Skip to main content
Law & Behold

Law & Behold

By Gaurav Pathak

Presently on Hold. Law & Behold is a legal podcast presenting recent and interesting judgments from courts in India. Listen to a fascinating story of a case that has been decided by the Supreme Court of India or one of the High Courts. A primer on legal education, the podcast is presented in Hinglish, and is suited for everyone interested in learning the nuances of law. Show Notes contain case name, case number and citation.
Available on
Apple Podcasts Logo
Castbox Logo
Google Podcasts Logo
Overcast Logo
Pocket Casts Logo
RadioPublic Logo
Spotify Logo
Currently playing episode

Gaming: Regulation and Data Protection ft. Abhishek Malhotra

Law & BeholdSep 20, 2021

00:00
29:53
Gaming: Regulation and Data Protection ft. Abhishek Malhotra
Sep 20, 202129:53
Kidnapping for Ransom: 364A IPC

Kidnapping for Ransom: 364A IPC

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

Jul 11, 202118:42
Reservation in Promotion

Reservation in Promotion

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


Jul 04, 202122:39
Deportation
Jun 27, 202114:12
Taxing Religious Institutions

Taxing Religious Institutions

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

Jun 20, 202119:43
Externment
Jun 14, 202108:57
Dismissal from Service
Jun 06, 202109:57
Specific Performance
May 31, 202113:00
Appearing to be Guilty

Appearing to be Guilty

“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

May 16, 202116:34
Senior Citizen
May 08, 202110:33
RJB: Raid, Jail and Bail
May 02, 202111:52
Manipulating Court Record
Mar 21, 202117:19
Limitation: Appointment of Arbitrator

Limitation: Appointment of Arbitrator

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/

Mar 14, 202117:50
Circumstantial Evidence

Circumstantial Evidence

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/

Mar 07, 202114:18
Crime & Commerce Ft. Mohit Negi

Crime & Commerce Ft. Mohit Negi

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/

Feb 21, 202127:12
Land Rights

Land Rights

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/ 

Feb 16, 202108:25
Najeeb: Bail under UAPA

Najeeb: Bail under UAPA

Feb 07, 202115:39
Advocate on Record
Jan 31, 202110:00
Trailer-Season 2

Trailer-Season 2

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

Jan 30, 202100:40
Heroin
Jul 12, 202009:28
Oh Calcutta!
Jul 05, 202012:44
Manufacturing Defects
Jun 28, 202012:39
Attempt to Murder
Jun 21, 202021:39
Amputation
Jun 14, 202012:04
Charas
Jun 07, 202014:40
Over Wait
May 31, 202014:16
Quarantine- COVID-19
May 24, 202017:25
Termites Ate Them
May 17, 202014:09
Court Martial
May 10, 202014:26
Corruption in Education
May 03, 202011:41
Celebratory Firing
Apr 26, 202010:18
Honourable Acquittal
Apr 19, 202006:50
Cat Food: Animal Rights during Lockdown
Apr 12, 202008:21
Seat, Venue & Place: Arbitration Ft. Shashwat Awasthi
Apr 05, 202022:52
Money Laundering Ft. Shantanu Singh
Mar 29, 202012:44
Telecom Sector in Peril: Understanding AGR Ft. Aayush Jain
Mar 23, 202030:50
Seed Battle
Mar 22, 202009:37
Land Acquisition Ft. Aayush Jain
Mar 15, 202017:53
Virtual Currencies in India: RBI Ban and Supreme Court
Mar 08, 202011:40
Fantasy Sports or Gambling? Ft. Kshitiz Sharma

Fantasy Sports or Gambling? Ft. Kshitiz Sharma

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/

Mar 01, 202008:13
Insanity and Death Penalty: Nirbhaya

Insanity and Death Penalty: Nirbhaya

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

Feb 23, 202009:44
Infra-less Tribunals: Scathing words from Bombay High Court

Infra-less Tribunals: Scathing words from Bombay High Court

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

Feb 16, 202009:27
Understanding Investigation: Ft. Shrey Singh

Understanding Investigation: Ft. Shrey Singh

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/

Feb 09, 202013:55
Policing Social Media

Policing Social Media

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

Crl. O.P. No. 34166 of 2019

Feb 02, 202008:46
Disqualifying Legislators: Radical Ideas

Disqualifying Legislators: Radical Ideas

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

Jan 26, 202008:39
Double Trouble: Indian Railways

Double Trouble: Indian Railways

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

Jan 19, 202004:02
Consumer Law and Penalties ft. Neel Kamal Mishra
Jan 12, 202018:47
Ratan Tata v. Cyrus Mistry ft. Shantanu Singh

Ratan Tata v. Cyrus Mistry ft. Shantanu Singh

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.

Jan 05, 202013:42