P&H HC: Eyewitness Account Not Credible if Eyewitness Directly Identifies Accused in Court || Delhi HC: Conditions u/s 45 PMLA Have to Give Way to Article 21 When Accused Incarcerated for Long || Delhi High Court: Delhi Police to Add Grounds of Arrest in Arrest Memo || Kerala High Court: Giving Seniority on the Basis of Rules is a Policy Decision || Del. HC: Where Arbitrator has Taken Plausible View, Court Cannot Interfere u/s 34 of A&C Act || Ker. HC: No Question of Estoppel Against Party Where Error is Committed by Court Itself || Supreme Court: Revenue Entries are Admissible as Evidence of Possession || SC: Mere Breakup of Relationship Between Consenting Couple Can’t Result in Criminal Proceedings || SC: Bar u/s 195 CrPC Not Attracted Where Proceedings Initiated Pursuant to Judicial Order || NTF Gives Comprehensive Suggestions on Enhancing Better Working Conditions of Medical Professions

SC Seeks WhatsApp, Facebook Response on Plea Seeking Data Protection on UPI Platforms - (02 Feb 2021)

MEDIA AND COMMUNICATION

Supreme Court has held that Section 43¬D (5) of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA Act) per¬ se does not oust the ability of Constitutional Courts to grant bail on ground of violation of Fundamental Right to Speedy Trial. The Court has also observed that the rigours of the provision will melt down where there is no likelihood of trial being completed within a reasonable time and the period of incarceration already undergone has exceeded a substantial part of the prescribed sentence

Tags : SUPREME COURT ABILITY OF CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS TO GRANT BAIL

Share :