DELHI HIGH COURT – SECTION 24 OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT – AD-INTERIM MAINTENANCE – WIFE IS ENTITLED TO SAME STANDARD OF LIVING WHICH SHE WAS ENTITLED TO LIVE ALONG WITH HER HUSBAND

Delhi High Court Date of Judgement: 03.03.2015 Hindu Marriage Act 1955 – Section 24 – Ad-interim maintenance – Quantum of – Respondent (Husband) has filed divorce petition seeking dissolution of marriage on the grounds of cruelty and desertion – Respondent (Husband) has not been truthful in revealing his correct income and it is only a false statement made by respondent that...

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA – MATRIMONIAL DISPUTES – CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE SECTION 41 – INDIAN PENAL CODE SECTION 498-A AND DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT SECTION 4 – ANTICIPATORY BAIL AGAINST ARREST – PROVISIONS ARE USED AS WEAPONS RATHER THAN TOOL OF LAW

Supreme Court of India Date of Judgement: 02.07.2014 Supreme Court of India-Matrimonial Disputes-Code of Criminal Procedure Section 41 – Indian Penal Code Section 498-A  and Dowry Prohibition Act Section 4- Anticipatory bail against arrest – provisions are used as weapons rather than tool of law – attitude to arrest first and then proceed with the rest is despicable – it has...

DELHI HIGH COURT – BAILABLE OFFENCE & DECLARATION OF PROCLAIMED OFFENDER UNDER SECTION 82 & 83 OF CR.P.C & SECTION 174A OF INDIAN PENAL CODE

Delhi High Court Date of Judgement: 22.05.2014 The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner/ complainant lodged FIR under Sections 325/34 IPC and Vide order dated 09.12.2010, learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi issued process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. against Respondent No. 2 and directed for publication in one leading newspaper having circulation in the concerned area. The Respondent No....

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA – NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT SECTION 138 – COMPLAINT CAN BE FILED EVEN AFTER SECOND NOTICE

Supreme Court of India Date of Judgement: 10.09.2013 Negotiable Instruments Act Section 138 – Complaint can be Filed Even after Second Notice This matter was referred before the larger Bench by order dated 25th March, 2009. The question referred to the larger Bench was : “whether the action of the appellant was time-barred under Section 138(b) of the Negotiable Instruments Act or not...

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA – NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT SECTION 138 -WHETHER THE COMPLAINT FILED IS WITHIN LIMITATION OR NOT

Supreme Court of India Date of Judgement: 26.08.2013 Whether the complaint filed under Section 138 of the NI Act is within limitation or not…… from the date on which the cause of action arose under clause (c) of the proviso to Section 138 of the NI Act? …. Whether for calculating the period of one month …. under Section 142(b),...

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA – NON BAILABLE WARRANTS CAN NOT BE ISSUED UNLESS AN ACCUSED IS LIKELY TO TAMPER THE EVIDENCE OR IS LIKELY TO EVADE THE PROCESS OF LAW

Supreme Court Of India Date of Judgement: 16 August 2013 There cannot be any straight-jacket formula for issuance of warrants but as a general rule, unless an accused is likely to tamper or destroy the evidence or is likely to evade the process of law, issuance of non-bailable warrants should be avoided. …. This could be when firstly it is...

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA – A GOVERNMENT SERVANT CANNOT APPROACH CONSUMER FORUM FOR RETIRAL BENIFITS

Supreme Court of India Date of Judgement: 11.07.2013 A government servant can raise any dispute regarding his service conditions or for payment of gratuity or GPF or any of his retiral benefits before any of the Forum under the Act. The government servant does not fall under the definition of a “consumer” as defined under Section 2(1)(d)(ii) of the Act. Such...

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA – CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE SECTION 311 – THE FOLLOWING PRINCIPLES WILL HAVE TO BE BORNE IN MIND BY THE COURTS

Supreme Court of India Date of Judgement: 4 July 2013 While dealing with an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. read along with Section 138 of the Evidence Act, we feel the following principles will have to be borne in mind by the Courts: a) Whether the Court is right in thinking that the new evidence is needed by it? Whether...