Nathu Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. [Criminal Appeal No.522 of 2021] Court can grant special protection despite dismissal of application for anticipatory bail, provided it is reasoned Brief: In the instant appeal, the Hon’ble Supreme Court set aside the portion of High Court order wherein while dismissing application of anticipatory bail it […]
Gautam Navlakha vs. National Investigation Agency [Criminal Appeal No.510 of 2021] Court can order house arrest under section 167 of the CrPC based on multiple factors like age etc. Brief: In the instant appeal, the Supreme Court dismissed the plea for default bail by Bhima Koregaon accused Gautam Navlakha as the house arrest of the
Uttar Pradesh Power Transmission Corporation Ltd. and Anr. vs. CG Power and Industrial Solutions Limited and Anr. [Special Leave Petition (C) No. 8630 of 2020] Existence of arbitration clause does not bar writ jurisdiction Brief: In the instant petition the Supreme Court held that levy of cess by the UPPTCL is arbitrary and without power
Existence of arbitration clause does not bar writ jurisdiction Read More »
Jayamma & Anr. vs. State of Karnataka [Criminal Appeal No. 758 of 2010] Dying declaration is admissible in evidence on the principle of necessity and can solitarily lead to conviction Brief: In this appeal the Supreme Court set aside the judgement of the High Court wherein it reversed and set aside the appellants’ acquittal, The
Rahul Sharma & Anr. vs. National Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors. [Civil Appeal No. 1769 of 2021] Supreme Court confirmed grant of future prospect regardless of victim being self-employed Brief: In this appeal the Supreme Court set aside the judgement of the High Court wherein the Court deducted future prospects. The Supreme Court confirmed grant of 40% future prospects in
Mangala Waman Karandikar (D) TR and LRS. vs. Prakash Damodar Ranade [Civil Appeal No. 10827 of 2010] When a document is a straightforward proviso 6 of section 92 or section 95 of the Evidence Act do not apply. Brief: In the instant case, the Supreme Court recognised several principles of contractual interpretation and set aside the reliance placed by the
Sanjay Kumar Rai vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. [Criminal Appeal No.472 of 2021] Orders framing charges or refusing discharge are amenable to revision jurisdiction Brief: In the said appeal, the Supreme Court held that orders framing charges or refusing discharge are neither interlocutory nor final in nature and are therefore not affected by
Orders framing charges or refusing discharge are amenable to revision jurisdiction Read More »
Mallappa vs. State of Karnataka [Criminal Appeal No. 1993 of 2010] Merely accused seen running away is too thin evidence to convict someone under s. 302 Brief: The Supreme Court set aside the conviction of the accused by the High Court. Notably, the Court observed that in absence of any cogent evidence demonstrating that the club seized was used to assault the
Merely accused seen running away is too thin evidence to convict someone under s. 302 Read More »
Supreme Court holds WB-HIRA as unconstitutional for repugnancy with RERA Forum for People’s Collective Efforts (FPCE) & Anr. vs. The State of West Bengal & Anr [Writ Petition (C) No. 116 of 2019] Brief: The Supreme Court in this petition has held WB-HIRA as repugnant to RERA under Article 254(1) of the Constitution. The Court
Supreme Court holds WB-HIRA as unconstitutional for repugnancy with RERA Read More »
Court has not to delve deep into the intricies of human mind to explore the undisclosed intention in an agreement Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Limited (BESCOM). vs. E.S. Solar Power Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. [Civil Appeal No. 9273 of 2019] RELEVANT PARAGRAPH 15. Before embarking on the exercise of interpretation of the agreement it is
The Bar Council of India does not permit solicitation of work and advertising by legal practitioners and advocates. By accessing the Litigating Hand website (our website), the user acknowledges that:
