Search Results for "production before judicial officer"

1601 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 1601 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Upholds Rights of Juvenile Offender; Directs Production Before Judicial Officer Holding Charge. Medical Report Disclosing Juvenility Not Acted Upon, Leading to Violation of Juvenile Justice Act, 2000; Investigating Agency's Primary Obligation Affirmed.

The petitioner, a juvenile offender, was arrested on 23 April 2004 and remanded to judicial custody. A charge-sheet was filed on 5 May 2004, but the p...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petitions Challenging Order Allowing Production of Additional Documents in RAE&R Suit. Court Held That Mere Production of Documents Without Ruling on Admissibility Does Not Cause Prejudice to Petitioners.

The case involves four writ petitions filed by the petitioners challenging an order dated 1 August 2022 passed by the learned Judge, Small Causes Cour...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Hears Public Interest Litigation Concerning Recruitment and Selection Process. Petition Challenges Appointments Made by State Authorities Alleging Irregularities in Selection.

The judgment text provided is incomplete, containing only the case heading, date, court, judges, advocates, and a list of parties. The matter is a wri...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Considers Suo Motu Reference on Summoning Advocates During Investigation; Examines Scope of Advocate-Client Privilege and Need for Guidelines to Prevent Coercive Summons. Court Addresses Legality of Direct Summons to Lawyers Under Section 179 BNSS and Absence of Judicial Oversight.

The Supreme Court initiated suo motu proceedings following a reference from a two-judge bench in a Special Leave Petition challenging a notice issued ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeals by Accused in Smuggling Case; Customs Officers Held Not to Be Police Officers Under Section 25 Evidence Act. Confessional Statements to Customs Officers Admissible; No Violation of Article 20(3) as Accused Not Formally Accused During Inquiry Stage.

The Assistant Collector of Customs filed a complaint against Romesh Chandra Mehta and four others for conspiracy under section 120-B of the Indian Pen...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Petition in Evidence Act Case — Bailiff's Report Held Public Document Under Section 74. Certified Copy Admissible Under Section 77, But Trial Court Must Give Opportunity to Rebut Contents.

The petitioner, Sushilkumar Mandanlal Ganediwal, was the original defendant no.1 in a civil suit for declaration and possession filed in the Court of ...