SEKAR REPORTER

Court News from Madras High Court

SEKAR REPORTER Blog

Sabarimala Gold Theft Case: Kerala High Court grants the Special Investigation Team six more weeks to complete the probe. The SIT today informed the Court of the interim progress and has been directed to file an interim report by January 19, 2025.

Uncategorized

Sabarimala Gold Theft Case: Kerala High Court grants the Special Investigation Team six more weeks to complete the probe. The SIT today informed the Court of the interim progress and has been directed to file an interim report by January 19, 2025.

Sabarimala Gold Theft Case: Kerala High Court grants the Special Investigation Team six more weeks to complete the probe. The SIT today informed the Court of the interim progress and has been directed to...

[05/01, 10:50] Sekarreporter: #SupremeCourt sets aside dismissal of Madhya Pradesh judicial officer Nirbhay Singh Suliya who was removed while serving as Additional District and Sessions Judge on allegations of corruption and adopting double standard while deciding bail applications under the Excise Act. [05/01, 10:50] Meta AI: The Supreme Court has set aside the dismissal of Madhya Pradesh judicial officer Nirbhay Singh Suliya, who was removed from service while serving as Additional District and Sessions Judge. Suliya was accused of corruption and adopting double standards in deciding bail applications under the Excise Act. The Madhya Pradesh High Court had upheld his removal, citing his failure to maintain high standards of judicial conduct. ¹ ² ³ The allegations against Suliya included granting bail to some applicants while dismissing similar applications, ignoring provisions of Section 59-A of the M.P. Excise Act. However, the Supreme Court’s decision suggests a review of the case, potentially considering factors like lack of direct evidence for corrupt motives or procedural improprieties in the disciplinary proceedings. Would you like to know more about the implications of this ruling or the specific grounds on which the Supreme Court based its decision?

Uncategorized

[05/01, 10:50] Sekarreporter: #SupremeCourt sets aside dismissal of Madhya Pradesh judicial officer Nirbhay Singh Suliya who was removed while serving as Additional District and Sessions Judge on allegations of corruption and adopting double standard while deciding bail applications under the Excise Act. [05/01, 10:50] Meta AI: The Supreme Court has set aside the dismissal of Madhya Pradesh judicial officer Nirbhay Singh Suliya, who was removed from service while serving as Additional District and Sessions Judge. Suliya was accused of corruption and adopting double standards in deciding bail applications under the Excise Act. The Madhya Pradesh High Court had upheld his removal, citing his failure to maintain high standards of judicial conduct. ¹ ² ³ The allegations against Suliya included granting bail to some applicants while dismissing similar applications, ignoring provisions of Section 59-A of the M.P. Excise Act. However, the Supreme Court’s decision suggests a review of the case, potentially considering factors like lack of direct evidence for corrupt motives or procedural improprieties in the disciplinary proceedings. Would you like to know more about the implications of this ruling or the specific grounds on which the Supreme Court based its decision?

[05/01, 10:50] Sekarreporter: [05/01, 10:50] Sekarreporter: #SupremeCourt sets aside dismissal of Madhya Pradesh judicial officer Nirbhay Singh Suliya who was removed while serving as Additional District and Sessions Judge on allegations of corruption and...

Uncategorized

Supreme Court Dismisses Justice Yashwant Varma’s Plea Challenging CJI’s Recommendation For His Removal Case Details: XXX V THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS|W.P.(C) No. 699/2025 Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 782) The Supreme Court August 7)

76. Supreme Court Dismisses Justice Yashwant Varma’s Plea Challenging CJI’s Recommendation For His Removal Case Details: XXX V THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS|W.P.(C) No. 699/2025 Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 782) The Supreme Court...

Uncategorized

reserved candidates scoring above General cut-off must be considered in Open Category. – Upholds Rajasthan High Court decision protecting rights of meritorious reserved candidates. – Open Category is merit-based, not a quota for any class. – Candidates can’t be confined to reserved category if they score higher than General cut-off. – Dismisses “double benefit” claim; merit alone determines suitability for unreserved posts [1][2][6]. Want to know more about implications or related cases?

[05/01, 08:36] Sekarreporter: “Home Other Legal News Merit Cannot Be Compartmentalised: Supreme Court Backs Open Category Inclusion For Reserved Candidates Merit Cannot Be Compartmentalised: Supreme Court Backs Open Category Inclusion For Reserved Candidates BW...

WP Twitter Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com