The Supreme Court in Deepak Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2022) 8 SCC 559 in Para 30 & 31 laid down grounds for cancellation of bail once granted. The said paras are reproduced below: “…30. This Court has reiterated in several instances that bail once granted, should not be cancelled in a mechanicalmanner without […]

In State of Haryana v. Ch. Bhajan Lal 1992 SCC (Cri) 426, the Hon’ble Apex Court had laid down the principles to be consideredwhile quashing FIRs. The same are reproduced hereunder: “102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law

The principles governing grant of an anti-suit injunction by a Court of natural jurisdiction against a party to a suit before it restraining him from instituting and/or prosecuting the suit between the same parties, if instituted in a foreign Court of choice of the parties have been settled in Modi Entertainment v. WSG Cricket Pte.

In Y. Narasimha Rao and Ors. v. Y. Venkata Lakshmi Rao and Anr., (1991) 3 SCC 451 the Apex Court in para 20 elaborated on the principles governing recognition of foreign matrimonial judgment in Indian courts in the following words: “20. From the aforesaid discussion the following rule can be deduced for recognizing a foreign

In Leonard Xavier Valdaris v. Jitendra Ramnayaran Rathod & Ors. [2024] 5 S.C.R. 400 : 2024 INSC 344 the issue which was under consideration was whether a Single Judge of the High Court can disagree with an earlier order of a Single Judge based on the same set of facts and one trial, and give

In Rahul Kumar Yadav v. The State of Bihar [2024] 5 S.C.R. 501 : 2024 INSC 359 the issue for consideration was challenge to the conviction of the Petitioner under Section 302 and 394 IPC on the ground that the courts below erred in not considering the Petitioner’s plea of juvenility on the date of

In Dolly Rani v. Manish Kumar Chanchal [2024] 5 S.C.R. 510 : 2024 INSC 355, the Supreme Court considered the issue that if the marriage ceremony had not been performed in accordance with section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, whether registration of such a marriage under section 8 of the 1955 Act would

In Swami Vedvyasanand Ji Maharaj (D) Thr LRs v. Shyam Lal Chauhan & Ors. [2024] 5 S.C.R. 462 : 2024 INSC 352, Supreme Court categorically held that the only purpose of substitution is the continuation of the case. The substitution as LR in a case by itself will not give any title in favour of

Supreme Court in Prem Kishore v. Brahm Prakash 2023 SCC OnLine SC 356 analysed cases dealing with rejection of plaint on grounds of res judicata and culled out the principles that a Court is required to keep in mind before deciding an application under Order VII Rule 11(d) which talks about rejection of a plaint

Supreme Court in para 18 in the case of Federal Bank Ltd. v. Sagar Thomas (2003) 10 SCC 733 culled out the categories of body/persons who would be amenable to writ jurisdiction of the High Court, which are as follows:“18. From the decisions referred to above, the position that emerges is that a writ petition