Skip to main content
Citation Index • Supreme Court

Cases Citing Section 468

Statute: Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS)

Manjit Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 821Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner has been made accused Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3761 of 2024(2) dt.12-02-2024 2/3 in this case only because of the co...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) 1 SCC 248

1978 1 SCC 248Supreme Court of India

70% Match

FACTS: Petitioner's passport was impounded without giving reasons. Held: Article 21 procedure must be 'just, fair, and reasonable', not arbitrary or oppressive. Ratio: Expanded Article 21 scope, introducing substantive due process principles into Indian jurisprudence....

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

undefined INSC 550Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

of Atrocities) Act. 3. As per the prosecution case, the co-accused person, Gulshan is alleged to have tried to commit rape on the informant's daughter. Even after making complaint against the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3882 of 2024(3) dt.10-05-2024 2/3 co-accused Gulshan Kumar @ Anand Y...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Sita Ram Singh v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 824Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

period starting from the Month of April, 2020 to 22.07.2021 and also from April 2004 to March 2005, as well as post retiral benefit, if any. On this prayer, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a Patna High Court CWJC No.414 of 2022(4) dt.10-09-2024 2/3 writ of mandamus against the respondent...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Upendra Kumar v. Ashok Rai

undefined INSC 531Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

construction over the suit property and parties were directed to maintain status quo without hearing the defendant/petitioner. No notice was issued as is reflected from the copy of the order sheet Patna High Court C.Misc. No.57 of 2024 dt.02-02-2024 2/4 attached with the present petition. ...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Harsh Bhushan Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 531Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

valid service of notice as per service report. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned APP for the State and perused the case diary. 3. The petitioners seek bail in connection with Buxar Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4784 of 2024(4) dt.29-04-2024 2/4 (T) P.S. case No. 612 of 2023 in...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Md. Afaque Ansari v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 328Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

for the parties. 2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a complaint case punishable for the offence under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 / 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11360 of 2024(3) dt.29-04-2024 2/3 3. Petitioners alongwith other co...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Shila Devi v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 452Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10910 of 2024 In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45166 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-308 Year-2021 Thana- PIRPAINTI District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== 1.Shila Devi W/O Arvind Yadav R/O Village-...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Ajmal Hussain v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 612Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

ORDER 612-08-2024Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. Despite valid service of notice, nobody appears on behalf of the Opposite Party No. 2. 3. The petitioner apprehends arrest in a complaint case registered for the offences punishable und...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Manohar Lal v. State

undefined INSC 281Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

based on the fact that he is owner of the Truck. It is next submitted that petitioner is a businessman and no prudent businessman would use his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7339 of 2024(2) dt.22-02-2024 2/2 create evidence against hims...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
← Previous PagePage 6Next Page →