Advanced Search Results

Fatima Riswana Vs. State Rep. by A.C.P., Chennai and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Information Technology Act, 2000 - Sections 67; Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986 - Sections 6; Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 - Sections 5 and 6; Arms Act, 1959 - Sections 27; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 120B, 306, 366, 376 and 506

Reported in : AIR2005SC712; 2005(1)ALD(Cri)589; 2005CriLJ900; 116(2005)DLT382; [2005(1)JCR209(SC)]; 2005(1)JKJ1[SC]; JT2005(1)SC425; 2005(1)KLT502(SC); RLW2005(3)SC409; (2005)1SCC582

respondents 2 to 6 are the accused facing trial for offences punishable under Section 67 of Information Technology Act, 2000 r/w Section 6 of Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986, Under Section 5 & 6 of Immoral

Subhash Gupta (individual) Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Jaipur

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2003)78TTJ(JP.)692

at nil income. Accordingly, the AO has completed the assessment at nil income vide order dt. 15th Feb., 2000, passed under Section 143(3) and has also initiated penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c).5. In reply to the show-cause … by the CIT(A), dt. 30th March, 2001, confirming the penalty, imposed by the AO under Section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act amounting to Rs. 14,45,240. "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A)

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. U.P. Forest Corporation

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Lucknow

Subject : Direct Taxation

and 1229/All/1989 for the asst. yrs. 1985-86 and 1986-87 respectively, the Tribunal issued notice under Section 254(2) of the IT Act dt. 30th Aug., 2000 requiring the assessee, M/s. U.P. Forest Corporation, Lucknow and the Revenue to state their … the order of the Tribunal, dt. 9th Sept., 1996. Although the Department has also filed Misc. Appln. Nos. 52 and 53/Lko/2000 relating the similar issue but for the sake of convenience, we proceed to decide the matter,

Bhim Sen Garg Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Information Technology Act, 2000 - Sections 5, 6 and 65; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 120B, 182, 211, 366, 376, 417, 465, 467, 468, 469 and 471; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 154, 155, 155(2), 156, 156(1), 156(2), 157, 162, 164, 169, 170, 173, 319 and 482; Evidence Act; Constitution of India - Articles 136, 226 and 227

Reported in : 2006CriLJ3643; RLW2006(3)Raj2411; 2006(4)WLC579

controversy.8. In the aforesaid backdrop, on the basis of inquiry report, an FIR No. 217/2005 was registered under Section 5 and 6 of PITA Act at Police Station Jamwa Ramgarh, Jaipur. The investigation of the same was given … Jaipur for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 469, 471, 120B, IPC, and Section 65 of Information Technology Act 2000.2. During, the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer has deleted the offence under Section 65 of the J.T.

Sreeja Prasad vs State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

is registered against the petitioner alleging offence punishable under Section 294(b) IPC, Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and Section 120(o) of the Kerala Police Act. 3.The prosecution case in nutshell is that the petitioner is … transmits or causes to be published or transmitted in the electronic form any material which B.A.No.2459 of 2020 5 is:-i) Lascivious. ii) Appeal to the prurient interest. iii) If its effect is such as to tend to

Union of India Vs. M/S g.s. Chatha Rice Mills

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Land Acquisition

Interpreting ‘day’ and ‘date’ Notification under Section 8A of the Customs Tariff Act General Clauses Act Information Technology Act, 2000 Effect of notifications issued in e-gazettes Retrospectivity Summation 6 PART A1A2Leave granted. The aftermath of Pulwama A terrorist … 3(13) defines ‘commencement’ to mean the day on which an Act or Regulation comes into force; (iii) Under Section 5(3) of the General Clauses Act, a Central Act or Regulation, unless the contrary is expressed, comes into force

Maulana Mahmood Asad Madani Vs. Union of India and ors

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

District Courts in the country it had, in exercise of powers under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, already blocked as many as 157 Uniform Resource Locators (URLs) hosting content related to clipping titled Innocence of … and in compliance of these court orders, more than 190 URLs were ordered to be locked. In addition, 52 more URLs were blocked under the provision of rules notified under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act.5.

Sri. Chandrashekar B vs State of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.69/2025 OF CYBER CRIME POLICE STATION FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 67 AND 66(C) OF THE IT ACT, 2000 AND U/S 351(3), 352, 75(3), 79 R/W SECTION 3(5) OF THE BNS 2023, PENDING ON THE FILE OF

Dr. L. Prakash Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and anr.

Court : Chennai

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Slum grabbers Act, 1982 - Sections 2, 3(1) and 5; Information Technology Act, 2000 - Sections 67; Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986 - Sections 4, 6 and 41; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 120B; Income Tax Act; Constitution of India - Articles 21 and 226; Arms Act, 1959 - Sections 27; Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls Act, 1956 - Sections 5; Tamil Nadu prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug-offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Slum-grabbers (Conditions of Detention) Order, 1986

Reported in : 2002CriLJ2596

Inspector of Police, R8 Vadapalani Police Station, Chennai for various offences, particularly Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, Section 4 read with Section 6 of the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986 and Section 120-B of … any offence under the Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls Act, 1956 (Central Act 104 of 1956);Section 5. Power to regulate places and conditions of detention.-- Every person in respect of whom a detention order has

Sasidharan M.G. vs Union of India

Court : Kerala

the liabilities of the intermediaries and exemptions respectively 3.19 It is submitted that as per Section 69A of the IT Act 2000, MeitY is empowered to block the information for public access through any computer resource only under the following … TV channels All programme telecasted on private TV channels are required toadhere to the Programme Code prescribed under Section 5 of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 and the rules framed thereunder. The Programme Code contains a