<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!--generator='jetpack-15.8'-->
<!--Jetpack_Sitemap_Buffer_News_XMLWriter-->
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="//sclaw.in/news-sitemap.xsl"?>
<urlset xmlns="http://www.sitemaps.org/schemas/sitemap/0.9" xmlns:news="http://www.google.com/schemas/sitemap-news/0.9" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.sitemaps.org/schemas/sitemap/0.9 http://www.sitemaps.org/schemas/sitemap/0.9/sitemap.xsd">
 <url>
  <loc>https://sclaw.in/2026/05/10/prohibition-of-benami-property-transactions-act-1988-section-45-bar-of-jurisdiction-of-civil-courts-this-section-bars-civil-courts-from-entertaining-suits-or-proceedings/</loc>
  <lastmod>2026-05-10T13:48:11Z</lastmod>
  <news:news>
   <news:publication>
    <news:name>Supreme Court of India  Judgements  </news:name>
    <news:language>en</news:language>
   </news:publication>
   <news:title>Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 — Section 45 — Bar of jurisdiction of civil courts — This section bars civil courts from entertaining suits or proceedings related to matters within the jurisdiction of authorities, Adjudicating Authorities, or the Appellate Tribunal under the Act — However, the question of whether a suit falls under this bar is itself a matter that can be considered in the context of Order 7 Rule 11 or Order XIV Rule 2.</news:title>
   <news:publication_date>2026-05-10T13:48:11Z</news:publication_date>
   <news:genres>Blog</news:genres>
  </news:news>
 </url>
 <url>
  <loc>https://sclaw.in/2026/05/10/penal-code-1860-ipc-section-34-common-intention-requires-proof-of-pre-arranged-plan-or-prior-meeting-of-minds-which-must-be-clearly-discernible-from-the-material-on-r/</loc>
  <lastmod>2026-05-10T13:44:17Z</lastmod>
  <news:news>
   <news:publication>
    <news:name>Supreme Court of India  Judgements  </news:name>
    <news:language>en</news:language>
   </news:publication>
   <news:title>Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 34 — Common intention — Requires proof of pre-arranged plan or prior meeting of minds, which must be clearly discernible from the material on record — Mere presence at the scene of offence without proof of participation or shared intention is insufficient to sustain conviction with the aid of Section 34 IPC — Prosecution must establish that accused shared a common intention and acted in furtherance thereof.</news:title>
   <news:publication_date>2026-05-10T13:44:17Z</news:publication_date>
   <news:genres>Blog</news:genres>
  </news:news>
 </url>
 <url>
  <loc>https://sclaw.in/2026/05/10/police-manual-jharkhand-rule-828-read-with-appendix-49-procedure-for-imposition-of-major-penalties-respondent-no-1-was-provided-with-charge-memorandum-relevant-materia/</loc>
  <lastmod>2026-05-10T13:41:31Z</lastmod>
  <news:news>
   <news:publication>
    <news:name>Supreme Court of India  Judgements  </news:name>
    <news:language>en</news:language>
   </news:publication>
   <news:title>Police Manual, Jharkhand, Rule 828 read with Appendix 49 — Procedure for imposition of major penalties — Respondent No — 1 was provided with charge memorandum, relevant materials, afforded adequate defence opportunity, participated in enquiry, received enquiry report, and submitted representation, satisfying procedural fairness.</news:title>
   <news:publication_date>2026-05-10T13:41:31Z</news:publication_date>
   <news:genres>Blog</news:genres>
  </news:news>
 </url>
</urlset>
