Cases Citing Section 139-1956
Statute: Supreme Court Case Law (supreme-court-case-law)
undefined INSC 207 • Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5311 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-70 Year-2017 Thana- MEHSI District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1.Shahbaj Kuraishi Md. Sharif Quraishi @ Sudhan Quraishi Village – Chaklahi P.S.- Mehs...
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 529 • Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)
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 →undefined INSC 417 • 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 449 • Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)
the petitioner to pay Rs. 3,000/- per month to the opposite party and Rs. 1,000/- each per month for their three children, total being Rs. 6,000/-. 8. This Court is of the considered view that if, the petitioner is directed to pay Rs. 6,000/- he is required to pay towards maintenance allowance ...
Read Full Judgment Analysis →undefined INSC 649 • 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 141 • Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.10 of 2020 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12370 of 2015 ====================================================== Krishnadeo Poddar Son of Late Sitabi Poddar, Retired Head Electrician, Muzaffapur Electric Supply Circle, res...
Read Full Judgment Analysis →undefined INSC 793 • Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1393 of 2024 ====================================================== 1.Baby Singh Wife of Umesh Prasad Singh Resident of Mohalla- Mohanpur, Punaichak, Sundri Bhawan, P.S.- Shashtrinagar, Dist.- Patna. 2.Umesh Prasad Singh, ...
Read Full Judgment Analysis →undefined INSC 327 • Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)
no. 38 (Old), Holding no. 96 (subsequent), presently part of Holding no. 1; (ii) further for direction to the respondents particularly respondent no. 3, 4 & 7 to abstain from creating unnecessary and unreasonable restrictions upon the petitioners in exercising their right to...
Read Full Judgment Analysis →undefined INSC 166 • Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3633 of 2018 ====================================================== Bande Lal Sah S/o Late Sundar Lal Sah, Resident of Village- Ekamba, P.S.- Jalalgarh, District- Purnea. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1.The State of Bihar. 2.Th...
Read Full Judgment Analysis →