Supreme Court Upholds Charges Under Prevention of Corruption Act in Goa Power Rebate Case Date of the Judgment: January 17, 2018 Citation: (2018) INSC 21 Judges: N.V. Ramana, J., S. Abdul Nazeer, J. Can public officials be charged under the Prevention of Corruption Act for allegedly misusing their positions to grant undue benefits to private […]
Supreme Court Sets Aside Non-Bailable Warrant in Bail Cancellation Case: Upendra Sharma vs. State of Bihar (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a High Court can issue a non-bailable warrant of arrest on an application for cancellation of regular bail. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Upendra Sharma vs. State of Bihar & Anr. Judgment Date: 10 January
LEGAL ISSUE: The central legal issue is the extent of the power of police officers to seize bank accounts under Section 102 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, particularly when those accounts are suspected to be linked to a crime. CASE TYPE: Criminal. Case Name: Teesta Atul Setalvad vs. The State of Gujarat. Judgment
LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the appointment of the Special Director of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) was valid, given allegations of impropriety and procedural lapses. CASE TYPE: Public Interest Litigation (Service Law) Case Name: Common Cause vs. Union of India and Others Judgment Date: 28 November 2017 Introduction Can an appointment to a high-ranking position
LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an elderly and illiterate plaintiff can be allowed to present their evidence through a commission at their residence. CASE TYPE: Civil Case Name: Prasadi Devi vs. Nagar Palika Sawai Madhopur Judgment Date: 13 November 2017 Date of the Judgment: 13 November 2017 Citation: 2017 INSC 987 Judges: R.K. Agrawal, J., Abhay Manohar
LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the testimony of a deaf and dumb, mentally challenged rape victim is essential for conviction when other evidence exists. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law Case Name: The State of Maharashtra vs. Bandu @ Daulat Judgment Date: 24 October 2017 Introduction Date of the Judgment: 24 October 2017 Citation: Criminal Appeal No. 1820 of
LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the accused were rightly convicted for kidnapping for ransom under Section 364A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). CASE TYPE: Criminal Law – Kidnapping, Dacoity Case Name: Birbal Choudhary @ Mukhiya Jee vs. State of Bihar [Judgment Date]: October 6, 2017 Introduction Date of the Judgment: October 6, 2017 Citation: Not Available
Date of the Judgment: October 4, 2017 Citation: (2017) INSC 873 Judges: Justice R.K. Agrawal and Justice S. Abdul Nazeer Can a conviction for attempt to murder be reduced to simple hurt if the injury is not on a vital part of the body and there was no pre-meditation? The Supreme Court of India addressed
Can a High Court grant anticipatory bail without considering the gravity of the accusations? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in a recent case concerning the alleged kidnapping of a minor. This case highlights the importance of considering the seriousness of the charges when granting pre-arrest bail. The Supreme Court, in this criminal
LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a conviction under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (TADA) is a sufficient ground to deny parole. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law, Parole. Case Name: Asfaq vs. State of Rajasthan and Others. Judgment Date: September 11, 2017. Introduction Can a person convicted under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA)
Can a contractor claim additional payments for work when there’s a discrepancy in government-prescribed rates? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this question in a civil appeal concerning a construction contract. The court upheld the High Court’s decision, which had rejected certain claims made by a contractor for extra work. This case clarifies how
Can a contractor claim additional payments for work beyond the original contract? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this question in a case involving a construction contract dispute. The court examined whether a contractor was entitled to extra payments for stone pitching and water lead, ultimately ruling against the contractor. This judgment highlights the
