Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
Bombay High Court explained that there is no power vested in the police under Section 115(4) of Trade Marks Act, 1999 to seal the factory premises, where the incriminating articles are situated.
In the spirit of cooperative federalism, the Union must exercise its powers within the boundaries created by the Constitution. NCTD, having a sui generis federal model, must be allowed to function in the domain charted for it by the Constitution. The Union and NCTD share a unique federal relationship. It does not mean that NCTD is subsumed in the unit of the Union merely because it is not a “State”.
Supreme Court said that NCTD like other states also represents the representative form of government, the involvement of Union of India in the administration of NCTD is limited by Constitution provisions and any further expansion will be contrary to the constitutional scheme of governance.
Allahabad High Court reiterated that the dying declaration recorded by a police officer, can be acted upon if the same is found to be true, coherent, consistent, and free from any effort to prompt the deceased to make such a statement.
Madras High Court said that there are instances of human rights violation in police stations, but every instance of a casual police enquiry cannot be termed as human rights violation.
Bombay High Court: In a PIL filed by the petitioner who is a social activist highlighted the issue of conduct of mock
Allahabad High Court said that police personnel are not above the law and the application of law and legal provisions should be one and the same for all and no special treatment shall be given to them.
A written statement sent by post or deliver by another person, may not fall under ‘to examine orally' but a written statement submitted by witness himself to I.O., and if the I.O. has assured its genuineness and reduced it in writing, shall be a statement duly recorded under Section 161 CrPC.
Rouse Avenue District Courts, Delhi: In a case filed by Central Bureau of Investigation questioning the power of investigating agency
Tripura High Court: In a public interest litigation concerning custodial torture on a 28-year-old woman in the police lockup, the division bench
Bombay High Court: In a case filed by a father (‘petitioner’) seeking for setting aside the order passed by the Juvenile Justice
Calcutta High Court: Shampa Sarkar, J. disposed of a writ petition with certain directions to police authorities in relation to an investigation
Delhi High Court: Jasmeet Singh, J. did not interfere with the impugned show cause notice issued by Delhi Police to a restaurant
Madhya Pradesh High Court: The Division Bench of Rohit Arya and Milind Ramesh Phadke, JJ. took strong exception to the functioning of
Rajasthan High Court: Sameer Jain J. granted police protection and directed the State authorities to charge an appropriate fee from the couple
“…basic protection of human decency and dignity extends to sex workers and their children, who, bearing the brunt of social stigma attached to their work, are removed to the fringes of the society, deprived of their right to live with dignity and opportunities to provide the same to their children.”
“When a person takes a chance and participates, thereafter he cannot, because the result is unpalatable, turn around to contend that the process was unfair or the selection committee was not properly constituted.”
Bombay High Court: While noting the failure of State Machinery in securing the presence of a person for 13 years, Division Bench
Madras High Court: Addressing the issue of the growing menace of job racketing and tackling the unemployment problem, Division Bench of N.
Patna High Court: Noticing discrepancies in the Trial the Division Bench of Ashwani Kumar Singh and Anil Kumar Sinha, JJ., acquitted a