๐•ƒ๐”ผ๐”พ๐”ธ๐•ƒ โ„‚๐•Œโ„โ„๐”ผโ„•๐•‹ ๐”ธ๐”ฝ๐”ฝ๐”ธ๐•€โ„๐•Š ๐”น๐•ช- โ„•๐•’๐•ฅ๐•ฆ๐•ฃ๐•’๐• ๐•๐•ฆ๐•ค๐•ฅ๐•š๐•”๐•– โ„ข
18.9K subscribers
851 photos
11 videos
1.72K files
3.09K links
๐Ÿ“ฒ Contact โ†’ @CurrentLegalGKBOT

โ˜บ๏ธ 360ยฐ Cases on topics.

Keywords: Civil Judge, MPCJ, UP PSCJ, Haryana ADA, DJS, CBI APP, RJS, JLO, CLAT PG, Supreme Court law clerk, AIBE, IBPS, UGC NET.
_____________
๐Ÿง  Daily Quiz โ†’ @LegalQuizzes

โณ๐Ÿš€ Enjoy Learning!
Download Telegram
๐ŸŒ… All done โœ… for jharkhand revision?
Do light revision of section numbers and cases that's it.(Or whatever u have planned)

๐ŸŒŸ All the best for tomorrow
jharkhand and SC law clerk candidates

@CurrentLegalGK
๐Ÿค2๐Ÿ˜‡1
๐•ƒ๐”ผ๐”พ๐”ธ๐•ƒ โ„‚๐•Œโ„โ„๐”ผโ„•๐•‹ ๐”ธ๐”ฝ๐”ฝ๐”ธ๐•€โ„๐•Š ๐”น๐•ช- โ„•๐•’๐•ฅ๐•ฆ๐•ฃ๐•’๐• ๐•๐•ฆ๐•ค๐•ฅ๐•š๐•”๐•– โ„ข
SC quashes FIR over Art 370 protest: How the court relied on the 1947 Justice Vivian Bose ruling ๐Ÿ”— #explained_law #express_explained
๐Ÿ”ฅ What was Justice Vivian Boseโ€™s 1947 ruling? (Staire decisis)

In 1947, a three-judge bench of the Nagpur HC, comprising Justice Vivian Bose, was tasked with deciding whether a particular article in the press, directly or indirectly, tended to bring about hatred or contempt for the government. In doing so, it also examined the offence of sedition under Section 124A of the IPC, which deals with the offence of sedition, and Section 4(1) of the Press (Emergency Powers) Act, 1931.
Justice Vivian Bose held that the said article didnโ€™t incite or lead to sedition. He also came up with a test, which went on to become the yardstick for such cases to be decided in the future.

In his judgment, he ruled: โ€œThe effect of the words must be judged from the standards of reasonable, strong-minded, firm and courageous men, and not those of weak and vacillating minds, nor of those who scent danger in every hostile point of viewโ€.

How important is to know the constitution not only for constitutional courts but for trial courts as well.

Article 19 (1)(a) and 153A IPC

@CurrentLegalGK
๐Ÿ‘1
https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/chennai/when-can-court-recall-judgment/article7415350.ece

Key terms - Power to recall, 362, 482 of CrPC, Article 226, interim orders, arithematical/clerical errors

๐Ÿ‘จโ€โš–๏ธLandmark Case law Antulay vs Nayak

seven-member Constitution bench of the apex court reiterated its powers to recall judgements under certain circumstances. โ€œThe injustice done should be corrected by applying the principle
๐Ÿ”ฅ Legal maxim - actus curiae neminem gravabit , an act of the court shall prejudice no one,โ€ the bench said.

In State of Orissa vs Janamohan Das , the Odisha High Court elaborated the principle set in Antulay and said there has to be โ€œsubstantial injury to the suitorโ€ to recall an order.
โ€œ..while conceding the power of recall available to this Court, we would say that the same would be exercisable only in exceptional cases where the mistake committed by the court is palpable and is such which, by its own force, has caused substantial injury to a suitor.โ€

HC bound by CrPC
While the fact that the courts have powers to recall is a settled one, there are still divisions on when this power could be exercised.

Read more....
๐Ÿ‘4๐Ÿ’ฏ1
pdf_upload-367991.pdf
424.4 KB
The Supreme Court has observed that the High Court has inherent power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to recall an order and the provisions of Section 362 Cr.P.C. would not bar it from exercise of such powers.

-------
S.C. held that if any order is passed in consonance of the prayer made in the present petition, it would invariably amount to review which is barred under Section 362 CrPC and is not permissible even under the inherent powers (Section 482) possessed by the Court.

SIMRIKHIA V. DOLLEY MUKHERJEE, (1992)

@CurrentLegalGK
๐Ÿ‘5๐Ÿ’ฏ1