Supreme Court Upholds Bail for Government Employees in UAPA Case: Kekhriesatuo Tep vs. NIA (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether government employees coerced into paying funds to a terrorist organization should be denied bail under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA). CASE TYPE: Criminal Law, Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. Case Name: Kekhriesatuo Tep etc. vs. […]
Supreme Court Upholds Bail for Government Employees in UAPA Case: Kekhriesatuo Tep vs. NIA (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether government employees who were coerced into paying money to a terrorist organization can be denied bail under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA). CASE TYPE: Criminal Law, Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act Case Name: Kekhriesatuo Tep etc.
Supreme Court Directs Absorption of Long-Serving Employees: State of Bihar vs. Jawahar Lal Ram (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether employees working for an extended period on contract basis are entitled to absorption into permanent positions. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: The State of Bihar and Others vs. Jawahar Lal Ram and Others [Judgment Date]: April
Supreme Court alters murder conviction to culpable homicide due to mental illness: Sumitra Bai vs. State of Chhattisgarh (2023) Date of the Judgment: April 10, 2023 Citation: (2023) INSC 324 Judges: B.R. Gavai, J. and Aravind Kumar, J. Can a person with a mental illness be convicted of murder? The Supreme Court of India recently
Supreme Court alters murder conviction to culpable homicide due to mental illness: Sumitra Bai vs. State of Chhattisgarh (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the accused was entitled to the benefit of Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, due to her mental illness. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law. Case Name: Sumitra Bai vs. The State of
Supreme Court Upholds Possessory Rights in Property Dispute: Shivshankara vs. Vedavyasa (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether prior possession can be the basis of a claim for recovery of possession against a dispossessor who does not have a better title. CASE TYPE: Civil Property Dispute Case Name: Shivshankara & Anr. vs. H.P. Vedavyasa Char [Judgment Date]: March
Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case Due to Doubtful Prosecution: Pulen Phukan & Ors. vs. State of Assam (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the prosecution established the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt in a murder case, particularly concerning the presence of police personnel at the scene of the crime and inconsistencies in witness
Supreme Court acquits accused in murder case due to lack of evidence: Pulen Phukan vs. State of Assam (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused were part of an unlawful assembly with a common object to commit murder. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law Case Name: Pulen Phukan & Ors. vs.
Supreme Court Allows Withdrawal of CIRP Before CoC Formation: Abhishek Singh vs. Huhtamaki PPL Ltd. (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) can be withdrawn before the constitution of the Committee of Creditors (CoC) when a settlement has been reached between the Operational Creditor (OC) and the Corporate Debtor (CD). CASE TYPE:
Supreme Court Allows Withdrawal of CIRP Before CoC Formation: Abhishek Singh vs. Huhtamaki PPL Ltd. (2023) Date of the Judgment: 28 March 2023 Citation: 2023 INSC 308 Judges: B.R. Gavai, J., Vikram Nath, J. Can a company undergoing the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) withdraw the process if it settles with the operational creditor before
Supreme Court Upholds Compensation for Coal Shortfall: Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Limited vs. Rattan India Power Limited (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a power generator is entitled to compensation for the shortfall in the supply of linkage coal and its associated costs. CASE TYPE: Electricity Regulatory Law Case Name: Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Limited
Supreme Court Upholds Compensation for Power Generator: Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Limited vs. Rattan India Power Limited (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a power generator is entitled to compensation for the increased costs of procuring coal due to a change in law and whether the unutilized monthly coal quota can be carried forward. CASE TYPE:
