Advanced Search Results

Md. Najrul Hassan Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.

Court : Jharkhand

Subject : Service

Acts : Right to Information Act (RTI); Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 - Sections 4, 4(2), 5, 6 and 17; Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981; Hazardous Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 1989 - Rule 5; Environment (Protection) Act, 1986; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 34, 120B, 323, 341, 379, 386, 411, 419, 420, 448, 467, 468, 471, 504 and 506; Constitution of India - Article 48A; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 197

Reported in : 2008(57)BLJR34; [2008(4)JCR406(Jhr)]

The State of Jharkhand by order dated 13.7.2004 already granted sanction under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for prosecuting respondent No. 5 and the said case is still pending. It is further stated that … No. 1420 dated 16.3.2007 issued under the signature of Respondent No. 4 Deputy Secretary, Department of Forest & Environment, Jharkhand Ranchi whereby respondent No. 5, Shri R.K. Sinha has been appointed as the Secretary of the Jharkhand

Minnesota Vs. Murphy

Court : US Supreme Court

Subject : Education

respondent's attendance and truthful answers and consciously sought incriminating evidence, that respondent did not expect questions about prior criminal conduct and could not seek counsel before attending the meeting, and that there were no observers to guard … rise to a similar impression. Moreover, custodial arrest thrusts an individual into "an unfamiliar atmosphere" or "an interrogation environment . . . created for no purpose other than to subjugate the individual to the will of his

Dr. Mahesh Vijay Bedekar Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Land Acquisition

was represented by an Advocate, who has made submissions and tendered written arguments. 8. The next matter is Criminal PIL No.20 of 2015. There are large number of Applications for intervention in this PIL. This PIL is … prayer in this PIL is for directing the Respondents to initiate penal action under section 15 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 (for short "the Environment Protection Act"). The grievance made in this Petition is that though

Adarsh Co-op. Housing Society Ltd. A Society registered under Maharash ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Land Acquisition

members under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against respondent No.1 - Union of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests (for short 'MOEF'), respondent No.2 - Mr. Jayram Ramesh, the then Hon'ble Minister of State holding … of law governing such Regulation namely, Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, M.R.andT.P. Act, MMRDA Act, Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 (for short MLRC ). Such regulation would include inter alia the grant of permission for development, construction

Sansar Chand. Vs. State of Rajasthan.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 - Section 55; Wildlife Protection (Amendment) Act, 2002 - Section 51; Code Of Criminal Procedure (CRPC) - Section 313

of wild animals, animal articles or trophies. Chapter VI makes violation of the provisions of the Act a criminal offence. By the Wildlife Protection (Amendment) Act, 2002 the punishment has been increased vide Section 51 as amended, … to the brink of extinction, thereby seriously jeopardizing and destroying the ecological chain and ecological balance in our environment.4. The appellant herein has been convicted under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 by all the three courts below

Vellore Citizens Welfare Forums Vs. Union of India rep. by its Secreta ...

Court : Chennai

Subject : Land Acquisition

the award under Section 25 and the second is to seek the prosecution of the offenders before a criminal court under Section 26. 30. Apart from the bar of jurisdiction of civil courts under Section 29, the … in 1996 (5) SCC 647), directing the Central Government to constitute an Authority under Section 3(3) of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. 2. In accordance with the said direction, the Central Government constituted an Authority known as

Hindustan Copper Limited Through Its General Manager Mines Sri Deb Kum ...

Court : Jharkhand

Subject : Land Acquisition

both. Since, a complaint is to be filed in the Court, it is apparent that the Code of Criminal Procedure would be applicable in the proceeding before the Magistrate and the proceeding initiated under the Environment (Protection)

State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Centre for Environment Protection Research ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Land Acquisition

to be a civil court for the purposes of section 195 and Chapter XXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974). 20.Tribunal to apply certain principles. The Tribunal shall, while passing any order or … SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS.8932-8933 OF2015STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH ….Appellant versus CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT & ORS. …..Respondent (s) JUDGMENT Indira Banerjee, J.These appeals filed by the State of

Anitha Bruse Vs. State of Kerala,

Court : Kerala

Subject : ConstitutionCriminal

Acts : Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 - Sections 4 (1)(A) and 21; Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001 - Sections 20; Constitution of India (Forty-fourth Amendment) Act, 1978 - Sections 3; Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 - Sections 2, 3, 3(1), 3(2), 3(3), 4, 5, 6, 7, 7(2), 7(3), 8, 8(2), 9, 10, 10(1), 10(2), 10(3), 10(4), 11(2), 12, 13, 14, 15 and 34; Preventive Detention (Amendment) Act, 1951; Preventive Detention Act, 1950; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 34, 143, 147, 148, 308, 323, 354, 420, 427 and 452; Code of Criminal Procedure - Sections 110; Constitution of India - Articles 14, 19, 21, 22, 22(4), 22(5), 22(7), 32, 226, 246, 246(1), 246(2) and 254(2); Punjab Communist Detenu Rules, 1950

Reported in : 2008(2)KLJ170; 2008(2)KLT857

the petitioner, her husband had gone to the house of one Maneesha Sumesh at Inchathotty not for any criminal purposes, but to object their criminal activities and due to tremendous influence exerted by them on the Police, … that if the detenu is allowed to continue his anti-social activities unrestricted, it will cause harm to the environment, danger, alarm and a feeling of insecurity to the public, the Government has approved the detention under Section

Williams Vs. Taylor, Warden

Court : US Supreme Court

Subject : Land Acquisition

the American Civil Liberties Union by Larry W Yackle and Steven R. Shapiro; for the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers by John D. Cline and Lisa B. Kemler; for the Virginia College of Criminal Defense Attorneys … violently, dangerously, or provocatively, and of a prison minister that Williams seemed to thrive in a more regimented environment. Although not all of the additional evidence was favorable to Williams, the failure to introduce the comparatively voluminous