Skip to main content
Citation Index • Supreme Court

Cases Citing Section 128

Statute: Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (transfer-of-property-act-1882)

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

1978 1 SCC 248Supreme Court of India

70% 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 →
Sheo Charan Dalmia v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 678Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

69% Match

petition so that the matter could be taken to its logical conclusion. 6. Learned State counsel as also learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Gaya Municipal Corporation do not have any objection. Patna High Court CWJC No.729 of 2024(2) dt.25-04-2024 4/5 8. Paragraphs 17 to 20 of the petition a...

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

undefined INSC 151Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

69% Match

tried to forcibly evict the informant from the land in which his buffaloes were grazing and the informant was taking care of that land as caretaker on behalf of some other person. When the informant Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6504 of 2024(2) dt.20-02-2024 2/3 opposed his eviction, the p...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Dipak Kumar Jha v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 278Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

69% Match

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1507 of 2017 ====================================================== Dipak Kumar Jha Son of Late Shyam Charan Jha, Grand Son of Late Tara Charan Jha @ Lalan Babu Resident of Village - Mahisi, P.O. and P.S. - Mahisi, ...

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

undefined INSC 599Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

69% 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 →
Lalita Kumari v. Government of UP (2013) 2 SCC 1

2013 2 SCC 1Supreme Court of India

69% 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 →
Ramesh Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 510Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

69% Match

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.131 of 2024 ====================================================== 1.Ramesh Kumar Singh Son of Late Ram Barai Singh, Permanent resident of village - Thakurbari Road, Ward No. - 5, P.S. and P.O. - Jogbani, District - Araria Peti...

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

undefined INSC 489Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

69% Match

Ram Narayan Mahto, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s: Mr. Anant Kumar 1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 220-02-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State. 02. In the...

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

undefined INSC 477Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

69% 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 →
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) 4 SCC 225

1973 4 SCC 225Supreme Court of India

69% 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 1Next Page →