Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
There is a distinction between “Law and Order” and “Public Order”, i.e., offences that target specific individuals fall under the category of “Law and Order” and it is only when the criminal activities of an individual adversely affect the public at large that their conduct is deemed to disturb “Public Order”.
The Telangana High Court noted that multiple issues could have driven Rohith Vemula to commit suicide and further, it could also not be established that the actions of the petitioners had driven Rohith Vemula to commit suicide.
The High Court found the cause of action to be untenable as the petitioners were already accused in a similar case.
Under Rule 6(1)(a) of the 1977 Rules, a manufacturer is required to mention on every package the name, address, telephone number, e-mail address of the person or the office that could be contacted in case of a consumer complaint.
Petitioners sought relief under Article 226 of the Constitution, to consider the letter and do the needful by nominating a Shia Muslim community member in Telangana Legislative Council under Governor’s quota for upliftment of their community.
Petitioner was directed to ensure that the persons with criminal antecedents did not participate in the Hanuman Vijaya Yatra.
The High Court observed that the levy of cost recovery charges, i.e., salaries payable to customs staff deployed at the Airport, is an administrative charge and is a tax and hence, it cannot be exacted from GMR Hyderabad International Airport Ltd. without any statutory provision.
The Collegium on 16-04-2024, resolved to recommend the appointment of 3 Judges, which included 2 Permanent Judges and 1 Advocate as a Judge.
The counsels who adopt such practices, jeopardize the harmony with the Bench along with their professional careers, by ignoring the fact that they are not only required to conduct the case in a fair manner, but while doing so they are also officers of the Court.
The Notification No. 6/2023 dated 5-4-2023, issued by Telangana Residential Educational Institutions Recruitment Board, inviting applications for the post of Art Teacher categorically mentioned at Para (1)(v) that the question paper is bilingual i.e., English and Telugu.
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.
Respondent 2’s act is contrary to the procedure laid down under the Passports Act, 1967 and the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in Vangala Kasturi Rangacharyulu v. CBI, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 3549.
The Special Judge for CBI Cases, Hyderabad, failed to appreciate the facts and circumstances and held that respondents are not public servants and accordingly exonerated them from offences under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
The Court found glaring loopholes in the prosecution case regarding the preparation of the samples of the contraband and safe keeping of the samples.
“Section 38(2) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, does not treat the equals as unequals, as the candidates belonging to recognized political parties, registered political parties and independent political parties stand on a different footing.”
“Once the agreement entered into between the parties is considered as a contract like any other contract, for the enforcement of the covenants of the contract or for any breach thereof, the parties have to work out their remedies under civil law.”
“When legislature confers the function of adjudication on an authority under the statute, the same can be performed by such authority within the four corners of the power conferred on it.”
“The Investigating Officer becomes functus officio when charge sheet is filed after investigation, unless there will be further investigation under Section 173(8) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.”
“The freedom of expression is a fundamental right in a democratic society which is governed by a rule of law. The producer of the film has a fundamental right under Article 19 of the Constitution which permits him to allude to true incidents with his perspective.”
“It is a well-settled law that while deciding the question of appointment of arbitrator, the Court shall not touch the merits of the case as it may cause prejudice to the case of the parties.”