Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1961SC112; (1961)63BOMLR221; 1961CriLJ173; [1961]1SCR497
..... s. 302 of the indian penalcode. he was produced before the additional chief presidency magistrate,greater bombay, in connection with that charge on april 28, 1959. themagistrate remanded him to police custody on that day. on the following day(april 29, 1959) the magistrate received a letter from the flag officer,bombay, to the effect that he was ready and willing .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1963Cal261,1963CriLJ579,67CWN297
..... the appeal his whereabouts became known and he was found and hasbeen sent for detention and treatment to lumbini park, a mental hospital and clinic at 115, bediadanga road, calcutta, police station tollygunge, 'district 24-parganas, within the jurisdiction of this 'court where he has been staying since december, 1960'.how he was found immediately the appeal was over, where he .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Baker v. Carr - 369 U.S. 186 (1962) U.S. Supreme Court Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186 (1962) Baker v. Carr No. 6 Argued April 19-20, 1961 Set for reargument May 1, 1961 Reargued October 9, 1961 Decided March 26, 1962 369 U.S. 186 APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE Syllabus Appellants are persons allegedly qualified to vote for members of the General Assembly of Tennessee representing the counties in which they reside. They brought suit in a Federal District Court in Tennessee under 42 U.S.C. 1983 and 1988, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, to redress the alleged deprivation of their federal constitutional rights by legislation classifying voters with respect to representation in the General Assembly. They alleged that, by means of a 1901 statute of Tennessee arbitrarily and capriciously apportioning the seats in the General Assembly among the State's 95 counties, and a failure to reapportion them subsequent...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1970Ker98; 1970CriLJ688
..... . m. on the 24th, pw 1 made the statement, ex. p1, to the head constable pw 7, on which the case was registered and investigated. the accused appeared at the police station at 9.15 p.m. on 28-3-1967 with the knife m. o. 1. he was arrested by the head constable pw 8, and the knife was seized .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : [1998]231ITR318(Delhi); [1998]97TAXMAN144(Delhi)
..... east of kailash are superior than those in a-block. we are also conscious of the status and standing of the transferor who was a meritorious officer of the indian police service, although this factor is extraneous to the issue being dealt with by us.'regarding the adjustments, the following reasons are given by the appropriate authority :'as regards the adjustments .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC1461; (1973)4SCC225; [1973]SuppSCR1
..... temper freedom of property with social responsibilities attached to property. the limitations on property are of many different kinds. the state's right of taxation, its police power and the power of expropriation-subject to fair compensation- are examples of public restrictions on freedom of property which are now universally recognised and used. another ..... as negligence in particular circumstances are equally capable of serving as tests in law. extracting those observations it was said by mr. palkhivala that though the border-line between essential features and non-essential features could not be stated or it was not possible to specify exhautively the amendment which could be invalid on ..... the fundamental features of our constitution. for doing so, one has only to look to the preamble. it is true that there are bound to be border line cases where there can be difference of opinion. that is so in all important legal questions. but the courts generally proceed on the presumption of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1976)17GLR1017
J.B. Mehta, J.1. The petitioner who was a Judge of this Court challenges in this petition the order of his transfer dated May 27, 1976 at Annexure 'A'. The short facts which have given rise to this petition are as under.2. The petitioner was enrolled as an advocate of the Bombay High Court on January 28, 1946. He practised at Bombay since his enrolment until April 30, 1960 and on the formation of the Gujarat State, he shifted his legal practice to this High Court where he practised till April 22, 1969. On April 23, 1969 he was appointed a Judge of the Gujarat High Court for a period of two years and was appointed a permanent puisne Judge on August 5, 1970. The petitioner' would retire on completion of the age of 62 years on January 5, 1981 and so, a period of about four years and six months was left for him to retire from service.3. The petitioner has been transferred by the impugned order to the Andhra Pradesh High Court without obtaining his consent, without consulting him and agains...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1978Ker111
..... taken against the person accused. if, therefore, a complainant does not go beyond giving what he believes to be correct information to the police, and the police without further interference on his part (except giving such honest assistance as they may require), think fit to prosecute, it would be improper to make him ..... pillai (i. l. r. (1903) 26 mad 362), it was observed by a division bench that if the defendant merely filed a complaint before the police and the police, after investigation, thought fit to prosecute the plaintiff (in the action for malicious prosecution), it could not be said that the defendant was a prosecutor; nor could ..... its application to the particular case was no doubt justified; but in the opinion of their lordships, it is not of universal application. in india, the police have special powers in regard to the investigation of criminal charges, and it depends very much on the result of their investigation whether or not further proceedings are .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : ILR1978Delhi536
..... itself (es. public witness .101/c) .specifically states as follows ; 'on entering the court the accused got hisface unmuffled'. the public prosecutor, the costiceroed police offcials,f v. jaggi, his father aad counsel were all present in court. nothingsignificant turns .upon 'ex. public witness 101(1 having beea mistakenly.takenback from ..... be proved even by the solitary evidence of an investigating officer if his evidence could otherwise be believed. any suchdiscovery would, however, become inadmissible if the police partyknew where they were hidden .(90) in the light of the above principles an effort will now be madeto analyze and discuss the disclosure statements alleged ..... that all of them travelledfrom bhopal to delhi by plane on 13th december with the police.therewas no suggestion to squadron. leader tarlok singh dhaliwal(p.w. 88), who brought the accused (except v. jaggi) from bhopalin the border security force plane piloted by him, that any of thewitnesses travelled in the plane. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1980Ker109
Subramonian Poti, J. 1. A question of some importance arises for decision in this case. It concerns the consequence of the repeal by Section 7 of the Kerala Joint Hindu Family System (Abolition) Act, 1975 of the Acts mentioned in the Schedule. One of the Acts so repealed is the Travancore Nair Act 2 of 1100. That Act provides among other things, for dissolution of a marriage solemnised under the Act. It specifies grounds for dissolution of marriage and also prescribes the procedure by which the right to seek dissolution is to be exercised. The court to which proceedings would lie is also specified. The Hindu Marriage Act 1955 provides in Section 13, for dissolution of Hindu Marriages. The grounds for dissolution are specified in this Act and the procedure for seeking dissolution is also specified in the Act. The grounds for dissolution under the Hindu Marriages Act are not identical with the grounds for divorce in the Nair Act 1100.2. Notwithstanding the commencement of the Hindu Marri...
Tag this Judgment!