Skip to main content
Citation Index • Supreme Court

Cases Citing Section 80

Statute: Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS)

Archana Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 721Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1412 of 2020 ====================================================== Archana Kumari Wife of Sri Pawan Kumar Singh, Resident of Village- Jagdishpur, P.O. and P.S.- Jagdishpur, District- West Champaran at Bettiah. ... ... Petiti...

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

2013 2 SCC 1Supreme Court of India

70% 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 →
Upendra Kumar v. Ashok Rai

undefined INSC 526Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

दी द एव फ दी स वा बितू त क क स वा स्थि ब वववा ब दत जमदी न पर हलो रह क ब नमर्मा ण कवा यर्य कवा फ लोटलो ग्रवा फ दवा ब खिल ब कयवा गयवा और ब नव क दन ब कयवा गयवा ब क मददवा लहन मदकदमवा कदी जवा नकवा रदी क क Patna High Court C.Misc. No.57 of 2024 dt.02-02-2024 3/4 बिवावजतू न्यवा यवा लय नहदी आकर ब वववा ब...

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

2017 10 SCC 1Supreme Court of India

70% 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 →
Sudha Devi v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 325Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.505 of 2020 ====================================================== 1.Sudha Devi W/o Manoj Kumar Das @ Manoj Das resident of Village - Purvi Kargahiya, P.S. - Bettiah Mufassil, District- West Champaran. 2.Manoj Kumar Das @ Manoj...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Jyoti Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 594Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

society. Any lapse in execution of the said scheme has to be taken very seriously. Closure of even one day entails the beneficiaries going without their meals, which cannot be overlooked. Thus, we do not find any infirmity in the decision of the authorities cancelling her selection as wel...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Jyoti Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 424Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

question of fact with regard the date of the marriage of the petitioner, which otherwise also, can not be determined without taking evidences. 9. So far the post of Aganwadi Sevika is concerned, it is a post created under the scheme and not holding any civil post, thus no prot...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Nagendra Chaubey v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 711Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.839 of 2024 ====================================================== Nagendra Chaubey S/o Sri Sukh ram Chaubey Resident of village-Hirpur, Post-Dalupur District-Buxar. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1.The State of Bihar through th...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Jyoti Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 355Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

deems it fit and proper to refer to a judgment rendered by the learned Division Bench of this Court in the case of Babita Kumari v. The State of Bihar and others, reported in 2016 SCC Online Pat 9434, paragraphs no. 7 and 8 whereof are reproduced herein below:- “7. Having considered t...

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

undefined INSC 168Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

of Sikandra P.S. Case no. 249 of 2022 registered under sections 307, 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 325, 34, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and one another are said to have struck Sintu Yadav with a tangi, seriously injuring h...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
← Previous PagePage 2Next Page →