Aravind Kumar

Supreme Court Upholds Compensation for Truck Driver’s Family in Workmen’s Compensation Case

/ Aravind Kumar, Compensation Calculation, Contested Cases, J.K. Maheshwari, Judges, Section 20, Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923

Supreme Court Upholds Compensation for Truck Driver’s Family in Workmen’s Compensation Case LEGAL ISSUE: Determination of compensation under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923, and the jurisdiction of the Deputy Labour Commissioner-cum-Commissioner for Workmen Compensation in contested cases. CASE TYPE: Workmen’s Compensation Case Name: Mamta Devi & Ors. vs. The Reliance General Insurance Company Limited & […]

Supreme Court Upholds Compensation for Truck Driver’s Family in Workmen’s Compensation Case Read Post »

Supreme Court sets aside bail rejection based on co-accused’s non-surrender in NDPS case

/ Aravind Kumar, Bail, Judges, K.M. Joseph, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 with Section 20

Supreme Court sets aside bail rejection based on co-accused’s non-surrender in NDPS case LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the non-surrender of a co-accused who was released on bail is a valid ground to reject the bail application of another co-accused. CASE TYPE: Criminal (Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985) Case Name: Sebil Elanjimpally v. The State

Supreme Court sets aside bail rejection based on co-accused’s non-surrender in NDPS case Read Post »

Supreme Court sets aside bail rejection based on co-accused’s non-surrender in NDPS case

/ Aravind Kumar, Judges, K.M. Joseph, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 with Section 20(b)(ii)(c)

Supreme Court sets aside bail rejection based on co-accused’s non-surrender in NDPS case LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the non-surrender of a co-accused who was granted bail can be a valid ground to reject the bail application of another accused. CASE TYPE: Criminal (Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985) Case Name: Sebil Elanjimpally vs. The State

Supreme Court sets aside bail rejection based on co-accused’s non-surrender in NDPS case Read Post »

Supreme Court Modifies Senior Advocate Designation Guidelines: Indira Jaising vs. Supreme Court of India (2023)

/ Advocates Act, 1961, Advocates Act, 1961 with Section 16, Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Aravind Kumar, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 32, Judges, Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Senior Advocate Designation, Supreme Court of India, Supreme Court Rules, 2013

Supreme Court Modifies Senior Advocate Designation Guidelines: Indira Jaising vs. Supreme Court of India (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Modification of guidelines for designation of Senior Advocates. CASE TYPE: Constitutional Law, Advocates Act, 1961 Case Name: Ms. Indira Jaising v. Supreme Court of India, Through Secretary General Judgment Date: 12 May 2023 Date of the Judgment: 12

Supreme Court Modifies Senior Advocate Designation Guidelines: Indira Jaising vs. Supreme Court of India (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Fine-Tunes Senior Advocate Designation Process: Indira Jaising vs. Supreme Court of India (2023)

/ Advocates Act, 1961, Advocates Act, 1961 with Section 16, Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Aravind Kumar, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 32, Judges, Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Senior Advocate Designation

Supreme Court Fine-Tunes Senior Advocate Designation Process: Indira Jaising vs. Supreme Court of India (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Modification of guidelines for designation of Senior Advocates. CASE TYPE: Constitutional Law, Advocates Act Case Name: Ms. Indira Jaising v. Supreme Court of India Judgment Date: 12 May 2023 Date of the Judgment: 12 May 2023 Citation: 2023

Supreme Court Fine-Tunes Senior Advocate Designation Process: Indira Jaising vs. Supreme Court of India (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Overturns Conviction in Murder Case Due to Lack of Evidence: Santosh vs. State (2023) INSC 385

/ Aravind Kumar, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 162, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 293, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 311-A, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 20(3), Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 106, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 27, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 45, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 34, Judges, Manoj Misra, Offences Against Human Body, Sanjay Kishan Kaul

Supreme Court Overturns Conviction in Murder Case Due to Lack of Evidence: Santosh vs. State (2023) INSC 385 LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the prosecution successfully proved the chain of circumstances to establish the guilt of the accused in a murder case based on circumstantial evidence. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law – Murder Case Name: Santosh @ Bhure

Supreme Court Overturns Conviction in Murder Case Due to Lack of Evidence: Santosh vs. State (2023) INSC 385 Read Post »

Supreme Court Overturns Conviction in Murder Case Due to Lack of Evidence: Santosh @ Bhure vs. State (28 April 2023)

/ Aravind Kumar, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 293, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 20, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 27, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 73, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 34, Judges, Manoj Misra, Offences Against Human Body, Sanjay Kishan Kaul

Supreme Court Overturns Conviction in Murder Case Due to Lack of Evidence: Santosh @ Bhure vs. State (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether circumstantial evidence was sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused in a murder case. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law Case Name: Santosh @ Bhure vs. State (G.N.C.T.) of Delhi Judgment Date: 28 April 2023

Supreme Court Overturns Conviction in Murder Case Due to Lack of Evidence: Santosh @ Bhure vs. State (28 April 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court acquits husband in murder case due to weak circumstantial evidence: State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Phoolchand Rathore (2023)

/ Aravind Kumar, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 201, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, Manoj Misra, Sanjay Kishan Kaul

Supreme Court acquits husband in murder case due to weak circumstantial evidence: State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Phoolchand Rathore (2023) Date of the Judgment: April 28, 2023 Citation: 2023 INSC 444 Judges: Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J., Manoj Misra, J., Aravind Kumar, J. Can a conviction for murder be upheld when the case relies solely on

Supreme Court acquits husband in murder case due to weak circumstantial evidence: State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Phoolchand Rathore (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court acquits husband in murder case due to weak circumstantial evidence: State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Phoolchand Rathore (28 April 2023)

/ Acquittal, Aravind Kumar, Circumstantial Evidence, Criminal Law, Evidence Law, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 201, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, Manoj Misra, Murder, Recovery of Evidence, Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Witness Testimony

Supreme Court acquits husband in murder case due to weak circumstantial evidence: State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Phoolchand Rathore (28 April 2023) Date of the Judgment: 28 April 2023 Citation: 2023 INSC 395 Judges: Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J., Manoj Misra, J., Aravind Kumar, J. Can a conviction for murder be sustained solely on circumstantial evidence

Supreme Court acquits husband in murder case due to weak circumstantial evidence: State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Phoolchand Rathore (28 April 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Title in Property Dispute: Prasanna vs. Mudegowda (27 April 2023)

/ Aravind Kumar, Civil Procedure, Judges, Limitation Act, 1963, Limitation Act, 1963 with Article 64, Rajesh Bindal, Suits for Possession

Supreme Court Upholds Title in Property Dispute: Prasanna vs. Mudegowda (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a suit for possession is barred by limitation when a prior suit established valid title, and the suit for possession was filed within six months of the prior suit’s disposal. CASE TYPE: Civil Property Dispute. Case Name: Prasanna and Others vs.

Supreme Court Upholds Title in Property Dispute: Prasanna vs. Mudegowda (27 April 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Discharge of RPF Recruit Based on Criminal Antecedents: Union of India vs. Santosh Kumar Singh (26 April 2023)

/ Aravind Kumar, Character Verification, Discharge from Service, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 498A, Judges, Sanjiv Khanna, Service Law

Supreme Court Upholds Discharge of RPF Recruit: Union of India vs. Santosh Kumar Singh (2023) Date of the Judgment: 26 April 2023 Citation: 2023 INSC 435 Judges: Sanjiv Khanna, J., and Aravind Kumar, J. Can an individual be denied employment in the Railway Protection Force (RPF) due to pending criminal charges, even if later acquitted?

Supreme Court Upholds Discharge of RPF Recruit Based on Criminal Antecedents: Union of India vs. Santosh Kumar Singh (26 April 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Discharge of RPF Recruit Despite Acquittal in Dowry Death Case: Union of India vs. Santosh Kumar Singh (26 April 2023)

/ Aravind Kumar, Discharge from Service, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, Offences Against Human Body, Railway Protection Force Rules, 1987, Sanjiv Khanna, Service Law

Supreme Court Upholds Discharge of RPF Recruit Despite Acquittal in Dowry Death Case LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a Railway Protection Force (RPF) recruit can be discharged from service due to involvement in a criminal case, despite subsequent acquittal. CASE TYPE: Service Law. Case Name: Union of India & Ors. vs. Santosh Kumar Singh. [Judgment Date]: 26

Supreme Court Upholds Discharge of RPF Recruit Despite Acquittal in Dowry Death Case: Union of India vs. Santosh Kumar Singh (26 April 2023) Read Post »

Scroll to Top