Daily Updates in Legal Research - 17-May-2020

Everyday our team scours the web and shares the most prominent news, advancements and updates in Legal research with you. Our goal is to spread Legal knowledge to help inform, inspire and create an awareness for Delivery of Justice, Case by Case !

In the meanwhile, please enjoy reading the insights from the below mentioned.

Case
Law Analysis: K. SARAVANAN KARUPPASAMY VS. STATE OF TAMILNADU, 2014 (10) SCC
406

Case Law Analysis: K. SARAVANAN KARUPPASAMY VS. STATE OF TAMILNADU, 2014 (10) SCC 406 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ( Before : T.S. Thakur, J;...

Sun, 17 May, 2020 at 3:44 AM

Case
Law Analysis: SUDIPTA LENKA Vs. STATE OF ODISHA ORS., 2014 (11) SCC 527

Case Law Analysis: SUDIPTA LENKA Vs. STATE OF ODISHA ORS., 2014 (11) SCC 527 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH ( Before : P. Sathasivam, C.J.; Ranjan ...

Sat, 16 May, 2020 at 4:49 AM

Case
Law Analysis of PROF. K.V. RAJENDRAN Vs. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CBCID SOUTH
ZONE, CHENNAI AND OTHERS, (2013) 12 SCC 480

Case Law Analysis of PROF. K.V. RAJENDRAN Vs. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CBCID SOUTH ZONE, CHENNAI AND OTHERS, (2013) 12 SCC 480 SUPREME COURT OF INDI...

Sat, 16 May, 2020 at 4:36 AM

Case
Law Analysis of STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS Vs. THE COMMITTEE FOR
PROTECTION OF DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS, WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS, 2010 (3) SCC 571

Case Law Analysis of STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS Vs. THE COMMITTEE FOR PROTECTION OF DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS, WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS, 2010 (3) SCC 571 In ...

Fri, 15 May, 2020 at 7:11 PM

Case Law Analysis of Ramesh Kumari Vs. State N C T Of Delhi, 2006 (2) SCC 677

Case Law Analysis of Ramesh Kumari Vs. State N C T Of Delhi, 2006 (2) SCC 677 In the matter of Ramesh Kumari Vs. State N C T Of Delhi, 2006 (2) SCC 677,...

Fri, 15 May, 2020 at 4:56 PM

Shree
Shree Ram Janki Ji Asthan Tapovan Mandir & Anr. Vs. The State Of Jharkhand
& Ors., CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4003 OF 2019 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 24177 of
2017)

Shree Shree Ram Janki Ji Asthan Tapovan Mandir & Anr. Vs. The State Of Jharkhand & Ors., 2019 (6) SCC 777 CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4003 OF 2019 (Arising ou...

Sun, 10 May, 2020 at 8:01 PM

Whether
the High Court can direct inquiry to be conducted by CBI - 2020-05-08 19-10-29

Whether the High Court can direct inquiry to be conducted by CBI - 2020-05-08 19-10-29 May-08-2020 Fri, 07:10 PM The question of law qua Whether the...

Fri, 8 May, 2020 at 9:00 PM

INDIAN
PENAL CODE SECTION 380

INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 SECTION 380 Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 380 - Removal of movable property from possession of another with intention t...

Thu, 11 Aug, 2016 at 3:43 AM

IPC
SEC. 354 - ASSAULT OR CRIMINAL FORCE TO WOMAN WITH INTENT TO OUTRAGE HER
MODESTY

IPC SEC. 354 - ASSAULT OR CRIMINAL FORCE TO WOMAN WITH INTENT TO OUTRAGE HER MODESTY Whoever assaults or uses criminal force to any woman, intending t...

Mon, 8 Aug, 2016 at 3:08 PM

CRIMINAL
LAW - WHAT IS THE CRPC SECTION TO FILE COMPLAINT AGAINST A FALSE AFFIDAVIT

CRIMINAL LAW - WHAT IS THE CRPC SECTION TO FILE COMPLAINT AGAINST A FALSE AFFIDAVIT CRPC SEC. 340 - PROCEDURE IN CASES MENTIONED IN SECTION 195...

Wed, 10 Aug, 2016 at 7:28 PM

Pasted from <http://law.satyagraha.com/support/solutions/folders/17000079456>

Case Law Analysis of STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS Vs. THE COMMITTEE FOR PROTECTION OF DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS, WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS, 2010 (3) SCC 571

In the matter of STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS Vs. THE COMMITTEE FOR PROTECTION OF DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS, WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS, 2010 (3) SCC 571, reliance was placed on a catena of Apex Court Judgments wherein it was held that :-

45. In the final analysis, our answer to the question referred is that a direction by the High Court, in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, to the CBI to investigate a cognizable offence alleged to have been committed within the territory of a State without the consent of that State will neither impinge upon the federal structure of the Constitution nor violate the doctrine of separation of power and shall be valid in law. Being the protectors of civil liberties of the citizens, this Court and the High Courts have not only the power and jurisdiction but also an obligation to protect the fundamental rights, guaranteed by Part III in general and under Article 21 of the Constitution in particular, zealously and vigilantly.

46. Before parting with the case, we deem it necessary to emphasise that despite wide powers conferred by Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution, while passing any order, the Courts must bear in mind certain self-imposed limitations on the exercise of these Constitutional powers. The very plenitude of the power under the said Articles requires great caution in its exercise. In so far as the question of issuing a direction to the CBI to conduct investigation in a case is concerned, although no inflexible guidelines can be laid down to decide whether or not such power should be exercised but time and again it has been reiterated that such an order is not to be passed as a matter of routine or merely because a party has levelled some allegations against the local police. This extra-ordinary power must be exercised sparingly, cautiously and in exceptional situations where it becomes necessary to provide credibility and instil confidence in investigations or where the incident may have national and international ramifications or where such an order may be necessary for doing complete justice and enforcing the fundamental rights. Otherwise the CBI would be flooded with a large number of cases and with limited resources, may find it difficult to properly investigate even serious cases and in the process lose its credibility and purpose with unsatisfactory investigations.

47. In Secretary, Minor Irrigation and Rural Engineering Services, U.P. and Others Vs. Sahngoo Ram Arya and Another, , this Court had said that an order directing an enquiry by the CBI should be passed only when the High Court, after considering the material on record, comes to a conclusion that such material does disclose a prima facie case calling for an investigation by the CBI or any other similar agency. We respectfully concur with these observations.

The sum and substance of the aforesaid being that the Hon'ble High Court has within its ambit to issue forth directions to the CBI to investigate a cognizable offence alleged to have been committed within the territory of a State without the consent of that State. At the same time, a caveat was issued to the effect that such powers must be exercised sparingly, cautiously and in exceptional situations where it becomes ncessary to provide credibility and instill confidence in investigations or where the incident may have national and international ramifications or where such anorder may be necessary for doing complete justice and enforcing the fundamental rights.