Category: Writ

A second writ petition for issuing a writ of habeas corpus is barred by principles of res judicata.

62. A second writ petition for issuing a writ of habeas corpus is barred by principles of res judicata. The doctrine of res judicata may not apply in case a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution is filed before this Court after disposal of a habeas corpus writ petition under Article 226 of… Read More A second writ petition for issuing a writ of habeas corpus is barred by principles of res judicata.

Advocatetanmoy

Alternative remedy shall not bar application u/a 226 of Constitution on grounds of fundamental rights, natural justice and challenging Vires

(2011) 2 CalHCN 28 : (2011) 129 FLR 322 : (2011) LabLR 597 : (2011) 4 LLJ 121 CALCUTTA HIGH COURT DIVISION BENCH ( Before : Sambuddha Chakrabarti, J; Baskar Bhattacharya, J ) PARAMOUNT LEATHERS — Appellant Vs. REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER AND ANOTHER — Respondent F.M.A. No’s. 65 and 66 of 2010 Decided on… Read More Alternative remedy shall not bar application u/a 226 of Constitution on grounds of fundamental rights, natural justice and challenging Vires

Advocatetanmoy

Whether the principle of constructive res judicata is applicable to writ petitions or not-Yes

07-10-1964-There can be no doubt that the fundamental rights guaranteed to the citizens are a significant feature of our Constitution and the High Courts under Art. 226 are bound to protect these fundamental rights. There can also be no doubt that if a case is made out for the exercise of its jurisdiction under Art. 226 in support of a citizen’s fundamental rights, the High Court will not hesitate to exercise that jurisdiction. But the question as to whether a citizen should be allowed to challenge the validity of the same order by successive petitions under Art. 226, cannot be answered merely in the light of the significance and importance of the citizens’ fundamental rights. The general principle underlying the doctrine of res judicata is ultimately based on considerations of public policy. One important consideration of public policy is that the decisions pronounced by courts of competent jurisdiction should be final, unless they are modified or reversed by appellate authorities; and the other principle is that no one should be made to face the same kind of litigation twice over, because such a process would be contrary to considerations of fair play and justice, vide : Daryao and Others Vs. The State of U.P. and Others, .… Read More Whether the principle of constructive res judicata is applicable to writ petitions or not-Yes

Advocatetanmoy

DR. SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY Vs. THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [ALL HC 2007 ALLAHABAD]

Supreme court dismissed the writ petition U/a 32, now the High court shall not entertain  a petition U/A 226 of the Constitution.

After dismissal of the writ petition by the Hon’ble Apex Court, the petitioner has not filed any review petition. It was open to the petitioner to file review and in case of its dismissal a curative petition. He has failed to point out as to why the same was not done. At his juncture, we may clarify that before Hon’ble Apex Court Annexure P-14 (which is annexure No. 1 to the instant writ petition), the order passed by respondent No. 2 dated 23.10.2004 was challenged. In the given circumstances, we find that neither review was filed nor any curative petition was filed nor it is stated before this Court that any such petition is pending before the Hon’ble Apex Court. Accordingly, finality is to be attached to the order passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court on 11.4.2005. Even at this stage, the petitioner has not pressed before this Court that he is inclined to file such petition before the Hon’ble Apex Court. Consequently, we have to proceed with the matter with the assumption that the order passed by Hon’ble Apex Court has become final as the same has not so far been challenged before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.… Read More DR. SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY Vs. THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [ALL HC 2007 ALLAHABAD]

Advocatetanmoy

Whether Habeas corpus could be maintained if a person is in police custody by remand order-SC said no.

September 05, 2018. The question as to whether a writ of habeas corpus could be maintained in respect of a person who is in police custody pursuant to a remand order passed by the jurisdictional Magistrate in connection with the offence under investigation,? This issue has been considered in the case of Saurabh Kumar through his father Vs. Jailor, Koneila… Read More Whether Habeas corpus could be maintained if a person is in police custody by remand order-SC said no.

Advocatetanmoy

State of West Bengal and OTHERS Versus The Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights, West Bengal and OTHERS[ALL SC 2010 FEBRUARY]

KEYWORDS:- CBI INVESTIGATION-WRIT POWER- Despite wide powers conferred by Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution, while passing any order, the Courts must bear in mind certain self-imposed limitations on the exercise of these Constitutional powers This extra-ordinary power must be exercised sparingly, cautiously and in exceptional situations where it becomes necessary to provide credibility… Read More State of West Bengal and OTHERS Versus The Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights, West Bengal and OTHERS[ALL SC 2010 FEBRUARY]

Advocatetanmoy

Bharatiya Janata Party West Bengal Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.[ALL SC 2018 APRIL]

KEYWORDS:- Panchayat Elections- Election Violetion- DATE:- April 09, 2018. Once the election process has been set in motion, the Court ought not to interfere ACT:-Article 32 of the Constitution of India AND West Bengal Panchayat Elections Act, 2003 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Bharatiya Janata Party West Bengal Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors. [Writ Petition (C)… Read More Bharatiya Janata Party West Bengal Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.[ALL SC 2018 APRIL]

Advocatetanmoy

Dr. Sabu Mathew George Vs. Union of India and Others [SC 2017 December]

KEYWORDS: PIL-SEX SELECTION- Exposer to internet- DATE : December 13, 2017- Many are guided by inappropriate exposure to the internet. The respondents have a role to control it and if any concrete suggestion is given by the petitioner, the same shall be incorporated. We command Google India, Yahoo ! India and Microsoft Corporation (I) Pvt.… Read More Dr. Sabu Mathew George Vs. Union of India and Others [SC 2017 December]

Advocatetanmoy