Cases Citing Section 38
Statute: Indian Contract Act, 1872 (indian-contract-act-1872)
undefined INSC 600 • Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)
the Indian Penal Code and later on Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code was added. 3. Prosecution case, in short, is that accused persons including this petitioner armed with lathi, danda and pistol assaulted the informant. On hulla, all the accused persons fled away. ...
Read Full Judgment Analysis →undefined INSC 404 • Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 222-02-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence under Section 33(1) / 66 of the Indian Forest (Bihar Amendment 1989) Ac...
Read Full Judgment Analysis →undefined INSC 548 • Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)
385 , 387/34 of the I.P.C and 27 of the Arms Act. 3. As per allegation in the FIR, two unknown miscreants used to come near his home and after throwing a letter they were fled away from there in which a demand of Rs. 15 lakh was made. It is further alleged that they also used to fire ...
Read Full Judgment Analysis →undefined INSC 265 • Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)
petitioner. Therefore, the same has to held as bad, illegal, contrary to the provisions of Rule 27(ii) of the Control Order and has to necessarily set aside. 9. Having regard to the above facts and circumstances and the law laid down by this Hon’ble...
Read Full Judgment Analysis →undefined INSC 542 • Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)
of fact with regard the date of the marriage, the same ought not to be considered while exercising the writ jurisdiction. The petitioner has always been at liberty to approach before the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction to settle the disputed question of fact. 8. This Court has heard the lea...
Read Full Judgment Analysis →undefined INSC 758 • Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)
2(k) of the Act, 2008. 12. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of M/s Brahmaputra Infrastructure Ltd. (supra), after referring Sections 8, 9 and 22 of the Act 2008 has held in paragraph-5 of the said Patna High Court C.R. No.12 of 2021(11) dt.12-01-2024 9/10 decision that in the absence of an agree...
Read Full Judgment Analysis →undefined INSC 301 • Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)
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 →undefined INSC 610 • Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)
ORDER 612-08-2024Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. Despite valid service of notice, nobody appears on behalf of the Opposite Party No. 2. 3. The petitioner apprehends arrest in a complaint case registered for the offences punishable und...
Read Full Judgment Analysis →undefined INSC 896 • Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)
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 →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 →