Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
“A decision-maker is insisted on recording reason in support of his decision to ensure transparency in decision-making process. When any order is subject to appeal or amenable to judicial review, then such order must be reasoned and speaking order.”
On 14-12-2023, the Court had remanded them for a period of 7 days.
The prosecution failed to establish the misbranding of the “Red Label Natural Care Tea” beyond a reasonable doubt as the report of the public analyst, was not adequately proven.
The petition under Section 43D(2)(b) First proviso of UAPA Act seeking extension of remand order was filed by the respondents a day before the elapse of the 90- days period.
The Manipur High Court held that where a person is taken into custody by an order of Magistrate, then such order cannot be challenged by Writ of Habeas Corpus as the detention cannot be termed as illegal.
It was observed that judicial discipline required that once the conviction was confirmed by the Supreme Court that too after hearing the accused, the High Court should not have thereafter made any comment on the merits of the case.
Supreme Court observed that the Patna High Court ought to have called upon the Bihar State Pharmacy Council to file the status report on the allegations of fake pharmacist and/or on how many Governments’ hospitals/hospitals in the State are running without registered pharmacist.
Any irregularity or illegality in the remand order is not a statutorily sanctioned reason for grant of default bail
Madras High Court: In a criminal appeal filed challenging the extension of the remand period from 90 days to 180
Bombay High Court: In a case filed by a wife (‘appellant') challenging the Family Court order that granted decree of
Supreme Court: In furtherance of Criminal Justice, the bench of Abhay S. Oka* and MM Sundresh, JJ has held that an appeal
Madhya Pradesh High Court: The Division Bench of Ravi Malimath, CJ and Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, J. allowed a writ appeal filed by
Madras High Court: While stating that, Jug Suraiya, Bachi Karkaria, E.P.Unny and G.Sampath … if any one of them, or for that
Supreme Court: In the case where two different criminal appeals were being heard against two sets of accused, on account of one
Telangana High Court: The Division Bench of Raghvendra Singh Chauhan, CJ and Vijaysen Reddy, J., observed that if the consequences of an offence
Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) had sought 14 days Judicial Custody of Actress Rhea Chakraborty for being involved in the procurement and distribution
Bombay High Court: A Division Bench of S.S. Shinde and N.B. Suryawanshi, JJ., dismissed a petition whereby the petitioners sought their release by
Delhi High Court: A Division Bench comprising of Rekha Palli and Siddhartha Mridul, JJ. dismissed an appeal filed against the order of
Tripura High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Arindam Lodh, J. disposed of an appeal filed under Section 54 of Land