
Gujarat Law University awards Justice CK Thakker with Honorary Doctorate in Law & Education
Justice Thakker served as a Judge of the Supreme Court from 2004 till his retirement in 2008.
Justice Thakker served as a Judge of the Supreme Court from 2004 till his retirement in 2008.
This report covers the Supreme Court’s Never Reported Judgment on consideration, dating back to the year 1954.
Recruitments to various posts of Primary School Teachers; Assistant School Teachers; Group C staff; and Group D staff, was questioned before the Calcutta High Court challenging the legitimacy of the procedures followed in the recruitments.
The Bench was dealing with the issue of whether the law and the procedure laid down by the Court regarding the designation of Advocates as Senior Advocates under Section 16 of the Advocates Act, 1961 required reconsideration.
by Atish Chakraborty* and Shaurya Kapoor**
It was alleged that Michel being a consultant of AgustaWestland, he was roped in for liaison work, in furtherance of which he and another person combined received more than Euro 70 million in the companies beneficially owned and controlled by them.
“It is the duty of the Court to reach the truth of the matter and such exercise may demand putting forward certain questions and suggestions which may be uncomfortable to some.”
“Delays are bad for the accused and extremely bad for the victims, for Indian society, and for the credibility of our justice system, which is valued. Judges are the masters of their Courtrooms and the Criminal Procedure Code provides many tools for the Judges to use in order to ensure that cases proceed efficiently.”
This report covers the Supreme Court’s Never Reported Judgment on ownership, dating back to the year 1954.
“Was there anything more sinister? Even if it was suicide what was the real cause? Was the deceased girl distraught with what happened to her friend? Considering the under-currents and the disapproval of the relationship, was there any instigation for the suicide from any other quarter?”
“If the recovery memos had been prepared in the police station itself or signed by the panch witnesses in the police station, the same would lose their sanctity and cannot be relied upon by the Court to support the conviction.”
The assessee’s case was that whether he had filed a belated return of income, after the expiry of the due date or not, was immaterial and the point in time when the offence under Section 276CC is committed is the date immediately following the due date for furnishing the return of income as prescribed under Section 139(1) of the Act.
Justice Dipankar Datta served as a Judge in the Calcutta High Court, and as Chief Justice of Bombay High Court, prior to being sworn in as Supreme Court Judge on 12-12-2022.
This report covers the Supreme Court’s Never Reported Judgment on what constitutes as a contract, dating back to the year 1954.
“We don’t see that anybody gets better treatment in this Court because he has a different gown,” the Bench remarked.
“The circumstances taken cumulatively must be so complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that, within all human probability, the crime was committed by the accused and none else. While there is no doubt that conviction can be based solely on circumstantial evidence, great care must be taken in evaluating circumstantial evidence.”
Common Law Admission Test-2025 (CLAT-2025) was held in December 2024 for admissions to undergraduate and post-graduate law courses in various National Law Universities. However, petitions were instituted before various High Courts challenging the results.
“We expected the State to put on record reasons for detaining 270 foreign nationals in the transit camp and details of the steps taken by the State Government for deporting the detenues in the detention camp.”
“All the benefits given to PwBD candidates must also be extended to PwD candidates, and there can be no discrimination between the candidates in granting facilities such as scribes, compensatory time, etc., except for reservation, in writing the examinations.”
The victim-wife and the accused-husband married each other as per Sikh rites and ceremonies against the wishes of her family. The wife accused the husband of rape and also alleged that the marriage was solemnised forcibly by the accused.