Blogs And Articles

By the team of Prime Legal
Order granting or refusing injunction u/s 146 of UP Revenue Code 2006, held appealable u/s 207 and not revisable u/s 210- STAY AND INJUNCTION: Allahabad High Court
Order granting or refusing injunction u/s 146 of UP Revenue Code 2006, held appealable u/s 207 and not revisable u/s 210- STAY AND INJUNCTION: Allahabad High Court

An order of injunction and an order of stay has been held to be distinct and to serve different purposes under the sections of UP Revenue Code was

Guidelines for fair treatment for Disabled Female Athletes: Madras High Court

The rights of disabled female athletes to fair treatment were upheld by the High Court of Madras presided by HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN in

Bail granted to Co-accused ignoring Sec 37 NDPS Act-Without giving reason-Not binding upon Coordinate Bench-BAIL REJECTED: Allahabad High Court
Bail granted to Co-accused ignoring Sec 37 NDPS Act-Without giving reason-Not binding upon Coordinate Bench-BAIL REJECTED: Allahabad High Court

The decision of the Bail Rejected in the case where bail is granted to Co-accused ignoring sec 37 of The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances

Section 73 of The Finance Act, 1994 provides a time limit of 30 months and the burden of prove is on the Respondent to claim any extension : Patna High Court

This petition was filled by M/s  Biswas  Security  Services  India  Pvt.  Ltd.  Jamuna  Apartment,  Boring Road,  Shop  No.3,  Patna, 

The obligation of a father does not end when his son reaches 18 years of age: Delhi High Court
The obligation of a father does not end when his son reaches 18 years of age: Delhi High Court

The right to maintenance under section 125 CrPC of a son attaining majority from his father is upheld by the High Court of Delhi presided by HONOUR

Excise  has jurisdiction  to  pass  order  for  release  of  seized  vehicle  during pendency  of  trial: Patna High Court.

A writ Petition was filled by Manoj  Ram  S/o-  Late  Krishan  Ram,  Resident  of  Village- Kondi,  P.S.Pandarak, District- Patna against

The contention that the accused had no intention of causing death of the deceased is wholly irrelevant for deciding whether the case falls in clause Thirdly of Section 300 IPC : Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Ramprakash vs State Of M.P. (Criminal Appeal Nos. 1049 of 2011, 102 of 2012 and 160 of 2012) upheld th

Causing of injury is not necessary to determine whether a person was a member of an Unlawful Assembly: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Causing of injury is not necessary to determine whether a person was a member of an Unlawful Assembly: Madhya Pradesh High Court

It was upheld by Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Bhaggo Bai vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh by Hon’ble Justice Mr. Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia

Only in exceptional cases the High Court may quash an FIR in exercise of its inherent powers : Madhya Pradesh High Court

It was upheld by High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the case of Manish Kumar Kartroliya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh (MCRC-39483-2021) that only in

Technicality  in the  procedural  law  is  not  available  as  a  defence  when  a matter  of  grave  public  importance  is  for  consideration before  the  court: Patna High Court.

A writ Petition was filled by the Petitioner Satyendra  Kumar  Construction  Pvt.  Ltd.  having  its  registered  office  at  202, Hira