Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
Supreme Court’s observed that no empirical data has been provided to demonstrate that Light Motor Vehicle (LMV) license holders driving transport vehicles are a significant cause of road accidents
It is manifest that it is the KPSC, with its vacillating and dithering stance, that is largely responsible for this long-pending litigation, impacting the lives, hopes and aspirations of nearly twelve hundred candidates
The 9-Judge Bench unanimously held that Article 31-C of the Constitution remains in force to the extent that it was upheld in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, (1973) 4 SCC 225.
“The prime object of FIR, from the point of view of the informant is to set the criminal law in motion and from the point of the investigating authorities is to obtain information about the alleged activity to enable them to take suitable steps to trace and book the guilty. FIR is an important document, though not a substantial piece of evidence, and may be put in evidence to support or contradict the evidence of its maker viz., the informant.”
This roundup revisits the analyses of Supreme Court’s judgments/orders on Section 6A of Citizenship Act; Intoxicating Liquor; Byju’s Insolvency case; Delhi Education Rules; Brij Bihari Prasad murder case; Pune Triple Murder case; RG Kar Rape and Murder Case; and more. It also covers Top stories; Never reported Judgments; Cases Reported in SCC Weekly in October.
Supreme Court noted that as per the employee in the case at hand, comes within the meaning of “workman” as given in Section 2(s) of the I.D. Act and the management without following the legal procedure, relieved him from service abruptly and hence, the same is illegal termination.
Justice B. V Nagarathna who is currently serving as a Judge of Supreme Court of India, formerly served as a Judge of Karnataka High Court until her elevation to the Supreme Court. Justice Nagarathna is also the potential contender for the first ever woman Chief Justice of India.
“This is one of the few orders we have come across in last few days passed by the High Court, in which, without deciding the matter on merits, the High Court has granted the bail to the accused, subject to the condition that he shall furnish the bail bonds after six months of the passing of the order.”
“When reasonable care, expected of the medical professional, is extended or rendered to the patient unless the contrary is proved, it would not be a case for actionable negligence.”
This report covers the Supreme Court’s Never Reported Judgment on, Supreme Court’s interference in concurrent findings of fact, dating back to the year 1954.
In the Judgment dated 12-09-2024, Supreme Court had held that an application for extension of time for passing an arbitral award under Section 29A (4) read with Section 29A (5) is maintainable even after the expiry of the twelve-month or the extended six-month period. The court, while adjudicating such extension applications will be guided by the principle of sufficient cause.
Supreme Court directed that the entire process of recounting of votes should be video-graphed, and the result of re-count to be signed by the parties, their counsel as well as the Court Commissioner, besides the Presiding Officer of the Election Tribunal.
The present appeal raises substantial questions about the legal framework governing the withdrawal of a CIRP; the settlement of claims after the admission of an application instituted by a debtor; and the scope of the inherent powers vested in the NCLAT under Rule 11 of the NCLAT Rules.
The Division Bench opined that in Section 498-A IPC cases, the courts have to be careful to identify instances of over implication and to avert the suffering of ignominy and inexpiable consequences.
Supreme Court affirmed that the cut-off date of 25 March 1971 is rational as on the said date, Pakistani Army launched Operation Search Light to curb Bengali nationalist movement in East Pakistan. The migrants before the operation were migrants of partition towards which India had a liberal policy. Migrants from Bangladesh after the said date were migrants of war and not partition.
by Akash Hogade†
Without making any observations on the merits at this stage, Allahabad Court granted three days’ time to the Chief Standing Counsel to obtain complete instructions. It instructed that the position regarding the category of the road and the applicable norms should be clarified at the next scheduled hearing.
This report covers the Supreme Court’s Never Reported Judgment on, confession of co-accused, dating back to the year 1954.
“Orientation of these guidelines is to prioritise prevention before protection and protection before penalisation.”