Cases Citing Section 243ZO
Statute: Constitution of India (Constitution)
1978 1 SCC 248 • Supreme Court of India
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 →1973 4 SCC 225 • Supreme Court of India
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 →undefined INSC 290 • Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)
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 →2014 8 SCC 273 • Supreme Court of India
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 →2013 2 SCC 1 • Supreme Court of India
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 →undefined INSC 702 • Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)
Pramod Sah presently residing at C/o Bachchu Rajak, Mohalla- Mahendru, Near Malariya Office, P.S.- Sultanganj, District- Patna, presently posted as Dresser in the Department of Surgical I.C.U. Patna Medical College and Hospital, Patna. 12.Pushpa Rani W/o Purushottam Das presently residing at - C/o ...
Read Full Judgment Analysis →2017 10 SCC 1 • Supreme Court of India
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 →undefined INSC 154 • Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)
Mr. Ajay Mukherjee, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State. 2. The petitioners apprehends their arrest in connection with Katoriya P.S. Case No. 257 of 2020 registered under Sections 341, 323, 307, 504, 506, 3...
Read Full Judgment Analysis →undefined INSC 271 • Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)
passenger from the running train upon his opposition for not to do the illegal act. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9330 of 2024(2) dt.20-02-2024 2/2 also submits that there is no mate...
Read Full Judgment Analysis →undefined INSC 422 • Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)
506, 379, 365, 364(A) of the Indian Penal Code read with section 141 of the Railways Act. 3. As per the prosecution case, the FIR has been lodged against the petitioner and other 10-11 unknown accused persons against whom there is an allegation that they have kidnapped the passenger from the runnin...
Read Full Judgment Analysis →