ID stringlengths 4 7 | para_id int64 0 26 | newJudgement stringlengths 0 34.1k |
|---|---|---|
id_1637 | 1 | Shrimati Mahua Moitra, Member of Parliament, while giving an interview to Shri Rajdeep Sardesai, which was widely telecast by India Today and is available on YouTube, accepted that Shri Darshan Hiranandani had gifted her a Hermes brand scarf, Bobbi Brown brand lipstick and eye shadow, and makeup articles. Whenever she ... |
id_1638 | 0 | Mohd. Nawaz Iqbal Shaikh, Applicant, versus the State of Maharashtra and Another Respondent; Salman Khan, also known as Abdul Rashid Salim, Applicant, versus the State of Maharashtra and Another Respondent; Mr. Vikram Sutaria with Mr. Parag Khandhar in behalf of DSK Legal for the Applicant in APL/450/22; Mr. Abad Ponda... |
id_1638 | 1 | The Magistrate is not bound to take cognizance merely because a complaint has been filed before him when it does not disclose a cause of action. In S.R. Sukumar vs. S. Sunaad Raghuram, the Honorable Supreme Court of India has rightly crystallised the process in the following words, which I must reproduce. Section 200 o... |
id_1639 | 0 | Neutral Citation Number 2023:DHC:2073-DB Reserved on: March 10, 2023 Pronounced on: March 23, 2023 Through: Mister Mukul Talwar, Senior Advocate with Mister Ankur Chhibber, Mister Rajesh Sachdeva, Miss Shobha Gupta, Mister Vineet Budhiraja, Mister Vivek Singh and Mister Apurva, Advocates. Versus Through: Mister Rajat A... |
id_1639 | 1 | Strict rules of evidence are to be followed by the criminal court where the guilt of the accused has to be proved beyond reasonable doubt. On the other hand, preponderance of probabilities is the test adopted in finding the delinquent guilty of the charge., The High Court of Delhi ought not to have interfered with the ... |
id_164 | 0 | Criminal Appeal No. 783 of 2023 between Kathula Vasu (Appellant) and the State of Telangana, represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana, Hyderabad (Respondent). Counsel for the petitioner: Sri M. V. Venu. Counsel for the respondent: Additional Public Prosecutor., This criminal appeal is filed aggriev... |
id_1640 | 0 | Reportable High Court Bar Association, Allahabad Appellant versus State of U.P. & Ors. Respondents Special Leave Petition (Criminal) nos. 13284-13289 of 2023 and Criminal Appeal Diary no. 49052 of 2023., By the order dated 1st December 2023, a Bench of three Hon'ble Judges of the Supreme Court of India expressed a view... |
id_1640 | 1 | The second question concerned the scope of powers of the High Court to stay proceedings of the trial under the Prevention of Corruption Act while entertaining a challenge to an order of framing charge. The question regarding the duration of the interim orders passed by the High Courts in various other proceedings did n... |
id_1640 | 2 | In many cases, while rejecting a bail petition, a time limit is fixed for disposal of trial on the ground that the petitioner has undergone incarceration for a long time without realizing that the concerned trial court may have many pending cases where the accused are in jail for a longer period. The same logic will ap... |
id_1641 | 0 | Civil Appeal No(s). 10856/2016 Date: 27-01-2022. These applications were called on for hearing today. Advocate Pawanshree Agrawal, Additional Counsel. Advocate Varun K. Chopra, Advocate for Appellant(s). Senior Advocate Siddhartha Dave, Senior Advocate Haresh Jagtiani, Senior Advocate Vishal Gosain, Advocate Anuroop Ch... |
id_1642 | 0 | Ibrahim Khwaja Miya Sayyed Raju, Applicant, versus the State of Maharashtra, Respondent. Ms. Sana Raees Khan with Mr. Aniket Pardeshi for the Applicant. Mr. R. M. Pethe, Additional Public Prosecutor for the Respondent State. Mr. Bhoye, Assistant Public Prosecutor, Assistant Narcotics Control, Bandra Unit, present., At ... |
id_1643 | 0 | Leave granted., The appellant in both the appeals (hereinafter referred to as the returned candidate) has challenged the legality of the impugned common order dated 19 November 2019 passed by the Madras High Court in Original Application Nos. 929/2019 and 930/2019 filed by the appellant in Election Petition No. 3/2019,... |
id_1643 | 1 | They amplify, refine and embellish material facts by giving finishing touch to the basic contours of a picture already drawn so as to make it full, more clear and more informative. Particulars ensure conduct of fair trial and would not take the opposite party by surprise., In Anil Vasudev Salgaonkar vs. Naresh Kushali ... |
id_1647 | 0 | By order dated 08 February 2024 in Criminal Revision Petition 1362 of 2023, the sentence awarded to the petitioner was suspended and he was directed to be released on bail on certain conditions and on furnishing a bail bond to the satisfaction of the Jail Superintendent., An application was filed pointing out that the ... |
id_1648 | 0 | Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 20406 of 2018 Mohammad Alauddin Bismil Petitioner versus The State of Bihar and Others Respondents. For the Petitioners: Mister Rashid Izhar, Advocate; Mister Mohammad Anis Akhtar, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mister Shashi Shekhar Tiwary, Additional Counsel to Additional Attorney Gen... |
id_1650 | 0 | Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd., a company incorporated under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act, 1913, having its office at Pirojsha Nagar, Vikhroli, Mumbai 400079, Petitioner, versus the State of Maharashtra, through the Government Pleader, High Court, Mumbai; the Union of India, through the Government ... |
id_1650 | 1 | It is submitted that the Respondents contentions proceed on a misreading of order dated 4th September 2019. The said order does not take away the right of the Petitioner to challenge the procedure adopted by the Respondent Authorities under the Fair Compensation Act. Moreover, the said order in paragraph 3, clearly rec... |
id_1650 | 2 | The Fair Compensation Act does not permit the Central Government to exempt any project from the application of Chapters II and III of the Fair Compensation Act, other than by invoking the urgency provisions under Sections 9 and 40 of the Fair Compensation Act. It is submitted that the Central Government therefore canno... |
id_1650 | 3 | Senior Counsel disputed that there is non‑application of mind on the part of the Deputy Collector in the impugned award. No family is affected due to acquisition of the writ property of the said infrastructure project. There is no question of resettlement of any project‑affected person. No person is displaced by the re... |
id_1650 | 4 | For this project, from Maharashtra, 430 hectares (approximately) of land is required out of which as of November 2022, 97% of the land is already acquired. For the underground section between Bandra Kurla Complex (BKC) and Thane, all the land parcels required are already in possession of the National High Speed Rail Co... |
id_1650 | 5 | This was the underlying basis for the Supreme Court stating that the person affected was only entitled to relief in respect of compensation. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that the Supreme Court in Automotive Tyre Manufacturers Association Vs. Designated Authority & Ors., (2011) 2 Supreme Court Cases 258 following th... |
id_1650 | 6 | There was disagreement with regards to the disbursement of compensation, more particularly with regards to repayment of compensation with interest in the event, Suit No. 679/1973 would have decided against the Petitioner., In view of this backdrop and development in the matter and the petitioner submitting the proposal... |
id_1650 | 7 | In our view, since there is no cap provided as to what period under the first proviso to Section 25 of the Fair Compensation Act to make an award can be extended, the appropriate Government granted two extensions of twelve months each in the facts of this case, which cannot adversely affect the subsequent proceedings, ... |
id_1650 | 8 | Crores have been expended by National High Speed Rail Corporation Limited (NHSRCL) towards implementation of the project. The land approximately admeasuring 430 hectares is required, out of which as of November 2022, 97% of the land is already acquired. For the underground section between Bandra Kurla Complex and Thane... |
id_1652 | 0 | Through: Mr. Chander M. Lall, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ankur Sangal, Ms. Sucheta Roy, Mr. Raghu Vinayak Sinha, Mr. Shaurya Pandey and Ms. Yashi Aggarwal, Advocates versus Through: Mr. Pawan Bindra, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rahul Dhawan and Ms. Vaishali Singh, Advocates for Defendants 1 to 3. Mr. Sahil Solanki, Advocate... |
id_1653 | 0 | WRIT PETITION Nos. 8223/2013, 3427/2015, 45742/2022, 23892, 24696, 25044, 25836, 26172, 27223, 27761 and 30952 of 2023 are being taken up and heard together and disposed of by this common order because the issues involved are intrinsically interconnected., The respondents have filed a consolidated counter affidavit in ... |
id_1653 | 1 | In this regard, the learned counsel for the petitioners has failed to place any such authority, under which the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation is only competent to inspect the business of the petitioners in serving hookah., In view of the foregoing discussion, the High Court of Telangana is of the view that th... |
id_1654 | 0 | Between: Sandrapati Vijaya Kumar, Petitioner, and the State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Department and Tribal Welfare Department, A.P. Secretariat, Guntur, and another Respondent. Between: Asuri Srinivasa Rao, Petitioner, and the Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by... |
id_1654 | 1 | Supreme Court of India reiterated that the reserved category candidates securing higher marks than the last of the general category candidates are entitled to get seat or post in unreserved categories. It was held that even while applying horizontal reservation, merit must be given precedence and if the candidates who ... |
id_1654 | 2 | An order made under clause (3) may (a) authorise the Administrative Tribunal to receive representations for the redress of grievances relating to any matter within its jurisdiction as the President may specify in the order and to make such orders thereon as the Administrative Tribunal deems fit; (b) contain such provis... |
id_1655 | 0 | Dated this the 12th day of April, 2023 Petitioner seeks a direction to the Customs and Enforcement Directorate, Government of India to conduct a fair and time‑bound investigation into allegations of money laundering and illegal gold smuggling, taking into consideration the statements made by the accused with regard to ... |
id_1656 | 0 | Criminal Petition Nos. 4819, 4843, 4844, 4867, 4938 and 5384 of 2020 dated 19-01-2021. Petitioners: Chekka Guru Murali Mohan and others. Respondents: The State of Andhra Pradesh through Station House Officer, Criminal Investigation Department, Police Station, Mangalagiri, Guntur District, represented by the Public Pros... |
id_1656 | 1 | Legal position in this regard is not res nova and the same has been authoritatively very well settled. The Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court of India in the case of A.R. Antulay v. Ramdas Sriniwas Nayak and Others had an occasion to deal with this concept of locus standi of a person to set the criminal law into... |
id_1656 | 2 | Similarly, as the sellers have sold the lands under registered sale deeds after receiving valid sale consideration to a tune of lakhs of rupees, no wrongful loss is also caused to them by unlawful means by the petitioners. The landed property was acquired lawfully that is by lawful means by the petitioners. So, it cann... |
id_1656 | 3 | The contents of the sale deeds show that the lands were not profitable to the vendors and they were in dire necessity of money for meeting family expenses or discharging debts. Consequently, the owners decided to sell their lands and offered them to the petitioners, who accepted the offer. A sale consideration of lakhs... |
id_1656 | 4 | Law does not permit such criminal prosecution of the buyer of the land on the said ground. Undoubtedly, it is a sort of speculative criminal prosecution that was launched by the State against the petitioners in this case, which is not permissible under law. Therefore, it is undoubtedly an attempt by the prosecution to ... |
id_1657 | 0 | Criminal Miscellaneous Number 249 of 2023 Danish Chauhan, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), through Mister Prithvi Raj Drora, Advocate, versus Director General Jammu and Kashmir Police and others, Respondent(s)., The petitioner has challenged First Information Report Number 12 of 2022 for commission of offences under Section... |
id_1658 | 0 | CM (M) 552/2020 Page 1 Date of Decision: 12.04.2021 Through: Mr. Sujoy Kumar, Mr. Raghav Kumar and Mr. Arindam Ghosh, Advocates versus Dr. Amit George, Mr. Alex Joseph, Mr. P. Harold, Mr. Rayadurgam Bharat and Mr. Amol Acharya, Advocates. This petition has been heard through video conferencing., This petition has been ... |
id_166 | 0 | These Criminal Miscellaneous Cases are filed by the accused in Criminal Case No. 811/2014, on the files of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class‑I, Nedumangad. The aforesaid Calendar Case arises from Crime No. 215 of 1994 of Vanchiyoor Police Station, which was registered for the offences punishable under sections 120... |
id_166 | 1 | In the said decision it was held that when the petition to quash the proceedings is filed after one year it suffers from delay and latches. In the said decision the reasonable period was fixed as ninety days. However, I respectfully disagree with the view taken therein. The petitioners are invoking the inherent powers ... |
id_1660 | 0 | Writ Petition(s) (Civil) No. 640/2021 dated 30 June 2021. These matters were called on for hearing today., For Petitioners: Ms. Meenakshi Arora, Senior Advocate; Mr. Divyansh Tiwari, Advocate; Mr. Hardik Gautam, Advocate; Mr. Nirnimesh Dube, Advocate; Mr. Shashibhushan P. Adgaonkar, Advocate on Record; Mr. Ravibhushan ... |
id_1663 | 0 | Applicant: Jugadi Alias Nizamuddin. Opposite Party: State of Uttar Pradesh through the Secretary, Home Civil Section, Lucknow, and another. Counsel for Applicant: Narendra Gupta. Counsel for Opposite Party: Additional Government Advocate Honourable Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan, Judge. Heard Shri Dharmendra Kumar Gupta, holding... |
id_1664 | 0 | Mr. Justice Umar Ata Bandial, Mr. Justice Maqbool Baqar, Mr. Justice Manzoor Ahmad Malik, Mr. Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel, Mr. Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, Mr. Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Mr. Justice Munib Akhtar, Mr. Justice Yahya Afridi, Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, and Mr. Justice Amin‑ud‑Din Khan. Civ... |
id_1664 | 1 | The petitioner has argued that the impugned directions affected her rights that had vested in her after lapse of the period prescribed under the Income Tax Ordinance for issuing, or making amendment in, the tax assessment order; therefore, such directions could not have been issued without giving her an opportunity of ... |
id_1664 | 2 | We agree with the submission of the contesting respondents that the Supreme Court of India did not direct the Council to proceed against Justice Isa necessarily, rather left it to the discretion of the Council to take such action as deemed appropriate by the Council, but the question is whether any law or any clause in... |
id_1664 | 3 | Any attempt to muffle judicial independence or to stifle dissent shakes the foundation of a free and impartial judicial system, thus eroding public confidence on which the entire edifice of judicature stands. Public confidence is the most precious asset of this organ of the state, which controls neither the sword nor t... |
id_1666 | 0 | Securities and Exchange Board of India (hereinafter referred to as SEBI) conducted an investigation into the trading in the shares of Reliance Petroleum Limited (now known as Reliance Industries Limited) for the period 1 November 2007 to 29 November 2007 (hereinafter referred to as the Investigation Period) to ascertai... |
id_1666 | 1 | Therefore, even assuming (without admitting) that Reliance Industries Limited exceeded the position limits, the same can at most be considered a technical breach of the Position Limits Circulars and can never be construed to be an inducement to the counter‑party to enter into the trade and thereby a fraud. Reliance Ind... |
id_1666 | 2 | The said application was placed before the High Powered Advisory Committee (HPAC) of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) and the HPAC decided that the application could not be settled through a consent order; this was communicated to Reliance Industries Limited (RIL) by letter dated 2 January 2013. Meanwh... |
id_1666 | 3 | 1976 SCC Online Gujarat 33, AIR 1978 Gujarat 226, the Honorable Gujarat High Court distinguished between hedging and speculative transactions by stating that hedging transactions are genuine transactions entered into for the purpose of insuring against adverse price fluctuations. In hedging transactions neither deliver... |
id_1666 | 4 | Noticee-2 in his submissions has stated that the scope of powers and functions of a Managing Director are subject to the agreement with the company and/or the powers delegated to such person by the board or shareholders of the company and that he is not responsible for each and every action of the company. In this rega... |
id_1666 | 5 | Therefore, based on the circumstances of the matter, I am of the view that the facility agreements entered with Vinamra by Noticee-3 and Noticee-4 were an important leg of the scheme of manipulative trades by Reliance Industries Limited and the funds so provided in the guise of ICDs by way of these facility agreements ... |
id_1667 | 0 | Mahadev Gaur Bishwas, Appellant, versus the State of Maharashtra and Another, Respondents. Ms. Mallika Sharma, on behalf of Anjali Patil, for the appellant. Mrs. A. A. Takalkar, Advocate for the State. Mr. Ujwal Agandsurve for respondent No.2. Police Sub-Inspector M. N. Kudmate from Chembur Police Station., On 6 Januar... |
id_1668 | 0 | Serial No. 9 (Appellate Side) WPA (P) 53 of 2021 Date of decision: 11 February 2021 Ramaprasad Sarkar Petitioner versus Union of India and others Respondents Present: Mr. Achintya Kumar Banerjee and Ms. Indumouli Banerjee, Advocates for the petitioner; Mr. Roma Prasad Sarkar, Advocate petitioner in person; Mr. Y.J. Das... |
id_1669 | 0 | Case: Under Sections 482, 378 and 407, Number 2567 of 2021. Applicant: Noor Alam, also known as Noor Alam Khan. Opposite Party: State of Uttar Pradesh and others. Counsel for Applicant: Bhanu Pratap Singh. Counsel for Opposite Party: G. A. Additional Government Advocate. Honourable Justice Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan, Judge.,... |
id_167 | 0 | Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 1792/2023 dated 31 July 2023 was called for hearing today. The petition was presented for the petitioner, Mr. Sameer Sodhi, by Advocate Mahesh Kumar, Advocate Amanpreet Singh Rahi, Advocate Nikhilesh Kumar, Advocate Sunit Kumar Toppo, Advocate Devika Khanna, Advocate V D Khanna, and Advoca... |
id_1673 | 0 | Reportable Civil Appeal No. 3224 of 2020: Ebix Singapore Private Limited (Appellant) versus Committee of Creditors of Educomp Solutions Limited and others (Respondents). Reportable Civil Appeal No. 3560 of 2020: Kundan Care Products Limited (Appellant) versus Mr Amit Gupta and others (Respondents). Reportable Civil App... |
id_1673 | 1 | While dealing with the said Application, liberty was given to the Applicant vide order dated 01.09.2019 to re‑file an application for withdrawal of the Resolution Plan. This direction further confirms that there was no conscious adjudication in CA No.1252(PB)/2019 on the issue of withdrawal of the resolution plan by th... |
id_1673 | 2 | That apart, there is no express provision in the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code allowing a Successful Resolution Applicant to stage a U‑turn and frustrate the entire exercise of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process. The argument advanced on behalf of the Appellant that there is no provision in the Insolvency and Ban... |
id_1673 | 3 | Any violation of the concluded contract, which would be the approved Resolution Plan in this case, would give the Committee of Creditors (E‑CoC) the right to invoke the performance guarantee. The above clauses, in addition to clause 1.8.3 read with 1.9.5, evince that the six‑month validity is with respect of the Earnes... |
id_1673 | 4 | There is some room for maneuverability provided to the parties to negotiate the terms of the documents, however, that does not make any difference to the statutorily prescribed nature of the documents; and (vi) The approval of the Resolution Plan under Section 30(3) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) by the Co... |
id_1673 | 5 | Resolution Professional, with the approval of the Committee of Creditors, invites prospective Resolution Applicants through a Request for Resolution Process. Once an unconditional Expression of Interest has been received from prospective Resolution Applicants who are otherwise eligible under Section 29A, the Resolution... |
id_1673 | 6 | The Committee of Creditors (CoC) shall evaluate the resolution plans received under sub‑regulation (1) strictly as per the evaluation matrix to identify the best resolution plan and may approve it with such modifications as it deems fit. The committee shall record its deliberations on the feasibility and viability of e... |
id_1673 | 7 | The Supreme Court of India left the question of whether a successful Resolution Applicant altogether forfeits the right to withdraw from the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) open for subsequent judicial determination. In terms of Regulation 39(4), the Resolution Professional (RP) shall endeavour to submit... |
id_1673 | 8 | It mentions that an insolvency law may include limited provision for a plan to be modified after it has been approved by creditors (and both before and after confirmation) if its implementation breaks down or it is found to be incapable of performance, whether in whole or in part, and the specific problem can be remedi... |
id_1673 | 9 | The principle of res judicata is embodied in relation to suits in Section 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure; but even where Section 11 does not apply, the principle of res judicata has been applied by courts for the purpose of achieving finality in litigation. The result of this is that the original court as well as an... |
id_1673 | 10 | Preparation of information memorandum. The resolution professional shall prepare an information memorandum in such form and manner containing such relevant information as may be specified by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India for formulating a resolution plan. The resolution professional shall provide to the ... |
id_1674 | 0 | Case: Writ Petition No. 1348 of 2024. Petitioner: Smt. Nikita alias Najrana and Another. Respondent: State of Uttar Pradesh and three others. Counsel for Petitioner: Sanjay Kumar Srivastava. Counsel for Respondent: Chief Standing Counsel Honourable Kshitij Shailendra, Judge., Heard Shri Sanjay Kumar Srivastava, learned... |
id_1677 | 0 | Date of Decision: 17th October 2023 FAO 264/2023 and CM APPL. Nos. 52896/2023, 52898/2023. Through: Dr. A.M. Singhvi, Senior Advocate with Ms. Warisha Farasat, Mr. Shadan Farasat, Mr. Amit Bhandari, Mr. Vivek Jain, Mr. Prashant Manchanda, Mr. Aman, Mr. Vivek Jain, Ms. Hrishika Jain and Mr. Honey Kumbhat, Advocates. Ver... |
id_1677 | 1 | It is submitted that the allotment of a Type‑VII Bungalow was above the appellant's entitlement as a first‑time Member of Parliament, and that therefore cancellation of such allotment was well in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Handbook of Members of Rajya Sabha., To support this submission, attention ha... |
id_1677 | 2 | In the above view of the matter therefore, the learned Trial Court was in error in returning the plaint for non‑compliance with the provisions of section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Accordingly the appeal is allowed, holding that there was no requirement for the appellant/plaintiff to file the application under ... |
id_1681 | 0 | In the Calcutta High Court, Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction (Appellate Side). Hon'ble Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya. W.P.A. No. 16089 of 2023. Gopal Seth, Election Commission of India and others (Petitioners): Mr. Kishore Dutta, Mr. Sanjib Dutta, Mr. Anindya Sundar Chatterjee. Respondent No.1 & 2: Mr. Anuran Samant... |
id_1682 | 0 | Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side Present: The Hon'ble Justice Jay Sengupta. Writ Petition Application No. 1238 of 2024. Nilanjan Mitra, The State of West Bengal & Ors. For the petitioner: Mr. Jayanta Narayan Chatterjee, Mr. Supreme Naskar, Ms. Jayashree Patra, Advocates. For the State: Mr. Ashim Kumar Ga... |
id_1684 | 0 | Preface: Plato, the Greek philosopher in his treatise *The Laws*, underscores that punishment is to be inflicted not for the sake of vengeance, for what is done cannot be undone, but for the sake of prevention and reformation (Thomas L. Pangle, *The Laws of Plato*, Basic Book Publishers, 1980). In his treatise, Plato r... |
id_1684 | 1 | Gulzar Ahmed Azmi v. Union of India, (2012) 10 Supreme Court Cases 73 (Gulzar Ahmed); Simranjit Singh Mann v. Union of India, (1992) 4 Supreme Court Cases 65 (Simranjit Singh); and Ashok Kumar Pandey v. State of West Bengal, (2004) 3 Supreme Court Cases 349 (Ashok Kumar). It is submitted that a third party or stranger ... |
id_1684 | 2 | It was further contended that the remission orders under challenge failed to meet the criteria laid down by the Supreme Court of India in Sangeet and Ram Chander vs. State of Chhattisgarh, (2022) 12 SCC 52 (Ram Chander), wherein it has been stated that the appropriate government must obtain the opinion of the Presiding... |
id_1684 | 3 | No.135 of 2022 vide judgment dated 13.05.2022 had held that the policy which would be applicable for deciding the remission application was the one which was in vogue at the time of conviction i.e., the premature release policy of 1992 and that for the purposes of Section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the appr... |
id_1684 | 4 | It was also contended that reliance cannot be placed on documents, such as, letter dated 09.07.2022 of the Central Bureau of Investigation, wherein an affirmative opinion on remission was expressed as well as a letter produced by respondent No.3 containing the affirmative opinion of the Special Judge (Central Bureau of... |
id_1684 | 5 | Although no convict can be said to have any constitutional right for obtaining remission in his sentence, the policy decision itself must be held to have conferred a right to be considered therefor. Whether by reason of a statutory rule or otherwise, if a policy decision has been laid down, the persons who come within ... |
id_1684 | 6 | A sentence of imprisonment for life means a sentence for the entire life of the prisoner unless the appropriate Government chooses to exercise its discretion to remit either the whole or a part of the sentence under Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The appropriate Government has the undoubted discretion t... |
id_1684 | 7 | On such an application being made, the appropriate Government is required to approach the Presiding Judge of the Court before or by which the conviction was made or confirmed to opine (with reasons) whether the application should be granted or refused. Thereafter, the appropriate Government may take a decision on the r... |
id_1684 | 8 | Point No.4: Whether the impugned order of remission passed by the respondent State of Gujarat in favour of respondent Nos.3 to 13 is in accordance with law? We have perused the original record which is the English translation from Gujarati language., Even according to the respondent State of Gujarat Radheshyam Bhagwand... |
id_1684 | 9 | Supreme Court of India while allowing the appeal of the appellant therein complainant held that the High Court of Gujarat fell in error in holding that the convicts were entitled to the benefit of the period of remission given by the various notifications cumulatively to be counted against the period during which they ... |
id_1684 | 10 | In Sharad Hiru Kolambe vs State of Maharashtra, (2018) 18 Supreme Court Cases 718, the point for consideration was the quantum of fine imposed by way of a default sentence in case of non‑payment of fine. It was contended that although the substantive sentence stood remitted and the appellant was directed to be released... |
id_1687 | 0 | No. HHC/Admn. 16(34)74-IV. Dated Shimla the 12th January, 2023. In exercise of the powers vested in it under Section 16(2) of the Advocates Act, 1961, the High Court of Himachal Pradesh has been pleased to designate Shri Anup Kumar Rattan, Advocate as a Senior Advocate with immediate effect., No. HHC/Admn. 16(34)74-IV-... |
id_1688 | 0 | 30 September 2020 To the Honorable Chief Justice of India and Companion Honorable Judges of the Collegium Supreme Court of India, Tilak Marg, New Delhi 110001. Respected Lordships, we are writing to you out of much anguish and distress over the manner and procedure in which the situation has been progressing with respe... |
id_1689 | 0 | Chief Justice's Court Serial No. 301 In Re: (Suo Moto) v/s State of Uttar Pradesh., Recently, a new variant of the COVID‑19 virus has drastically increased the number of COVID‑19 cases, not only across the State of Uttar Pradesh but also throughout the country, and the situation is deteriorating day by day. Noticing su... |
id_169 | 0 | The appellants before us assail two judgments of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay rejecting, in substance, their prayers for bail. Both the applications were filed on 27th October 2018 after the Special Judge, Pune under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (1967 Act) had dismissed their bail plea. The ... |
id_169 | 1 | Whoever organises or causes to be organised any camp or camps for imparting training in terrorism shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than five years but which may extend to imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine., Punishment for recruiting any person for a terroris... |
id_169 | 2 | In absence of any form of corroboration at the prima facie stage it cannot be presumed that it was the same Arun Ferreira who had received money from Darsu. The prosecution has also not produced any material to show that actual money was transmitted. The communication dated 5th November 2017 (R-5), purportedly addresse... |
id_1690 | 0 | Date of decision: 02 September 2022. Letter Patent Appeal 48 of 2021 and Civil Miscellaneous No. 4157 of 2021 were filed through Mr. Akhil Sibal, Senior Advocate (Amicus Curiae) with the appellant in person, versus through Mr. Tushar Sannu, Standing Counsel with Ms. Pooja Gupta, Advocate for the respondent, Municipal C... |
id_1690 | 1 | We are unable to accept the argument of the appellant as correct. It is true that the normal rule is that it is for the plaintiff to prove negligence and not for the defendant to disprove it. But there is an exception to this rule which applies where the circumstances surrounding the thing which causes the damage are a... |
id_1692 | 0 | Civil Writ Petition No. 13497 of 2023 (Original and Miscellaneous) and other connected matters; Civil Writ Petition No. 19629 of 2023 (Original and Miscellaneous); Civil Writ Petition No. 19447 of 2023 (Original and Miscellaneous); Civil Writ Petition No. 13519 of 2023 (Original and Miscellaneous); Civil Writ Petition ... |
id_1692 | 1 | The District Judge concerned or the Registrar of the High Court are presumed to have satisfied themselves about the fact that the person in whose favour the certificate is being issued has practised for a particular length of time and we do not find any objection to the Commission reposing implicit faith and confidence... |
id_1694 | 0 | W.P.(C) 75/2024 Page 1 of 23 Reserved on: 13 February 2024 Pronounced on: 26 February 2024 Through: Mr. Rahul Bajaj, Advocate versus Through: Mr. Subhrodeep Saha and Mr. Kushal for Ms. Monika Arora, CGSC Issue 1. The petitioner is a 100 percent visually disabled student, pursuing his Master of Arts in Sociology in the ... |
id_1694 | 1 | In Vikash Kumar, the Supreme Court of India emphasized that reasonable accommodation is at the heart of the principle of equality and non‑discrimination espoused under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016. The denial of reasonable accommodation to a Person with Disability amounts to discrimination., The Ri... |
id_1695 | 0 | W.P.(C) 8136/2017 & W.P.(C) 8401/2017 Through: Mr. Prashant Bhushan, Senior Advocate with Ms. Neha Rathi and Ms. Kajal Giri, Advocates, versus Through: Mr. Ravi Prakash and Mr. Ali Khan, Advocates for Union of India. Ms. Charu Sharma for Mr. Aditya Singla, Senior Standing Counsel, Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Cu... |
id_1696 | 0 | Date of decision: 14 February 2024. Appellant: Through Mr. Trideep Pais, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Mihir Samson, Ms. Asawari Sodhi, Ms. Gargi Sethi, Advocates. Versus: Through Mr. Shoaib Haider, Appellant. Mr. S. K. Manan, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Rahul Khan, Mr. Karmanya Singh Choudhary, Mr. Ritik, Mr. Lavish, Advoca... |
id_1697 | 0 | Sharayu & Kavita & Jitendra World Crest Advisors LLP Applicant/Plaintiff Versus Catalyst Trusteeship Limited & Ors. Defendants And J.C. Flowers Asset Reconstruction Private Limited Respondent (Proposed Defendant) Mr. Navroz Seervai, Senior Counsel, Ms. Gulnar Mistry, Mr. Manish Desai, Mr. Subit Chakrabarti, Ms. Shreni ... |
id_1697 | 1 | Pursuant to the Assignment Agreement, e‑mails were addressed by the Company Secretary of Yes Bank and representative of JCF on 20th December 2022 making disclosures as to the purported transfer., A letter dated 3rd January 2023 was addressed by JCF to the Plaintiff, intimating them of the purported transfer of all righ... |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.