Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
“If the candidature is not rejected at the threshold and candidate is allowed to participate in the selection process and ultimately his name was there in the merit list, though such candidate has no indefeasible right to claim appointment, he does have a limited right of being accorded fair and non-discriminatory treatment”.
Supreme Court considered the fact that there was no specific complaint of non-cooperation in the investigation.
The tower in question was incomplete and there was no scope of construction to be completed within 6 months.
Supreme Court directed NCPCR to formulate model guidelines after due consultation with the Central and State Governments for the States and Union Territories to frame their rules respecting the support persons under Section 39 of POCSO Act.
“There has been large growth in the legal profession of first- generation lawyers making their mark, some of them young ones, coming from National Law Schools and other prominent Law Schools”.
Supreme Court said that the delivery will be conducted by AIIMS at the appropriate time and the Union Government will bear all the medical costs for the delivery.
The Supreme Court considered an appeal seeking divorce for husband and wife aged 87 years and 82 years respectively, on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage.
The weighted average shareholding method is applied by taking average shareholding held by particular shareholder for the year for the purpose of calculating proportionate electricity required to be consumed by it in terms of the second proviso of Rule 3(1)(a).
The Finance Act, 2017 introduced a system by which electoral bonds could be issued by any scheduled bank for the purpose of electoral funding.
A PIL on the implementation of the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013 is pending before the Supreme Court.
Earlier, the Bombay High Court had refused to grant bail to the accused considering the seriousness of the offence.
This report covers the Supreme Court’s Never Reported Judgment dating back to the year 1952 on applicability of pre-emption to non-Muslims.
A letter was received by ASG seeking clarification from the Court regarding whether foeticide can be done before termination process since the baby was viable, and that if that was not done, it would be a preterm delivery and not a foeticide.
The woman had adopted Lactational Amenorrhea Method (‘LAM’), a process which implies absence of menstruation due to continuing breast feeding as a contraceptive method.
Wipro Enterprises has a registered all India trade mark ‘Chandrika’ since 1976.
“The accused has miserably failed to discharge his evidential burden, that fact will have to be taken to be proved by force of the presumption, without requiring anything more from the complainant”
The case is of a married couple who conceived for a third time and due to financial and emotional reasons cannot raise the child. The woman sought the court’s intervention for abortion, as her pregnancy had crossed the legally permissible limit of 24 weeks for abortions under the MTP Act
“When the testimonies of the eye-witnesses suffer from fatal flaws, to sustain conviction on the basis of such unreliable evidence would surely amount to miscarriage of justice”
“Bar Council of India is directed to examine the representation of the petitioner after taking note of the Supreme Court’s observations in the case of Bar Council of India v. Bonnie Foi Law College.”
Having regard to larger ramifications of NN Global case, the Supreme Court viewed that proceedings should be placed before a seven-judge bench to reconsider the correctness of the view by a five-judge bench.