ive
THE BHARATIYA SAKSHYA ADHINIYAM, 2023
THE BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2023
THE BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(121) NEERAJ KUMAR SINGH Vs. TESU KUMARI[PATNA HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Sections 5, 7 and 9 - Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Section 498A - Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 - Sections 3 and 4 – Matrimonial Dispute -Restitution of conjugal rights - The appellant's marriage was solemnized on November 9, 2003, but issues arose when his family pressured him to remarry for dowry - The primary issue was the validity of the marriage and whether the respondent was entitled to restitution of conjugal rights - The respondent argued that the marriage was valid
India Law Library Docid # 2414897

(122) SUNIL KUMAR MODAK Vs. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND OTHERS[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024
Service Law – Medical Leave - Absence and Salary payment - A Grade-IV employee was transferred to Chhagolia High School and sought medical leave for tuberculosis - This led to a dispute over his absence and salary payment - The main issue is whether petitioner's leave from 11.05.2017 to 20.06.2017 should be sanctioned and his salary released - Petitioner argues he was entitled to leave for medical reasons and that his continued absence was due to illness - The school and authorities argue that
India Law Library Docid # 2414915

(123) DON BOSCO COLLEGE AND ANOTHER Vs. THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024
Railways Act, 1989 - Sections 16, 18, and 19 - Don Bosco College, located on partially gifted land, is facing a dispute over the maintenance of a level crossing gate installed by the Railways - The college argues that the gate is used by the public and the Railways have a duty to maintain it without charging the college - The Railways argue that the gate is exclusively for the college and is not financially justified to be maintained without the college contributing to maintenance costs - The co
India Law Library Docid # 2414916

(124) ARUN KUMAR AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Sections 7 and 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) – Demanding and accepting bribes - A trap was set and the appellants were caught red-handed - The main issue was the validity of the conviction without the complainant's testimony and the sufficiency of other evidence to prove the demand for a bribe - The appellants argued infirmities in the prosecution case, such as the non-examination of the complainant and the absence of proof of demand - The State defended
India Law Library Docid # 2414932

(125) SABIR ALIAS AKRAM AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME, U.P. LKO.[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (LUCKNOW BENCH)] 10-05-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 396 and 412 – Dacoity with Murder – The applicants have been in jail since 22.02.2016 - The main issue is whether the applicants were falsely implicated, as the FIR did not name anyone and the subsequent investigation and identification process have been questioned - The defence argues that the applicants were falsely implicated, citing past bail orders for Applicants - They also point out the testimony of the deceased's brother, which contradicts the occurrence
India Law Library Docid # 2414847

(126) FAYAZ AHMAD SHAH Vs. UT OF J&K AND OTHERS[JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024
Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 - Section 8 – Detention –Petitioner was detained to prevent him from acting in a manner prejudicial to the security of the UT of J&K - The main issue is the legality of the detention order, with the petitioner arguing that it was passed mechanically without proper grounds and the respondent asserting that all legal requirements were met - The petitioner contends there are no criminal antecedents against the detenue, the order lacks compelling reasons, an
India Law Library Docid # 2414848

(127) JIBIN T THANKACHAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA[KERALA HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 451, 427, 294(b) and 308 - House-trespass –Causing damage and hurling abuses at a barber shop - The main issue is whether the petitioner, who has been in custody since 06.04.2024, should be granted regular bail - The petitioner claims innocence, stating he is falsely implicated and that the complainant sustained no injuries - The Public Prosecutor has no serious objection to granting bail, subject to stringent conditions - Bail is granted with conditions includi
India Law Library Docid # 2414849

(128) SH NEERAJ AHUJA Vs. AIPL ZORRO PVT LTD[DELHI HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) – Order 8 Rule 1, Order 11 Rule 4 - The petitioner is contesting a suit for recovery of Rs. 45,28,463 filed by the respondent - The petitioner filed a written statement and an affidavit for admission/denial of documents, arguing that the Trial Court erroneously removed the statement from the record - The respondent argues that the statement was filed without an application for condonation of delay and the affidavit was not included with the written statement - Th
India Law Library Docid # 2414850

(129) DAUD NASIR Vs. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT[DELHI HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024
Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 – Sections 45 and 50 – Anticipatory Bail - A petitioner, charged under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, seeks interim bail due to his wife's surgery and the need to care for their one-year-old child - The court grants interim bail on humanitarian grounds, allowing him to support his wife and child during the surgery with specific conditions and without extending bail post-operation - The Directorate of Enforcement argues that granting bail could un
India Law Library Docid # 2414851

(130) DAYA NAND CHANDELA Vs. STATE[DELHI HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 452, 307 and 34 – The case involves an attack on the residence of an MLA, with the appellant and co-accused convicted for offences under IPC - Petitioner aged 70, seeks to suspend his conviction to contest the Lok Sabha Elections 2024, citing his political career and public service record - The State opposes the suspension, noting previous similar applications were dismissed and the trial court's conviction was based on detailed evidence - The application for su
India Law Library Docid # 2414852

(131) VANDANA BATRA Vs. ANUPAM GUPTA AND ANOTHER[DELHI HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) – Order 6 Rule 17 – Amendment of Pleadings - Property Dispute – Partition - The case revolves around the partition of Late 'M's estate, with the plaintiff and defendants being his children - The plaintiff argues for a 1/3rd share in the estate, claiming Late 'M' died intestate - Defendant no. 1 seeks to amend their written statement to include additional properties for partition, claiming Late 'M' left a Will - The court allowed the amendment, citing that the ame
India Law Library Docid # 2414853

(132) REMAL SOLANKI AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF M. P. AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024
Service Law – Termination - The petitions challenge the unilateral termination of services of the petitioners from their teaching positions - The main issue is whether the termination of services without a departmental enquiry is legal - The petitioners argue that their services were terminated without a departmental enquiry and without an opportunity to be heard, making the termination illegal - The respondents claim that the petitioners' appointments were fraudulent and thus, their services we
India Law Library Docid # 2414854

(133) TRBEX IMPEX PVT. LTD. Vs. M/S ASHOK FINE SPUN[MADHYA RADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 10-05-2024
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Section 11 (6) - Petitioner filed for an arbitration against respondent over an unpaid amount of Rs. 5,22,84,012/- under an agreement for solar electricity supply - The main issue was whether the arbitration clause in the agreement, which uses the word "may," mandates arbitration or if it's optional - Petitioner argued for the appointment of an arbitrator as per the agreement's dispute resolution clause – Respondent contended that arbitration was optional
India Law Library Docid # 2414855

(134) SMT. ROHANI AHIRWAR Vs. MUKESH LADIYAI[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Sections 174, 200 and 482 - The petitioner filed a complaint under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. after her husband's death on 10.12.2015 - Despite an inquest inquiry, no charge-sheet was filed, leading her to file a complaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. The main issue was the discrepancy between the incident date and the respondent's statement under Section 200- The petitioner argued that the trial Magistrate erred by not considering the respondent's extra-judic
India Law Library Docid # 2414856

(135) RAJARAM YADAV Vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER, SAGAR DIVISION AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024
Limitation Act, 1963 – Section 5 – The petitioner filed a petition regarding a mutation entry based on a partition order from 2005 - Respondent No.5 applied for the mutation in 2017, which was granted, leading to the petitioner's appeals being dismissed due to limitation - The main issue was whether the mutation entry and subsequent orders were lawful, considering the delay in the application for mutation and the petitioner's non-inclusion in the proceedings - The petitioner argued that the orde
India Law Library Docid # 2414857

(136) KARNAIL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 – Section 15 - The appellant was convicted of possessing 49 kg of poppy husk under Section 15 of the NDPS Act- . The appeal challenged the sentence duration, not the conviction - The appellant has already undergone 10 months and 23 days of the sentence - His counsel argued for a reduced sentence due to his age, health issues, and the long duration since the incident - The State's counsel upheld the trial court's judgment, and the High Court mo
India Law Library Docid # 2414947

(137) KULDEEP SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Sections 22(c) and 25 – Possession of 10,000 Tramadol tablets, a commercial quantity under the NDPS Act - The petitioner filed a third bail application under Section 439 of the CrPC, questioning the applicability of Section 37 of the NDPS Act - The petitioner argued that the delay in trial was due to a lack of witnesses and acquittal in a previous case - The State opposed bail, citing the commercial quantity of Tramadol involved and the stat
India Law Library Docid # 2414948

(138) ASHOK KUMAR SAHNI AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF HARYANA[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 and 120B – The case involves two petitions related to an alleged fraud where entities controlled by the complainant paid Rs.2.02 crores for mobile phone accessories that were not supplied - The petitioners, one a senior citizen and the other a woman, argue for anticipatory bail, claiming they are not involved in day-to-day operations - The State argues that the petitioners were involved in siphoning off funds and had criminal anteced
India Law Library Docid # 2414949

(139) JASWINDER KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 302, 452 and 34 –Petitioner is accused of murder alongside co-accused, based on allegations of a fatal altercation - The main issue is whether Petitioner, as a co-accused, should be granted anticipatory bail - The petitioner contends that pre-trial incarceration would cause irreversible injustice and agrees to comply with stringent conditions for bail - The State counsel opposes the bail, highlighting the seriousness of the allegations against the petitioner - T
India Law Library Docid # 2414950

(140) ARPIT @ ARPIT KUNDU Vs. STATE OF HARYANA[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 10-05-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 148, 149, 323, 307, 379-B, 387 and 506 - Arms Act, 1959 – Section 25 – A petitioner was arrested for extortion, assault, and shooting, and has been in custody since 06.03.2023 - He seeks bail, claiming no criminal antecedents and being a student - The state opposes bail, citing him as the main accused - The petitioner argues for bail based on his status as a student with no prior criminal record and his willingness to comply with stringent conditions, including
India Law Library Docid # 2414951