A Case for Feminist Reasoning in Judicial Edict
by Balram Pandey*
by Balram Pandey*
The Gujarat High Court had previously dismissed Teesta’s application for regular bail and directed her to surrender immediately.
The instant matter related to a person killed while he was travelling with his group on scooter, allegedly by constables patrolling the village, which was investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation (‘CBI’).
by Tarun Jain†
Cite as: 2023 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 60
Rhea Chakraborty and others including her brother Showik Chakraborty were accused of having facilitated the procurement of drugs for consumption by late actor Sushant Singh Rajput.
Two Benches of the Supreme Court had expressed their disagreement with the view taken in Central Organisation for Railway Electrification v. ECI-SPIC-SMO-MCML (JV), therefore, the matter was referred to larger Bench.
Justice Bhatti served as Chief Justice of Kerala High Court for 1 month before being elevated to the Supreme Court on 14-07-2023.
The direction came in a contempt petition filed by Common Cause NGO which argued that the BCI was not taking steps to prevent advocates from going on strikes.
The show is based on a young legal professional who recently graduated from the National Law University, portraying the struggles of newbies in the legal profession, with fun elements.
As per the fresh guidelines for the designation of Senior Advocates, there shall be no voting by secret ballot save in an exceptional situation, for reasons to be recorded.
Power of Indian Courts to modify an Arbitral Award: This article submits that the courts ought to have power to modify the
This report covers the Supreme Court’s Never Reported Judgment dating back to the year 1951 on Section 6 of the Merchandise Marks Act, 1889.
A chargesheet was filed against the Juvenile Delinquent for offences under Sections 363, 366-A, 368, 376 of the IPC and Section 3, 4, 16 and 17 of the JJ Act.
“Offences of forging documents for transferring ownership of land worth crores are grave in nature. Hence, while it is extremely important to protect the personal liberty of a person, it is equally incumbent to analyse the seriousness of the offence and determine if there is a need for custodial interrogation.”
by Puneeth Ganapathy*
Supreme Court extended the time to file the counter affidavit to four weeks.
The Court observed that the recommendations made by an Expert Committee are not binding on the NGT, they are only by way of assistance to enable the NGT to arrive at a correct decision in the matter.
The Delhi High Court and Rose Avenue District Court had previously denied the Ex-Deputy Chief Minister’s Bail plea.
Supreme Court advised the petitioner to secure appropriate treatment for spinal disorder during the given period of 6 weeks.
Supreme Court said that it will take recourse to the coercive arm of law, if any such incident occurs in the future. Also warned that there shall be no impediment in the work of legal defense counsel.