Month: June 2012


    Central Information CommissionRoom No. 305, 2nd Floor, ‘B’ Wing, August Kranti Bhavan,Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066Web: Tel No: 26167931Case No. CIC/SS/A/2011/000350 Name of Appellant : Sh. Ritesh Suri (The Appellant was present) Name of Respondent : Addl. Commissioner of Police, Special Police Unit for Women andChildren, New Delhi. Represented by:Shri O.P. Arora, ACP and […]

  • Powers of CAW CELL – Delhi High Court – S.N.Dhingra

    7. The creation of CAW Cells for investigation of crimepertaining to women, in my opinion, does not cause any discrimination on the basis ofsex for the CAW Cells have been constituted with a social purpose so that the crimesrelating to women are dealt with sensitivity. CAW Cell is like any other specializedwing of the Delhi […]

  • Hindu Marriage Act – What ? How ?

          The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955   An Act to amend and codify the law relating to marriage among Hindus. BE it enacted by Parliament in the Sixth Year of the Republic of India as follows:- 1- Short title and extent.   (1) This Act may be called the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. […]

  • Truth the ultimate end of judicial proceedings/actual realistic costs & caretaker’s possession

    In this case – the court highlighted that courts are meant to discover the truth and hence should not adopt a laid back attitude but be pro-active to ensure that relevant questions are not left unanswered, the court also held that a premium cannot be placed on unnecessarily prolonging the litigation for ulterior ends, actual/realistic costs have […]

  • When original not produced before Court S.195(1)(b)(ii) not attracted.

    As the document alleged to have been forged was not produced in the court the provisions on S.195(1)(b)(ii).  Supreme Court of India Sushil Kumar And Ors vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 8 December, 1987 Equivalent citations: 1988 AIR 419, 1988 SCR (2) 182 Bench: Sharma, L. PETITIONER: SUSHIL KUMAR AND ORS. Vs. RESPONDENT: […]

  • Supreme Court on Fake Encounter Killing

    Supreme Court of India Brijlala Pd. Sinha vs State Of Bihar on 13 July, 1998 Author: Pattanaik Bench: M Mukherjee, G Pattanaik PETITIONER: BRIJLALA PD. SINHA Vs. RESPONDENT: STATE OF BIHAR DATE OF JUDGMENT: 13/07/1998 BENCH: M.K. MUKHERJEE, G.B. PATTANAIK ACT: HEADNOTE: JUDGMENT: WITH CRL. APPEAL Nos. 218/98, 279/98 & 280-282/98 JUDGMENT PATTANAIK,J. These five […]

  • Supreme court on law of attempt to rape

     In every crime, there is first, intention to commit, secondly, preparation to commit it, thirdly, attempt to commit it. If the third stage, that is, attempt is successful, then the crime is complete. If the attempt fails the crime is not complete, but law punishes the person attempting the act. Section 511 is a general […]

  • Murder Conviction on testimony of interested witnesses

    In this murder case the court was faced with a situation where a grandson murdered his grandfather when the latter tried bringing sense into him not to indluge in rowdyism and to work. The Court convicted on the basis of clinching testimony of 3 eye witnesses/Recovery/Disclousure Statement/Strained Relations and subsequent conduct of the offendor. The […]

  • No Injunction against Landlord – against eviction of tenant

    TENANT CANNOT SEEK INJUNCTION AGAINST LANDLORD WHEREBY LATTER MAY BE RESTRAINED FROM EVICTING THE TENANT _ FOR THE SAME IS DESTRUCTIVE OF VERY OWNERSHIP RIGHTS OF THE LANDLORD Madras High Court Saraswathi Ammal vs Viveka Primary School on 30 April, 2001 Equivalent citations: AIR 2001 Mad 417 Author: S Jagadeesan Bench: S Jagadeesan JUDGMENT S. […]