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: Having Different Age Criteria For Contractual and Regular Appointments is Unconstitutional  ||  Delhi HC: Registered Property Title Prevails over Claims Based on Oral Family Settlements  ||  Gauhati HC: Only A Family Court Can Grant A Divorce under Muslim Law, Not A Civil Judge  ||  Del HC: Courts Cannot Compel Lawyers to Disclose Sources of Documents Filed on Clients' Instructions  ||  SC Explains When Shares Received After Company Amalgamation are Taxable as Business Income  ||  SC: Excavators, Dumpers Etc Used Within Factories aren’t Motor Vehicles For Road Tax Purposes  ||  SC: Complaints Alleging Fraud under Companies Act Can Be Filed Only By SFIO, Not By Private Parties  ||  SC: Preventive Detention Cannot Override Bail and Requires Proof of a Threat to Public Order    

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