Search Results for "Shilpa Vishnu Thakur"

26 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 26 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Caste Validity Claim for 'Thakur' Scheduled Tribe Based on Pre-1950 Documents Despite Adverse Entries. Pre-1950 documentary evidence of caste cannot be discarded solely on affinity test or stray entries.

The petitioners, a daughter, father, and son, filed two writ petitions challenging the common order dated 04.08.2017 passed by the Scheduled Tribe Cas...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Confirms Death Sentence for Rape and Murder of Minor Tribal Girl under POCSO Act and IPC. Circumstantial evidence including DNA, last seen, and medical evidence established guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

The case pertains to the brutal rape and murder of a 10-year-old tribal girl, Ku. S, on 15-08-2015 at the newly constructed hostel building of Adivasi...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition for Caste Certificate — Limited Scope of Inquiry Under Section 4(1) of Maharashtra Caste Certificate Act. Prima Facie Evidence Sufficient for Issuance of Scheduled Tribe Certificate; Appellate Authority Cannot Conduct Roving Inquiry.

The petitioner, Anand Dhananjay Nalawade, applied for a caste certificate claiming to belong to the Thakur caste, which is notified as a Scheduled Tri...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Invalidation of Thakur Scheduled Tribe Claim. Petitioner failed to prove her caste claim due to lack of contemporaneous documentary evidence and contradictory school records.

The petitioner, Smt. Sangita Sahebrao Bhalerao, filed a writ petition challenging the order dated 06/07/2011 passed by the Scheduled Tribe Certificate...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Caste Certificate Invalidation as Not Maintainable Before Division Bench. Preliminary objection upheld that matters under Act 23 of 2001 must be heard by Single Judge as per Chapter XVII Rule 18(3) of Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960.

The petitioner, Nilofarnaz w/o Nazkatkhan, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India before the Bombay High Court ...