SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2014 Supreme(SC) 132

JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR, M.Y.EQBAL
RAKESH KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA – Respondent


Order

Arguments heard, which remained inconclusive. For further arguments, list these cases on 27-2-2014. To be taken up as the first case.

In view of an apparent difference of views expressed on the one hand in Shyam Babu Verma v. Union of India, (1994) 2 SCC 521 and Sahib Ram v. State of Haryana, 1995 Supp (1) SCC 18; and on the other hand in Chandi Prasad Uniyal v. State of Uttarakhand, (2012) 8 SCC 417 we are of the view that the remaining special leave petitions should be placed before a Bench of three Judges.

The Registry is accordingly directed to place the file of the remaining special leave petitions before the Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India for taking instructions for the constitution of a Bench of three Judges, to adjudicate upon the present controversy.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top