Search Results for "procedural safeguards"

446 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 446 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging DRAT Order Setting Aside DRT's Reference to Arbitration in Bank Recovery Suit. Arbitration Clause Does Not Oust Jurisdiction of DRT Under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993.

The petitioner, Harvestdeal Securities Ltd., challenged an order of the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) dated 19 February 2015, which set asid...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging DRAT Order Setting Aside DRT's Reference to Arbitration in Bank Recovery Suit. Debt Recovery Tribunal Has Exclusive Jurisdiction Under RDDB Act, 1993, and Arbitration Clause Cannot Oust It.

The Bombay High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by Harvestdeal Securities Ltd. challenging an order of the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRA...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings in Food Adulteration Cases Due to Non-Compliance with Mandatory Sampling Procedures Under Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006. Failure to Follow Section 47 and Rule 2.4.2 of the Manual of Procedures Renders Prosecution Invalid.

The Bombay High Court at Aurangabad, through a common judgment, allowed three criminal writ petitions challenging the validity of criminal proceedings...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Detention Order Under COFEPOSA for Non-Application of Mind and Non-Supply of Vital Documents. Detenu's Right to Make Effective Representation Under Article 22(5) of Constitution Violated as Statements of Co-Accused Not Furnished.

The petitioner, brother-in-law of the detenu Burhan Fakhruddin Khatumdi, challenged a detention order dated 27.3.2015 passed by the Principal Secretar...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Detention Order Under COFEPOSA for Non-Application of Mind and Non-Supply of Vital Documents. Detenu's Right to Make Effective Representation Under Article 22(5) of the Constitution Violated by Failure to Furnish Statements of Co-Accused and Retraction Letters.

The petitioner, Deepak Bapu Keluskar, challenged a detention order dated 29th September 2014 passed by the detaining authority under Section 3(1) of t...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Detention Order in MPDA Case Due to Non-Application of Mind. Preventive Detention Order Set Aside as Detaining Authority Failed to Consider Bail Orders.

The petitioner, Shailesh Dnyaneshwar Kedar, challenged a detention order dated 23 November 2014 passed by the Commissioner of Police, Nagpur, under Se...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Order Under COFEPOSA Act for Non-Application of Mind and Mechanical Exercise of Power. Detenu's Right to Make Representation Under Article 22(5) of Constitution Was Frustrated by Delayed Consideration and Failure to Supply Relevant Documents.

The petitioner, a friend of the detenu Mavin Keezhil Mohamed Aslam, filed a writ of habeas corpus under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging th...