Case BriefsHigh Courts

Gujarat High Court: Sangeeta K. Vishen, J., allowed an application directing the respondent to allow the petitioner to appear in the examination

Uttarakhand High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Uttaranchal High Court: N.S. Dhanik, J., partly allowed a criminal revision which was preferred against the Judgment and order passed by the

Telangana High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Telangana High Court: A Division Bench of Raghvendra Singh Chauhan, CJ and B. Vijaysen Reddy, J., while addressing the present petition observed the

Kerala High Court
Appointments & TransfersNews

President appoints the following Additional Judges as Permanent Judges: S/Shri Justices (i) V.G. Arun (ii) N. Nagaresh (iii) T.V. Anilkumar, and (iv)

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Rajasthan High Court: Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J., partly allowed a writ petition filed by the Society of Catholic Education Institutions in Rajasthan

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Madras High Court: B. Pugalendhi, J., while addressing a petition, observed that, “An impartial investigation is the basic requirement for any investigation. A

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Madras High Court: S.M. Subramaniam, J., while addressing a motor accident claim, observed that, Once, the policy is contractual in nature and the

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Allahabad High Court: Suresh Kumar Gupta, J., while addressing the present jail appeal held that, “…in cases involving sexual assault/rape, it is

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Gujarat High Court: A Division Bench of Sonia Gokani and N.V. Anjaria, JJ., held that there may not be an actual interference with

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Madras High Court: N. Anand Venkatesh, J., while addressing the contempt petition held that, “The doctrine of merger does not make a distinction

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Allahabad High Court: A Division Bench of Samit Gopal and Ramesh Sinha, JJ., while addressing the present petition made the following observation: “…the

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Calcutta High Court: A Division Bench of Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, CJ and Subhasis Dasgupta, J. takes suo motu cognizance of the unnatural death

Chhattisgarh High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Chhattisgarh High Court: A Division Bench of P.R. Ramachandra Menon, CJ and Parth Prateem Sahu, J., addressed an issue with regard to the

Punjab and Haryana High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Punjab and Haryana High Court: Harnaresh Singh Gill, J., rejected the bail application filed by the applicant-accused in connection with the FIR

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Delhi High Court: Prathiba M. Singh, J., noted that Delhi University has now launched an online portal through which the students can obtain

Tripura High Court
Case BriefsCOVID 19High Courts

Tripura High Court: Arindam Lodh, J.,  while terming the doctors as “frontline warriors”, directed the Investigating officer to conduct Test identification parade

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Delhi High Court: A Division Bench of D.N. Patel, CJ and Prateek Jalan, J., held that as and when any advocate approaches the

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Bombay High Court: Bharati Dangre, J., while addressing a bail application made the following observation: There cannot be a straight jacket formula as

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Allahabad High Court: A Division Bench of Govind Mathur, CJ and Saumitra Dayal Singh, J., took suo moto cognizance of reports wherein it

Op EdsOP. ED.

by Karl Shroff*