State of Rajasthan Vs. Love Kush Meena, 2020 Scc Online Sc 1177

  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Publications
  4. /
  5. Case Snippets
  6. /
  7. State of Rajasthan...

The court held that for an accused acquitted to join as a police constable, mere acquittal will not be sufficient. The court observed that being acquitted on the absence of any evidence is different from acquittal based on grounds of benefit of doubt. Thereby, in the case of an heinous offence, an acquittal based on the grounds of benefit of doubt would not make the respondent eligible for appointment as a police constable.

Tags:

Let us help you!

If you need any help, please feel free to contact us. We will get back to you within one business day. Alternatively, if you're in a hurry, you can call us now

+91 9052538538
info@karavadi.in

Recent Case Snippets

Gattification Through Appellate Paralysis: Wto’s Dispute Settlement Crisis And Pathways Forward

The World Trade Organization (WTO), established in 1995, replaced the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), which began in 1947. GATT set early rules for international trade but functioned mainly as a diplomatic arrangement, lacking strong enforcement mechanisms. The WTO carried forward GATT’s principles... Read more »

Arvind Kejriwal Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, 2024 INSC 687

In the case of Arvind Kejriwal vs. Central Bureau of Investigation (2024 INSC 687), the Supreme Court of India addressed the legality of Kejriwal’s arrest by the CBI and his subsequent request for bail. ​ Kejriwal, a prominent political figure, was implicated in a case involving alleged irregularities in the framing and implementation of the... Read more » Read more »

The Exorbitant Price of Justice: Assessing Security Deposits in Arbitration Appeals under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

The 2015 amendments to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act aimed to revolutionize the arbitration process in India, focusing on enhancing time and cost efficiency, and ensuring flexibility of procedures with minimal judicial intervention. Despite these progressive intentions, the imposition of 100% security deposits for the... Read more »

Disclaimer

The Rules and Regulations set forth by the Bar Council of India under Advocates Act, 1961 prohibit Advocates or Law Firms from advertising or soliciting work through public domain communications. This website is intended solely to provide information. Karavadi & Associates (“K&A”) does not aim to advertise or solicit clients through this platform. K & A disclaim any responsibility for decisions made by readers/visitors based solely on the content of this website.

By clicking 'AGREE,' readers/visitors agree and acknowledge that the information provided herein (a) does not constitute advertising or solicitation, and (b) is intended solely for their understanding of K & A services. By continuing to use this site, you consent to the use of cookies on your device as outlined in our Cookie Policy.