Author name: G.R. Hari

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Double Murder Case Based on Eyewitness Testimony and Circumstantial Evidence: Hajabhai Rajashibhai Odedara vs. State of Gujarat (2022) INSC 644 (11 July 2022)

/ Attempt to Murder, B.V. Nagarathna, Criminal Law, Evidence, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 307, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 328, Judges, M. R. Shah, Murder

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Double Murder Case Based on Eyewitness Testimony and Circumstantial Evidence LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the conviction of the accused for murder can be sustained based on the testimony of a sole eyewitness who provided inconsistent statements, along with circumstantial evidence. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Hajabhai Rajashibhai Odedara vs. State of […]

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Double Murder Case Based on Eyewitness Testimony and Circumstantial Evidence: Hajabhai Rajashibhai Odedara vs. State of Gujarat (2022) INSC 644 (11 July 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Remands Case on Technical Assistant Appointment: Biju K.K. vs. Cochin University of Science and Technology (2022)

/ Appointment, B.V. Nagarathna, Daily Wager, Eligibility Criteria, Judges, Judicial Review, M.R. Shah, Service Law

Supreme Court Remands Case on Technical Assistant Appointment: Biju K.K. vs. Cochin University of Science and Technology (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a Selection Committee’s decision on awarding marks for experience can be challenged when prior service as a daily wager is ignored, and whether a candidate met the eligibility criteria for a Technical Assistant position.

Supreme Court Remands Case on Technical Assistant Appointment: Biju K.K. vs. Cochin University of Science and Technology (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Revisits Disciplinary Action: Gajendra Singh vs. Union of India (2022)

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Disciplinary Proceedings, Judges, M. R. Shah, Proportionality of Punishment, Removal from Service, Service Law

Supreme Court Revisits Disciplinary Action: Gajendra Singh vs. Union of India (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the punishment of removal from service was disproportionate to the misconduct of issuing an insurance cover note without receiving the premium. CASE TYPE: Service Law/Disciplinary Proceedings Case Name: Dr. Gajendra Singh vs. Union of India & Ors. Judgment Date: July

Supreme Court Revisits Disciplinary Action: Gajendra Singh vs. Union of India (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies classification of ‘KADIPROL’ as Poultry Feed vs. Drug: State of Gujarat vs. Cadila Healthcare Ltd. (2022)

/ Drug and Medicine, Gujarat Sales Tax Act, Gujarat Sales Tax Act with Entry 25 Schedule I, Judges, M.R. Shah, Poultry Feed, Sanjiv Khanna

Supreme Court clarifies classification of ‘KADIPROL’ as Poultry Feed vs. Drug: State of Gujarat vs. Cadila Healthcare Ltd. (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the product “KADIPROL” should be classified as “Poultry Feed” or “Drug and Medicine” under the Gujarat Sales Tax Act. CASE TYPE: Sales Tax Law Case Name: State of Gujarat vs. Cadila Healthcare Ltd.

Supreme Court clarifies classification of ‘KADIPROL’ as Poultry Feed vs. Drug: State of Gujarat vs. Cadila Healthcare Ltd. (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Debtor’s Right to Reclaim Property Under Income Tax Act: R.S. Infra-Transmission Ltd. vs. Saurinindubhai Patel (2022)

/ Auction Sale, B.V. Nagarathna, Income Tax Act, 1961, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Rule 60, Judges, M.R. Shah, Recovery of Debt

Supreme Court Upholds Debtor’s Right to Reclaim Property Under Income Tax Act: R.S. Infra-Transmission Ltd. vs. Saurinindubhai Patel (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a debtor’s right to reclaim property under Rule 60 of the Second Schedule of the Income Tax Act, 1961, can be defeated due to a minor shortfall in payment caused by an error

Supreme Court Upholds Debtor’s Right to Reclaim Property Under Income Tax Act: R.S. Infra-Transmission Ltd. vs. Saurinindubhai Patel (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Classifies Anardana: Customs Duty Dispute Resolved (2022)

/ Bela M. Trivedi, Classification of Goods, Customs Law, Customs Tariff Act, 1975, Customs Tariff Act, 1975 with Section 0813, Customs Tariff Act, 1975 with Section 1209, Import Policy, Judges, Sanjiv Khanna

Supreme Court Classifies Anardana: Customs Duty Dispute Resolved (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Classification of dried pomegranate seeds (anardana) for customs duty. CASE TYPE: Customs and Excise Law Case Name: Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, Amritsar vs. M/s D.L. Steels Etc. Judgment Date: 11th July 2022 Introduction Date of the Judgment: 11th July 2022 Citation: Civil

Supreme Court Classifies Anardana: Customs Duty Dispute Resolved (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Temple’s Right Over Dedicated Jewelry: R.M. Sundaram vs. Sri Kayarohanasamy Temple (2022)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order II Rule 2, Judges, Religious Endowment, Sanjiv Khanna, Specific Endowment, Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959, Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 with Section 6(17)

Supreme Court Upholds Temple’s Right Over Dedicated Jewelry: R.M. Sundaram vs. Sri Kayarohanasamy Temple (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether certain jewelry kept in a temple vault constitutes a specific endowment for the deity or belongs to the family that placed it there. CASE TYPE: Religious Endowment/Civil Case Name: R.M. Sundaram @ Meenakshisundaram v. Sri Kayarohanasamy and

Supreme Court Upholds Temple’s Right Over Dedicated Jewelry: R.M. Sundaram vs. Sri Kayarohanasamy Temple (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Enhances Compensation for Homemaker’s Death: Chandrasekharan vs. Dinakar (2022)

/ Aniruddha Bose, Compensation Law, Dinesh Maheshwari, Homemaker Compensation, Judges, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 with Section 166, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 with Section 168, Supreme Court Judgments

Supreme Court Enhances Compensation for Homemaker’s Death: Chandrasekharan vs. Dinakar (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Determination of pecuniary loss in motor accident claims involving the death of a homemaker. CASE TYPE: Motor Accident Compensation Case Name: S. Chandrasekharan & Ors. vs. M. Dinakar & Anr. [Judgment Date]: 11th July 2022 Date of the Judgment: 11th July 2022

Supreme Court Enhances Compensation for Homemaker’s Death: Chandrasekharan vs. Dinakar (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Striking Off Defence for Non-Payment of Rent: Asha Rani Gupta vs. Vineet Kumar (2022)

/ Aniruddha Bose, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order XV Rule 5, Dinesh Maheshwari, Eviction, Judges, Landlord and Tenant Law, Procedural Law, Rent Recovery, Tenant Obligations

Supreme Court Upholds Striking Off Defence for Non-Payment of Rent: Asha Rani Gupta vs. Vineet Kumar (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a tenant’s defense can be struck off for failing to deposit rent as per Order XV Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, even if the tenant denies the landlord-tenant relationship. CASE TYPE:

Supreme Court Upholds Striking Off Defence for Non-Payment of Rent: Asha Rani Gupta vs. Vineet Kumar (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Life Imprisonment in Terror Conspiracy Case: Mohammad Irfan vs. State of Karnataka (2022)

/ Arms Act, 1959, Arms Act, 1959 with Section 25, Arms Act, 1959 with Section 26, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 196, Explosive Substances Act, 1908, Explosive Substances Act, 1908 with Section 5, Explosives, Hemant Gupta, Illegal Arms, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 120B, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 121A, Judges, Offences Against the State, S. Ravindra Bhat, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Upholds Life Imprisonment in Terror Conspiracy Case: Mohammad Irfan vs. State of Karnataka (2022) Date of the Judgment: 11 July 2022 Citation: 2022 INSC 610 Judges: Uday Umesh Lalit, J., Hemant Gupta, J., S. Ravindra Bhat, J. Can mere association with a group planning terrorist acts lead to a conviction for waging war

Supreme Court Upholds Life Imprisonment in Terror Conspiracy Case: Mohammad Irfan vs. State of Karnataka (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Orders Imprisonment and Recovery in Contempt Case Against Vijay Mallya

/ Civil Contempt, Constitution of India, Constitution of India with Article 129, Contempt of Courts Act, Contempt of Courts Act with Contempt, Judges, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, S. Ravindra Bhat, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Orders Imprisonment and Recovery in Contempt Case Against Vijay Mallya LEGAL ISSUE: Contempt of Court for Disobeying Orders and Transferring Funds CASE TYPE: Contempt of Court Case Name: State Bank of India and Ors. vs. Dr. Vijay Mallya Judgment Date: July 11, 2022 Date of the Judgment: July 11, 2022 Citation: Not Available

Supreme Court Orders Imprisonment and Recovery in Contempt Case Against Vijay Mallya Read Post »

Supreme Court overturns conviction in murder case due to lack of evidence: Virendra vs. State of M.P. (2022)

/ Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 27, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 3, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 34, Judges, M.M. Sundresh, Offences Against Human Body, Sanjay Kishan Kaul

Supreme Court overturns conviction in murder case due to lack of evidence: Virendra vs. State of M.P. (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the prosecution proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused committed the murder. CASE TYPE: Criminal Appeal Case Name: Virendra vs. State of Madhya Pradesh Judgment Date: 11 July 2022 Introduction Date of the

Supreme Court overturns conviction in murder case due to lack of evidence: Virendra vs. State of M.P. (2022) Read Post »

Scroll to Top