NEET seat allotted to Pakistani candidate upon court’s order: Rajasthan High Court
The High Court of Rajasthan, through learned judge, Justice Dinesh Mehta in the case of Sandeep Kumar v. Union of India and Others (S.B. Civil Writ
DOES THE OPPOSING PARTY IN A BIGAMY SUIT HAVE THE GROUNDS OF DELAY AS A DEFENCE OR DOES THE OFFENCE OF BIGAMY REMAIN A CONTINUING OFFENCE?: Karnataka High Court
This particular decision is upheld by the Karnataka High Court through the learned bench led by JUSTICE M NAGAPRASANNA in the case of Anand C. &
The Karnataka High court directs a husband to pay Rs. 25,000 towards litigation expenses of the opposing party, his wife for marriage dissolution proceedings.
This particular decision is upheld by the Karnataka High Court through the learned bench led by JUSTICE S G PANDIT in the case of Pooja S V. Abhish
A husband called impotent by wife before his relatives amounts to mental cruelty: Karnataka High Court
This particular decision is upheld by the Karnataka High Court through the learned bench led by JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA J. in the case of Shasidha
An interim order restraining arrest, if passed while dealing with an application under Section 438 of the Code will amount to interference in the investigation : Tripura High Court
The Tripura High Court in the case of Jawhar Miah vs The State Of Tripura (AB 21 of 2022) upheld that an interim order restraining arrest, if passe
The Secretary of Home Department was directed to hold a high level meeting, with all the Superintendents of Police of the Districts to formulate the advisory in terms of the directions contained in the case of Lalita Kumari : Tripura High Court
The Tripura High Court in the case of Sri Subhash Pal vs The State Of Tripura & Ors (WP(C) 249 of 2022) upheld that the Secretary of Home Depar
Injury is not a sine qua non to establish the offense as defined under Section 7 of the POCSO Act : Tripura High Court
The Tripura High Court in the case of Sri Setu Ghosh vs The State Of Tripura (Crl. A. 3 of 2021) upheld that injury is not a sine qua non to establ
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF THE PROSECUTION WITNESSES BEING AN ESSENTIAL RIGHT OF THE ACCUSED, IT IS EVIDENT THAT NON-CROSS-EXAMINATION OF THE SAID WITNESSES WILL PUT THE PETITIONER TO PREJUDICE: ODISHA HIGH COURT
This particular decision is upheld by the High Court of Odisha through the division bench of Justice S.K Panigrahi in the case of Pidika Sambaru v
IT IS SETTLED LAW THAT THE FACTOR WHICH DISTINGUISHES CULPABLE HOMICIDE FROM MURDER IS THE PRESENCE OF SPECIAL MENS REA WHICH CONSISTS OF THE MENTAL ATTITUDES INDICATED IN SECTION 300 IPC: ODISHA HIGH COURT
This particular decision is upheld by the High Court of Odisha through the division bench of Justice R.K Pattanaik in the case of Anjari Rout V Sta
ACCORDING TO THE TRIAL COURT, THE CRUCIAL POINT IN TIME WHEN INSANITY HAD TO BE ESTABLISHED WAS WHEN THE CRIME WAS ACTUALLY COMMITTED: ODISHA HIGH COURT
This particular decision is upheld by the High Court of Odisha through the division bench of Justice R.K Pattanaik in the case of Gobardhan Pradhan
