'No Predicate Offence, No Proceeds Of Crime; So No Money Laundering' : Supreme Court Tells ED In Chhattisgarh Liquor Case

"If there's no predicate offence, there are no proceeds of crime. Therefore, there can't be money laundering," Justice AS Oka told Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, who was appearing for the Directorate of Enforcement (ED). Read More>>

Supreme Court Delivers Split Verdict On Appointment Of Shiksha Karmi's In Madhya Pradesh

The point of consideration in the present matter was whether non-impleading of the Appellants and members of the selection committee would amount to a violation of the second limb of the principle of natural justice i.e., audi alteram partem (right to be heard). Read More>>

High Courts Should Not Ordinarily Interfere With Scrutiny Committee's Findings On Caste Claims Unless Findings Are Perverse : Supreme Court

“It is well settled that High Courts as well as Supreme Court should refrain themselves from deeper probe into factual issues like an appellate body unless the inferences made by the concerned authority suffers from perversity on the face of it or are impermissible in the eyes of law.,” the judgment read. Read More>>

Kerala High Court Refrains From Passing Orders Against Airing Of 'The Kerala Story' Movie On Doordarshan

The petitioner alleges that airing a propaganda movie would propagate religious terrorism and polarize voters during election time. The petitioner has also submitted emails to the Election Commission of India, Director General, Doordarshan and Director General, Prasar Bharati to prevent airing the movie today since it would be against the election rules and Model Code of Conduct. Read More>>

[S.38 Arms Act] All Offences Under Arms Act Are Cognizable Offences: Karnataka High Court

In dismissing the plea, a single judge bench of Justice S Vishwajith Shetty held, "[On that occasion] Section 38 of the ARMS Act was not brought to the notice of this Court and therefore, the order passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.4567/2018, wherein, this Court has held that the offence under Sections 30 and 35 of the Act are non-cognizable offences is per incuriam.” Read More>>