Skip to main content
Citation Index • Supreme Court

Cases Citing Section 378

Statute: Constitution of India (Constitution)

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

2014 8 SCC 273Supreme Court of India

72% 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 →
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 →
Nisha Bharti v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 180Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

71% Match

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2438 of 2024 ====================================================== Nisha Bharti Wife of Nagendra Sharma, resident of Village-Naya Tola, Bhalui, P.S.-Chanan, District-Lakhisarai. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1.The State of Bih...

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

2017 10 SCC 1Supreme Court of India

71% 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 →

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.3 of 2022 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10685 of 2019 ====================================================== Vinni Kumari presently residing at Bhawar Pokhar, Behind Khetan Market, P.S. - Pirbahore, district- Patna, Posted as Dre...

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

undefined INSC 310Patnahcucisdb94 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 →
Chandradeo Mandal v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 669Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.4 of 2023 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6909 of 2022 ====================================================== Chandradeo Mandal, Son of Dukhi Mandal, resident of Village- Khagor, P.S.- Kiul, District- Lakhisarai. ... ......

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Yogendra Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 625Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.5 of 2023 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6732 of 2017 ====================================================== Yogendra Prasad son of late Rameshwar Prasad Singh, resident of Village Makhdumpur, Police Station- Ekangarsara...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →

W/o Purushottam Das presently residing at - C/o Sitabji, Dariyapur, Mohar Tola, P.S.- Kadamkuan, District- Patna, presently posted as Dresser in Female O.T. (Gayni) Patna Medical College and Hospital, Patna High Court L.P.A No.3 of 2022(4) dt.16-01-2024 2/3 Patna. 13.Madhaw Murari Singh S/o Baban ...

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 →
← Previous PagePage 1Next Page →