Month: May 2017

Application for migration – The Vice-Chancellor and also the Director/Principal of Dental College Rohtak have totally ignored the recommendations of the sub-committee, the guidelines laid down for admission and the merit list of the candidates and for reasons of their own, they selected persons of their own choice for admission in a high-handed and arbitrary manner

  (1996) 2 AD 54 : (1996) 1 JT 636 : (1996) 1 SCALE 587 : (1996) 2 SCC 103 : (1996) 1 SCR 862 : (1996) 1 UJ 398…

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 378—Appeal against acquittal—It is trite that only when two views are possible, Supreme Court cannot interfere with a judgment of acquittal; but that would not mean that despite existence of substantial and compelling reasons, the Court will refuse to interfere in a case where it would be just and proper to do so.

2007(3) LAW HERALD (SC) 2577 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.B. Sinha The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Markandey Katju Criminal Appeal Nos. 85-87 of 2000…

Compensation—Normally, when larger extents are involved in an acquisition, it will be more prudent to rely on sale deeds of larger extents and not to base the assessment of the compensation on values fetched at sales of small extents. Compensation—Agricultural Lands used for cultivation—Valuation of such lands on the basis of price per square meter does not appear to be justified.

  2007(3) LAW HERALD (SC) 2563  IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice P.K. Balasubramaniyan The Hon’ble Mr. Justice D.K. Jain Civil Appeal No. 5355 of…

Bail–Anticipatory–The apprehension that the respondent is in a position to influence, induce or coerce witnesses to desist from furnishing relevant information to the investigating agency cannot be considered to be imaginary and the court ought to have considered that aspect seriously before granting anticipatory bail.

  2007(3) LAW HERALD (SC) 2543   IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarun Chatterjee The Hon’ble Mr. Justice P.K. Balasubramaniyan Criminal Appeal No. 1065…

You missed

Temple Bye Laws — Oachira Parabrahma Temple — Ancient structure without a building or deity, governed by Bye-laws with three-tier elected committees — Appellants, elected Secretary and President, challenged two High Court orders (2020 and 2023) that removed their committee and appointed an unelected one under an Administrative Head, citing violations of the temple’s Bye-laws and customs —Legality of appointing an unelected committee and removing the elected one contrary to the temple’s Bye-laws — Petitioner argues that the High Court overstepped its jurisdiction and violated the temple’s governance structure by appointing an unelected committee and removing the elected one without proper legal basis — The High Court’s actions were necessary for the efficient administration of the temple until a scheme could be framed and new elections held — The Supreme Court modified the High Court orders, appointing a new retired Judge as Administrative Head to conduct fair elections within four months, while directing all parties to cooperate — The Court emphasized the need to preserve temple properties and governance as per established customs and laws — The Supreme Court struck down the High Court’s order appointing an unelected committee, appointed a new Administrative Head to conduct elections, and directed all parties to cooperate, emphasizing the importance of adhering to the temple’s established governance structure and Bye-laws.