Aniruddha Bose Archives

Supreme Court Directs Manipur Speaker to Decide Disqualification Petitions: Keisham Meghachandra Singh vs. The Hon’ble Speaker Manipur Legislative Assembly & Ors. (21 January 2020)

January 21, 2020 / Aniruddha Bose, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Judges, R.F. Nariman, Tenth Schedule, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Directs Manipur Speaker to Decide Disqualification Petitions: Keisham Meghachandra Singh vs. The Hon’ble Speaker Manipur Legislative Assembly & Ors. (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a High Court can direct a Speaker to decide a disqualification petition within a certain time, and whether such a direction would not fall foul of the quia timet action […]

Supreme Court Directs Manipur Speaker to Decide Disqualification Petitions: Keisham Meghachandra Singh vs. The Hon’ble Speaker Manipur Legislative Assembly & Ors. (21 January 2020) Read Post »

Child Custody in International Disputes: Supreme Court Addresses Habeas Corpus and Parental Rights in Yashita Sahu vs. State of Rajasthan (20 January 2020)

January 20, 2020 / Aniruddha Bose, Child Custody, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Deepak Gupta, Family Law, Habeas Corpus, Judges, Parental Rights

Supreme Court Rules on Child Custody in International Disputes: Yashita Sahu vs. State of Rajasthan (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a writ of habeas corpus is maintainable for child custody when a child is with a natural guardian, and the extent to which Indian courts should consider foreign court orders in child custody matters. CASE TYPE:

Child Custody in International Disputes: Supreme Court Addresses Habeas Corpus and Parental Rights in Yashita Sahu vs. State of Rajasthan (20 January 2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles reservation in promotions for persons with disabilities: Siddaraju vs. State of Karnataka (2020) INSC 26 (14 January 2020)

January 14, 2020 / Aniruddha Bose, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 16(1), Constitutional Law with Article 16(4), Judges, Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995, Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995 with Section 33, R.F. Nariman, Reservation in Promotions, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Clarifies Reservation in Promotions for Persons with Disabilities Date of the Judgment: 14 January 2020 Citation: (2020) INSC 26 Judges: R.F. Nariman, J., Aniruddha Bose, J., V. Ramasubramanian, J. Can persons with disabilities be given reservation in promotions? The Supreme Court of India addressed this crucial question, clarifying the extent of reservation for

Supreme Court settles reservation in promotions for persons with disabilities: Siddaraju vs. State of Karnataka (2020) INSC 26 (14 January 2020) Read Post »

National and State Child Rights Commissions: Supreme Court clarifies jurisdiction in child trafficking case (13 January 2020)

January 13, 2020 / Aniruddha Bose, Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005, Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005 with Section 13, Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005 with Section 24, Constitutional Law, Deepak Gupta, Functions of Commission, Judges

National Commission for Protection of Child Rights vs. Dr. Rajesh Kumar: Supreme Court clarifies powers of Child Rights Commissions Date of the Judgment: 13 January 2020 Citation: (2020) INSC 19 Judges: Deepak Gupta, J., Aniruddha Bose, J. When a child’s rights are violated, who steps in to protect them? The Supreme Court of India recently

National and State Child Rights Commissions: Supreme Court clarifies jurisdiction in child trafficking case (13 January 2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Coastal Zone Regulations in Kerala Backwater Island Resort Case: Kapico Kerala Resorts Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Kerala (2020)

January 10, 2020 / Aniruddha Bose, Coastal Regulation Zone, Encroachments, Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 with CRZ Notification 1991, Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 with CRZ Notification 2011, Judges, Kerala Land Conservancy Act, 1957, Rohinton Fali Nariman, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Upholds Coastal Zone Regulations in Kerala Backwater Island Resort Case Date of the Judgment: January 10, 2020 Citation: (2020) INSC 12 Judges: Rohinton Fali Nariman, J., Aniruddha Bose, J., V. Ramasubramanian, J. Can a resort be constructed on a backwater island in Kerala, despite Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) restrictions? The Supreme Court of

Supreme Court Upholds Coastal Zone Regulations in Kerala Backwater Island Resort Case: Kapico Kerala Resorts Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Kerala (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies jurisdiction of Armed Forces Tribunal in service matters: Balkrishna Ram vs. Union of India (2020) INSC 12

January 9, 2020 / Aniruddha Bose, Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007, Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 with Section 14, Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 with Section 34, Constitution of India, Constitution of India with Article 226, Constitution of India with Article 227, Deepak Gupta, Judges

Supreme Court clarifies jurisdiction of Armed Forces Tribunal in service matters: Balkrishna Ram vs. Union of India (2020) INSC 12 Date of the Judgment: January 09, 2020 Citation: (2020) INSC 12 Judges: Deepak Gupta, J. and Aniruddha Bose, J. Can an appeal against a single judge’s order of a High Court be transferred to the

Supreme Court clarifies jurisdiction of Armed Forces Tribunal in service matters: Balkrishna Ram vs. Union of India (2020) INSC 12 Read Post »

Supreme Court Remands Landlord-Tenant Dispute: Vinay Eknath Lad vs. Chiu Mao Chen (2019)

December 18, 2019 / Aniruddha Bose, Deepak Gupta, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 116, Indian Partnership Act, 1932, Indian Partnership Act, 1932 with Section 45(1), Indian Partnership Act, 1932 with Section 48, Judges, Transfer of Property Act, Transfer of Property Act with Section 106, Transfer of Property Act with Section 109

Supreme Court Remands Landlord-Tenant Dispute: Vinay Eknath Lad vs. Chiu Mao Chen (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the original plaintiffs had the locus to institute a suit for eviction of a tenant without proper attornment or public notice of change of ownership. CASE TYPE: Civil (Landlord-Tenant Dispute) Case Name: Vinay Eknath Lad vs. Chiu Mao Chen

Supreme Court Remands Landlord-Tenant Dispute: Vinay Eknath Lad vs. Chiu Mao Chen (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Dowry Death Conviction: Jatinder Kumar vs. State of Haryana (2019)

December 17, 2019 / Aniruddha Bose, Deepak Gupta, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 113-B, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 304-B, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 498-A, Judges

Supreme Court Upholds Dowry Death Conviction: Jatinder Kumar vs. State of Haryana (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the accused was guilty of dowry death and cruelty to his wife, leading to her suicide. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Jatinder Kumar vs. State of Haryana [Judgment Date]: 17 December 2019 Introduction Date of the Judgment: 17 December

Supreme Court Upholds Dowry Death Conviction: Jatinder Kumar vs. State of Haryana (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case Based on Circumstantial Evidence: Harinder Singh vs. State of Punjab (2019)

December 17, 2019 / Aniruddha Bose, Circumstantial Evidence, Criminal Law, Deepak Gupta, Extra-Judicial Confession, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 201, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, Murder Conviction

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case Based on Circumstantial Evidence: Harinder Singh vs. State of Punjab (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether circumstantial evidence was sufficient to convict the accused of murder. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Harinder Singh @ Hira vs. The State of Punjab Judgment Date: 17 December 2019 Introduction Date of the Judgment:

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case Based on Circumstantial Evidence: Harinder Singh vs. State of Punjab (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court overturns High Court order in Kerala Murder Case: Kooli Saseendran & Ors. vs. State of Kerala (17 December 2019)

December 17, 2019 / Acquittal, Aniruddha Bose, Criminal Procedure, Deepak Gupta, Explosive Substances Act, 1908, Explosive Substances Act, 1908 with Section 3, Explosive Substances Act, 1908 with Section 5, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 149, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, Offences Against Human Body, Remand

Supreme Court overturns High Court order in Kerala Murder Case: Kooli Saseendran & Ors. vs. State of Kerala (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the High Court was justified in setting aside the acquittal order of the trial court and remanding the case for fresh consideration in a criminal case. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Kooli Saseendran

Supreme Court overturns High Court order in Kerala Murder Case: Kooli Saseendran & Ors. vs. State of Kerala (17 December 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies “Seat” of Arbitration Under the Arbitration Act, 1996: BGS SGS SOMA JV vs. NHPC LTD. (2019) INSC 1052 (10 December 2019)

December 10, 2019 / Aniruddha Bose, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 20, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 37, Commercial Courts Act, 2015, Commercial Courts Act, 2015 with Section 13, Judges, R.F. Nariman, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Clarifies “Seat” of Arbitration Under the Arbitration Act, 1996 Date of the Judgment: 10 December 2019 Citation: (2019) INSC 1052 Judges: R.F. Nariman, J., Aniruddha Bose, J., V. Ramasubramanian, J. Can a contractual clause specifying a venue for arbitration proceedings also be considered the “seat” of arbitration, thereby determining which courts have jurisdiction

Supreme Court Clarifies “Seat” of Arbitration Under the Arbitration Act, 1996: BGS SGS SOMA JV vs. NHPC LTD. (2019) INSC 1052 (10 December 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Refers Rule 5 Validity Challenge Back to Division Bench: M/S Bhuwalka Steel Industries Ltd vs. Union of India (2019) INSC 1234 (05 December 2019)

December 5, 2019 / Aniruddha Bose, Central Excise Act, 1944, Central Excise Act, 1944 with Section 3A, Central Excise Rules, 1997, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Judges, R.F. Nariman, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Refers Rule 5 Validity Challenge Back to Division Bench Date of the Judgment: 05 December 2019 Citation: (2019) INSC 1234 Judges: R.F. Nariman, J., Aniruddha Bose, J., V. Ramasubramanian, J. When a case is referred to a larger bench, is it always necessary for the larger bench to answer the questions referred? The

Supreme Court Refers Rule 5 Validity Challenge Back to Division Bench: M/S Bhuwalka Steel Industries Ltd vs. Union of India (2019) INSC 1234 (05 December 2019) Read Post »