Month: July 2017

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.482 & S.438-Quashing-lnherent Powers- Anticipatory Bail–S.438 CrPC has been deleted in State of Uttar Pradesh-Wherever the High Court finds that in a given case if the protection against pre-arrest is not given, it would amount to gross miscarriage of justice

2017(1) Law Herald (SC) 238 : 2017 LawHerald.Org 516 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dipak Misra The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitava Roy Criminal Appeal…

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Sections 23 and 24 – Acquisition of land in excess of ceiling – Determination of compensation – Land in excess of ceiling exempted by the Government – Land not vesting in Government – Acquisition under the Act, permissible – Land owner is entitled to compensation under the Act as acquisition is not under Land Ceiling Act.

  AIR 1996 SC 3142 : (1996) 3 JT 629 : (1996) 3 SCALE 140 : (1996) 3 SCC 282 : (1996) 3 SCR 772 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA GOVERNMENT…

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC)-Section 300 – Murder – Custodial death – Case based on circumstantial evidence – Deceased allegedly brought to police station where he died of injuries from severe beating – No evidence about offence in regard to which deceased was brought to police station – No evidence to prove alleged beating – Prosecution case not supported by medical evidence – Circumstances not sufficient to prove guilt of accused – Conviction set-aside.

  AIR 1998 SC 370 : (1998) CriLJ 662 : (1998) 4 JT 384 : (1997) 7 SCALE 30 : (1998) 9 SCC 17 : (1997) 5 SCR 154 Supp…

Schedule Caste—Central and State Government directed to strictly enforce the provisions of SCST Act. Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989-Non implementation of provisions—There has been a failure on the part of the concerned authorities in complying with the provisions of the Act and Rules

2017(1) Law Herald (SC) 193 : 2016 LawHerald.Org 2528 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Chief Justice T.S. Thakur The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dr. D. Y.…

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.