Supreme Court Upholds Murder Conviction: Satya Raj Singh vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the conviction of the appellant for murder was justified based on the evidence presented. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Satya Raj Singh vs. State of Madhya Pradesh Judgment Date: 28 January 2019 Date of the Judgment: 28 January […]
Supreme Court Upholds Key Provisions of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 Date of the Judgment: 25 January 2019 Citation: (2019) ibclaw.in 03 SC Judges: Justice R.F. Nariman and Justice Navin Sinha Is the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) a constitutionally valid law? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this critical question in a
Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Mobile Snatching Case Due to Doubtful Identification: Suraj Pal vs. State of Haryana (2019) Date of the Judgment: 25 January 2019 Citation: 2019 INSC 68 Judges: R. Banumathi, J. and R. Subhash Reddy, J. Can a conviction be sustained solely on the basis of a witness identifying the accused for
Supreme Court clarifies absorption criteria for Ad-hoc Fast Track Court Judges: High Court of Hyderabad vs. P. Murali Mohana Reddy (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether minimum qualifying marks are required in the viva voce (interview) for absorption of ad-hoc Fast Track Court Judges into the regular cadre. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: High Court of
Supreme Court allows import of restricted goods on payment of market value: Commissioner of Customs vs. M/S. Atul Automations Pvt. Ltd. (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether restricted goods imported without authorization can be released on payment of market value. CASE TYPE: Customs Law, Import/Export Regulation Case Name: Commissioner of Customs vs. M/S. Atul Automations Pvt. Ltd.
Supreme Court Allows Additional Evidence in Cheating Case: Brig. Sukhjeet Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2019) Date of the Judgment: January 24, 2019 Citation: 2019 INSC 67 Judges: Ashok Bhushan, J. and K.M. Joseph, J. Can an appellate court allow additional evidence in a criminal case where the accused claims crucial documents were not
Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Fatal Family Dispute Case: Munishamappa & Ors. vs. State of Karnataka (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the High Court was correct in reversing the acquittal order of the Trial Court and convicting the accused under Section 304 Part I read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and whether
Supreme Court Upholds Appointment of Projectionist: Gangaram vs. State of Rajasthan (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a candidate must possess a license for operating a cinema projector on the last date of application, or if acquiring it within a stipulated time after appointment is sufficient. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Gangaram vs. The State of
Supreme Court Overturns Conviction Based Solely on Extra-Judicial Confession in Murder Case LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code can be solely based on an extra-judicial confession. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Chakarai @ Chakaravarthi vs. State Rep. by Inspector of Police Judgment Date: 24 January 2019 Introduction Date
Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Assault Case: Raju Ambadas vs. State of Maharashtra (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: The key legal issue was whether the High Court was justified in reversing the trial court’s acquittal of the accused in a case involving assault and subsequent death. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law Case Name: Raju Ambadas Gangekar vs. The
Supreme Court Clarifies Definition of ‘Agricultural Produce’ Under Maharashtra Act Date of the Judgment: 24 January 2019 Citation: (2019) INSC 59 Judges: R. Banumathi, J. and R. Subhash Reddy, J. Can processed items like edible oil, vanaspati, and sugar be considered “agricultural produce” under the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1963? The Supreme Court
Supreme Court Upholds Summoning of Additional Accused under Section 319 CrPC in Homicide Case Date of the Judgment: 24 January 2019 Citation: 2019 INSC 60 Judges: L. Nageswara Rao, J. and Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, J. Can a trial court summon additional individuals as accused based on evidence presented during a trial? The Supreme Court of
