[Civil Appeal No.9363 of 2011] [C.A.No.9147 of 2011] SHIVA KIRTI SINGH, J. These civil appeals are directed against judgment of Bombay High Court dated 31.08.2010 in W.P.(L) No.1915 of 2010 and dated 10.08.2010 in W.P.No.316 of 2010 respectively whereby the writ petitions preferred by the appellants were dismissed. For the sake of brevity facts have […]
[Civil Appeal No. 3272 of 2015 arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.15900 of 2013] Pinaki Chandra Ghose, J. Leave granted. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment delivered by the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court on March 8, 2013 in A.P.O. No.180 of 2012 whereby the High Court while holding that the
NEW DELHI: A whistleblower, who makes public secret and confidential documents of the government or its agencies, cannot be prosecuted if it was done in public interest and to expose corruption, the Supreme Court said. It turned down former CBI chief Ranjit Sinha’s plea seeking action against the whistleblower who provided CBI’s confidential documents including
[Civil Appeal No. 7377 of 2008] [Civil Appeal Nos. 8635-8636 of 2014] [Civil Appeal Nos. 8637-8638 of 2014] [Civil Appeal Nos. 6184-6185 of 2010] Abhay Manohar Sapre, J. 1. Civil Appeal No. 7377 of 2008 is filed against the judgment and order dated 19.10.2005 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
Recent SC Judgement – Bhupal Singh Vs. State of Haryana – 01.04.15 Read More »
[Civil Appeal No. 8912 of 2003] A.K. SIKRI, J. 1. What is the correct method of computation of deductions under Section 80HHC(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in the given facts and circumstances, is the question which needs an answer in the present appeal. 2. The given facts and circumstances, as they appear on
[Civil Appeal No.3238 of 2015 arising out of SLP (C) No. 1865 of 2014] V. GOPALA GOWDA, J. Leave granted. This appeal has been filed by the appellant-claimants against the Judgment and order dated 25.07.2013 passed in FAO No. 1652 of 2010 by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, wherein the High
Recent SC Judgement – Chanderi Devi Vs. Jaspal Singh – 31.03.15 Read More »
[Civil Appeal Nos.2729-2730 of 2004] R. F. NARIMAN, J. The present case concerns itself with a classification issue. The facts necessary to appreciate the controversy are as follows: – The appellant manufactures security holograms. At the very beginning of the manufacturing process, they use coated metallised film which we are informed is classified under Tariff
NEW DELHI: In a major embarrassment to former CBI chief Ranjit Sinha, the Supreme Court on Thursday said that probe against him is needed for allegedly protecting accused of coal scam. A bench headed by Madan B Lokur said that Sinha meeting various accused multiple times, when the probe against them was on, is highly
Coalgate: Ex-CBI chief Ranjit Sinha needs to probed for protecting accused, SC says Read More »
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that no one had the poetic license to use a historically respected person like Mahatma Gandhi as a character and attribute obscene words to him in any fiction, poetry or any type of literary work. A bench headed by Justice Dipak Misra said if an author, writer
Cannot attribute obscene words to Mahatma Gandhi: SC Read More »
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday stayed Arvind Kejriwal-led AAP government’s circular which said that the government will pursue the case against any person for making defamatory allegation against its employees. A bench headed by Justice Dipak Misra stayed the circular issued on May 6 allowing the government to proceed against a person who
SC stays Kejriwal govt’s circular on defamation proceedings against media houses Read More »
In accordance with the Bar Council of India rules, Law Intellect India does not solicit work or advertise through this website. By clicking ‘I agree,’ you acknowledge that you are accessing this information voluntarily and that no attorney-client relationship is created through this site.
The content on this website is for informational purposes only and should not be taken as legal advice. We disclaim any liability for actions taken based on the information provided. For personalized legal advice, please consult a qualified attorney.
Please review and accept our Privacy Policy before using this website. All intellectual property rights related to the website and its content belong to the Firm.
