Skip to main content
Citation Index • Supreme Court

Cases Citing Section 36

Statute: Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (negotiable-instruments-act-1881)

Jyoti Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 219Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

67% Match

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

2014 8 SCC 273Supreme Court of India

67% 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 →

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 →

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

2017 10 SCC 1Supreme Court of India

67% 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 →
Yogendra Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 521Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

67% Match

Bindu Bhushan, Chief Engineer, Muzaffarpur Zone, Public Health Engineering Department, Muzaffarpur. 6.Sri Manoj Kumar, Superintending Engineer, Public Health Engineering Darbhanga Circle, Darbhanga. 7.Sri Subodh Sankar, Executive Engineer, Public Health Division, Madhubani. 8.Sri Dharmendra Kumar, ...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Sheo Charan Dalmia v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 751Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

67% Match

P.N. Shahi, Sr. Advocate Mr.Avinash Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s: Mr. Abbas Haider, SC-6 Mr. Wasi Mohammad, AC to SC-6 For the Corporation : Mr. Rabindra Kumar Priyadarshi, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Sita Ram Singh v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 378Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

67% Match

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.414 of 2022 ====================================================== 1.Sita Ram Singh, son of Late Mathura Singh, Resident of Village-Tarhari, Police Station-Halsi, District-Lakhisarai. 2.Priya Shankar Sah, son of Late Shree Kant...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Jyoti Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 788Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

67% Match

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 →
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) 4 SCC 225

1973 4 SCC 225Supreme Court of India

67% 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 →
← Previous PagePage 4Next Page →