Mohan M. Shantanagoudar

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case Based on Eyewitness Testimony and Dying Declaration: Laltu Ghosh vs. State of West Bengal (2019) INSC 123

/ Dinesh Maheshwari, Dying Declaration, Evidence Law, Eyewitness Testimony, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Offences Against Human Body

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case Based on Eyewitness Testimony and Dying Declaration: Laltu Ghosh vs. State of West Bengal (2019) INSC 123 LEGAL ISSUE: Admissibility and reliability of eyewitness testimony and dying declarations in criminal cases. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Laltu Ghosh vs. State of West Bengal [Judgment Date]: 19 February 2019 […]

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case Based on Eyewitness Testimony and Dying Declaration: Laltu Ghosh vs. State of West Bengal (2019) INSC 123 Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Gruesome Murder Case: Md. Rojali Ali & Ors. vs. State of Assam (2019)

/ Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 148, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 323, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Gruesome Murder Case: Md. Rojali Ali & Ors. vs. State of Assam (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the testimony of related witnesses can be the basis of conviction in a criminal case. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law Case Name: Md. Rojali Ali & Ors. vs. The State of Assam Judgment Date: 19

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Gruesome Murder Case: Md. Rojali Ali & Ors. vs. State of Assam (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitral Award: MMTC Ltd. vs. Vedanta Ltd. (2019)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 37, Arbitration Law, Contract Law, Interpretation of Contracts, Judges, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Vineet Saran

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitral Award: MMTC Ltd. vs. Vedanta Ltd. (2019) Date of the Judgment: February 18, 2019 Citation: [Not Available in Source] Judges: Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, J., Vineet Saran, J. Can a party avoid an arbitration award by claiming the dispute was outside the scope of the original agreement? The Supreme Court of India,

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitral Award: MMTC Ltd. vs. Vedanta Ltd. (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Belated Amendment in Partition Suit: M. Revanna vs. Anjanamma (2019)

/ Amendment of Pleadings, Civil Law, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order VI Rule 17, Judges, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, N.V. Ramana, Partition Suit

Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Belated Amendment in Partition Suit: M. Revanna vs. Anjanamma (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a court can allow an amendment to a plaint after the trial has commenced, particularly when the amendment introduces a new and inconsistent case that was known to the party earlier. CASE TYPE: Civil (Partition Suit) Case

Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Belated Amendment in Partition Suit: M. Revanna vs. Anjanamma (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Commutes Death Sentence in Gruesome Murder Case: Md. Mannan vs. State of Bihar (2019)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 21, Criminal Procedure Code, Criminal Procedure Code with Section 235, Criminal Procedure Code with Section 354, Fundamental Rights, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 376, Indira Banerjee, Judges, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, N. V. Ramana, Offences Against Human Body

Supreme Court Commutes Death Sentence in Gruesome Murder Case: Md. Mannan vs. State of Bihar (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a death sentence should be commuted to life imprisonment when there are mitigating circumstances and procedural lapses in the sentencing process. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Md. Mannan @ Abdul Mannan v. State of Bihar Judgment

Supreme Court Commutes Death Sentence in Gruesome Murder Case: Md. Mannan vs. State of Bihar (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies allowance parity for Indian Military Personnel in Bhutan: Union of India vs. Captain Gurdev Singh (2019) INSC 79 (11 February 2019)

/ Allowances, Classification, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Judges, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, N.V. Ramana, Service Law, Service Law with Indian Foreign Service (Pay, Leave, Compensatory Allowance and other Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981

Supreme Court clarifies allowance parity for Indian Military Personnel in Bhutan Date of the Judgment: 11 February 2019 Citation: (2019) INSC 79 Judges: N.V. Ramana, J., Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, J. The Supreme Court of India addressed the question of whether the Bhutan Compensatory Allowance (BCA) paid to Indian Military Training Team (IMTRAT) personnel in Bhutan

Supreme Court clarifies allowance parity for Indian Military Personnel in Bhutan: Union of India vs. Captain Gurdev Singh (2019) INSC 79 (11 February 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Title Based on Sale Deeds Over Claim of Possessory Title in Property Dispute: Poona Ram vs. Moti Ram (29 January 2019)

/ Judges, Limitation Act, 1963, Limitation Act, 1963 with Section 64, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, N.V. Ramana, Possessory Title, Property Law, Title Deeds

Supreme Court Upholds Title Based on Sale Deeds Over Claim of Possessory Title in Property Dispute Date of the Judgment: 29 January 2019 Citation: Civil Appeal No. 4527 of 2009 Judges: N.V. Ramana, J., Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, J. Can a person claim ownership of a property based solely on prior possession, even if they don’t

Supreme Court Upholds Title Based on Sale Deeds Over Claim of Possessory Title in Property Dispute: Poona Ram vs. Moti Ram (29 January 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Summoning of Additional Accused under Section 319 CrPC in Homicide Case: Dev Wati and Ors. vs. The State of Haryana and Anr. (24 January 2019)

/ Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 125, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 319, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 34, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Offences Against Human Body

Supreme Court Upholds Summoning of Additional Accused under Section 319 CrPC in Homicide Case Date of the Judgment: 24 January 2019 Citation: 2019 INSC 60 Judges: L. Nageswara Rao, J. and Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, J. Can a trial court summon additional individuals as accused based on evidence presented during a trial? The Supreme Court of

Supreme Court Upholds Summoning of Additional Accused under Section 319 CrPC in Homicide Case: Dev Wati and Ors. vs. The State of Haryana and Anr. (24 January 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Overturns Conviction Based Solely on Extra-Judicial Confession in Murder Case: Chakarai @ Chakaravarthi vs. State (2019) INSC 48

/ Dinesh Maheshwari, Evidence Law, Extra-Judicial Confession, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Offences Against Human Body

Supreme Court Overturns Conviction Based Solely on Extra-Judicial Confession in Murder Case LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code can be solely based on an extra-judicial confession. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Chakarai @ Chakaravarthi vs. State Rep. by Inspector of Police Judgment Date: 24 January 2019 Introduction Date

Supreme Court Overturns Conviction Based Solely on Extra-Judicial Confession in Murder Case: Chakarai @ Chakaravarthi vs. State (2019) INSC 48 Read Post »

Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case Due to Weak Circumstantial Evidence: Malaichamy vs. State of Tamil Nadu (23 January 2019)

/ Benefit of Doubt, Circumstantial Evidence, Criminal Law, Dinesh Maheshwari, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 27, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 34, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 449, Judges, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Murder

Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case Due to Weak Circumstantial Evidence: Malaichamy vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the circumstantial evidence presented by the prosecution was sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt in a murder case. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Malaichamy & Anr. vs.

Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case Due to Weak Circumstantial Evidence: Malaichamy vs. State of Tamil Nadu (23 January 2019) Read Post »

Child Legitimacy in Irregular Muslim Marriages Upheld: Supreme Court Decision in Mohammed Salim vs. Shamsudeen (22 January 2019)

/ Family Law, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 35, Inheritance, Judges, Marriage, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Muslim Law, N.V. Ramana

Supreme Court Upholds Child Legitimacy in Irregular Muslim Marriages: Mohammed Salim vs. Shamsudeen (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a child born from an irregular Muslim marriage (fasid) is considered legitimate and entitled to inherit property. CASE TYPE: Civil (Property Partition and Inheritance) Case Name: Mohammed Salim (D) Through Lrs. & Ors. vs. Shamsudeen (D) Through Lrs.

Child Legitimacy in Irregular Muslim Marriages Upheld: Supreme Court Decision in Mohammed Salim vs. Shamsudeen (22 January 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court upholds acquittal in triple murder and robbery case: Ashish Jain vs. Makrand Singh (2019)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 20(3), Identification of Prisoners Act, 1920, Identification of Prisoners Act, 1920 with Section 4, Identification of Prisoners Act, 1920 with Section 5, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 27, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 394, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 449, Judges, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, N.V. Ramana

Supreme Court upholds acquittal in triple murder and robbery case: Ashish Jain vs. Makrand Singh (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the High Court was correct in acquitting the accused based on circumstantial evidence in a case of triple murder and robbery. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Ashish Jain vs. Makrand Singh and Ors. Judgment Date: 14

Supreme Court upholds acquittal in triple murder and robbery case: Ashish Jain vs. Makrand Singh (2019) Read Post »

Scroll to Top