Hindu Succession Act, 1956 – Section 14(1) – There cannot be a fetter in a owner of a property to give a limited estate if he so chooses to do including to his wife but of course if the limited estate is to the wife for her maintenance that would mature in an absolute estate under Section 14(1) of the said Act.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH JOGI RAM — Appellant Vs. SURESH KUMAR AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M.M. Sundresh, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…
(CrPC) – Section 482 – At the stage of deciding the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. mini trial is not permissible – Order of quashing criminal proceedings is unsustainable.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. AKHIL SHARDA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ.…
(IPC) – S 302/34 – Murder – Common intention- HELD the evidence available on record was not looked into as the witnesses had already been exposed to the accused in the police station – After all, the test identification parade is only a part of an investigation, and therefore, nothing more can be attached to it – Acquittal
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH SHISHPAL @ SHISHU — Appellant Vs. THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and M.M. Sundresh, JJ. )…
Last seen theory – When the last seen theory is found to be not true, there has to be much more concrete and clinching evidence to implicate the accused. HELD when a large number of persons were available near the dead body, it is incomprehensible as to how all of them refused to sign the documents prepared by the police – Order of conviction is set aside.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH RAVI SHARMA — Appellant Vs. STATE (GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI) AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and M.M. Sundresh,…
Recovery having not been proved in the manner known to law, coupled with inadequate evidence on record to implicate the appellant – Prosecution has failed in its attempt to prove beyond reasonable doubt, that the appellant has committed the offence
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH VIRENDRA — Appellant Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M.M. Sundresh, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No.…
Accused has failed to explain the aforesaid incriminating material/circumstances found against him namely the purchase of pesticides by him, prior to the occurrence and that the very bottle of pesticide which was purchased by him was found from the place of occurrence – Conviction and sentence id upheld.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH HAJABHAI RAJASHIBHAI ODEDARA — Appellant Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT — Respondent ( Before : M. R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…
Appeal allowed – Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 302 – Murder – Even the evidence of a hostile witness can be considered to the extent, it supports the case of the prosecution –
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH MALTI SAHU — Appellant Vs. RAHUL AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. 471…
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Section 27 A -HELD we are inclined to set aside the orders passed and dismiss the complaint. As there is no vicarious liability that can be fastened on the appellant and the appellant’s role cannot be stretched to the policy decision of the Republic of Philippines, the appeal stands allowed.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH HCMI EDUCATION — Appellant NARENDRA PAL SINGH — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and M.M. Sundresh, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No. 2481…
The Government of India may consider the introduction of a separate enactment in the nature of a Bail Act so as to streamline the grant of bails.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH SATENDER KUMAR ANTIL — Appellant Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M.M. Sundresh, JJ.…
HELD any deposit made under or pursuant to the said order of High Court, cannot wipe out the default already committed by the defendant- respondent. On the contrary, with setting aside of the said order of the High Court, the order of the Trial Court shall stand revived.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH ASHA RANI GUPTA — Appellant Vs. SRI VINEET KUMAR — Respondent ( Before : Dinesh Maheshwari and Aniruddha Bose, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No.…