Sekarreporter- Republic Day function at High Court 2020
Follow:
- Next story Sekarreporter- Republic Day function at High Court 2020 govt advts photos
- Previous story Family Pension to 2nd wife: Here’s why Madras High Court allowedCiting a Supreme Court judgment, Justice Anand Venkatesh allowed her petition and said “… this court has to necessarily lean towards the presumption of marriage rather than branding the petitioner as a concubine.”
Recent Posts
- HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR Crl.O.P.No.9848 of 2026 and Crl.M.P.Nos.7042 & 7043 of 2026 Abdul Khader Mohammed Farook (M/56), S/o.Abdul Khader, No.59, M.K.N.Road, Guindy, Chennai-600032. PAN: AAHPF4076K. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle-1[1], Numgambakkam, … Petitioner Chennai-600034. … Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to call for the records relating to E.O.C.C.No.133 of 2019 pending on the file of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Economic Offences), Egmore, Chennai and quash the same. For Petitioner : Ms.N.Lavanya For Respondent : Ms.M.Sheela, Senior Standing Counsel (Income Tax) and Mr.H.Siddarth, Junior Standing Counsel (Income Tax) ORDER The petitioner/accused facing trial for offence under Section 276C(2) of Income Tax Act, 1961 before the learned Additional Chief
- THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2193 /2026 [@ SLP [CRL.] NO.18828/2025] MOHAN KARTHIK & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF TAMIL NADU & ANR. Respondent(s) O R D E R Leave granted. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and the learned Senior counsel appearing for the respondents.
- sekarreporter1: https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/parameters-for-sections-1563-200-crpc-are-different-supreme-court-sets-aside-hc-order-allowing-second-1563-plea-532935 [05/05, 15:23] sekarreporter1: The Supreme Court has held that the parameters governing the invocation of Sections 156(3) and 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 operate in distinct fields, setting aside a High Court order that had
- https://x.com/i/status/2051594369271271840 [05/05, 15:20] sekarreporter1: ‘Parameters For Sections 156(3) & 200 CrPC Are Different’: Supreme Court Sets Aside HC Order Allowing Second 156(3) Plea |@mittal_mtn
- Sabarimala Reference Hearing – Day 11 | 05.05.2026* *9-Judge Constitution Bench | CJI Surya Kant presiding* *Bench*: Justices B.V. Nagarathna, M.M. Sundresh, Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Aravind Kumar, A.G. Masih, R. Mahadevan, Prasanna B. Varale, Joymalya Bagchi 28ac
More
Recent Posts
- HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR Crl.O.P.No.9848 of 2026 and Crl.M.P.Nos.7042 & 7043 of 2026 Abdul Khader Mohammed Farook (M/56), S/o.Abdul Khader, No.59, M.K.N.Road, Guindy, Chennai-600032. PAN: AAHPF4076K. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle-1[1], Numgambakkam, … Petitioner Chennai-600034. … Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to call for the records relating to E.O.C.C.No.133 of 2019 pending on the file of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Economic Offences), Egmore, Chennai and quash the same. For Petitioner : Ms.N.Lavanya For Respondent : Ms.M.Sheela, Senior Standing Counsel (Income Tax) and Mr.H.Siddarth, Junior Standing Counsel (Income Tax) ORDER The petitioner/accused facing trial for offence under Section 276C(2) of Income Tax Act, 1961 before the learned Additional Chief
- THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2193 /2026 [@ SLP [CRL.] NO.18828/2025] MOHAN KARTHIK & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF TAMIL NADU & ANR. Respondent(s) O R D E R Leave granted. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and the learned Senior counsel appearing for the respondents.
- sekarreporter1: https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/parameters-for-sections-1563-200-crpc-are-different-supreme-court-sets-aside-hc-order-allowing-second-1563-plea-532935 [05/05, 15:23] sekarreporter1: The Supreme Court has held that the parameters governing the invocation of Sections 156(3) and 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 operate in distinct fields, setting aside a High Court order that had
- https://x.com/i/status/2051594369271271840 [05/05, 15:20] sekarreporter1: ‘Parameters For Sections 156(3) & 200 CrPC Are Different’: Supreme Court Sets Aside HC Order Allowing Second 156(3) Plea |@mittal_mtn
- Sabarimala Reference Hearing – Day 11 | 05.05.2026* *9-Judge Constitution Bench | CJI Surya Kant presiding* *Bench*: Justices B.V. Nagarathna, M.M. Sundresh, Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Aravind Kumar, A.G. Masih, R. Mahadevan, Prasanna B. Varale, Joymalya Bagchi 28ac