Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
Find crux of what happened in major matters dealt by Supreme Court of India in July 2023 with interesting stories on Teesta Setalvad bail, guidelines for designation of Senior Advocates, Supreme Court's suo motu cognizance of Manipur women incident, final extension of ED Chief SK Mishra's tenure, and much more.
Supreme Court opined that the Jharkhand High Court fell into error in adopting such a casual approach and set aside the impugned order. Thus, granted bail to the husband.
Supreme Court said that the prosecution has failed to prove that the accused had either any intention of causing the death of the deceased or the intention of causing such bodily injury to the deceased which was likely to cause his death.
The Supreme Court noted that investigation was complete, charge sheet was filed and trial was yet to commence, and its conclusion was likely to take some time.
Six first information reports were registered by the Police over the Ram Navami violence in the State of West Bengal.
This report covers the Supreme Court's Never Reported Judgment dating back to the year 1951 on breach of contract.
Vernon Gonsalves and Arun Ferreira were charged with several offences under IPC and Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 and they were alleged to have played an active role in recruitment of and training for cadres of the Communist Party of India (Maoist).
The Court explained that the power to special leave is an exceptional and overriding power, naturally it must be exercised sparingly and with caution and only in very exceptional situations. It will only be used to advance the cause of justice and its exercise will be governed by well-established principles.
Earlier, the Bombay High Court had denied the plea of Vernon Gonsalves and Arun Ferreira.
Supreme Court further made it clear that no further extension of tenure would be granted for SK Mishra.
The Supreme Court said that due consideration must be given to the facts which are suggestive of the nature of crime, the criminal antecedents of the accused and the nature of punishment that would follow a conviction vis-à-vis the offences alleged against an accused.
The alleged non-compliance with statutory and Election Commission mandated regulations, and their legal effect, cannot be examined through a summary proceeding under Order VII Rule 11, CPC, or even under Order XII Rule 6, CPC.
The Court directed the States and Union Territories to submit their responses positively by 31-08-2023.
Supreme Court said that once there is no eyewitness of the incident, the prosecution will have to establish a motive for the commission of the crime because in a case of no direct evidence, motive has a major role.
The Supreme Court was hearing a petition against the Varanasi District Court’s Order wherein ASI was directed to undertake scientific survey of the Gyanvapi Mosque to find out whether the same was constructed over a pre-existing structure of Hindu Temple.
The Supreme Court called the matter at hand a classic case in which a litigant had been able to mislead the Courts and authorities at different levels to put life into his stale claim.
This report covers the Supreme Court's Never Reported Judgment dating back to the year 1951 on whether the property acquired through invalid adoption, will be considered as joint family property.
Supreme Court also issued notice on a separate transfer petition filed by the producer of the film for transferring the proceedings of the movie in different High Courts to the Supreme Court.