[Self-Incrimination] Company Cannot Seek Protection Under Article 20(3) Of Constitution Without Satisfying Its Ingredients: P&H High Court
https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/punjab-and-haryana-high-court/punjab-haryana-high-court-company-cannot-seek-protection-art-203-without-satisfying-ingredients-when-document-necessary-to-adjudicate-matter-is-summoned-281191

Justice N.S Shekhawat explained that, “considering the Article 20(3) of the Constitution of India, the protection against self incrimination would come to the rescue of a person only when these three ingredients are satisfied,
(a) accusation of an offence against such person
(b) compulsion to provide evidence and
(c) giving out self incriminating material, relating to accusations levelled against him, either in the form of oral testimony or in the form of a statement recorded or in the form of document produced.”

@CurrentLegalGK

Handcuffing: Necessity Or Violation Of Rights?
https://www.livelaw.in/articles/arrested-person-handcuffing-violation-of-fundamental-rights-supreme-court-judgments-280994

⛓️🔗🙌#Quotes_@CurrentLegalGK

“Handcuffing is prima facie inhuman and, therefore, unreasonable; it should be the last resort, not the first reflex." -

~ Justice Krishna Iyer

S. 54 TPA | Possession Of Property Under Agreement To Sell Doesn't Grant Ownership; Registration Required: Supreme Court
https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/supreme-court-property-ownership-registration-agreement-to-sell-281269

Drafting Pleading and Conveyancing.

See the drafts of Civil criminal pleadings such as Plaint, complaint, bail etc. as well as Agreement to sell and Sale deed.

To get a fair idea of how practically the law is applied because 1st step for a practical lawyer is to learn to draft as per the law and a law student to imagine how practical world works and to understand the concept in interesting way then it is a good method.


Reading Writs under constituion then go through these drafts after reading the concept and find out what what law points are applied and what aren't.

@CurrentLegalGK

The two-Judge Bench comprising Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice K.V. Viswanathan observed, “It can thus be seen that in the said case, it was held that the test of manifest arbitrariness as laid down by this Court in various judgments would also apply to invalidate legislation as well as subordinate legislation under Article 14. It was held that manifest arbitrariness must be something done by the legislature capriciously, irrationally and/or without adequate determining principle. It further goes on to hold that when something is done which is excessive and disproportionate, such a legislation would be manifestly arbitrary.

@CurrentLegalGK

Can’t Declare HC Judgment As Illegal Under Article 32 Of Constitution; If Petitioners Haven't Been Heard, They Can Either File Recall Application Before HC Or SLP: SC
https://www.verdictum.in/court-updates/supreme-court/vimal-babu-dhumadiya-ors-v-the-state-of-maharashtra-ors-2025-insc-77-article-32-constitution-article-136-recall-application-1565090

In our considered opinion, under Article 32 of the Constitution, the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay cannot be declared as illegal”, the Bench held. It was further explained by the Bench that if the petitioners have not been heard and are affected by the said judgment, the remedy available to them is to either file a petition/application for recall of the said judgment or a petition under Article 136 of the Constitution before the Apex Court.

Conditions To Invoke S. 53A Transfer Of Property Act : Supreme Court Explains
https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/conditions-to-invoke-s-53a-transfer-of-property-act-supreme-court-explains-279281

Section 53A of TPA acts as a shield for the prospective transferee who is holding possession of the immovable property under a contract of sale, that is not formally executed (not registered). The provision puts an obligation on the transferor to not enforce the contract against the transferee when the transferee has acted in accordance with the written agreement.
“Section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act was inserted partly to set at rest the conflict of views in this country, but principally for the protection of ignorant transferees who take possession or spend money in improvements relying on documents which are ineffective as transfers or on contracts which cannot be proved for want of registration. The effect of this section, is to relax the strict provisions of the Transfer of Property Act and the Registration Act in favour of transferees in order to allow the defence of part performance to be established.”, the court observed.

GIRIYAPPA v. KAMALAMMA, 2024

#Object_of_law@CurrentLegalGK

Rights of Senior Citizens

#Essay@CurrentLegalGK

What is the history of the Kuka martyrs’ day? 🔗
#bhagwant_mann #bhagwant_singh_mann

What does secularism mean in Bangladesh, a country where Islam is the state religion? 🔗
#bangladesh #explained_global #express_explained #secularism

Order II Rule 2 CPC Doesn't Bar Second Suit For Relief Which Was Barred At The Time Of First Suit : Supreme Court
https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/order-ii-rule-2-cpc-doesnt-bar-second-suit-for-relief-which-was-barred-at-the-time-of-first-suit-supreme-court-281243

Facts: Order II Rule 2 CPC required Respondent No. 1 to include the reliefs of specific performance of the agreement to sell and recovery of possession in the initial suit. However, due to a government ban on executing sale deeds in the village, these reliefs couldn't be sought then. After the ban was lifted, Respondent No. 1 filed a second suit seeking these additional reliefs.

S. 100 CPC | High Courts Cannot Pass Interim Order In Second Appeal Without Framing Substantial Question Of Law : Supreme Court
https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/supreme-court-section-100-cpc-second-appeal-interim-order-substantial-question-of-law-281308

whether the High Court could pass any ad interim order for a limited period, before framing the substantial question(s) of law, while dealing with a second appeal filed under Order XLI r/w Section 100 CPC.

Answering negatively, the Court observed:

This Court has categorically held that the High Court acquires jurisdiction to deal with the second appeal on merits only when it frames a substantial question of law as required to be framed under Section 100 CPC; and it cannot grant an interim order, without framing substantial question of law.”

High Court cannot use 151 to issue interim orders before framing substantial question of law.

@CurrentLegalGK