Explore every episode of the podcast Law & Behold

In this Bonus Episode of Law and Behold, I interview Mr. Abhishek Malhotra, Managing Partner of TMT Law Practice on different aspects of Gaming Laws. Tune in to discover the history of Gaming Laws, why Intellectual Property matters in Gaming, the role of data protection in Gaming and lots more.

R. M. D. Chamarbaugwalla vs The Union Of India:  https://indiankanoon.org/doc/725224/

Madras HC Judgment: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1V2i7MRord5ucSgsHhBkitNJe4X4CH_CV/view?usp=sharing

Delhi HC Judgment: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Xv1HUE4HFUvp7vULVd0YosIbTeEpwfb_/view?usp=sharing

India United States Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty: https://drive.google.com/file/d/17MI7qV8LQpSXqqdKkUKTOVZhwIjEO986/view?usp=sharing

Prateek Gupta, was a student in VIth standard in St. Mary’s High School, Rezimental Banzar, Secunderabad, Hyderabad was kidnapped on his way back home. The Police arrested the kidnapper named Sheik Ahmed, and he was convicted under Section 364A IPC by the Sessions Court. Ahmed’s appeal before High Court was dismissed, but the Supreme Court found in his favour. Tune in to know why!

Cause Title: SHAIK AHMED VERSUS STATE OF TELANGANA LNIND 2021 SC 180

Case Number: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.533 OF 2021

Court: Supreme Court of India

Citation: LNIND 2021 SC 180

Instagram: lawandbehold

Leesama Joseph was appointed in 1996 to the post of Typist/clerk in the Police Department on compassionate grounds, after her brother had passed away during service. She undisputedly suffered from Post Polio Residual Paralysis (L) Lower Limb and her permanent disability had been assessed at 55%. Leesama was promoted to the position of Upper Division Clerk and Cashier, but she initiated a litigation claiming that she was entitled to reservation in promotion on account of her disability, and therefore should get her benefits from a back date, i.e. the date she became entitled for promotion. 

The Kerala Administrative Tribunal declined her plea but the High Court decided in her favour. 

Tune is as we see how the Supreme Court interpreted Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995. We also explore if a legislative provision can become a fetter for implementation of the same legislation? Why is it so difficult to bring about a societal change, and how should a statute be interpreted to give out its most comprehensive meaning. 

Cause Title: THE STATE OF KERALA & OTHERS VERSUS LEESAMMA JOSEPH

Case Number: CIVIL APPEAL NO. 59 OF 2021

Court: Supreme Court of India

Citation: LNIND 2021 SC 181

Instagram: lawandbehold

Government of India submitted an undertaking in 1994 to not deport Sri Lankan Tamils to Sri Lanka against their wishes. Does that undertaking still stand in 2021? Tune in as we unravel the case of Bhaskaran and his quest for a Swiss Visa!

Cause Title: THAMARAI VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

Case Number: H.C.P. NO.1456 OF 2020,CRL.M.P. NO.5133 OF 2020,W.P. NO.11754 OF 2021,W.M.P. NOS.12516 & 12517 OF 2021

Court: Madras High Court

Citation: LNINDORD 2021 MAD 292

Instagram: lawandbehold

Does the exemption provision in Kerala Building Tax Act, 1975 apply to building housing nuns and students? Tune in as we discover why cases are decided so long after they are admitted. What are the different rules for interpreting tax laws, and the different methods to use them. 

Cause Title: Government of Kerala and Another  Versus Mother Superior Adoration Convent 

Case Number: Civil Appeal No. 202 of 2012

Court: Supreme Court of India 

Citation: 2021 SCC OnLine SC 151

Instagram: lawandbehold

What is externment? What are the necessary features of an externment order. Tune in as we discover what the Bombay High Court said on this issue.

Cause Title: Ranjit Kumar Veeran of Mumbai v. Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone XII

Case Number: Criminal Writ Petition 356 of 2021

Court: High Court of Judicature at Bombay

Citation: LNIND 2021 BOM 209

Instagram: lawandbehold

Even if the proven offence relates to dishonest conduct of the employee. There cannot be any hard and fast Rule that once the misconduct of theft is proved, the dismissal will be automatic.High Court can interfere with the decision of the Industrial Tribunal under Section 11-A of the I.D. Act only on limited grounds. It cannot substitute its decision for that of the Tribunal. It can interfere with the punishment, if it is found that that the decision of the Tribunal is perverse or one, which no man in his senses will take. Tune in, as we discover what the Jharkhand High Court did in the case of GC Patnayak.

Cause Title: G.C. Patnayak Versus Telco Ltd., Telco Colony, P.O. & P.S. Telco, Rep. through its Managing Director

Case Number: W.P.(L). No. 4707 of 2013

Court: High Court of Jharkhand

Citation: [2021] 2 LLJ 396

Instagram: lawandbehold

Where the contract for no fault of the plaintiff becomes impossible, Section 21 of Specific Relief Act, 1963 enables award of compensation in lieu and substitution of the specific performance. So far as the determination of the amount of compensation, it has been held that the compensation awarded under the Land Acquisition Act may safely be taken to be the measure of damages subject, of course, to the deduction therefrom of money value of the services, time and energy expended by the original land owner in pursuing the claims of compensation and the expenditure incurred by him in the litigation culminating in the award. Tune in as we discover how this principle played out in case of Ajit and Sukhbir.

Cause Title: Sukhbir v. Ajit Singh

Case Number: Civil Appeal 1653 of 2021

Court: Supreme Court

Citation: LNIND 2021 SC 155

Link to Judgment: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1sl8ZiqUzoWoNiierVKoJ6Oy4eYmb-tmY/view?usp=sharing

Instagram: lawandbehold

“The presumption of innocence is the general law of the land as every man is presumed to be innocent unless proven to be guilty. Alternatively, certain statutory presumptions in relation to certain class of offences have been raised against the accused whereby the presumption of guilt prevails till the accused discharges his burden upon an onus being cast upon him under the law to prove himself to be innocent. Section 319 CrPC springs out of the doctrine judex damnatur cum nocens absolvitur (Judge is condemned when guilty is acquitted) and this doctrine must be used as a beacon light while explaining the

ambit and the spirit underlying the enactment of Section 319 CrPC.

It is the duty of the court to do justice by punishing the real culprit. Where the investigating agency for any reason does not array one of the real culprits as an accused, the court is not powerless in calling the said accused to face trial. The question remains under what circumstances and at what stage should the court exercise its power as contemplated in Section 319 CrPC?”

Tune in as we discover how the Supreme Court answered this question with respect to Section 319 CrPC.

Cause Title: Sartaj Singh v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Case Number: Crl. Appeal 298-299 of 2021

Court: Supreme Court

Citation: 2021 Indlaw SC 115

Link to Judgment: https://drive.google.com/file/d/10gq8ns_dJdIWO2jB1ZhUM-G1_RKf689g/view?usp=sharing

Instagram: lawandbehold

Link to FIR: https://drive.google.com/file/d/10gq8ns_dJdIWO2jB1ZhUM-G1_RKf689g/view?usp=sharing

#Podcast #Legal #Criminal #SupremeCourt #CRPC #Haryana #Karnal #HighCourt #Chandigarh #TrialCourt #DistrictCourt #Law #Hindi #HindiPodcast #Podcaster #PodcasterIndia

The Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizen Act, 2007 and Delhi Rules 2009 are welfare legislations. Senior Citizen Act and rules have been framed for the benefit and protection of senior citizens/Parents, so that they can spend their twilight years peacefully. The story of a father in law who was claimed of being thrown away from his own house. This and lots more in this episode of Law and Behold.

Cause Title: MS. MAMTA VERSUS THE STATE (GNCT OF DELHI) AND OTHERS

Case Number: W.P.(C) 5144/2021

Court: Delhi High Court

Citation: LNIND 2021 DEL 877

Link to Judgment: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Kj8bGB2o78sJwMjlhiloA4Y3hzMujZYm/view?usp=sharing

Instagram: lawandbehold

Sonu, who is in custody under Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act), w.e.f. 29.11.2019 for possessing 18.44 grams of heroin (Deacetyl morphine), has now come up before High Court under Section 439 of CrPC, seeking bail, on the grounds that the quantity of contraband allegedly seized is intermediate quantity and does not restrict bail, because the quantity greater than 250 grams of heroin (Deacetyl morphine), falls in the category of the commercial quantity; hence the restrictions for bail imposed in S. 37 of NDPS Act, do not apply, and in the present case he is in custody for a considerable time. What does the Court do?

Sonu Kumar v. State of Himachal Pradesh

Case No : Cr. MP (M) No. 264 of 2021

Bench : Anoop Chitkara

Citation : 2021 Indlaw HP 196

Link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Q-5-HLnI8YB-MFMBrRHpN-Yx5pv92rfO/view?usp=sharing

Instagram: lawandbehold

A writ petition was filed by Naveen Singh before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench being for issuance of writ of mandamus to take action on the complaint made by him against Mahesh Singh for committing forgery in Court record. At that time, it was alleged that there was a fabrication in the court record by way of using whitener in Sessions Trial No. 89-A/01, State vs. Mahesh, under Sections 307, 504 and 506 IPC, Crime Case No.152/2000, Police Station Makhi, District Unnao. The court record was tampered with and instead of 'Mahesh', 'Ramesh' had been written. Considering the gravity of the matter, the High Court called for-the comments of the Learned Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court, Unnao. Mahesh was eventually chargesheeted but the High Court granted him bail. In this episode, we see as to how Supreme Court dealt with the question on bail in a crime allegedly involving tampering court records. Naveen Singh v State of Uttar Pradesh and another Criminal Appeal No. 320 of 2021 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 2545 of 2020) 2021 Indlaw SC 116 Link to Judgment: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_Gk4iAJF1-Uxhz6UMGFi7mFKL3lxJ0sx/view?usp=sharing Instagram: lawandbehold

This episode discusses two important issues (i) the period of limitation for filing an application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996; and (ii) whether the Court may refuse to make the reference under Section 11 where the claims are ex facie time-barred?

Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited and another v Nortel Networks India Private Limited

Civil Appeal Nos. 843-844 of 2021

2021 Indlaw SC 109

Link to Judgment: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Pkfsc2-jm_62B7Pj1-E6b3_uCZlgv5Ef/view?usp=sharing

Feedspot has enlisted Law and Behold in Top 20 Podcasts on Indian Law! To see the list and discover more click on https://blog.feedspot.com/indian_law_podcasts/

Jayashree was married to Shivaji Chintappa Patil in 1995. They were blessed with two children. On the fateful night of 23rd March 2003,  Shivaji and Jayashree went to sleep in their house. At the dawn of 24th March 2003, Ramchandra Chintappa gave a call to the Shivaji, so that they could go to their field for harvesting jawar crop. Shivaji opened the door and expressed his inability to accompany him to the field stating, that Jayashree had committed suicide by hanging.

A trial follows and Shivaji is convicted for murder. The case eventually reaches Supreme Court. Join in, as we examine Circumstantial Evidence.

Shivaji Chintappa Patil v. State of Maharashtra

Criminal Appeal No. 1348 of 2013

2021 Indlaw SC 87

Link to Judgment: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1tRZfK0peY7flM5R94RjsoUK0L_VKCTlD/view?usp=sharing

Feedspot has enlisted Law and Behold in Top 20 Podcasts on Indian Law! To see the list and discover more click on https://blog.feedspot.com/indian_law_podcasts/

The transaction relating to goods took place in Gujarat, the representations and meeting took place in Gujarat, the goods were shipped from a port in Gujarat, bill of ladings were released from Gujarat, the invoices were raised by the entity based out of Gujarat and the jurisdiction of such invoices were subject to the court of Gujarat. But the FIR was registered in Delhi!

As per Section 177, CrPC, an inquiry and trial with respect of an offence is to be conducted by the court within whose local jurisdiction occurrence is said to have taken place, and the cause of action has arisen. Sections 178 and 179 are merely exceptions to the principle laid down in Section 177. Their scope should not be enlarged on analogous consideration. Ordinarily, the case is to be tried by the court in whose local limits the offence was committed, which in the present case is the state of Gujarat. In addition, for determination of offences alleged to have been committed under Section 406, IPC, Section 181, CrPC lays down that the jurisdiction lies with court where the offence was committed or any part of the property which is the subject of the offence was received or retained.

Join is as we discuss this and lots more with Mohit Negi.

Ramesh Boghabhai Bhut v. State and Another

Crl.M.C. 1616/2020 & Crl.M.A. 10307/2020

2020 SCC OnLine Del 1475

Link to Judgment: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1brwFF_SlpjMfnJZK9jnISO3i61JpT086/view?usp=sharing

https://www.instagram.com/lawandbehold/

Joginder and Karamveer who are the residents of Village Sarsad, Tehsil Gohana, District Sonepat encroached upon the panchayat land and constructed the houses. The Government of Haryana framed a policy regarding sale of panchayat land in unauthorised possession. Joginder and Karamveer submitted the application before the competent authority along with the resolution of the concerned panchayat and requested to sell the lands occupied by them illegally and unauthorizedly, but the same was rejected. The case eventually reached Supreme Court. This and lots more in this episode of Law and Behold.

Case Name: Joginder and another v State of Haryana and others

Citation: 2021 Indlaw SC 37

Link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RjecXawFtdiDXpZtgMMe8o32nKXZ7gsA/view?usp=sharing 

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandbehold/ 

Professor TJ Joseph while framing the Malayalam question paper for the second semester B.Com. examination at the Newman College, Thodupuzha, had included a question which was considered objectionable against a particular religion by certain sections of society. Prosecution alleged that Najeeb in association with other members of the Popular Front of India (PFI), decided to avenge this purported act of blasphemy. On 04.07.2010 at about 8AM, a group of people with a common object, attacked the victim-professor while he was returning home with his mother and sister after attending Sunday mass at a local Church. Over the course of the attack, members of the PFI forcefully intercepted the victim's car, restrained him and chopped-off his right palm with choppers, knives, and a small axe. Country-made bombs were also hurled at bystanders to create panic and terror in their minds and to prevent them from coming to the aid of the victim.

Najeeb was arrested on 10.04.2015 and has been in jail since then. The Kerala High Court granted him bail, but the Supreme Court stayed that Order. Did Najeeb finally get bail from Supreme Court? What are the contours of bail jurisprudence in special laws such as UAPA. This and lots more in Episode 2 of Law and Behold!

Union of India v. K.A. Najeeb

Criminal Appeal No. 98 of 2021

2021 Indlaw SC 30

Link to Judgment: https://drive.google.com/file/d/16MLTsjbBuQ3fXacA5_tCEam-I90aQ4ho/view?usp=sharing

https://www.instagram.com/lawandbehold/

The institution of Advocate on Record is specific to the Supreme Court of India. The question which is raised in the present case is whether an Advocate-on-Record can have the entry in the Advocate-on-Record Register in the form of his style of carrying on the profession instead of Siddharth Murarka, as Law chamber of Siddharth Murarka?

In Re: Advocate on Record Includes A Proprietary Firm

Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1107/2020

2021 Indlaw SC 21

Link to Judgment: https://drive.google.com/file/d/16MLTsjbBuQ3fXacA5_tCEam-I90aQ4ho/view?usp=sharing

Welcome to Season 2 of Law and Behold! A weekly podcast full of facts, fun and law. Presenting to you the latest and most interesting judgments from Courts all over India. 

Instagram: lawandbehold

The Police says that it recovered 15.07 grams of Heroin from the flat of Suresh Thakur. He was arrested and put into jail. The drugs were apparently purchased from a foreigner in Delhi. But Suresh is himself a drug addict. In this season finale, we see how the Himachal Pradesh High Court decided Suresh’s bail application.

Judgment-Suresh Thakur v State of Himachal Pradesh

Link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Belj4N7zxndCzcQmyH9cxONixoIpgbQI/view?usp=sharing

Citation: 2020 Indlaw HP 485

Twitter: https://twitter.com/law_behold

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandbehold/

Cavalier Enterprises alleged that Kolkata Municipal Corporation has illegally put a lock on its lifts. The real story turned out to be a lot different. In our penultimate episode of this season, we trace the history of hottest property in Kolkata from 1906! The Calcutta High Court saw through the charade, but what did it do?

Judgment-Cavalier Enterprises Private Limited and others v Kolkata Municipal Corporation and others

Link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1tpvRTTojxkAzZYMXMUzeOvDmVCsmW79r/view?usp=sharing

Citation: 2020 Indlaw CAL 312

Twitter: https://twitter.com/law_behold

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandbehold/

On 08.12.2010 Krishan Bhatia purchased one Honda Activa scooter from Satnam Motors Pvt. Ltd. at Jaipur for Rs. 52,500/-, but the bill invoice mentioned the amount as Rs. 44,076/-. The scooter was manufactured by Honda Motorcycle and Scooter India Pvt. Ltd. Krishan Bhatia alleged that due to some manufacturing defect some liquid was leaking and the front elevation of the scooter got damaged and spoiled the colour completely. Honda and the dealer did not resolve the said problem and refused to repair them. Being aggrieved by the deficiency in service, Krishan Bhatia filed a complaint against the Honda and M/s Satnam before the District Forum-II, Jaipur and prayed for refund of Rs. 52,500/- with interest alongwith other reliefs. The case went up to NCDRC, twice! In this episode we examine deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. All of which took 10 years to decide!

Judgment-Satnam Motors Private Limited, through its Director, Rajasthan and another v Krishan Bhatia S/o M. L. Bhatia

Link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1i15Tn24ZXRzX018ltAh-P2vJaKo7ZrGS/view?usp=sharing

Citation: 2020 Indlaw NCDRC 441

Twitter: https://twitter.com/law_behold

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandbehold/

Dr. Jaydeep A Patel was going to his laboratory from his residence at around 4.45 p.m. on 3.12.2002, in his Indica Car being driven by his driver Jignesh G. Vyas. When the car had to slow down to negotiate a speed breaker, a motorbike stopped beside the car, and Dr. Patel was shot at. The bullet pierced the glass window and hit Dr. Patel on his face. The shooters fled from the spot. The case eventually reached Supreme Court, where the Apex Courts pronounced an important judgment on attempt to murder. This and lots more in this episode.

Judgment-Mustak @ Kanio Ahmed Shaikh v State of Gujarat

Link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hTRlVsQ5lAYUsaMFQ7G78iSgefniHCzc/view?usp=sharing

Citation: 2020 Indlaw SC 375

Twitter: https://twitter.com/law_behold

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandbehold/

Anthony Swamy, a painter by profession was travelling in a bus. The bus meets an accident and hits a lorry. Anthony suffers grievous injuries. His left leg is amputated. He suffers all loss of income. He can no longer paint, or walk, or climb stairs or socialise. The Motor Accident Tribunal grants him a meagre compensation, which is increased marginally by the High Court. The Supreme Court employs the functional test to decide the amount of compensation. How are claims in motor accident cases decided? This and lots more in this episode.

Judgment-Anthony Alias Anthony Swamy v Managing Director, K.S.R.T.C.

Link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yEWlcB2Stix1JPL6xab0B2aoDuqDfb29/view?usp=sharing

Citation: 2020 Indlaw SC 358

Twitter: https://twitter.com/law_behold

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandbehold/

Cannabis or marijuana is grown in ample amount in Himachal Pradesh. The Indian law mandates severe punishment for trading in contraband, especially in commercial quantities . Yet, one KG of Charas is not a commercial quantity. Shocked you, right?

Listen in as we delve into Himachal Pradesh granting bail to a person accused of multiple NDPS offences.

Judgment- Khekh Ram v. State of Himachal Pradesh

Link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1JSc9WYAlcxCzUPqpFrbCp3O8ztcn2Uo4/view?usp=sharing

Citation: 2020 Indlaw HP 434

Twitter: https://twitter.com/law_behold

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandbehold/

The Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) conducts an exam for entry as Assistant Commandant in the Central Armed Police Forces. A written exam is followed by medical tests, subsequent to which candidates are called for interview. The medical standards are strict, and this particular candidate in question is found to be overweight. He approaches the Delhi High Court that his medical must be re-conducted by measuring weight with a properly calibrated weighing machine. What follows is a saga on examining normal human behaviour and how not to expend one’s legal rights.

Judgment- Dhiraj Milind Dhurve v Union Public Service Commission and another

Link: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1O8_4X1b_HdQJsX5W_tSdPDttqI6TtPcJ

Citation: 2020 Indlaw DEL 1161

Twitter: https://twitter.com/law_behold

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandbehold/

TCLF: http://tclf.in/

One Take Show : https://open.spotify.com/episode/1gT1hDNAlLgoKKCIUZhJEI?si=xPl93ZAXTqqwHSpd8CsUnw

A photojournalist comes in contact with a Pizza Delivery person, who was later diagnosed as positive for coronavirus. The Govt came and directed the photojournalist to stay at home. A few days later, the Government passed another order for extending the quarantine. It also issued warnings for breaking quarantine. All of this was challenged in Court. The Delhi High Court conducted hearings over video conference. It balanced the claims of the journalist, with the needs of the Government. But how long is too long?

Judgment- Amit Bhargava v State (NCT of Delhi)

Link: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1JpF3jZIxb244hlqiAdKwbeoT-f-HgBWE

Citation: 2020 Indlaw DEL 1038

Twitter: https://twitter.com/law_behold

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandbehold/

A property dispute! It started in 2007-08, seven years later, the notary who attested the documents claims that the notary registry has been eaten up by termites! And well, this was an act of god. The Central Information Commission trashes this stand and imposes maximum penalty. All of this comes up before Delhi High Court, whose judgment we discuss!

Judgment- Meena Sharma v. Nand Lal & Anr.

Link: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1jDKKuhB3i_-PTqNCLP5FYzLpFMqFPMfX

Citation: 2020 Indlaw DEL 1076

Twitter: https://twitter.com/law_behold

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandbehold/

A non commissioned officer in the Indian Army is accused of breaking-in at the middle of the night. A Court Martial follows. A culmination of a 21 year old journey, at the hands of the Supreme Court. This and lots more in this episode of Law and Behold!

Judgment- Union of India and others v Dafadar Kartar Singh and another

Link: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1sNmNjjppmhKfi_BeqZWHUfARTFWkkLfX

Citation: 2019 Indlaw SC 1206

Twitter: https://twitter.com/law_behold

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandbehold/

An MBBS Student in a Deemed University in Gujarat is asked to cough up Rs. 20 Lakhs for an NOC. What follows is a tale of corruption. Charge and Discharge! See the rot in the education system and witness how the Supreme Court held that even private individuals can be considered to be public servants.

Judgment- State of Gujarat v Mansukhbhai Kanjibhai Shah

Link: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1k36GcPSyFzKi903_0WN3lkouWuCDFXaF

Citation: 2020 Indlaw SC 319

Twitter: https://twitter.com/law_behold

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandbehold/

A happy wedding in Uttrakhand is shattered by gunshots. Two people die, and the shooter is the groom’s father. The trial court awards life imprisonment for murder. The High Court confirms it, but the Supreme Court says that there was no murder! This and lots more in this episode of Law & Behold!

Judgment- Bhagwan Singh v State of Uttarakhand

Link: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1m-KenA4gunit2XWmSa8pTZRuyPPaa1wD 

Citation: 2020 Indlaw SCO 144

Twitter: https://twitter.com/law_behold

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandbehold/

Innocent until proven guilty, right? Well, that is not always the case. Especially when you are in a government service or an applicant for one! The Madhya Pradesh High Court examined a case in which the government employee was suspended because of a criminal case against him. Upon acquittal, he asked for full salary. Did he get it? This and lots more in this episode of Law & Behold!

Judgment- Vijay Manjhi v State of Madhya Pradesh and others

Link: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1RB0dCn7OxqJG3E8VbdAj352ZZYadnRAL

Citation: 2020 Indlaw MP 6

Twitter: https://twitter.com/law_behold

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandbehold/

The Kerala High Court allowed a cat owner to travel during the lockdown to get food for his pets. Did you know that international law recognises five fundamental rights of animals? Not feeding your pet is a criminal offence in India! This and lots more in this episode of Law & Behold!

Judgment - N Prakash v. State of Kerala, W.P.(C). TMP-28 OF 2020, Kerala High Court

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1e1DJR-548Ee8vcbIS275Lqecpdz_gocP

Twitter: https://twitter.com/law_behold

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandbehold/

Why an Indian Company in the business of air purifiers had its air being put tight before the Supreme Court? The Apex Court has delivered an important verdict on differentiating the concepts of seat, venue and place. This case takes us to India, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Hong Kong, all while being under lockdown. In this episode, Shashwat Awasthi discusses various aspects of arbitration law and why the Supreme Court did what it did.

Judgment - MANKASTU IMPEX PRIVATE LIMITED v. AIRVISUAL LIMITED, 2020 SCC OnLine SC 301

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1KSAH_qzd6-ev5PFQfZEKj7R4frTalaTl 

Twitter: https://twitter.com/law_behold

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandbehold/

PS- Due to the present lockdown, the episode has been recorded remotely using Skype. As a result, the audio quality has suffered. Apologies for the same, and thank you for the support. Stay safe!

What is Money Laundering? Know its history, present and future as we discuss a very important judgment from Punjab and Haryana High Court.

P&H High Court Judgment: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1aSF2Gn9syxAm8cBE4GpEaQW-F9_HA2Yj

Twitter: https://twitter.com/law_behold

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandbehold/

PS- Due to the present lockdown, the episode has been recorded remotely using Skype. As a result, the audio quality has suffered. Apologies for the same, and thank you for the support. Stay safe!

The Telecom Sector in India is in peril. It is a key contributor to the Indian economy but in debt of Rs 4 lakh crore. Bharti Airtel and Vodafone Idea, two major operators owe thousands of crores to the Government. The Supreme Court is on a relentless pursuit to make them pay. On October 24, 2019, the Apex Court delivered a verdict that shook up the sector. The judgment impacts entities who were not litigating in the first place!

What is the AGR issue? How did we get here? And what is the way out. All of this and lots more in this Bonus Episode of Law and Behold!

AGR Judgment- https://drive.google.com/open?id=1YOjKmr6_651GhvxQ6zTJZ_iBS1wJtV-8

AGR Judgment Final Order- https://drive.google.com/open?id=1sL5CZ8qqvff4QscArfZNDTE0HErFhH3Y

Self Assessment Rejection Order- https://drive.google.com/open?id=1zCrZ9X2nLpVuJPbUzma0oRwQKIzd9nSE

Twitter: https://twitter.com/law_behold

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandbehold/

Is a small scale farmer, who purchased seeds from a Company with a buy-black clause, a consumer? The Supreme Court has answered the same. In this episode, we trace the history and story of a longstanding litigation, which is yet to come to an end after 16 years. A classic David v. Goliath battle, in the corridors of Indian Courts.

Judgment- https://drive.google.com/open?id=14W60XnmDmiV_d7KFEcVmxHhAn5vAZFfc

Final Order- https://drive.google.com/open?id=1SZhOUghXr75FsXUGBlEvFRWb-WQHYs-3

Twitter: https://twitter.com/law_behold

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandbehold/

A Five Judge Bench of the Supreme Court delivered a landmark verdict on land acquisition. In this episode, we understand what land acquisition is, why is it done, what has changed in the law, and what is so interesting about the judgment.

Indore Development Authority Judgment 2020 SCC OnLine SC 316- https://drive.google.com/open?id=1aAulU5W-0OVzn0xQaLVYgCHio1qO0TTG

Get in touch! Follow us at

Twitter: @law_behold

Instagram: lawandbehold

Reserve Bank of India (RBI) effectively banned virtual currencies in April 2018. This March, Supreme Court set that ban aside. Do you hold BitCoin, LiteCoin or any other crypto? Well, you can now finally encash and put them into your bank accounts. In this episode, we see what virtual currencies actually are and who uses them! We see the points canvassed before the Supreme Court and how the Court eventually decided. In short, Virtual Currency, Decoded. 

Judgment- https://drive.google.com/open?id=1PhfzinvvE-Ii5q02Ad8NMeizQW2gWoxl

Follow Law & Behold at

Twitter- https://twitter.com/law_behold

Instagram- https://www.instagram.com/lawandbehold/

Many High Courts have held that Fantasy Sports based online games like Dream 11 are not gambling websites. Rajasthan High Court has also delivered a judgment recently on this issue. In this episode, we discuss what are fantasy games, how do they different from gambling, and the tests courts employ to differentiate them. Recorded in the Pink City of Jaipur, this is a primer on how not to lose money!

Rajasthan HC Judgment: Chandresh Sankhla v. State of Rajasthan, 2020 SCC OnLine Raj 264

Supreme Court Judgment: State Of Andhra Pradesh vs K. Satyanarayana https://indiankanoon.org/doc/84963/

Patiala House Court in Delhi has rejected insanity plea of Vinay Sharma, convicted in the Nirbhaya case. Law says that insane persons and pregnant women cannot be hanged. But why is that? Has it always been that? This and lots more in this episode.

2019 Judgment- https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/india-joins-nations-which-dont-execute-mentally-ill-convicts/articleshow/69615922.cms

How will the economy be fixed, if cases of financial institutions remain pending for 20 years! Scathing words from Bombay High Court. Will the Government now act?

WRIT PETITION NO. 386 OF 2020, Bombay High Court

https://drive.google.com/open?id=13ZePKV1Jw0ws2X1eElbWsfnco2O1gRbg

Supreme Court has held that Trial Court can order further investigation, even after taking cognizance. This is a paradigm shift in criminal law. Read more: https://lawsamjho.in/2020/01/08/further-investigation-can-be-ordered-at-post-cognizance-stage/

Madras High Court has suggested ways to police social media. But is it even feasible?

Crl. O.P. No. 34166 of 2019

Presently, Speaker of the Legislature decides on disqualification of MP and MLAs on the grounds of Defection. Supreme Court has suggested the Parliament to make a constitutional amendment and replace the role of the Speaker, with a Panel of retired judges to decide on disqualifications, in a fair and time bound manner.

Cases Mentioned: Keisham Meghachandra Singh v. The Hon’ble Speaker Manipur Legislative Assembly & Ors. Civil Appeal No. 547 Of 2020

Rajendra Singh Rana and Ors. -v- Swami Prasad Maurya and Ors. 2007) 4 SCC 270.

Know more- https://www.firstpost.com/politics/sc-asks-parliament-to-ponder-over-speakers-mandate-to-disqualify-mps-mlas-solution-may-lie-in-transferring-power-to-bodies-outside-legislature-7941341.html

India Railways books two people on the same seat. What does one do? https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Delhi/railways-to-compensate-man-for-allotting-same-berth-to-2-passengers/article30597296.ece

India has two consumer legislations. Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and Consumer Protection Act, 2019. Which one is in force? Does Chairman/Member of the Consumer Forum have all the powers that the Forum has? Let’s find out what the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court said https://drive.google.com/open?id=1KkNqobqnFf4hVFb-0IVj6ZOsbPdoG5ic

Cyrus Mistry was removed as the Chairman of Tata Sons in October 2016. The National Company Law Tribunal ruled against him, but the Appellate Tribunal ruled in his favour. The battle is now in Supreme Court. What is the dispute about? What is at stakes! Know it all.