Registry is directed to develop software along similar lines in collaboration with NIC or otherwise, for automatic consideration of prisoners applications for premature release in accordance with their respective policies/schemes.
High Court cannot overstep its jurisdiction under Article 227 of Constitution by interfering with Appellate Benchs discretion to allow an amendment to plaint following landlords death during appeal.
Reliefs sought by Panchayat aim to restrain Corporations statutory authority related to municipal planning, a matter governed by public law, which cannot be handled in civil suits focused on private rights.
Polices failure to follow proper procedures during investigation contributed to unresolved crime and raised concerns about effectiveness of authorities in conducting criminal investigations hence, impugned order of conviction and sentence set aside.
Due to non-compliance with statutory obligations and lack of necessary information in bail application, impugned order cannot be upheld, necessitating reevaluation of bail request by competent Court without delving into cases merits.
Even if Will were proven forged, aggrieved parties would be property purchasers thus, further prosecution of appellant regarding Charge sheet is deemed unjustified and an abuse of court process.
Trial Courts must request reports on aggravating and mitigating circumstances post-conviction and High courts are to ensure these reports are recorded before admission of death references and dedicated legal teams must be assigned to represent convicted individuals in death sentence confirmation references.
Prosecution failed to prove its case against appellants beyond reasonable doubt hence, impugned judgment of conviction passed by High Court is set aside and Appellants are acquitted of all charges.
Appellants are deemed eligible for release and it is ordered that they be released on bail, contingent upon meeting bail bond requirements set by trial Court and any additional conditions it may impose.
Arbitral Tribunal is not justified in awarding pre-award/pendente lite interest in favor of respondent-claimant, contrary to Clause 16(3) and Clause 64(5) of General Conditions of Contract (GCC) and this award is liable to be set aside.
Appellants are permitted to seek compensation re-determination based on High Court award, regardless of prior compensation received, as there is no statutory prohibition against it.
Immediate transfer of declared juveniles to observation homes to uphold their rights and Court calls for improved coordination among all stakeholders to prevent future lapses.
APTEL order is set aside regarding compensation for coal procurement to address shortfalls during operationalization of Ganeshpur captive coal block however, compensation relating to Change in Law events from 25.08.2014, including carrying costs until actual payment, is upheld.
Appellant, APMCD, failed to act for three years regarding joint inspection before fire incident, leading to claims of unfulfilled conditions hence, impugned judgment of Division Bench is set aside and that of Single Judge is restored.
Despite the Appellants age and exoneration in departmental proceedings, statutory requirements for gratuity release remain unchanged as per Rule 69(1)(c) of the Rules.
High Court committed error in dismissing statutory appeal filed under Section 10F of Erstwhile Act and thereby, affirming order of CLB condoning delay of 249 days in filing appeal under Section 58(3) of Act, 2013.
Orders issued by Executing Court which altered decrees terms by modifying land portions designated for each party, exceed its jurisdiction and are therefore legally unsustainable.
Judgment of English Court is not enforceable in terms of Section 44A of CPC since it falls foul of exceptions enumerated in Section 13 of CPC.
Concerns regarding safety of respondent during interrogation away from Central Prison will be mitigated by utilizing secure facilities under police control hence, terms and conditions imposed in order of Magistrate and High Court are modified.
Prosecution failed to establish clear case against Respondent No. 2, reinforcing validity of his acquittal amidst considerable reasonable doubt and High Courts assessment of evidence was sound and not legally unsustainable and credibility of earlier findings warrants no interference by Court.
You were logged out of this device because this account is also signed in on another device, and that device asked this one to sign out.
Tap the button below to open the PDF in your device's default viewer