Pinaki Chandra Ghose

Babri Masjid Demolition Case: Supreme Court Orders Joint Trial (19 April 2017)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 with Section 11, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 with Section 223, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 with Section 407, Fundamental Rights, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 120-B, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 153-A, Judges, Offences against Public Tranquility, Pinaki Chandra Ghose, R.F. Nariman

The Supreme Court of India addressed a critical issue regarding the demolition of the Babri Masjid. The Court has ordered a joint trial for all accused. This decision aims to consolidate proceedings and ensure a comprehensive resolution. This judgment was delivered by a two-judge bench comprising Justice Pinaki Chandra Ghose and Justice R.F. Nariman. Justice […]

Babri Masjid Demolition Case: Supreme Court Orders Joint Trial (19 April 2017) Read Post »

Babri Masjid Demolition Case: Supreme Court Orders Joint Trial and Overturns Discharge of Accused (19 April 2017)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Constitutional Law with Article 21, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 with Section 11(1), Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 with Section 407, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 120-B, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 153-A, Judges, Offences against Public Tranquility, Pinaki Chandra Ghose, R.F. Nariman

Date of the Judgment: 19 April 2017 Citation: 2017 INSC 398 Judges: Pinaki Chandra Ghose, J., R.F. Nariman, J. Can a fractured prosecution derail the course of justice? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in the Babri Masjid demolition case, ordering a joint trial of all accused individuals. The core issue was whether

Babri Masjid Demolition Case: Supreme Court Orders Joint Trial and Overturns Discharge of Accused (19 April 2017) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Disciplinary Inquiry Rules for Minor Penalties: D.H.B.V.N.L. vs. Yashvir Singh Gulia (30 July 2013)

/ Disciplinary Inquiry, Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 with Section 79(c), Haryana State Electricity Board Employees (Punishment & Appeal) Regulations, 1990, Judges, K. S. Radhakrishnan, Minor Penalty, Pinaki Chandra Ghose, Service Law

Date of the Judgment: 30 July 2013 Citation: (2013) INSC 536 Judges: K. S. Radhakrishnan, J. and Pinaki Chandra Ghose, J. Can a disciplinary authority impose a minor penalty after issuing a charge-sheet for a major penalty, without conducting a full departmental inquiry? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in a case concerning

Supreme Court Clarifies Disciplinary Inquiry Rules for Minor Penalties: D.H.B.V.N.L. vs. Yashvir Singh Gulia (30 July 2013) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Partial Refund for Uncompleted PhD Study Leave: Sant Longowal Institute vs. Suresh Chandra Verma (2013)

/ Central Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1972, Judges, K.S. Radhakrishnan, Pinaki Chandra Ghose, Service Law, Service Law with Rule 63, Study Leave

LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an educational institute can demand a full refund of salary and allowances from an employee who failed to complete their PhD during a study leave. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Sant Longowal Institute of Engineering & Technology & Anr. vs. Suresh Chandra Verma Judgment Date: 18 July 2013 Introduction Date of

Supreme Court Upholds Partial Refund for Uncompleted PhD Study Leave: Sant Longowal Institute vs. Suresh Chandra Verma (2013) Read Post »

Supreme Court Decides Juvenile Status Under the JJ Act: Ketankumar Gopalbhai Tandel vs. State of Gujarat (2013)

/ Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 324, Judges, Juvenile Justice Act, Juvenile Justice Act with Section 2(k), Juvenile Justice Act with Section 20, Juvenile Justice Act with Section 49, K.S. Radhakrishnan, Pinaki Chandra Ghose

Date of the Judgment: July 18, 2013 Citation: (2013) INSC 521 Judges: K.S. Radhakrishnan, J., Pinaki Chandra Ghose, J. Can a person who was not considered a juvenile under the old law, be considered a juvenile under the new law? The Supreme Court addressed this question in a case where the accused was a few

Supreme Court Decides Juvenile Status Under the JJ Act: Ketankumar Gopalbhai Tandel vs. State of Gujarat (2013) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies retrenchment definition in contractual employment: Bhavnagar Municipal Corporation vs. Salimbhai Umarbhai Mansuri (2013)

/ Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 2(bb), Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 2(oo), Judges, K.S. Radhakrishnan, Pinaki Chandra Ghose, Retrenchment

LEGAL ISSUE: Whether termination of service on expiry of a fixed-term contract constitutes retrenchment under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. CASE TYPE: Labour Law Case Name: Bhavnagar Municipal Corporation vs. Salimbhai Umarbhai Mansuri Judgment Date: 16 July 2013 Introduction Date of the Judgment: 16 July 2013 Citation: 2013 INSC 507 Judges: K.S. Radhakrishnan, J., Pinaki

Supreme Court clarifies retrenchment definition in contractual employment: Bhavnagar Municipal Corporation vs. Salimbhai Umarbhai Mansuri (2013) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds US Court Order in Child Custody Case: Arathi Bandi vs. Bandi Jagadrakshaka Rao (2013)

/ Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Section 13, Comity of Courts, International Child Abduction, International Law, Judges, Pinaki Chandra Ghose, Surinder Singh Nijjar

Date of the Judgment: July 16, 2013 Citation: 2013 INSC 473 Judges: Surinder Singh Nijjar, J., Pinaki Chandra Ghose, J. Can a parent who takes a child out of their home country against court orders be compelled to return the child? The Supreme Court of India addressed this critical issue in a recent case involving

Supreme Court Upholds US Court Order in Child Custody Case: Arathi Bandi vs. Bandi Jagadrakshaka Rao (2013) Read Post »

Scroll to Top