Court : Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:24. h December, 2014 Date of Decision:06. h February, 2015 % + CRL.A.910/2008 VIKAS YADAV Through: ..... Appellant Mr.Sumeet Verma, Adv. with Mr.Amit Kala,Adv. versus STATE OF UP Through : + ..... Respondent Mr.Rajesh Mahajan, Adv. with Ms. Shinjan Jain, Adv. for State. Mr.P.K. Dey, Adv. with Mr.Kaushik Dey, Mr. Abhijeet, Mr. Vijay Pal Singh and Mr. Andleeb Naqvi, Advs. for complainant. CRL.A.741/2008 VISHAL YADAV Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Sanjay Jain and Mr. Vinay Arora, Advs. versus STATE GOVT. OF UP ....Respondents Through : Mr.Rajesh Mahajan, Adv. with Ms. Shinjan Jain, Adv. for State. Mr.P.K. Dey, Adv. with Mr.Kaushik Dey, Mr. Abhijeet, Mr. Vijay Pal Singh and Mr. Andleeb Naqvi, Advs. for complainant. Crl.A.Nos.910, 741, 958/2008, Crl.Rev.P.No.369/2008, Crl.A.Nos.1322/2011 & 145/2012 pg. 1 + CRL.A.958/2008 STATE Through : ..... Appellant Mr.Rajesh Mahajan, Adv. with Ms. Shinjan Jain, Adv. for State. Ms. Ritu Gauba, APP for ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:24. h December, 2014 Date of Decision:06. h February, 2015 % + CRL.A.910/2008 VIKAS YADAV Through: ..... Appellant Mr.Sumeet Verma, Adv. with Mr.Amit Kala,Adv. versus STATE OF UP Through : + ..... Respondent Mr.Rajesh Mahajan, Adv. with Ms. Shinjan Jain, Adv. for State. Mr.P.K. Dey, Adv. with Mr.Kaushik Dey, Mr. Abhijeet, Mr. Vijay Pal Singh and Mr. Andleeb Naqvi, Advs. for complainant. CRL.A.741/2008 VISHAL YADAV Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Sanjay Jain and Mr. Vinay Arora, Advs. versus STATE GOVT. OF UP ....Respondents Through : Mr.Rajesh Mahajan, Adv. with Ms. Shinjan Jain, Adv. for State. Mr.P.K. Dey, Adv. with Mr.Kaushik Dey, Mr. Abhijeet, Mr. Vijay Pal Singh and Mr. Andleeb Naqvi, Advs. for complainant. Crl.A.Nos.910, 741, 958/2008, Crl.Rev.P.No.369/2008, Crl.A.Nos.1322/2011 & 145/2012 pg. 1 + CRL.A.958/2008 STATE Through : ..... Appellant Mr.Rajesh Mahajan, Adv. with Ms. Shinjan Jain, Adv. for State. Ms. Ritu Gauba, APP for ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:24. h December, 2014 Date of Decision:06. h February, 2015 % + CRL.A.910/2008 VIKAS YADAV Through: ..... Appellant Mr.Sumeet Verma, Adv. with Mr.Amit Kala,Adv. versus STATE OF UP Through : + ..... Respondent Mr.Rajesh Mahajan, Adv. with Ms. Shinjan Jain, Adv. for State. Mr.P.K. Dey, Adv. with Mr.Kaushik Dey, Mr. Abhijeet, Mr. Vijay Pal Singh and Mr. Andleeb Naqvi, Advs. for complainant. CRL.A.741/2008 VISHAL YADAV Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Sanjay Jain and Mr. Vinay Arora, Advs. versus STATE GOVT. OF UP ....Respondents Through : Mr.Rajesh Mahajan, Adv. with Ms. Shinjan Jain, Adv. for State. Mr.P.K. Dey, Adv. with Mr.Kaushik Dey, Mr. Abhijeet, Mr. Vijay Pal Singh and Mr. Andleeb Naqvi, Advs. for complainant. Crl.A.Nos.910, 741, 958/2008, Crl.Rev.P.No.369/2008, Crl.A.Nos.1322/2011 & 145/2012 pg. 1 + CRL.A.958/2008 STATE Through : ..... Appellant Mr.Rajesh Mahajan, Adv. with Ms. Shinjan Jain, Adv. for State. Ms. Ritu Gauba, APP for ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:24. h December, 2014 Date of Decision:06. h February, 2015 % + CRL.A.910/2008 VIKAS YADAV Through: ..... Appellant Mr.Sumeet Verma, Adv. with Mr.Amit Kala,Adv. versus STATE OF UP Through : + ..... Respondent Mr.Rajesh Mahajan, Adv. with Ms. Shinjan Jain, Adv. for State. Mr.P.K. Dey, Adv. with Mr.Kaushik Dey, Mr. Abhijeet, Mr. Vijay Pal Singh and Mr. Andleeb Naqvi, Advs. for complainant. CRL.A.741/2008 VISHAL YADAV Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Sanjay Jain and Mr. Vinay Arora, Advs. versus STATE GOVT. OF UP ....Respondents Through : Mr.Rajesh Mahajan, Adv. with Ms. Shinjan Jain, Adv. for State. Mr.P.K. Dey, Adv. with Mr.Kaushik Dey, Mr. Abhijeet, Mr. Vijay Pal Singh and Mr. Andleeb Naqvi, Advs. for complainant. Crl.A.Nos.910, 741, 958/2008, Crl.Rev.P.No.369/2008, Crl.A.Nos.1322/2011 & 145/2012 pg. 1 + CRL.A.958/2008 STATE Through : ..... Appellant Mr.Rajesh Mahajan, Adv. with Ms. Shinjan Jain, Adv. for State. Ms. Ritu Gauba, APP for ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.13 OF2015Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record - Association and another Petitioner(s) versus Union of India Respondent(s) With |WRIT PETITION (C) No.14 OF2015| |WRIT PETITION (C) No.18 OF2015| |WRIT PETITION (C) No.23 OF2015| |WRIT PETITION (C) No.24 OF2015| |WRIT PETITION (C) No.70 OF2015| |WRIT PETITION (C) No.83 OF2015| |WRIT PETITION (C) No.108 OF2015| |WRIT PETITION (C) No.124 OF2015| |WRIT PETITION (C) No.209 OF2015| |WRIT PETITION (C) No.309 OF2015| |WRIT PETITION (C) No.310 OF2015| |WRIT PETITION (C) No.323 OF2015| |WRIT PETITION (C) No.341 OF2015| |TRANSFER PETITION(C) No.391 OF2015 |TRANSFER PETITION (C) No.971 OF2015 | | JUDGMENT Jagdish Singh Khehar, J.Index |Sl.No.|Contents |Paragraphs|Pages | |1. |The Recusal Order | 1 - 18| 1 - | | | | |15 | | | | | | |2. |The Reference Order | 1 - 101| 16 - 169| |I |The Challenge | 1 - | 16 - | | | |9 |19 | |II. |The Background to the Challenge ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2024 INSC545REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL/APPELLATE/INHERENT JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.115 OF2004GENE CAMPAIGN & ANOTHER PETITIONERS VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS RESPONDENTS WITH WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.260 of 2005 WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.840 OF2016CIVIL APPEAL NO.4086 OF2006CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.295 OF2007IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.260 of 2005 CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.6 OF2016IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.260 of 2005 Writ Petition (Civil) No.115 of 2004 Etc. Page 1 of 260 JUDGMENT NAGARATHNA, J Table of Contents Acronyms ............................................................................................................................ 4 Preface: ................................................................................................................................ 7 Birds eye view of the controversy: ............................................................................. 9 Pleadings: ............................
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE/ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.3123 of 2020 DR. JAISHRI LAXMANRAO PATIL ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE CHIEF MINISTER & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.3124 of 2020 SANJEET SHUKLA ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ...RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.3133 of 2020 KRISHNAJI DATTATRAYA MORE ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS DR. JAISHRI LAXMANRAO & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.3134 of 2020 MADHUSHRI NANDKISHOR JETHLIYA & ORS. ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S) 2 WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.3131 of 2020 DEVENDRA ROOPCHAND JAIN & ORS. ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. ...RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.3129 of 2020 KAMALAKAR SUKHDEO DARODE @ DARWADE ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S) WITH WRIT PETITION (C) NO.915 of 2020 DESHMUKH ESHA GIRISH ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S)...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.4634 OF2014VIJAY MADANLAL CHOUDHARY & ORS. ...PETITIONER(S) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S) WITH SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) No.28394 OF2011SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) No.28922 OF2011SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) No.29273 OF2011SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO.............OF2022(@ DIARY No.41063 OF2015 SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.9987 OF2015SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO.10018 OF2015SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.10019 OF20152 SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.993 OF2016TRANSFER PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.150 OF2016TRANSFER PETITION (CRIMINAL) NOS.151-157 OF2016WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.152 OF2016SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.11839 OF2019SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.2890 OF2017SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.5487 OF2017CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1269 OF2017CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1270 OF2017CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 1271-1272 O...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
APPEALS RELATING TO DEATH SENTENCE PART-1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1728 of 2007 Yakub Abdul Razak Memon .... Appellant(s) vs. The State of Maharashtra, through CBI , Bombay . Respondent(s) WITH Criminal Appeal No.609-610 of 2008 WITH Criminal Appeal No.628-629 of 2008 WITH Criminal Appeal No.637-638 of 2008 WITH Criminal Appeal No.365 of 2008 WITH Criminal Appeal No.864-865 of 2008 WITH Criminal Appeal No.897 of 2008 WITH Criminal Appeal No.941-942 of 2008 AND Death Reference Case No.1 of 2011 ******** REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION 1 2 CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1728 OF 200.Yakub Abdul Razak Memon .... Appellant (s) Versus State of Maharashtra thr., CBI, Bombay .... Respondent(s) With Batch JUDGMENT P. Sathasivam, J.1) This appeal and the connected matters have been directed against the final orders and judgments of conviction and sentence passed on various dates by the Presiding Offic...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.194 OF2017Petitioner(s) VERSUS Respondent(s) Joseph Shine Union of India JUDGMENT Dipak Misra, CJI (For himself and A.M. Khanwilkar, J.) The beauty of the Indian Constitution is that it includes I you and we. Such a magnificent, compassionate and monumental document embodies emphatic inclusiveness which has been further nurtured by judicial sensitivity when it has developed the concept of golden triangle of fundamental rights. If we have to apply the parameters of a fundamental right, it is an expression of judicial sensibility which further enhances the beauty of the Constitution as conceived of. In such a situation, the essentiality of the rights of women gets the real requisite space in the living room of individual dignity rather than the 2 space in an annexe to the main building. That is the manifestation of concerned sensitivity. Individual dignity has a sanctified realm in a civ...
Tag this Judgment!