Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 63 (0.40 seconds)
Devender Pal Singh Bhullar & Anr vs State Of Nct Of Delhi on 12 April, 2013 cites

Epuru Sudhakar & Anr vs Govt. Of A.P. & Ors on 11 October, 2006

41. While examining challenge to the decision taken by the President under Article 72 or the Governor under Article 161 of the Constitution, as the case may be, the Court’s power of judicial review of such decision is very limited. The Court can neither sit in appeal nor exercise the power of review, but can interfere if it is found that the decision has been taken without application of mind to the relevant factors or the same is founded on the extraneous or irrelevant considerations or is vitiated due to malafides or patent arbitrariness – Maru Ram v. Union of India, (1981) 1 SCC 107, Kehar Singh v. Union of India (1989) 1 SCC 204, Swaran Singh v. State of U.P. (1998) 4 SCC 75, Satpal v. State of Haryana (2000) 5 SCC 170, Bikas Chatterjee v. Union of India (2004) 7 SCC 634, Epuru Sudhakar v. Government of A.P. (2006) 8 SCC 161 and Narayan Dutt v. State of Punjab (2011) 4 SCC 353.
Supreme Court of India Cites 35 - Cited by 111 - A Pasayat - Full Document

Bachan Singh Etc. Etc vs State Of Punjab Etc. Etc on 16 August, 1982

“From Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab and Machhi Singh v. State of Punjab the principle culled out is that when the collective conscience of the community is so shocked, that it will expect the holders of the judicial power centre to inflict death penalty irrespective of their personal opinion as regards desirability or otherwise of retaining death penalty, the same can be awarded. It was observed:
Supreme Court of India Cites 112 - Cited by 863 - P N Bhagwati - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 Next