Skip to main content
Citation Index • Supreme Court

Cases Citing Section 267

Statute: Constitution of India (Constitution)

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 →
KS Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) 10 SCC 1

2017 10 SCC 1Supreme Court of India

72% 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 →
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) 1 SCC 248

1978 1 SCC 248Supreme Court of India

72% 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 →
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 →
Ramji Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 287Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% 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 →
Arpan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 499Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

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 →
Kumar Pushpak v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 417Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% 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 →
Arpan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 884Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

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 →
Manish Kumar Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 683Patnahcucisdb94 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 →
Shahida Khatoon v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 627Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% 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 →
← Previous PagePage 1Next Page →