Ipso Facto, a delay in conducting a disciplinary investigation does not invalidate it: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court stated that any delay in conducting a disciplinary investigation does not ipso facto render the investigation void. The bench of
In UAPA cases, magistrates cannot extend the time it takes to complete the investigation: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court ruled that magistrates lacked the authority to extend the period for UAPA investigations. According to the bench of Justices Uday
Any person who is a tenant can be protected against eviction: Court of New Delhi
There was an alleged business carried on by the parties and it was sufficient to do so, but they applied to concur more space from the other party,
No Confidence Motion – against President of Municipal Committee – Secret ballot voting not required – Motion carried if passed by voting by show of hands: Punjab and Haryana High Court
It appeared that the allegation of the petitioners regarding any political pressure upon these members is ruled out; per se. Had there been any pre
The Court finds that once recovery is from the place which is under possession and cultivation of the petitioner, prima facie, an offence is made out under the Act: High court of Patna
The petitioner was arrested under Section 272 IPC, “Adulteration of food or drink intended for sale whoever adulterates any article of food or dr
Accused cannot be arrested soon after the registration of an FIR: Punjab & Haryana High Court
When a complaint discloses the commission of a cognizable offence while filing an FIR, the arrest cannot be merely done through registration of an
The Court is inclined to allow the prayer for pre-arrest bail as there is no direct evidence as to prove the offence by the petitioners: High court of Patna
The petitioner was taken into custody under Section 498A IPC, “Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty”, section 50
“Respondent will face jail time if he does not deposit the said amount”: Supreme Court, Part 2.
In the proceedings dated 09.08.2021, learned counsel submitted on behalf of the appellant that he was willing to pay compensation of Rs.3.00 lakhs
“Respondent will face jail time if he does not deposit the said amount”: Supreme Court, Part 1.
In context of the Criminal Appeal No .894 Of 2021, Samaul Sk. vs. The State of Jharkhand & Anr., Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul passed the judgment
Sharing or forwarding of defamatory material without any verification and without asking the authorities prior in time to investigate the authenticity of the same amounts to defamation : Delhi High Court
Any material that could be potentially defamatory, cannot be shared or forwarded carelessly especially in this modern day and age of internet. This
