RANJIT GIRI

Section 498A IPC : Recent Supreme Court Judgments 498A Complaints Can Be Filed At A Place Where A Woman Driven Out Of Matrimonial Home Takes Shelter [Rupali Devi vs. State of UP] In this case, three Judge bench comprising CJI Ranjan Gogoi, Justice L. Nageswara Rao and Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul considered the following question: "Whether in a case where cruelty had been committed in a matrimonial home by the husband or the relatives of the husband and the wife leaves the matrimonial home and takes shelter in the parental home located at a different place, would the courts situated at the place of the parental home of the wife have jurisdiction to entertain the complaint under Section 498A, in a situation where no overt act of cruelty or harassment is alleged to have been committed by the husband at the parental home where the wife had taken shelter? The bench observed that mental cruelty borne out of physical cruelty or abusive and humiliating verbal exchanges would continue...

================================== June 19, 2019: Calling your overweight husband “mota haathi” (fat elephant) is grounds for divorce as it is “destructive of the matrimonial bond”, the Delhi high court has ruled . The court on March 22 upheld a divorce granted by a family court in 2012 to a man who said he was subjected to cruelty by his wife for being overweight and his alleged failure to satiate her sexual desires. The woman challenged the order in the high court. “The calling of names and hurling of abuses such as ‘Haathi’, ‘Mota Haathi’ and ‘Mota Elephant’ by the appellant (woman) in respect of her husband – even if he was overweight, is bound to strike at his self respect and self esteem,” justice Vipin Sanghi said. The woman had contended the family court relied on “vague and non-specific” allegations while granting the divorce. She argued he failed to give specific instances of allege...

=========================≠========== "You will never let this country remain in peace," the Supreme Court said Friday while dismissing a plea seeking permission to carry out religious activities in nine ancient temples situated on the undisputed acquired land adjacent to Ram Janambhoomi-Babri Masjid site at Ayodhya. "There will always be something," said a bench comprising Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justice Sanjiv Khanna. The bench was hearing an appeal filed against the January 10 order of the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court, which had dismissed the plea seeking its nod to offer prayer in the nine temples there and had also imposed a cost of Rs 5 lakh on the petitioner. The apex court, while hearing the appeal, told petitioner Pandit Amar Nath Misra to "stop poking" around with the issue. Misra, who is a social activist, had claimed before the high court that authorities have turned a "blind eye" to the initiation of religio...

Supreme Court Collegium has recommended the elevation of Jharkhand High Court Chief Justice Aniruddha Bose And Gauhati High Court Chief Justice AS Bopanna To Supreme Court of India. "The Collegium is of the considered view that at present the following persons are more deserving and suitable in all respects than other Chief Justices and senior puisne Judges of High Courts, for being appointed as Judges of the Supreme Court of India: 1. Mr. Justice Aniruddha Bose, Chief Justice, Jharkhand High Court (PHC:Calcutta) and 2. Mr. Justice A.S. Bopanna, Chief Justice, Gauhati High Court (PHC:Karnataka). The Collegium, therefore, recommends that Mr. Justices Aniruddha Bose and A.S. Bopanna be appointed as Judges in the Supreme Court of India", states the resolution. Mr. Justice Aniruddha Bose was appointed as a Judge of the Calcutta High Court on 19th January, 2004 and was elevated as Chief Justice of Jharkhand High Court on 11th August, 2018. Mr. Justice Bose stands at Sl. No.1...

The Supreme Court has observed that mere financial assistance to buy a property cannot be the sole determinative factor/circumstance to hold the transaction as benami in nature. The issue before the bench comprising of Justice L. Nageswara Rao and Justice MR Shah in an appeal arising out of a suit filed by a lady (P. Leelavathi vs. Shankarnarayana Rao) against her brothers was whether the transactions can be said to be benami in nature merely because some financial assistance has been given by the father (Late G. Venkata Rao) to the sons (defendants) to purchase the properties, subject matter of the suit (filed by his daughter, claiming share in these properties) The bench referred to judgment in Binapani Paul v. Pratima Ghosh that had held that the source of money had never been the sole consideration, and is only merely one of the relevant considerations but not determinative in character. It also reiterated the observations made in Valliammal v. Subramaniam, which delineated six c...

The bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi directed for these EVMs to continue to be chosen at random, the objective being to ensure a higher degree of accuracy to enhance the satisfaction in free and fair elections of not just the political parties but of the people of the country, though clarifying that the efficacy of the system as it presently exists or the credibility of the EVMs is not doubted. It was advanced on behalf of the petitioners that the ECI's contention of 50% VVPAT verification delaying the declaration of results by 6 days is premised on the assumption that even after the EVMs are so increased from more than 1, only 1 person, as is the case at present, shall continue to count the VVPAT slips of each of those EVMs one after the other- "As per the ECI, if 1 VVPAT slip verification in 1 polling booth requires 1 hour, 125 polling booths would need 125 hours, which would be 5.2 days". How are you saying that there is only 1 person to count all the VVPAT...

103 पिछड़ी जातियों की जमीन खरीद सकते हैं अगड़े रांची : झारखंड की सिर्फ 51 पिछड़ी जातियों की जमीन ही छोटानागपुर काश्तकारी अधिनियम (सीएनटी) के दायरे में आएगी। इस प्रकृति की भूमि अगड़े ...