The Delhi High Court in the case of [Sanjay Pandey v Directorate of Enforcement] Wherein, Justice Jasmeet Singh held that phone calls cannot be recorded without the consent of an individual under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, and guaranteed the demand of right to privacy. In the case of [KS Puttaswamy v Union Of
The Calcutta High Court in the case of [Asit Kumar Palit vs State of West Bengal] wherein, Justice Rajasekhar Mantha held that the old parents were not feeling comfortable to live with their son and daughter-in-law and lodged an FIR (First Information Report) against them at local Police Station, under the provision of Indian Penal
In a strongly worded order, Special judge MG Deshpande also noted that not even a single trial before the court which he is currently presiding, has been concluded since its establishment. A Mumbai special court under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act strongly deprecated the Enforcement Directorate (ED) for its modus operandi of arresting the
The Court opined that the consent given by a girl aged above 16 years may have to be considered. In a significant observation, the Karnataka High Court has said that in view of the ground realities, it is imperative for the Law Commission to rethink on the age of consent under the POCSO Act. “Having
A three-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Uday Umesh Lalit noted that the aggravating circumstances in the case weighed more than the mitigating circumstances, thereby, warranting death sentence. The Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the death sentence awarded to Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) terrorist and Pakistani national, Mohd Arif who was convicted for attacking the Red
Interestingly, the High Court had in another case that the POCSO Act overrides Muslim personal law with respect to the age of consent for sex and hence, sex after marriage with minor Muslim wife would be punishable. The Karnataka High Court on October 10 quashed a rape case and case under the Protection of Children
As per the rules of the Bar Council of India, We are not permitted to solicit work and advertise. This website is no mode of advertisement, personal communication, solicitation, invitation or inducement of any sort whatsoever from us to solicit any work from any individual or any other entity. This website has been created with a view to enabling the users to gain more information about our organization for the enhancement of their own knowledge and use. The information about us is provided to the user only on his/her specific request and materials downloaded from this website is completely at the user’s volition and any transmission, receipt, or use of this site would not create any lawyer-client relationship of any sort. The information provided on this website is solely for informational/educational & demonstration purposes and the same should not be interpreted as an exercise soliciting any kind of work, neither the same be construed as an advertisement exercise.
We are not liable for any consequence of any action taken by the user relying on material/information provided on this website. In cases where the user has any legal issues, he/she in all cases must seek independent legal advice.
The entire material content published on this website is the intellectual property of the Law offices of Kr. Vivek Tanwar Advocate & Associates. Any unauthorized reproduction of the content of this website may entail appropriate legal action as per the relevant statute.
The Team, Law offices of Kr. Vivek Tanwar Advocate & Associates.
