ive
THE BHARATIYA SAKSHYA ADHINIYAM, 2023
THE BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2023
THE BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(1) PATEL RAJESHKUMAR JAYANTILAL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 26-04-2024
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Section 37 – The petitioner is accused of selling cough syrup containing Codeine without a license, which is considered illegal under the NDPS Act - The petitioner argues that the syrup is within permissible limits and is used for therapeutic purposes, not falling under the Act - The respondent claims that the petitioner was found with a commercial quantity of Codeine cough syrup without a license, suggesting it was sold as a contraband sub
India Law Library Docid # 2414314

(2) KHEMCHANDRA GOLHANI AND OTHER Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHER[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 26-04-2024
Evasion of Stamp Duty - Land Dispute - The case involves a dispute over land with an injunction order issued against petitioner No.1, restraining him from encroaching upon the land - The main issue is whether the petitioners attempted to evade stamp duty in a land transaction and whether the injunction order was justified - Petitioner No.2 claims to have entered into an agreement to purchase the land and paid the full consideration, but the sale deed was not executed due to a slow server - Not e
India Law Library Docid # 2414321

(3) MANJRI CHOUDHARI Vs. UNION OF INDIA[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 26-04-2024
Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 – Section 70 - The petitioner is arguing against a supplementary prosecution complaint and cognizance taken by the Special Court under the PML Act, 2002, claiming she was falsely implicated and had no involvement in the alleged money laundering activities of her husband and others related to M/s. Zoom Developers Private Limited (ZDPL) - The main issue is whether the proceedings constitute an abuse of the legal process and whether the cognizance taken by t
India Law Library Docid # 2414322

(4) NASIR KHAN Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (GWALIOR BENCH)] 26-04-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 376(3), 376(2i), 376 (2)(n) - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Section 5(l) read with 6 – Quashing of FIR - Following his marriage to the prosecutrix and the birth of their two children - The main issue was whether the FIR and subsequent proceedings could be quashed considering the petitioner and prosecutrix are now married and wish to settle the matter - The petitioner argued for the quashment of the FIR and all consequential proceedings
India Law Library Docid # 2414323

(5) GOA SHIPYARD LIMITED Vs. SHOFT SHIPYARD PVT. LTD.[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 26-04-2024
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Sections 34 and 37 - Appealable orders - Modification of Arbitral Awards - The case involves arbitration appeals filed by Goa Shipyard Limited (GSL) and Shoft Shipyard Private Limited (SHOFT), challenging orders passed by the District Court under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act - The main issues include the challenge to arbitral awards, questions of limitation, entitlement for adjustment or set-off, interest payable on the awarded amount, and the power
India Law Library Docid # 2414324

(6) SMT. BADRUNISA Vs. SABDAR KHAN AND OTHER[BOMBAY HIGH COURT (NAGPUR BENCH)] 26-04-2024
Transfer of Property Act, 1882 - Section 53-A - Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 - Section 4 -Appellant filed a property dispute with Respondent over an agreement dated 07.07.1995 - The central issue was whether the agreement was binding on the appellant, who was not a signatory - The appellant argued that the agreement was unilateral and did not bear her signature, making it unenforceable - The respondents claimed that the appellant's husband was the real owner and sold the
India Law Library Docid # 2414325

(7) STARLIFT SERVICES PVT. LTD. Vs. ALBA ASIA PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 26-04-2024
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 – The case involves Starlift Services Pvt. Ltd. alleging contempt of court by Alba Asia Pvt. Ltd. for disobeying a court order related to an arbitration petition - The main issue is whether Alba Asia Pvt. Ltd. willfully disobeyed the court's direction to deposit a specific amount as part of the arbitration proceedings - Starlift Services contends that the respondents deliberately failed to deposit the ordered amount, constituting willful disobedience and contempt of
India Law Library Docid # 2414326

(8) GEEP INDUSTRIES (INDIA) PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS Vs. COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA[DELHI HIGH COURT] 26-04-2024
Competition Act, 2002 - Section 27(b) - Orders by Commission after inquiry into agreements or abuse of dominant position - The petitioners challenged an order by the Competition Commission of India (CCI) demanding interest on a penalty for cartelization in the Dry Cell Batteries market - The main issue was whether CCI could demand interest on the penalty without following the procedure under the 2011 Regulations - They argued that interest on the penalty can only be levied according to the 2011
India Law Library Docid # 2414327

(9) BHARTENDU GUPTA Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 26-04-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 – The case involves fraudulent medical reimbursement claims totaling Rs. 9,45,982/- and Rs. 25,53,252/- by two individuals, with the petitioner accused of aiding in passing the fake bills - The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail, fearing arrest due to the ongoing investigation into the fraudulent claims - The petitioner claims innocence, stating the money transferred from one of the accused was repayment of a friendly loan, not related t
India Law Library Docid # 2414328

(10) MOHD. ASGAR ALI Vs. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH HOME SECY. AND OTHERS[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 26-04-2024
Service Law – Removal from Service - The petitioner was removed from service in CISF and challenged the orders, seeking reinstatement with benefits - The main issues include alleged bias of the inquiry officer, non-application of mind by the punishing authority, and procedural irregularities - The petitioner argued that the inquiry officer was biased, the inquiry violated natural justice, and there was non-consideration of his representations - The respondent contended that the petitioner commit
India Law Library Docid # 2414329

(11) M/S. M.M.I. TOBACCO PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER Vs. IFTIKHAR ALAM[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 26-04-2024
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) – Section 114 – Review – Seeking review of a remand order in an original suit against opposite party - The main issues are the maintainability of the review application after the trial court's subsequent order and the merits of the grounds for review - The petitioner argues that there is an error apparent on the face of the record regarding the concept of "prior user" and that material facts were concealed during the proceedings - The respondent contends that the
India Law Library Docid # 2414330

(12) BABURAM MURMU Vs. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 26-04-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 354 - Assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty – The appellant argued against the conviction, questioning the evidence and the delay in filing the FIR - The State supported the conviction, emphasizing the appellant's intent to outrage the victim's modesty - The High Court affirmed the conviction but modified the sentence to one year of imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000, in default, simple imprisonment for two months - The Court fou
India Law Library Docid # 2414331

(13) BABA VISHAL GIRI Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 26-04-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 302, 201, 109, 111 read with Section 34 – Murder - Quarrel at a temple - The petitioner is seeking regular bail due to a delay in trial and over five years of incarceration - The prosecution argues against bail due to the heinous nature of the crime and substantial circumstantial evidence - The court grants bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions, without commenting on the merits of the case - The court considers the entire facts and circumstances, Suprem
India Law Library Docid # 2414332

(14) SMTI. PRIYANCHI R. MARAK AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF MEGHALAYA REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVT. OF MEGHALAYA AND OTHERS[MEGHALAYA HIGH COURT] 26-04-2024
Flash Flood Relief Supplies - The petitioners are suing government authorities for non-payment of cattle, poultry, and pig feed supplied to North Garo Hills areas affected by a flash flood/landslide in 2014 - The petitioners argue that they fulfilled their contracts and have been awaiting payment for years - The respondents argue that there are disputed facts, such as the timing of supply orders and the setup of relief camps, which should be resolved in a civil court - The court dismissed the pe
India Law Library Docid # 2414333

(15) RINKU KUMAR TYAGI Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA THROUGH SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE[MEGHALAYA HIGH COURT] 26-04-2024
Protection of Children from Sexual offences Act, 2012 - Section 4 - Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 366A - Penetrative sexual assault - Kidnapping and sexually assaulting a minor girl - A girl was found missing and later found with the accused from Tripura - The main issue was determining the victim's age and whether the accused forcibly carried away and sexually assaulted her - The defense argued that it was a case of a love affair, and there was no concrete evidence to prove her age as a mino
India Law Library Docid # 2414334

(16) BANSH RAIJADA Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 26-04-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 120-B, 307, 324, 326, 327 and 384 - Arms Act, 1959 - Section 25 – Bail - The main issue is whether Petitioner should be granted bail considering the nature of the accusations, the evidence against him, and his potential influence on witnesses - The petitioner claims innocence, asserts the improbability of the prosecution's version, and emphasizes his young age and status as a student - The State opposes bail, highlighting the severity of the offences, the brazen
India Law Library Docid # 2414335

(17) MANOJ KUMAR AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 26-04-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 420, 120-B - Himachal Pradesh Protection of Interests of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999 - Section 5 - Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019 - Sections 21 and 23 - Default in repayment of deposit and interest honouring the commitment – Economic offences involving a fraudulent investment scheme through websites - The main issue was whether the petitioners should be granted bail despite being accused of serious economic offences - The
India Law Library Docid # 2414336

(18) SHEHNAZ BEGUM AND OTHERS Vs. KARAMVIR SAINI AND ANOTHER[DELHI HIGH COURT] 26-04-2024
Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 - Sections 14(1)(e) and 25B(8) – Bona fide requirement – The case involves an eviction order challenge under Section 25B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act - The petitioners (tenants) are legal representatives of the originally inducted tenant, ‘U’ and the respondent is the landlord claiming ownership of the property - The main issues are the ownership of the property, the bona fide requirement of the landlord for the premises, and whether the eviction order was passe
India Law Library Docid # 2414337

(19) VIJAY KUMAR Vs. STATE OF H.P[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 26-04-2024
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 – Sections 21 and 29 - Bail - Pregnant wife's need for his presence – Recovery of 7.34 grams of heroin - The court must decide on the bail application considering the petitioner's criminal antecedents and the nature of the accusations - Petitioner's Arguments - Claims innocence, false implication, and the necessity to care for his pregnant wife - Respondent's Arguments - Emphasizes the petitioner's criminal history and argues against bail due
India Law Library Docid # 2414338

(20) JIGNESH SHASHIKANT PATEL (EMPLOYEE CODE - 3472) AND OTHERS Vs. GENERAL MOTORS INDIA PVT. LTD.[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 26-04-2024
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Section 11 - Former General Motors India employees filed a petition under the Arbitration Act for compensation disputes under the Voluntary Severance Scheme – Hourly 2017 - The dispute revolved around the calculation of compensation and whether the petitioners were entitled to compensation based on revised wages effective from 01.02.2017, as opposed to wages as on 01.04.2016 - The petitioners argued that due to a calculation error, they received less comp
India Law Library Docid # 2414339