Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.25 seconds)

Ajay Singh And Anr And Etc vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Anr on 6 January, 2017

In support of this contention, learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon a decision Ajay Singh and Another v. State of Chhattisgarh and another4, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that Article 227 of the Constitution of India confers power of superintendence on the High Court over the Courts and tribunals within the territory of the State. The High Court has the 4 2017 (3) SCC 330 5 jurisdiction and the authority to exercise suo motu power. In the said case it was held that the High Court on the administrative side had transferred the case to the learned Sessions Judge by which it has conferred jurisdiction on the trial Court which has the jurisdiction to try the Sessions Case under Cr.P.C. and found no illegality in transferring the same.
Supreme Court of India Cites 27 - Cited by 21 - D Misra - Full Document

Nathu Lal & Others vs State Of U.P. on 18 May, 2018

In support of his contention he relies on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Nathi Lal and Others v. State of U.P. and another1 wherein it was held that in cross cases, each case has to be decided on the basis of evidence placed on record in that particular case without being influenced by the evidence or arguments urged in cross case and Judgments should be pronounced by the same Judge one after the other.
Allahabad High Court Cites 17 - Cited by 9 - Full Document
1