Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The State of Uttar Pradesh v. Raj Narain (1975 AIR 865, 1975 SCR (3) 333) was a 1975 case heard by the Allahabad High Court that found the Prime Minister of India Indira Gandhi guilty of electoral malpractices.
Kharak Singh, a resident of Uttar Pradesh was arrested for dacoity in 1941 (pre-independence era) but was released for lack of evidence. The Uttar Pradesh Police subsequently opened a history sheet under Regulation 236 (Chapter XX) of the U. P. Police Regulations that permitted police officers to undertake: (i) secret picketing of the house or approaches to the house of suspects; (ii ...
The prosecutors felt that Utter was too quick to throw court cases out on technicalities, letting "criminals go free". [5] In 1978, Utter dissented from the majority opinion in State v. Riker, arguing that evidence that Riker suffered from "battered woman syndrome" should have been admitted in the case.
Every year, each of the 50 United States state supreme courts decides hundreds of cases. Of those cases dealing with state law, a few significantly shape or re-shape the law of their state or are so influential that they later become models for decisions of other states or the federal government, or are noted for being rejected by other jurisdictions.
Ajitsingh Januja & Others v. State of Punjab AIR 1996 SC 1189; Ashok Kumar Gupta: Vidyasagar Gupta v. State of Uttar Pradesh 1997 (5) SCC 201; Jagdish Lal and others v. State of Haryana and Others (1997) 6 SCC 538; Chander Pal & Others v. State of Haryana (1997) 10 SCC 474; Post-Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh v.
The Wire and others reported that the Uttar Pradesh government employed Concept PR, a Mumbai public relations firm. The PR firm allegedly sent out press releases (on behalf of the government) stating that the Hathras teenager was not raped. The press releases also alluded to a conspiracy to push the state of Uttar Pradesh into caste turmoil ...
Puttaswamy v. Union of India; Court: Supreme Court of India: Full case name: Justice K. S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) and Anr. vs Union Of India And Ors. Decided: August 24, 2017 () Citation: Writ Petition (Civil) No 494 of 2012; (2017) 10 SCC 1; AIR 2017 SC 4161: Case history; Related actions: decriminalization of homosexuality; decriminalization of ...
As an example of the law itself, the State of Michigan defines the offense (MCL 750.249): "Any person who utters and publishes as true any false, forged, altered or counterfeit record, deed, instrument or other writing specified, knowing it to be false, altered, forged, or counterfeit, with intent to injure or defraud is guilty of uttering and ...