All

Judgement Name: Laxmibai Chandaragi B & Anr. v. The State of Karnataka & Ors. Writ Petition [Criminal] No.359/2020. Court Name: Supreme Court of India Facts: Santosh and Laxmi were both working as assistant professors in different colleges and developed a mutual attraction for each other while meeting regularly. However, there was opposition from Laxmi’s parents, […]

Introduction: A civil appeal was made before the high court of Jharkhand at Ranchi, regarding the negligence of pleading. The appellant claimed that he preferred motor vehicle act no.66 of 2011 whereas the respondent preferred no.115 of 2011 of the motor vehicle act.  Facts: Due to the rash and negligent driving of Mr. Sunil Gurum,

Introduction: The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed the appeal of the appellant dated 06-11-2008 and upheld the order of conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court on 11-12-1997. Facts: Appellant 1 and the deceased were married on 01-07-1994. On 31-07-1995, some person informed the Complainant at about 4 or 4.30 that their

Background/ Overview – Facts – A case of similar nature appeared in the court of Additional Session Judge, Gadhchiroli. In this case, the mother the informant of the victim of a 5-year-old girl in her criminal complaint stated that she works as domestic help in other houses she works from 8.00 am to 4.00 pm.

Court name: The Supreme Court of India. Judgement name: Union of India, through the Secretary, Ministry of Environment and Forest Vs. Trilok S. Bhandari & Ors.  Judgement date: September 29th,2021 Judges/ Bench: J.Ajay Rastogi and J. Abhay S. Oka  Introduction: This case is an appeal directed to the Supreme court against the High court of

Facts: The current appeal was filed by the deceased’s son, Daansingh, who was the Sarpanch of the village. Due to a prior enmity between the accused and the deceased, the accused’s husband, along with certain other members of his family and sharpshooters, shot at Daansingh in September 2015, but Daansingh survived. The accused respondent was

Introduction: A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India was rejected by a Division Bench at the Indore Bench of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh challenging a detention order passed against the appellant under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act 1980. Facts: The Fake Remdesivir Injections were administered to Patients during

Court Name:  The Supreme Court of India Judgment Name:  Harwansh Kaur & ANR V/s Special Area Development Authority & ORS. Judgment Date: October 22, 2021 Judgment Bench:  J. Uday Umesh Lalit & J. S. Ravindra Bhat. Introduction: This is an appeal challenging the judgment by the Madhya Pradesh High court, which is also a judgment

Facts – Submission of Appellant – Mr. Mahesh Thakur appeared on the behalf of the appellant and put forth the following submissions before the apex court – Submission of Respondent 1 (The State of Karnataka) Mr. V. N. Raghupathy appeared for the state and made the following arguments – Submission of Respondent 2 (Accused) –

Introduction: Farid Pindari and others come with an appeal for a suit of the permanent injunction before the civil court by ignoring sec 85 of the waqf act 1995. As the defendant raise a boundary wall in their portion of land. Facts: A piece of land situated at Mirzaganj, Pargana, and Tehsil Milahabad Lucknow belonged