Posts

Showing posts from 2022

SUSHIL KUMAR vs STATE OF HARYANA

Image
SUSHIL KUMAR vs STATE OF HARYANA - Supreme Court Case 2022 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 401 OF 2022 ARISING OUT OF SLP(CIVIL) NO. 30370 OF 2017 SUSHIL KUMAR …. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF HARYANA & ORS. .... RESPONDENT(S) J U D G M E N T PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, J. Leave granted. 2. This Civil Appeal arises out of the final judgment and order dated 29.07.2015 of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh passed in LPA No. 1910 of 2011. 3. The Appellant was appointed as a Constable in the year 1995. It is his case that he was positioned as a Head Constable under the extent ORP Policy on 21.08.2001. Due to his acts of bravery his name was recommended by the Superintendent of Police (hereinafter ‘the SP’) for promotion under the 10%  2 quota of outstanding performance for inclusion in the B-I List for promotion to the post of Head Constable in the year 21.01.2004. However, the Appellant’s name was dropped down

State of Rajasthan vs Ganeshi Lal

Image
 State of Rajasthan vs Ganeshi Lal - Important Supreme Court Case 2007 On 10th December, 2007, a two Judges Bench in State of Rajasthan vs Ganeshi Lal [Civil Appeal No.3021 of 2006] held that "a decision is a precedent on its own facts." "The only thing in a Judge's decision binding a party is the principle upon which the case is decided and for this reason it is important to analyse a decision and isolate from it the ratio decidendi", the Bench said. Landmark Cases  of India /  सुप्रीम कोर्ट के ऐतिहासिक फैसले

JAIBUNISHA vs MEHARBAN

Image
JAIBUNISHA vs MEHARBAN - Supreme Court Case 2022 NON­REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.76  OF 2022 (ARISING OUT OF SLP(CRL.) NO. 6329 OF 2020) JAIBUNISHA                  …..APPELLANT(S)  VERSUS MEHARBAN & ANR.                        ….RESPONDENT(S) WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.77  OF 2022 (ARISING OUT OF SLP(CRL.) NO. 1337 OF 2021) JAIBUNISHA                  …..APPELLANT(S)  VERSUS JUMMA & ORS.                        ….RESPONDENT(S) J U D G M E N T NAGARATHNA J.  These   appeals   have   been   preferred   by   the   informant   ­ appellant assailing the orders dated 7th October, 2020 and 17th November,   2020   passed   by   the   High   Court   of   Judicature   at Allahabad   in   Criminal   Miscellaneous   Bail   Application   Nos. 29759 of 2020 and 39886 of 2021 respectively whereby bail has been granted to six persons accused in Sardhana P.S. Crime Case No.955 of 2018.  2 2. It is the case of the appellant that she is

Geeta Devi vs State of U.P.

Image
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.78 OF 2022 Geeta Devi                ..Appellant(S) Versus State of U.P. & Ors.                     ..Respondent(S) J U D G M E N T  M. R. Shah, J. 1. Feeling   aggrieved   and   dissatisfied   with   the   impugned judgment and order dated 06.12.2019 passed by the High Court   of   Judicature   at   Allahabad,   Lucknow   Bench   in Criminal Appeal No. 2356 of 2019 by which the High Court has dismissed the said appeal preferred by the victim of the offence, which was filed against the judgment and order dated   13.09.2019   passed   by   the   learned   Special   Court, acquitting the respondent accused under Sections 354, 504, 506 of the IPC, Section 3(1)(x) and 3(1)(xi) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) 1 Act, 1989, the victim – original appellant has preferred the present appeal.        2. That   the   learned   Special   Court/Trial   Court   co