Skip to main content
Citation Index • Supreme Court

Cases Citing Section 264

Statute: Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS)

Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273

2014 8 SCC 273Supreme Court of India

73% Match

FACTS: Anticipatory bail application in a Section 498A IPC cruelty case. Held: Arrest should not be the default action in offences carrying punishment of less than 7 years. Ratio: Police must comply with Section 41A CrPC (now Section 35 BNSS) notice guidelines before executing arrest....

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) 4 SCC 225

1973 4 SCC 225Supreme Court of India

72% Match

FACTS: Challenged Kerala Land Reforms Act. 13-judge bench reviewed parliament's power to amend the Constitution. Held: Parliament can amend any part of the Constitution, including Fundamental Rights, but cannot alter or destroy the 'Basic Structure' of the Constitution. Ratio: Basic Structure doctri...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Ramji Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 812Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

71% Match

counsel appearing on behalf of appellants and learned Spl. Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. This appeal has been filed against the order dated 19.10.2023 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.249 of 2024(3) dt.12-09-2024 2/2 Motihari, East Champaran in con...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Lalita Kumari v. Government of UP (2013) 2 SCC 1

2013 2 SCC 1Supreme Court of India

71% Match

FACTS: Petition seeking action for police failure to register an FIR for kidnapping. Held: Registration of FIR is mandatory under Section 154 CrPC (now Section 173 BNSS) if the information discloses a cognizable offence. Ratio: No preliminary inquiry is permitted if cognizable offence is disclosed; ...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
KS Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) 10 SCC 1

2017 10 SCC 1Supreme Court of India

71% Match

FACTS: Challenged Aadhaar biometrics scheme as violating privacy. Held: Right to Privacy is a fundamental right guaranteed under Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India. Ratio: Privacy is intrinsic to life and personal liberty, subject to proportionality tests for state restrictions....

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Kumar Pushpak v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 755Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

71% Match

learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State. 2. The petitioners are in custody in a case registered under Sections 419, 420, 467, 478, 471 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code. Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4141 of 2024(5) dt.08-10-2024 2/3 3. As per allegation in the FIR, pet...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Shahida Khatoon v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 737Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

71% Match

of the petition. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State. The petitioners have filed the instant application for grant of regular bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegation against the petitio...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Nunmani Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 540Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

SC/ST P.S. Case No. 19 of 2023 dated 10.07.2023 registered for the offences punishable u/ss 341, 323, 337, 354B, 509, 336, 504 and 506 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 8 of the POCSO Act and sections 3(i)(r)(s) (w) / 3(2) (Va) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 3. A...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Mithlesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 631Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

No. 163 of 2023 registered for the offence under Sections 394/395/412 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 25 (1-b)A, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act. 3. As per the prosecution case, the allegation against four unknown miscreants is that they assaulted the informant and looted a cas...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Parmanand Chauhan v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 469Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

alleged that on 09.07.2023, when the informant’s husband was going to meet Md. Rafik, the accused persons surrounded and assaulted with fists and slap and also took away Rs. 50,000/- from his pocket. Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3756 of 2024(3) dt.09-04-2024 2/3 4. Learned counsel for the petitio...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
← Previous PagePage 1Next Page →