar Ansari, who died on 28-03-2024.
Allahabadia and his associates were barred from airing any show on YouTube or any other audio/video visual mode of communication over India’s Got Latent Row.
Justice N. Kotiswar Singh was serving as the Chief Justice of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court, prior to being elevated as Judge of the Supreme Court of India on 18-7-2024.
“There is no absolute bar on the Constitutional Courts to examine the proportionality of the punishment imposed on a Member while reviewing the validity of the action taken by the House.”
Recruitments to various posts of Primary School Teachers; Assistant School Teachers; Group C staff; and Group D staff, was questioned before the Calcutta High Court challenging the legitimacy of the procedures followed in the recruitments.
The Court stayed his arrest in two FIRs registered in Maharashtra and Assam, subject to his cooperation in the investigation, while barring him from doing any further shows.
“In the context of matrimonial disputes, emotions run high, and as such in the complaints filed alleging harassment or domestic violence, there may be a tendency to implicate other members of the family who do not come to the rescue of the complainant or remain mute spectators to any alleged incident of harassment, which in our view cannot by itself constitute a criminal act without there being specific acts attributed to them.”
Once a person is arrested, his right to liberty under Article 21 is curtailed. When such an important fundamental right is curtailed, it is necessary that the person concerned must understand on what grounds he has been arrested.
“The requirement of law in criminal trials is not to prove the case beyond all doubt but beyond reasonable doubt and such doubt cannot be imaginary, fanciful, trivial or merely a possible doubt but a fair doubt based on reason and common sense.”
There was a feud between two groups of the family which resulted in an armed clash between the groups and culminated in the filing of separate complaints by the respective groups. The High Court set aside the conviction and sentence under Sections 307, 148, and 149 of the IPC but affirmed his conviction under Sections 326, 325, 452, and 323 of the IPC.
“The right to sue under Article 113 of the Limitation Act accrues when there is an accrual of rights asserted in the suit and an unequivocal threat by the defendant to infringe the right asserted by the plaintiff in the suit.”
“A written complaint by a public servant before the Court takes cognizance is sine qua non, absence of which would vitiate such cognizance being taken for any offence punishable under Section 186 of the IPC.”
The Court held that NIA could investigate non-scheduled offence, or a person involved in a non-scheduled offence, provided there is a connection with the scheduled offence. This nexus between any other offence and the Scheduled Offence is of critical importance and must be present to enable the NIA to investigate any other offence committed by an accused in connection with the Scheduled Offence.
The Court further observed that there is a worrying trend that consensual relationships going on for prolonged period, upon turning sour, have been sought to be criminalised by invoking criminal jurisprudence.
The High Courts of Bombay and Delhi had rendered two opposing verdicts on the issue. One view favoured the Revenue while the other one was in favour of the Mobile Service Providers.
“A duty is cast on the State to pay compensation to the land losers as otherwise there would be a breach of Article 300-A of the Constitution.”