Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.
The Karnataka High Court held that merely mentioning an individual’s caste during an altercation with no intention to insult, would not attract the provisions of the SC/ ST Act
The Punjab and Haryana High Court commented that victim's silence for such a long time would dent her credibility, and such a dent would not justify any further pre-trial incarceration. Thus, the Court allowed bail application, subject to certain conditions.
Saket Court, Delhi released an accused charged for conspiracy and murder and the Court held that mere call detail records were not sufficient to proceed against the accused.
The Delhi High Court granted four weeks parole to a rape convict and held that right of a citizen to avail a legal remedy in the final court of country cannot be denied.
The Delhi High Court held that the law did not permit even the husband to take household articles including the jewellery without the consent and knowledge of his wife.
The Delhi High Court while granting bail to a man accused of cheating held that undertrial prisoners cannot be placed in custody for indefinite periods of time when a speedy trial does not appear to be a possibility.
A Child-in-conflict with law (CIL) was granted bail considering that she was a young girl; her family was poor; she had less understanding to distinguish between right and wrong and her family atmosphere was good. The Court also discussed situations in which a CIL could be denied bail even in bailable offences as per Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Ss. 14(1)(a) and 2(1)(e) r/w Ss. 11(5) and 11(6) — Application seeking termination of
The Telangana High Court upheld the conviction of a husband under Section 498A of Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) despite there being contradictions in the dying declarations as there were consistent statements about abuse and cruelty committed on the wife in all the dying declarations.
The application was filed to restrain social media platforms from sharing the sexually explicit video of a judicial officer that was being circulated over the internet. Therefore, the Delhi High Court had taken up the suit on urgent mentioning and in the light of imminent and irreparable harm that was likely to be caused to the plaintiff.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Ss. 7, 8 and 11 — Essential requirements of arbitration agreement: When there is discernible intention
Allahabad high Court: In a second anticipatory bail application for offences under Sections 363, 366, 376 of the Penal Code,
Supreme Court: In a case wherein concern was raised regarding common deficiencies and practices adopted by trial courts during criminal
Supreme Court: In a case wherein the appeal challenged the final judgment and order passed by the High Court of
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — S. 17 — Interim measures — Termination of lease: Interim direction by arbitrator to
Constitution of India — Arts. 300-A and 31 — Expropriation of private property by State — Compensation — Entitlement: State
Advocates Act, 1961 — S. 16 — Procedure for designation of Senior Advocates: Clarification of Guidelines prescribed for Supreme Court
Allahabad High Court: Dinesh Kumar Singh, J. rejected the bail application of former UP MLA Mukhtar Ansari who was arrested under Sections