The Calcutta High Court recently ruled that a deceased government employee's family pension must be split equally between his two wives, while his gratuity belongs solely to his registered nominee.
The Supreme Court of Canada's decision in United States v. Burns established that extraditing individuals to countries where they could face the death penalty violates section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This ruling underscores the importance of aligning
The R. v. Marshall case was a pivotal moment in Canadian jurisprudence, highlighting the need to honor historic Indigenous-Crown treaties. It addressed the complexities of Indigenous treaty rights, particularly in the context of fishing, and sparked significant controversy and debate.
The R. v. Stinchcombe case, a pivotal Supreme Court of Canada decision, established the necessity of full and complete disclosure of evidence by the Crown in criminal cases. This decision, rooted in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, has significantly influenced
This article explores the landmark Canadian case, R. v. Morgentaler, [1988] 1 S.C.R. 30, detailing its background, legal challenges, the Supreme Court's decision, and its significant impact on women's rights and Canadian law.
Parmanand vs State of MP: The Importance of Injury Explanations in Murder Convictions The Supreme Court of India has once again demonstrated its commitment to the principles of justice and fairness in the case of Parmanand vs State of MP (2023 LiveLaw
Manohar Singh vs State Of Rajasthan The Indian judiciary’s meticulous approach towards framing charges in criminal cases was once again underscored in the landmark judgment of Manohar Singh vs State of Rajasthan on April 1, 2021. The High Court of Rajasthan at
State Of M.P vs Madanlal In a landmark judgment by the Supreme Court of India, the legal landscape regarding the treatment of rape and attempt to rape cases in the judicial system has been reinforced with clear directives. The case of State
Jagdish Ram vs State Of Rajasthan The Indian judiciary witnessed a remarkable case that underscores the enduring battle against the practice of untouchability, a social evil abolished by the Constitution of India decades ago. The case of Jagdish Ram vs State Of
Anticipatory Bail: Insights from Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia vs State of Punjab ‘Anticipatory Bail’ is an enchanting term that materializes in the convoluted corridors of the Indian legal system reassuring those who dread being arrested unfairly. In India, the crucial case of Gurbaksh
Rasiklal v. Kishore Khanchand Wadhwani High Court hearing Rasiklal v. Kishore Khanchand Wadhwani overruled a previous judgment delivered by JMFC, Indore, on 01.07.2015 in Criminal Case No.16047/2006 made the news headlines on July 2. The case involves defamation allegations against petitioner Rasiklal