Judgments
I.C. Sharma Versus The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.
THE SECRETARY, KERALA STATE COASTAL MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY VERSUS DLF UNIVERSAL LIMITED & ORS.
Baiju @ Vijay Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh
Sudeep Patel Vs. State of M.P. and others
Law Laid Down - Parity between the preventive detention and the externment proceedings. Reliance is placed on the case of State of Maharashtra and others v. Bhaurao Punjabrao Gawande, (2008) 3 SCC 613. Full Judgment
Shiv Pratap Singh Tomar Vs. Smt. Seema Tomar and Others
Law laid down - (I) A defendant may cross-examine a co-defendant or any other witness who has given evidence against him, and reply on such evidence though there is no issue joined between them. (II) Once it is demonstrated by a defendant that his interest is not common and there is a conflict of interest affecting the interest of co-defendant then the defendant can cross-examine the witnesses of co-defendant for reaching to the truth. (III) Condition precedent for giving an opportunity to a Full Judgment
Shiv Narayan and others Versus State of Madhya Pradesh
Law laid down - (i) Even after acquittal of the charge under section 302 read with section 149 IPC, the remaining accused can be convicted under section 302 IPC without there being separate charge u/s 302 IPC. The same is a curable irregularity. (ii) To claim the right of self defence, there must be real danger to life or grievous hurt. Full Judgment
UNION TERRITORY, CHANDIGARH ADMINISTRATION AND ORS. Versus PRADEEP KUMAR AND ANOTHER
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Versus RAJ KUMAR
Dineshbhai Chandubhai Patel VERSUS State of Gujarat & Ors
National Kamgar Union VERSUS Kran Rader Pvt. Ltd. & Ors
Leena Vivek Masal VERSUS State of Maharashtra & Anr
M/S. INOX WIND LTD Versus M/S THERMOCABLES LTD
Alok Sharma Vs. Smt. Nisha Chaubey
SUSME BUILDERS PVT. LTD. Vs. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SLUM REHABILITATION AUTHORITY AND ORS.
Jagdish Valecha Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Ors.
Caparo Engineering India Ltd Vs. Pradhanmantri Engineering Shramik Sanghthan
S.N. Vijaywargiya Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation
Law Laid Down - In terms of Section 170(1) of the CrPC, the Investigating Agency is mandated to produce an accused in custody for the non-bailable offence. The argument that the Court should have issued summons in respect of such offence stands rejected. An order dated 20.10.2016 of a Single Bench of this Court in MCRC No.17501/2016 (Rajendra Kori vs. State of Madhya Pradesh) - is overruled. Accused has no right to insist upon investigation by a particular agency – whether State Full Judgment