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

(961) PURUSHOTTAM DAS AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 29-03-2024
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 125 – Maintenance - Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - Sections 23 and 29 - Power to grant interim and ex parte orders – The appellant ‘B’, sought maintenance allowance from her husband, ‘P’ - The trial court rejected her application, but the appellate court set aside that order -Whether the appellate court’s order was valid – Whether ‘B’ was entitled to maintenance -The appellate court’s order was against the weight of evidence and dis
India Law Library Docid # 2403687

(962) PREETI AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF U.P. THRU. DIRECTOR PROSECUTION U.P. LUCKNOW AND ANOTHER[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (LUCKNOW BENCH)] 29-03-2024
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 125 - Limitation Act, 1963 - Section 5 - Family Courts Act, 1984 - Section 19(4) –The revision challenged the validity of a judgment and order passed by the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court No. 8, Lucknow - The order pertained to a claim for maintenance under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C - The revisionists sought condonation of a 105-day delay in filing the revision - The reason for the delay was an accident suffered by revisionist no. 1, resulting i
India Law Library Docid # 2403688

(963) NAVJOT SINGH Vs. STATE OF U.P.[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 29-03-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 498-A, 304-B, 504 – Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 - Sections 3 and 4 – The applicant is accused under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 504 I.P.C., and Section 3/4 D.P. Act - The allegations relate to cruelty, dowry demands, and the death - The applicant claims innocence and asserts that he was falsely implicated - The marriage was a love marriage, so the question of dowry demand is baseless - The applicant’s family members were granted bail, and no charges have been framed
India Law Library Docid # 2403689

(964) NAINA ANANDJEE @ NAINA MURTI SRIVASTAVA Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 29-03-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 406, 420,504 and 506 - Anticipatory Bail - The case pertains to a property dispute between the applicant and the informant - The applicant was accused of breach of contract - The applicant claimed that the allegations were false and that there was no criminal liability - The applicant argued that it was a case of breach of agreement, not a criminal offence - The informant contended that the applicant had an intention to cheat - Despite receiving a substantial am
India Law Library Docid # 2403690

(965) STATE OF U.P THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LUCKNOW Vs. ALOK KUMAR @ MUNMUN AND OTHERS[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (LUCKNOW BENCH)] 29-03-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 363, 366 - Limitation Act, 1963 - Section 5 - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012 - Section 4 and 17 – Kidnapping, abducting or inducing woman to compel her marriage – The case involves an appeal filed by the State of U.P. against the acquittal of the accused persons - The appeal was filed with a delay of 30 days -The delay occurred due to official formalities - The State seeks condonation of delay in the interest of justice - The explanation fo
India Law Library Docid # 2403691

(966) KRISHNA MOHAN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHER[PATNA HIGH COURT] 28-03-2024
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Section 138 - The petition challenges the order dated 08.09.2014, where cognizance was taken under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (N.I. Act) for a dishonored cheque of Rs. 8 lakhs - The petitioner is accused of not repaying a loan to ‘V’, resulting in a legal complaint after a cheque was dishonored due to insufficient funds - The petitioner seeks to quash the cognizance order, claiming the cheque was stolen and misused by ‘V’ who is facing trial
India Law Library Docid # 2403648

(967) HRIDAY NARAYAN CHOUBEY Vs. SATYA NARAYAN CHOUBEY AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 28-03-2024
Will – Dispute over the probate - The petitioner challenges the order that dismissed his petition for recalling an earlier order which closed his evidence in a probate case - The case involves a dispute over the probate of Will of ‘L’ - The petitioner’s evidence was closed after two witnesses were recorded, and his subsequent petition to recall the order was denied - The petitioner contends that he was ill on the date of the hearing due to extreme cold and that there was no deliberate act on his
India Law Library Docid # 2403649

(968) GENESIS INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT & TECHNOLOGY Vs. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 28-03-2024
Allotment of Land – Cancellation of - The petitioner is challenging the cancellation of land allotment by the KMDA and seeking a writ of mandamus to commence construction on the allotted plot - KMDA allotted land to the petitioner for a healthcare institute, which was later cancelled due to non-payment of penal charges for delayed construction - The petitioner appealed for the cancellation of the penalty and the resumption of construction rights - The petitioner contends that as a non-profit, pe
India Law Library Docid # 2403650

(969) DEBASISH MONDAL Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANOTHER[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 28-03-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 304B - Dowry Death - The revisional application challenges the continuance of a case involving 14 accused and allegations of dowry death and torture - The case pertains to the alleged torture and death of ‘K’ with the petitioner being a distant relative of the deceased’s husband - The petitioner appeals against his implication in the case, arguing for the lack of specific allegations against him – Petitioner contends he had no role in the family affairs or the al
India Law Library Docid # 2403651

(970) DR. RAJEEV SANDAL Vs. STATE OF H.P. AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 28-03-2024
Service Law - Refusal of NOC - The petitioner faced refusal of a No Objection Certificate (NOC) by the State of Himachal Pradesh, which affected his appointment at AIIMS Bilaspur - Petitioner after completing super specialty in Clinical Hematology, was denied NOC based on a bond to serve the state, despite being selected for a post at AIIMS Bilaspur – Petitioner argued that he is being discriminated against compared to a similarly situated individual who was granted NOC - The State contested the
India Law Library Docid # 2403652

(971) SARSWATI DEVI Vs. STATE OF H.P. AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 28-03-2024
Service Law – Transfer - The petitioner is seeking a transfer to a place of convenience due to her daughter’s disability, which is not being granted despite relevant provisions in the transfer policy - The petitioner’s daughter is visually impaired to the extent of 80% - The petitioner has been seeking a transfer to GSSS Amarpur, where a vacancy is about to occur, to better care for her child - The petitioner argues that the transfer policy’s sub-para 5.6 allows for concessions to officials with
India Law Library Docid # 2403653

(972) UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. SMT. LEELA WATI AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 28-03-2024
Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 - Section 163A - Whether the deceased were covered under the insurance policy - The vehicle owned by the respondent met with an accident, resulting in the death of two individuals and injuries to another - The claimants filed petitions under Section 163-A of the Act, claiming compensation - The insurer argued that the claim petitions were not maintainable as the annual income of the deceased exceeded Rs.40,000, and that the deceased were gratuitous passengers not covered
India Law Library Docid # 2403654

(973) JAGDEV CHAND Vs. STATE OF H.P. AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 28-03-2024
Service Law – Appoinment - The petitioner challenges the appointment of respondent No.4 as a Junior Basic Trained Teacher on contract basis in District Sirmour, alleging the use of a fake Scheduled Tribe Certificate - Respondent No.4 obtained a Scheduled Tribe Certificate and secured a JBT position, which was later found to be withdrawn - Despite this, respondent No.4 continued to use the certificate for educational qualification and government employment - The petitioner argues that respondent
India Law Library Docid # 2403655

(974) KAMLA THAKUR AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 28-03-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 354D, 506 and 509 - Quashing of FIR - FIR was filed by petitioner No.1 against petitioner No.2, which has now been amicably settled - The dispute has been resolved through a compromise deed, and continuing proceedings would be an abuse of process - Not explicitly mentioned, but the state likely argued for the continuation of legal proceedings based on the nature of the offences - Citing the case Narinder Singh vs. State of Punjab, the court recognized its power
India Law Library Docid # 2403656

(975) RAMANDEEP AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 28-03-2024
Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 226 - The petitioners seek protection for their life and liberty - Petitioners are in a live-in relationship, not of marriageable age, and fear harm from relative - Cited previous judgments supporting protection for live-in relationships and fundamental rights - The State has no objection to assessing the threat and providing protection if necessary - Emphasized the paramount importance of protecting life and liberty under the Constitution - Directed the Sen
India Law Library Docid # 2403657

(976) SUREKHA SAMAL AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF ORISSA AND OTHERS[ORISSA HIGH COURT] 28-03-2024
Service Law - Sikshya Sahayaks - An advertisement for Sikshya Sahayak positions required candidates to have passed +2 and C.T. training - Some candidates with vocational qualifications were initially excluded, leading to legal challenges and subsequent inclusion after court orders - The petitioners argue that the vocational candidates obtained their certificates by suppressing facts, which amounts to fraud, and their engagement orders should be declared illegal - The respondents claim that the c
India Law Library Docid # 2403658

(977) MOIZ SHABBIR LOKHANDWALA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 28-03-2024
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Sections 22(c) and 29 - Arms Act, 1959 - Sections 3 and 4 - Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 - Sections 135 read with 37(1) - (A1) and (A2) were apprehended with contraband substances - The applicant is alleged to be the main supplier of drugs in the Mumbra and Thane area -Whether there is prima facie material to connect the applicant with the offences - Whether the seizure of contraband articles from Abhishek (A1) is valid - The applicant has
India Law Library Docid # 2403695

(978) MR. SUBHASH RAMNATH PANDEY Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHER[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 28-03-2024
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005- Section 19(1)(a) - restraining the respondent from dispossessing or in any other manner disturbing the possession of the aggrieved person from the shared household - The order is a revision application taken to the High Court regarding a modification made by the Appellate Court to an order passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate - The revisional application is dismissed, as the High Court finds no infirmity in the order of the Appellate Court
India Law Library Docid # 2403696

(979) DR. MADHAV Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT (AURANGABAD BENCH)] 28-03-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 420, 274, 275, 276 and 34 - Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 - Section 9-B, 18(c), 17-B – Spurious drugs - The petitioner, a medical practitioner, was accused of selling spurious remdesivir injections to a respondent for COVID-19 treatment. The respondent's mother was prescribed the injections, but the respondent couldn't obtain them and informed the petitioner, who arranged for them to be supplied by another doctor. The respondent purchased the injections for a h
India Law Library Docid # 2403697

(980) KISHOR PANDURANG BALPANDE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASTRA[BOMBAY HIGH COURT (NAGPUR BENCH)] 28-03-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 143, 147, 149, 332, 353, 405, and 406 - Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 - Section 48(7) - Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 - Section 3(1)(ii), 3(2), and 3(4) - Anticipatory Bail - The case revolves around an applicant accused of threatening a Circle Officer and preventing him from fulfilling his duties - The primary issue is whether there is a prima facie case to deny anticipatory bail - The court considered whether the confessional statement
India Law Library Docid # 2403698