Supreme Court Reduces Sentence in Rash Driving Case: Sagar Lolienkar vs. State of Goa (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the High Court’s order of conviction for offences under Sections 279 and 304A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for rash and negligent driving is justified, and what should be the appropriate sentence. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case […]
Supreme Court Dismisses Transfer Petition in Matrimonial Dispute: Preeti Alok Singh vs. Alok Anil Singh (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Withdrawal of Transfer Petition. CASE TYPE: Criminal. Case Name: Preeti Alok Singh vs. Alok Anil Singh & Ors. [Judgment Date]: 18 November 2021 Date of the Judgment: 18 November 2021 Citation: Not Available Judges: Justice Vikram Nath
Supreme Court Dismisses Review Petition in Kiran Devi vs. Ravindra Kumar Yadav (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Review of a prior order of the Supreme Court. CASE TYPE: Criminal. Case Name: Smt. Kiran Devi vs. Ravindra Kumar Yadav [Judgment Date]: November 16, 2021 Date of the Judgment: November 16, 2021 Judges: Uday Umesh Lalit J., Ajay Rastogi
Supreme Court Dismisses Review Petition in Kiran Devi vs. Ravindra Kumar Yadav (2021) Read Post »
Supreme Court Dismisses Review Petition in Shikha Jain v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2021) – Case Review Date of the Judgment: November 16, 2021 Citation: [Not Available in Source] Judges: Uday Umesh Lalit, J. and Ajay Rastogi, J. Can a review petition be dismissed if there is no error apparent in the original judgment? The
Supreme Court Clarifies Complaint Filing in Cheque Dishonor Cases: Bhupesh Rathod vs. Dayashankar Prasad Chaurasia (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, by the Managing Director of a company, is valid if the company is not explicitly named as the complainant in the cause title. CASE
Supreme Court quashes conviction due to non-compliance with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act: Narayana Prasad Sahu vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2021) Date of the Judgment: 29 October 2021 Judges: Abhay S. Oka, J. and Ajay Rastogi, J. Can a conviction under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 be upheld if
Supreme Court quashes detention under National Security Act due to delay in representation consideration: Sarabjeet Singh Mokha vs. District Magistrate (2021) INSC 735 (29 October 2021) Date of the Judgment: 29 October 2021 Citation: (2021) INSC 735 Judges: Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J, Vikram Nath, J, B V Nagarathna, J. The judgment was authored by
Supreme Court Clarifies Attempt to Commit Rape vs. Preparation: State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Mahendra Alias Golu (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: What constitutes an ‘attempt to commit rape’ versus ‘mere preparation’ under the Indian Penal Code? CASE TYPE: Criminal Law Case Name: State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Mahendra Alias Golu Judgment Date: 25 October 2021 Date
Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Kerala Abkari Act Case Due to Lack of Evidence: Jayan vs. State of Kerala (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the prosecution has sufficiently proven the charges of illegal transportation of spirit under the Kerala Abkari Act. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law Case Name: Jayan vs. State of Kerala [Judgment Date]: 22 October
Supreme Court Abates Criminal Appeal Due to Appellant’s Death: Uma Shanker Sharma vs. Registrar General (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Abatement of a criminal appeal due to the death of the sole appellant. CASE TYPE: Criminal Appeal Case Name: Uma Shanker Sharma vs. The Registrar General, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Judgment Date: 20 October 2021
Supreme Court clarifies “illicitly removed” under Kerala Forest Act: Bharath Booshan Aggarwal vs. State of Kerala (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the prosecution must prove that the accused had knowledge of the illicit origin of forest produce for conviction under Section 27(1)(d) of the Kerala Forest Act, 1961. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law Case Name: Bharath Booshan
Supreme Court Upholds Criminal Probe in Housing Scam: Shaikh Ansar Ahmad vs. State of Maharashtra (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the High Court’s order directing authorities to take steps based on inquiry reports, which led to the initiation of criminal proceedings, was justified, and whether the appellants, who were not parties to the original public interest
