Rahul Gandhi’s Lok Sabha Disqualification: Legal Position On Suspension Of Conviction | Explainer

Congress leader Rahul Gandhi was recently disqualified from his position as a Member of Parliament after his conviction in a defamation case. He was disqualified in accordance with Article 102(1)(e) of the Indian Constitution read with Section 8 of the Representation of People Act, 1951.He has filed an appeal in Surat Sessions Court to challenge his conviction in the defamation case. While...

Section 52 TP Act -Alienation Of Suit Property Pendente Lite Not Invalid; But It'll Be Subject To Rights Of Litigants : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has observed that the principle of "lis pendens" is based on "justice, equity and good conscience" and the same will apply even in a case where the provisions of Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act is not applicable in the strict sense.A bench comprising Justices BR Gavai and CT Ravikumar explained that though the doctrine of "lis pendens" will not invalidate the...

Section 27 of Evidence Act For More Lucidity

Read this in continuation of the Article “Section 27” Of The Evidence Act And The Verdict In “Pulukuri Kottaya” Continue To Elude The Comprehension Of Many Judges At All Levels"If the “information” to be received from an accused person in the custody of a Police Officer should be regarding a “fact...

Can Foreigners Seek Information From Authorities In India Under RTI Act? Explained

Section 3 of the Right To Information Act states all the citizens shall have the right to information. While dealing with a case related to the RTI request of a Tibetan refugee, the Delhi High Court this week considered the question whether a non-citizen or a foreigner can also seek information under the RTI Act.Justice Pratibha M. Singh said that it would be inherently contradictory to hold...

Article 226(2) - Supreme Court Explains Tests To Determine If Cause Of Action Has Arisen Within Jurisdiction Of High Court

In a notable judgment explaining the concept of 'cause of action' under Article 226(2) of the Constitution of India, the Supreme Court held that only those facts, which are relevant to the grant of the relief, will give rise to 'cause of action'. Applying this principle, the Court held that a company cannot challenge a GST notification issued by one state before a High Court located in...

NI Act| Company's Authorized Signatory Not "Drawer" Of Cheque, Not Liable To Pay Interim Compensation Under Sec.143A : Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court recently held that authorised signatory of a company who signs a cheque on its behalf is not the "drawer" of the cheque and hence such signatory is not liable to pay interim compensation under section 143A of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 in a case for dishonour of cheque."The signatory of the cheque, authorized by the "Company", is not the drawer in terms of...

Compassionate Appointment : Supreme Court Summarises Principles

The Supreme Court, recently, held that since compassionate appointment is not a vested right. A claim for compassionate appointment by the dependent of the deceased employee may not be entertained after a lapse of a considerable period since the death. The Court opined - “...the operation of a policy/scheme for compassionate appointment is founded on considerations of immediacy. A sense...

Section 313 CrPC : Supreme Court Summarises 10 Well-Settled Principles

Recently, the Supreme Court briefly summarised the settled principles with respect to Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The provision deals with the power to examine the accused. The Trial Court is vested with the power to put questions to the accused at any stage of the trial to enable them to explain any circumstances appearing in evidence against him. It is the duty of the Court...

“Section 27” Of The Evidence Act And The Verdict In “Pulukuri Kottaya” Continue To Elude The Comprehension Of Many Judges At All Levels

A “confession” made to a “police officer”, by a person (presently or subsequently) accused of an offence cannot be proved against him and is, therefore, inadmissible in evidence before a Court of law in view of Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (“Evidence Act” for short). Similarly, a confession by a person (presently or subsequently) accused of an offence and made while he is in the custody of a police officer, is also excluded from being proved against him by virtue of ...

Explained: What Happens To Order Of Conviction When Juvenility Of Accused Is Proved Under Juvenile Justice Act?

Under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, a person accused of an offence at any stage can raise a claim that he or she was a minor on the date of the commission of offence. The court is legally bound to order an inquiry to determine the age and if the claim of juvenility is proved, the accused is to be forwarded to the Juvenile Justice Board for appropriate...

Explained: Why Is There No End In Sight For DMRC-Reliance Infra Dispute Despite Court Orders?

Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) and Reliance Infra-owned Delhi Airport Metro Express Private Limited (DAMEPL) are engaged in a long-drawn battle over an arbitral award which attained finality in 2021 when Supreme Court ruled in favour of the latter. DMRC, which is owned by both the union government and Delhi government, has failed to pay the award money to DAMEPL despite multiple orders...

Manish Sisodia Sent To CBI Custody For Not Giving 'Satisfactory Answers': What Have Courts Said On Right Against Self Incrimination & Power To Arrest?

A Court on Monday remanded Aam Aadmi Party leader and Delhi Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia to CBI custody for five days in the Delhi liquor policy scam case. Sisodia’s legal team, while opposing CBI’s application seeking custody, laid emphasis on the alleged violation of Section 41 and Section 41-A CrPC.It was also argued that he cannot be remanded to CBI custody for the purposes...