India Law Library

User not Logged..

Free Artificial Intelligence Case Analyzer

Latest Cases

First
«
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
»
Last

(261) GULAM FAREED Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 20-11-2025
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 — Section 132 — Bail application — Tax Evasion — Bail granted despite seriousness of offence and reliance on supporting evidence against systematic network for tax evasion — Consideration of factors like nature of evidence (documentary/electronic, already seized), identity of witnesses (tax department officers, reducing risk of influencing them), maximum sentence (five years,
India Law Library Docid # 2436148

(262) MADHYA PRADESH JUDGES ASSOCIATION Vs. HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 20-11-2025
Service Law — Judicial Officers — Superannuation Age — Enhancement — Challenge to rejection by High Court (administrative side) of representation to enhance superannuation age of Judicial Officers in Madhya Pradesh — State Government increased superannuation age of all its employees to 62 years — Petitioner-Association
India Law Library Docid # 2436155

(263) AKBAR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 20-11-2025
Capital Punishment — Appeal against Death Sentence — Review of Sentencing — Supreme Court granted leave to appeal and stayed the execution of the death sentence awarded to the appellant (Akbar) — Directed summoning of original records from Trial Court and High Court, and supply of translated records to the parties.
India Law Library Docid # 2436168

(264) DEEPAK KUMAR @ GOLU @ D. KUMAR Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 20-11-2025
Death Sentence — Stay of Execution — Supreme Court orders stay of execution of the death sentence awarded to the appellant pending appeal.
India Law Library Docid # 2436169

(265) KAKARALA RAJU Vs. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 20-11-2025
Criminal Law — Dacoity (Section 391 Indian Penal Code, 1860) — Essential ingredients — Dacoity requires five or more persons conjointly committing or attempting to commit robbery — Absence of the term "conjoint commission of offence" in the charge sheet is not fatal if the evidence on record, including witness testimony and material objects, clearly substantiates that the accused persons acted
India Law Library Docid # 2436185

(266) Y P REDDY Vs. CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 20-11-2025
Service Law — Disciplinary Proceedings — Judicial Review — Scope — Misconduct of sleeping while on duty in a hypersensitive unit (SDSC SHAR) — Punishment of compulsory retirement — High Court's power of judicial review is limited to reviewing the manner in which the decision was made, checking for compliance with natural justice and statutory rules, and ensuring findings are based on
India Law Library Docid # 2436186

(267) THE APSRTC, REP.BY ITS VICE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR MUSHEERABAD, HYDERABAD Vs. CHINTALA ARUNA KUMARI[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 20-11-2025
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 168 (Award of just compensation) — Fatal Accident Claim — Quantum of Compensation — Negligence — Evidence established accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the APSRTC bus driver based on eye witness testimony (PW-2) and Police investigation (FIR/Charge Sheet, Ex.A1, A9) — Finding on negligence by the Tribunal upheld.
India Law Library Docid # 2436187

(268) MUNGAMURI PEDA THIRUPATHAIAH AND OTHERS Vs. SMT PERLA LEELAVATHI[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 20-11-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 26 Rule 9 — Commissions to make local investigations — Appointment of Advocate Commissioner — Purpose of appointment — A Court Commissioner should not be appointed for the purpose of collecting evidence on behalf of either party, especially in a suit for permanent injunction, at the initial stage before evidence is completed — Appointment of
India Law Library Docid # 2436188

(269) SARWA ZAHOOR AND ANOTHER Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT AND ANOTHER[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT AT SRINAGAR] 20-11-2025
Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) — Section 26(4) — Appeal to Appellate Tribunal — Power of Remand — The Appellate Tribunal, while exercising powers under Section 26(4) to "pass such orders thereon as it thinks fit, confirming, modifying or setting aside the order appealed against," is vested with the power to remand the matter back to the Adjudicating Authority — The expression "pass such orders thereon as it thinks fit" is of the widest amplitude and includes the power of
India Law Library Docid # 2436250

(270) BUILDING OPERATION CONTROLLING AUTHORITY, MUNICIPAL AREA, JAMMU Vs. MRS. RATNO DEVI AND OTHER[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT AT JAMMU] 20-11-2025
Jammu & Kashmir Municipal Act, 2008 (1951 A.D.) — Sections 225, 229, 229(3) — Demolition Notice — Procedure — Strict Compliance — Where the Municipality issues notices to stop construction (Sec. 225) and alter/demolish (Sec. 229), subsequent demolition notice (Sec. 229(3)) requires strict adherence to the prescribed procedure; failure to dispute or deny the claim of the building owner that a building
India Law Library Docid # 2436264

(271) UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs. ARUN KALMODIYA[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 20-11-2025
Service Law — Recruitment — Sub Inspector in Delhi Police/Central Armed Police Forces — Physical Standard Test (PST) — Minimum Height Requirement — Requirement of 170 cm for male candidates (General Category) as per advertisement (Para 12.10.1) — Candidate measured at 169.6 cm — Applicability of "rounding off" provision in Uniform Guidelines for Medical Examination Test (Clause 2(d)) — Held, the "rounding off" provision (0.5 cm or more rounded to next higher cm) prescribed
India Law Library Docid # 2436398

(272) VISHAL KHANDURI AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ANOTHER[UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] 20-11-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 125 — Interim Maintenance — Quantum of Maintenance — Nature and Purpose — Section 125 is a measure of social justice designed to prevent destitution and must be interpreted liberally — Sufficiency of means or proof of actual income should not be approached with hyper-technical rigidity — Maintenance is compensatory, meant to enable the wife to live with dignity consistent
India Law Library Docid # 2436557

(273) SANJAY KASHYAP Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND[UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] 20-11-2025
Criminal Law — Conviction and Sentencing — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 504 (Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace), 506 (Criminal intimidation), and 509 (Word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman) — Setting aside of conviction — Appellant convicted initially based on evidence primarily related to a scuffle and subsequent alleged consumption of poison by the victim — High Court found significant contradictions and improvisations in the statements
India Law Library Docid # 2436558

(274) M/S. RALLIS INDIA LIMITED Vs. DEPUTY CONTROLLER OF PATENTS AND DESIGNS AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 20-11-2025
Patents Act, 1970 — Section 117(A)(2) — Appeal against rejection of patent application (Stable Herbicidal Composition) — Validity of Prior Art (IN 2243/MUM/2014) — Prior art objection based on anticipation and obviousness — Determination of Priority Date — Crucial issue regarding whether the claim for an Emulsifiable Concentrate (EC) formulation in the cited prior art (D3) is "fairly based" on disclosures in its provisional specification, as required under Section 11(2) of the Act, to
India Law Library Docid # 2436737

(275) R.SIVA @ SIVAKUMAR AND OTHERS Vs. STATE[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 20-11-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 374(2) — Appeal against conviction — Murder case — Sole eyewitness testimony — Quality of evidence — The court should not insist on plurality of witnesses, but the single witness's testimony must be entirely reliable and free from suspicion to sustain a conviction — Where evidence of
India Law Library Docid # 2436738

(276) STATE OF TAMIL NADU Vs. SELVI[MADRAS HIGH COURT (MADURAI BENCH)] 20-11-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 227 — Discharge — Framing of Charge — Principles governing the exercise of court's power at the stage of framing charges/discharge — Court must sift and weigh evidence only to see if a prima facie case is made out — Grave suspicion not properly explained justifies framing charge — Court
India Law Library Docid # 2436739

(277) STATE OF TAMIL NADU Vs. CHANDRALEKHA[MADRAS HIGH COURT (MADURAI BENCH)] 20-11-2025
Criminal Procedure — Discharge of Accused — Principles under Section 227 and 228 Cr.P.C. (old code referred to) or Section 438 read with 442 of BNSS, 2023 (as cited in the prayer) — Trial Court's power to sift and weigh evidence for a limited purpose; necessity for a prima facie case or grave suspicion; Court must apply judicial mind and cannot act merely as a mouthpiece of the prosecution — Discharge is warranted if two
India Law Library Docid # 2436740

(278) K. BALACHANDRAN Vs. R. VALLINAYAGAM[MADRAS HIGH COURT (MADURAI BENCH)] 20-11-2025
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 — Dishonour of cheque — Statutory presumption under Section 139 — When the accused does not deny the issuance of the cheque, the signature on the cheque, and its dishonour for 'Funds Insufficient', the presumption under Section 139 that the cheque was issued for a legally enforceable debt comes into play against the accused. (Paras 2a, 2c, 6, 11, 12, 13, 14,
India Law Library Docid # 2436741

(279) UMAKANT RATH AND OTHERS Vs. DEENBANDHU RATH AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 19-11-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 7 Rule 11 (d) — Rejection of Plaint — Bar by law (Order IX Rule 9) — A plaint cannot be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 (d) unless the statutory bar (such as under Order IX Rule 9) is evident on the face of the plaint itself — Where the question of bar depends upon disputed facts, such as the identity of the cause of action, subject-matter, and parties between the present suit and a
India Law Library Docid # 2435850

(280) MADRAS BAR ASSOCIATION Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 19-11-2025
Constitution of India, 1950 — Articles 14, 32, 136, 141, 142, 226, 227, 323-A, 323-B, 368 — Separation of powers — Judicial Independence — Constitutional Supremacy — Judicial Review — Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021 (Impugned Act) — Challenge to vires — The Impugned Act, which reproduces provisions previously struck down in Madras Bar Association v. Union of India (MBA) cases, is unconstitutional as it constitutes an impermissible legislative override of binding
India Law Library Docid # 2435531

First
«
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
»
Last