Skip to main content
Citation Index • Supreme Court

Cases Citing Section 164

Statute: Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC)

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

2014 8 SCC 273Supreme Court of India

71% 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

71% 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 →
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 →
Santosh Kumar Sahu v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 195Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6504 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-290 Year-2023 Thana- BAHERI District- Darbhanga ====================================================== 1.Santosh Kumar Sahu @ Santosh Sahu Son of Bilat Sahu @ Bilat Sah R/o vill - Barmattar, P...

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

undefined INSC 185Patnahcucisdb94 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 →
Gajendra Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 324Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5021 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-5645 Year-2022 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE District- Patna ====================================================== 1.Gajendra Thakur Son Of Late Devnath Thakur Resident Of Village - Rupolia, Pa...

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

undefined INSC 761Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner by submitting that the bar of Section 76(2) of the Act applies in this case. 6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the material available on record, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his a...

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

undefined INSC 377Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

under sections 307, 379, 323, 324, 341, 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code to which section 302 of the Indian Penal Code was added subsequently. 3. As per the prosecution case, the accused persons including the petitioner herein are said to have come variously armed with lathi, farsa etc. It is st...

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

undefined INSC 746Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

despite the bar under Section 76 (2) of the Act, if on the basis of allegation made in the FIR, no offence under the said provision is made out. 5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner by submitting that the bar of Section 76(2) of t...

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