Manmohan

Supreme Court Invalidates Appointment of Chairperson, National Commission for Homeopathy due to Ineligibility: Dr. Amaragouda L Patil vs. Union of India (2025)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 77, Dipankar Datta, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Manmohan, National Commission for Homeopathy Act, 2020, National Commission for Homeopathy Act, 2020 with Section 4, National Commission for Homeopathy Act, 2020 with Section 5

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 12th February, 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 201 Judges: Dipankar Datta, J., Manmohan, J. Was the selection process for the Chairperson of the National Commission for Homeopathy (NCH) flawed? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this critical question in Dr. Amaragouda L Patil vs. Union of India & Ors., examining […]

Supreme Court Invalidates Appointment of Chairperson, National Commission for Homeopathy due to Ineligibility: Dr. Amaragouda L Patil vs. Union of India (2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court Enhances Compensation in Motor Accident Case Involving Comatose Claimant: Prakash Chand Sharma vs. Rambabu Saini (2025)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Judges, Manmohan, Motor Accident Compensation, Motor Vehicle Act, Motor Vehicle Act with Negligence, Sanjay Karol

Date of the Judgment: February 10, 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 180 Judges: Sanjay Karol, J., Manmohan, J. Can a higher compensation be awarded to a motor accident victim who is in a comatose state? The Supreme Court of India addressed this critical question in the case of Prakash Chand Sharma vs. Rambabu Saini, where the

Supreme Court Enhances Compensation in Motor Accident Case Involving Comatose Claimant: Prakash Chand Sharma vs. Rambabu Saini (2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court Enhances Compensation for Grievously Injured Claimant in Motor Accident Case: Deepak Singh vs. Mukesh Kumar (2025)

/ Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 279, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 304-A, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 337, Judges, Manmohan, Motor Vehicles Act, Sanjay Karol

Date of the Judgment: February 10, 2025 Judges: Sanjay Karol, J. and Manmohan, J. Can the compensation awarded by a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) be enhanced if it does not adequately consider the victim’s potential future income? The Supreme Court addressed this question in a recent case, enhancing the compensation for a claimant who

Supreme Court Enhances Compensation for Grievously Injured Claimant in Motor Accident Case: Deepak Singh vs. Mukesh Kumar (2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court acquits accused in murder case due to inconsistencies in evidence: Raja Khan vs. State of Chhattisgarh (2025) INSC 167 (07 February 2025)

/ Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 161, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 313, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 27, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 201, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 34, Judges, Manmohan, Sanjay Karol

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 07 February 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 167 Judges: Sanjay Karol, J., Manmohan, J. In a case hinging on circumstantial evidence, can inconsistencies in the prosecution’s evidence lead to the acquittal of the accused? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this question in Raja Khan vs. State of Chhattisgarh. The

Supreme Court acquits accused in murder case due to inconsistencies in evidence: Raja Khan vs. State of Chhattisgarh (2025) INSC 167 (07 February 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Maintainability of Writ Petitions Against MSEFC Orders in MSME Disputes: Tamil Nadu Cements vs. MSEFC (January 22, 2025)

/ A&C Act with Section 34, Arbitration, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Judges, Manmohan, Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006, MSMED Act with Section 18, MSMED Act with Section 19, Sanjay Kumar, Sanjiv Khanna

Introduction Date of the Judgment: January 22, 2025 The Supreme Court of India is examining whether High Courts can intervene using writ petitions against orders from the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council (MSEFC). This council handles disputes under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (MSMED Act). The core issue is whether

Supreme Court Clarifies Maintainability of Writ Petitions Against MSEFC Orders in MSME Disputes: Tamil Nadu Cements vs. MSEFC (January 22, 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court quashes penalty for Senior Medical Officer: Bhupinderpal Singh Gill vs. State of Punjab (20 January 2025)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 311(2), Dipankar Datta, Disciplinary Proceedings, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Manmohan, Pension, Punjab Civil Services (Punishment & Appeal Rules, 1970), Punjab Civil Services (Punishment & Appeal Rules, 1970) with Rule 8, Retirement Benefits, Service Law

Supreme Court quashes penalty for Senior Medical Officer: Bhupinderpal Singh Gill vs. State of Punjab (2025) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether disciplinary proceedings initiated against a public servant just before retirement and the subsequent penalty imposed were justified. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Bhupinderpal Singh Gill vs. State of Punjab and Others [Judgment Date]: 20 January

Supreme Court quashes penalty for Senior Medical Officer: Bhupinderpal Singh Gill vs. State of Punjab (20 January 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court Partially Allows Appeal in Corruption Case, Modifies Sentence | 2025 INSC 85

/ Dipankar Datta, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 420, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 465, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 468, Judges, Manmohan, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with Section 13(1)(d), Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with Section 2(c)(iii)

Supreme Court Partially Allows Appeal in Corruption Case, Modifies Sentence | 2025 INSC 85 LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the appellant was rightly convicted under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and the quantum of sentence for the other offences. CASE TYPE: Criminal Appeal Case Name: Biswajit Das vs. Central Bureau of Investigation [Judgment Date]: January 16,

Supreme Court Partially Allows Appeal in Corruption Case, Modifies Sentence | 2025 INSC 85 Read Post »

Scroll to Top