SC: Under Order XXI Rule 102 CPC, A Transferee Pendente Lite Cannot Obstruct Execution of a Decree  ||  SC: RTE Act promotes fraternity and equality by children of judges and vendors studying together  ||  MP High Court: Aadhaar and Voter ID Cards are Not Definitive Proof of Date of Birth  ||  Chhattisgarh HC: Second Marriage During Subsisting First Marriage Void Unless Custom Permits It  ||  Allahabad HC: Will in Favor of Someone Does Not Affect Compassionate Appointment Based on Dependency  ||  MP High Court: Mere Illness of a Family Member, If Improving, is Not Sufficient for Interim Bail  ||  Bombay HC: ?25K Fine for Flying Kites With Nylon Manjha; Parents Must Ensure Responsible Conduct  ||  Delhi High Court: Home State Must be the First Preference For Claiming Insider IFS Cadre Allocation  ||  SC: Hindu Daughter-In-Law Widowed After Her Father-In-Law’s Death is Entitled to Maintenance  ||  SC: Vendor Remains a Necessary Party in Specific Performance Suits Even After Transferring Property    

Raj HC: Procedural Safeguards Provided by Statute Must be Followed Strictly - (24 Jul 2023)

CIVIL

Rajasthan High Court while quashing interception orders for phone tapping of a private individual issued by authorities in the state in 2020-2021, observed that when the statute provides procedural safeguards to prevent arbitrary infringement of the rights to privacy, it must be strictly followed.

Tags : RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT   PROCEDURAL SAFEGUARDS   INTERCEPTION ORDERS   PHONE TAPPING  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved