SC: Clarificatory Statement Does Not Constitute a Binding Undertaking for Contempt Proceedings  ||  Supreme Court: Litigant Cannot be Worse Off for Filing an Appeal under ‘No Reformatio in Peius’  ||  Orissa HC: Article 22(1) Arrest Rights Pre-Exist, Written Grounds Ruling Not Prospective  ||  Kerala HC: Kissing a Child’s Penis Constitutes Penetrative Sexual Assault under POCSO  ||  Madras HC: Married Daughter Cannot be Denied Compassionate Appointment Solely for Her Marriage  ||  Bombay High Court: Child Welfare Prevails as ‘Joint Parenting’ is Not Recognised in Indian Law  ||  Kerala HC: Minor’s Consent or Relationship with Accused Holds No Relevance under POCSO Act  ||  Bombay HC: Failure to Prove Exact Quantum of Loss Does Not Bar Compensation  ||  CCPA Fines Dial4Trade Rs. 10 Lakh for Online Ammonium Nitrate Listing Featuring Blast Images  ||  Supreme Court: Multiple Cases Alone Cannot Justify an Externment Order    

Hardik Bharatbhai Patel v. State of Gujarat & Ors. - (High Court of Gujarat) (01 Oct 2015)

Hardik Patel’s application against sedition order dismissed

Criminal

The Gujarat High Court turned down Hardik Patel’s application to recall a previous order by which the judge had called for an investigation to determine if Patel had committed a cognizable offence. It noted that no mandamus had been issued that the Applicant would be charged, let alone arrested.

Relevant : Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of U.P. and others MANU/SC/1166/2013

Tags : HARDIK PATEL   SEDITION   ACCUSED   MANDAMUS   COGNIZABLE  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved