Jaggo Vs. Union of India & Ors. Anita & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors.

i. Respondent shall be allowed to visit the minor daughter every Sunday between 10:00 AM and 02:00 PM. ii. Such visits shall take place in Madurai, in a public park or a temple premises, and in the ...

12. As for the matter with regard to grant of anticipatory bail to the respondents-accused, the law has been enunciated by this Court in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi)2, wherein it was held ...

During the course of investigation, it was found that the said Anil Kumar Sethi entered in service as Stipendiary Engineer in the year 1993 in Orissa State Housing Board Corporation and worked there ...

3. Heard the learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned counsel appearing for the State of Tamil Nadu. 4. As noted above, the appellant is charge sheeted only under Section 27 ...

On going through the contents of the application preferred under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and also to meet the ends of justice, we deem it appropriate to set aside the order ...

An Act to consolidate and amend the law relating to juveniles in conflict with law and children in need of care and protection, by providing for proper care, protection and treatment by catering to ...

2. The Union of India is in appeal against the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Patna1 allowing the writ petition filed by the respondent challenging the order of the ...

Dechamma I.M. @ Dechamma Koushik Vs. State of Karnataka and Anr. [Criminal Appeal No.________ of 2024 arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 3421 of 2022] 2. Though Respondent No.2 has been duly served with ...

2. This appeal challenges the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital in Criminal Misc. Application No. 355 of 2022, vide which the learned ...

4. We have heard Shri S. Nagamuthu, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and Shri N.R. Elango, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the State of Tamil Nadu.

25. This Court in Ude Singh v. State of Haryana10, held that to convict an accused under Section 306 IPC, the intent or mental state to commit the specific crime must be evident when assessing ...