Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The applicant bore sole responsibility for any adverse effects arising from the inability to cross-examine the prosecutrix due to repeated delay tactics.
The Bench had earlier deferred the hearing dated 10 Jan to 24 Jan, and yet again the matter got deferred.
Madras High Court said that the High Court cannot issue directions for speedy disposal unless there is a justification or acceptable reason for issuing any such directions. The Court concerned is expected to regulate its own procedures in respect of the cases for effective disposal.
Allahabad High Court said that, since the trial in question is of 2015, therefore, the precaution to that effect, which has been taken by the Trial Court, is appreciated, but in the light of such precaution, a single opportunity to cross-examine prosecution witness may not be denied
The Delhi High Court held that Facebook posts cannot be treated as determinative of the location of a person at a particular point of time. Therefore, the Court set aside the order of Intellectual Property Appellate Board and restored the rectification petitions filed before the Intellectual Property Appellate Board for re-hearing.
Madhya Pradesh High Court: The Division Bench of Ravi Malimath, CJ. and Vishal Mishra, J. allowed a writ petition and issued several
Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT): A Division Bench of Justice L. Narasimha Reddy (Chairman) and A.K. Bishnoi (Administrative Member) took Suo Motu cognizance
Himachal Pradesh High Court: The instant petition was related to Section 29-A of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 entertained by Jyotsna Rewal
Rajya Sabha passed a few path-breaking Bills positively impacting the socio-economic development of the country besides checking corruption and improving transparency. These
Supreme Court: Stating that the virus of seeking adjournments needs to be controlled in order to avoid the abuse of the process