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    

Nabam Rebia v Registrar General, Gauhati High Court and ors. - (Supreme Court) (27 Jan 2016)

Arunachal Pradesh President’s Rule petition deferred

Constitution

The Supreme Court decided to hear petitions against President’s Rule in Arunachal Pradesh on 1 February, 2016. It called for adducing copies of the State Governor’s report recommending President’s Rule and other material that was in support of issuing the proclamation.

Relevant : President proclaims powers under Article 356 in Arunachal Pradesh MANU/HOME/0004/2016 Article 356 Constitution of India Act

Tags : PRESIDENT’S RULE   ARUNACHAL PRADESH  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2024 - All Rights Reserved