web analytics

Menu

Skip to content
Shades of Knife
  • Home
  • True Colors of a Vile Wife
  • Need Inspiration?
  • Blog Updates
  • SOK Gallery
  • Vile News Reporter
  • About Me
  • Contact Me

Shades of Knife

True Colors of a Vile Wife

Tag: Landmark Case

State Of Punjab and Anr Vs Jalour Singh and Ors on 18 January, 2008

Posted on January 25, 2019 by ShadesOfKnife

 

State Of Punjab and Anr Vs Jalour Singh and Ors on 18 January, 2008

Citations : [2008 SCC CIV 1 669], [2008 SCC CRI 1 524], [2008 SCC L&S 1 535], [2008 AIR SC 1209], [2008 KLJ 1 887], [2008 AIC SC 64 262], [2008 JT 2 83], [2008 SCALE 2 52], [2008 RCR CIVIL 1 857], [2008 AIR SC 0 1196], [2009 TAC 1 819], [2008 ALLSCR 0 692], [2008 SCJ 2 95], [2008 SCC 3 660], [2008 TNMAC 1 244], [2008 KHC 2 89], [2008 AIOL 112], [2008 ARBLR SC 1 257], [2008 SCR 1 922], [2008 MLJ SC 5 311], [2008 AIR SCW 1196], [2008 KLT SC 2 236], [2008 ACJ SC 2874]

Other Sources :

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/483834/

https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/5609ae95e4b0149711414361

Posted in Supreme Court of India Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged 3-Judge (Full) Bench Decision Landmark Case Reportable Judgement or Order State Of Punjab and Anr Vs Jalour Singh and Ors Work-In-Progress Article | Leave a comment

Sundeep Kumar Bafna Vs State Of Maharashtra and Anr on 27 March, 2014

Posted on January 25, 2019 by ShadesOfKnife

In this landmark judgment, a 2-judge Bench of Apex Court has held that a person can approach either High Court of a Sessions Court for a Regular bail under 439 CrPC, instead of exhausting the remedy of approaching the Magistrate Court.

Sundeep Kumar Bafna Vs State Of Maharashtra and Anr on 27 March, 2014

News about this judgment:

https://www.livelaw.in/courts-country-including-high-courts-extremely-careful-circumspect-concluding-judgment-supreme-court-per-incuriam-sc/

https://www.livelaw.in/bail-seekers-first-exhaust-sessions-court-remedy-approaching-high-court-sc-set-examine/

https://www.livelaw.in/accused-can-directly-approach-high-court-sessions-court-regular-bail-necessary-accused-apply-magistrate-first-sc/


Citations: [2014 AIOL 181], [2014 CRIMES SC 2 161], [2014 SCALE 4 215], [2014 BOMCR CRI SC 2 313], [2014 SUPREME 3 285], [2014 AIR SC 2115], [2014 SLT 3 540], [2014 RCR CRIMINAL SC 2 416], [2014 CRLJ SC 2245], [2014 JT 4 486], [2014 JCC SC 2 1264], [2014 AIR SC 1745], [2014 SCC 16 623], [2014 SCC ONLINE SC 257], [2014 KERLT 2 809], [2014 CRILJ 2245], [2014 NCC 1 570], [2015 NCC 1 798]

Other Source Links: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/102030495/ and https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/5609af48e4b01497114160a8


Reproduced in accordance with Section 52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from main.sci.gov.in/judgments, judis.nic.in, lobis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court and District Court Websites such as ecourts.gov.in

Posted in Supreme Court of India Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged Bail Application High Court or Sessions Court Maintainable Landmark Case Legal Procedure Explained - Interpretation of Statutes Obiter Dicta Right to Bail Sundeep Kumar Bafna Vs State Of Maharashtra and Anr | Leave a comment

Kesavananda Bharati Sripadagalvaru and Ors Vs State Of Kerala And Anr on 24 April, 1973

Posted on January 24, 2019 by ShadesOfKnife

This is the landmark judgment of Supreme Court, where in Hon’ble Justice Hans Raj Khanna has outlined the basic structure doctrine of the Constitution and that only those amendments which tend to affect the ‘basic structure of the Constitution’ are subject to judicial review.

Kesavananda Bharati Sripadagalvaru and Ors Vs State Of Kerala And Anr on 24 April, 1973

Wikipedia : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kesavananda_Bharati_v._State_of_Kerala

Posted in Judicial Review | Tagged Article 368 - Power of Parliament to amend the Constitution and procedure therefor Kesavananda Bharati Sripadagalvaru and Ors Vs State Of Kerala And Anr Landmark Case Legal Procedure Explained - Interpretation of Statutes | Leave a comment

Minerva Mills Ltd. & Ors Vs Union Of India & Ors on 31 July, 1980

Posted on January 24, 2019 by ShadesOfKnife

In this landmark judgment from Apex Court, two sections of Article 368 of Constitution of India are struck down as being invalid and unconstitutional, as they are against the basic structure of Constitution.

Minerva Mills Ltd. & Ors Vs Union Of India & Ors on 31 July, 1980

Citation : 1980 AIR 1789, 1981 SCR (1) 206

Indiankanoon.org link : https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1939993/

Posted in Judicial Review | Tagged Amendment To Constitution of India Article 368 - Power of Parliament to amend the Constitution and procedure therefor Landmark Case Legal Procedure Explained - Interpretation of Statutes Minerva Mills Ltd. & Ors Vs Union Of India & Ors | Leave a comment

Perspective Publications (P) Ltd. & Anr Vs State of Maharashtra on 19 November, 1968

Posted on January 20, 2019 by ShadesOfKnife

 

Perspective Publications (P) Ltd. & Anr Vs State of Maharashtra on 19 November, 1968

 

Posted in Supreme Court of India Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged Imprisonment For Contempt Of Court IPC 499 - Defamation Landmark Case Perspective Publications (P) Ltd. and Anr Vs State of Maharashtra Work-In-Progress Article | Leave a comment

Abhijit Bhikaseth Auti Vs State Of Maharashtra and Anr on 16 September, 2008

Posted on January 1, 2019 by ShadesOfKnife

Following questions arise for consideration in this petition filed with Hon’ble Bombay High Court:

“Whether an order passed on an application made under section 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as “the said Act”) is appelable under section 29 of the said Act?

Whether an appeal will lie under section 29 of the said Act against every order passed by the learned Magistrate in proceedings initiated on the basis of an application made under section 12 of the said Act?

What is the scope of an appeal under section 29 of the said Act?”

From Para 25,

Thus, the conclusions which can be summarised are as under:
(i) An appeal will lie under section 29 of the said Act against the final order passed by the learned Magistrate under sub-section 1 of section 12 of the said Act;

(ii) Under sub-section 2 of section 23 of the said Act, the learned Magistrate is empowered to grant an ex-parte ad-interim relief in terms of sections 18 to 22 of the said Act. The power under sub-section 1 is of granting interim relief in terms of sections 18 to 22 of the said Act. Before granting an interim relief under sub-section 1, an opportunity of being heard is required to be granted to the respondent.

(iii) An appeal will also lie against orders passed under sub section 1 and sub section 2 of the section 23 of the said Act which are passed by the learned Magistrate. However, while dealing with an appeal against the order passed under section 23 of the said Act, the Appellate Court will usually not interfere with the exercise of discretion by the learned Magistrate. The appellate Court will interfere only if it is found that the discretion has been exercised arbitrarily, capriciously, perversely or if it is found that the Court has ignored settled principles of law regulating grant or refusal of interim relief.
(iv) An appeal under section 29 will not be maintainable against purely procedural orders which do not decide or determine the rights and liabilities of the parties.

Abhijit Bhikaseth Auti Vs State Of Maharashtra & Anr on 16 September, 2008

Citations: [2

Other Source links:

Posted in High Court of Bombay Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged Abhijit Bhikaseth Auti Vs State Of Maharashtra and Anr Expedite Order - Complete Trial Within Three Months Landmark Case Legal Procedure Explained - Interpretation of Statutes PWDV Act Sec 23 - Inquire Prima Facie DV Before Granting Interim Maintenance PWDV Act Sec 29 - Interim order U/s 23 Appealable U/s 29 Work-In-Progress Article | Leave a comment

Justice K.S.Puttaswamy(Retd) & Anr Vs Union Of India And Ors. (Right to Privacy – Aadhaar Case)

Posted on December 29, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

This is the case in which Supreme Court held that Right to Privacy is a fundamental right as a part of Article 21, overruling M.P. Sharma And Ors. Vs Satish Chandra, District Magistrate, Delhi on 15 March 1954.

Justice K.S.Puttaswamy(Retd) & Anr Vs Union Of India & Ors on 11 August, 2015

Justice K.S.Puttaswamy(Retd) & Anr Vs Union Of India And Ors. on 24 August, 2017

Justice K.S.Puttaswamy(Retd) & Anr Vs Union Of India And Ors. on 26 September, 2018

List of other case laws around Article 21 are here.

Posted in Judicial Activism (for Public Benefit) | Tagged 5-Judge Constitutional Bench Decision Aadhaar Case Article 21 - Protection of life and personal liberty Catena of Landmark Judgments Referred/Cited to Justice K.S.Puttaswamy(Retd) and Anr Vs Union Of India and Ors. Landmark Case Overrules MP Sharma Overruling Judgment Right to Privacy Work-In-Progress Article | Leave a comment

Kusum Lata Sharma Vs State and Anr on 2 September, 2011

Posted on December 26, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

This is the landmark judgment from Delhi High Court which held that “A mother who is being maltreated and harassed by her son would be an “aggrieved person”. If the said harassment is caused through the female relative of the son i.e. his wife, the said female relative will fall within the ambit of the “respondent‟. This phenomenon of the daughters-in-law harassing their mothers-in-law especially who are dependent is not uncommon in the Indian society.”

From Paras 9 and 10,

9. As a matter of fact, para ‘4(i)’ clarifies that even those women who are sisters, widows, mothers, single woman or living with the abuser are entitled  to legal protection under the proposed legislation. A mother who is being maltreated and harassed by her son would be an “aggrieved person”. If the said harassment is caused through the female relative of the son i.e. his wife, the said female relative will fall within the ambit of the ‘respondent’. This phenomenon of the daughters-in-law harassing their mothers-in-law especially who are dependent is not uncommon in the Indian society.
10. In view of the authoritative pronouncement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, para ‘4’ of the Statement of Objects and Reasons cannot be stated to have excluded a female relative of the male partner or a respondent and thus, a mother-in-law being an “aggrieved person” can file a complaint against the daughter-in-law as a respondent.

Kusum Lata Sharma Vs State & Anr. on 2 September, 2011

Citations : [2011 DMC 3 1], [2011 CRIMES 4 548], [2011 DLT 181 775], [2011 DRJ 126 298], [2011 ILR SUPP DELHI 4 435], [2012 RCR CRIMINAL 1 924], [2011 SCC ONLINE DEL 3710], [2011 AIC 106 846], [2011 AD DELHI 6 576]

Other Sources :

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1272794/

https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/56090db1e4b014971117a40b

Posted in High Court of Delhi Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged Hiral P Harsora and Ors Vs. Kusum Narottamdas Harsora and Ors Kusum Lata Sharma vs State and Anr. Landmark Case Legal Procedure Explained - Interpretation of Statutes PWDV Act - Mother-in-Law can file DV case on Daughter-in-Law PWDV Act Sec 2(q) – ‘Adult Male’ Words Struck Down by SC - Any Person Can Be Respondent In PWDV Case Sandhya Manoj Wankhade Vs Manoj Bhimrao Wankhade and Ors | Leave a comment

Harbans Lal Malik Vs Payal Malik on 29 July, 2010

Posted on December 25, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

This is the Delhi High Court judgment from Shri. Shiv Narayan Dhingra, affirming that in a DV case, respondent can be other family member other than husband and are liable for relief mentioned under Monetary Relief u/s 20 of PWDV Act.

Punch Statement:

The girl and the parents of the girl knew it very well that they had selected a person for marriage with whom the girl was going to live abroad and the matrimonial home and the shared household was going to be outside India. This act of marrying a person settled abroad is a voluntary act of the girl. If she had not intended to enjoy the fat salary which boys working abroad get and the material facilities available abroad, she could have refused to marry him and settled for a boy having moderate salary within India. After having chosen a person living abroad, putting the responsibility, after failure of marriage, on the shoulders on his parents and making them criminals in the eyes of law because matrimonial ties between the two could not last for long, does not sound either legally correct or morally correct. How can the parents of a boy who is working abroad, living abroad, an adult, free to take his own decisions, be arrayed as criminals or respondents if the marriage between him and his wife failed due to any reason whatsoever after few years of marriage. If the sin committed by such parents of boy is that they facilitated the marriage, then this sin is equally committed by parents of the girl. If such marriage fails then parents of both bride and groom would have to share equal responsibility. The responsibility of parents of the groom cannot be more. Shelter of Indian culture and joint family cannot be taken to book only relatives of boy. A woman’s shared household in India in such cases is also her parents’ house where she lived before marriage and not her in-laws’ house where she did not live after marriage.

Another one here:

I am surprised that the Courts below did not give weight to the judgment of New Jersey where parties lived for 7 ½ years but assumed jurisdiction under Domestic Violence Act because of the pure temporary residence (as pleaded by her) of wife in Delhi who is otherwise resident of Hissar. The Court of ASJ wanted that the order of the Court of MM should be honoured by the US while the Court here would not honour a decree of Court of USA where the husband and wife lived for 7 ½ years.

Harbans Lal Malik Vs Payal Malik on 29 July, 2010

 

Posted in High Court of Delhi Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged Definition of Family Harbans Lal Malik Vs Payal Malik Justice Shiv Narayan Dhingra Landmark Case Legal Procedure Explained - Interpretation of Statutes PWDV Act Sec 2(q) – ‘Adult Male’ Words Struck Down by SC - Any Person Can Be Respondent In PWDV Case PWDV Act Sec 29 - Appeal Dismissed On Merits | Leave a comment

Juveria Abdul Majid Patni Vs Atif Iqbal Mansoori on 18 September, 2014

Posted on December 25, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

In this Supreme Court judgment, it was held that

From Para 31, “An act of domestic violence once committed, subsequent decree of divorce will not absolve the liability of the Respondent from the offence committed or to deny the benefit to which the aggrieved person is entitled under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 including monetary relief Under Section 20, Child Custody Under Section 21, Compensation Under Section 22 and interim or ex parte order Under Section 23 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005.“.

Lesson Learnt:

Once an act of domestic violence is done, later on divorce happens, the woman can file DV case even after getting divorce, for the dv acts committed while the marriage was in vogue.

Juveria Abdul Majid Patni Vs Atif Iqbal Mansoori on 18 September, 2014

 

Posted in Supreme Court of India Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged Juveria Abdul Majid Patni Vs Atif Iqbal Mansoori Landmark Case Legal Procedure Explained - Interpretation of Statutes Maintainability PWDV Act Sec 2(f) - Maintainable After Divorce | Leave a comment

Post navigation

  • Older posts
  • Newer posts

Search within entire Content of “Shades of Knife”

My Legal X Timeline

Advocate Sandeep Pamarati 🇮🇳💪👨🏻‍🎓 Follow

AP High Court Advocate with M Tech (CS) || 12 years in 'Software Industry' as Solution Architect || Blogs at https://t.co/29CB9BzK4w || #TDPTwitter

SandeepPamarati
Retweet on Twitter Advocate Sandeep Pamarati 🇮🇳💪👨🏻‍🎓 Retweeted
exsecular

exsecular

Verified account @exsecular ·
24 Oct

Aaj ka gyan ..

Reply on Twitter 2113863679263580543 Retweet on Twitter 2113863679263580543 28 Like on Twitter 2113863679263580543 108 X 2113863679263580543
Retweet on Twitter Advocate Sandeep Pamarati 🇮🇳💪👨🏻‍🎓 Retweeted
mrhyperreddy

పల్నాడు పెద్దిరెడ్డి

@mrhyperreddy ·
24 Oct

తిలక్ - నువ్వు కాల్ ఇవ్వలేదు
నితీష్ - నువ్వు వచ్చేసేయ్ నేను వచ్చేస్తా ఆరాంసే

తిలక్ - రేయ్ రెండు అని చెప్పురా పోనీ

ఎంత బాగుందో
ఇంటర్నేషనల్ మ్యాచ్ లో తెలుగులో మాట్లాడుకుంటుంటే 😍

Reply on Twitter 2113958622615232589 Retweet on Twitter 2113958622615232589 2204 Like on Twitter 2113958622615232589 17035 X 2113958622615232589
Retweet on Twitter Advocate Sandeep Pamarati 🇮🇳💪👨🏻‍🎓 Retweeted
drsjaishankar

Dr. S. Jaishankar

Verified account @drsjaishankar ·
23 Oct

Paid a visit to the historic Ateshgah fire temple in Baku.

A symbol of the historical and cultural connect between our two peoples.

🇮🇳 🇦🇿

Reply on Twitter 2113680108695195986 Retweet on Twitter 2113680108695195986 1770 Like on Twitter 2113680108695195986 16241 X 2113680108695195986
Retweet on Twitter Advocate Sandeep Pamarati 🇮🇳💪👨🏻‍🎓 Retweeted
jspbvmnaresh

JSP Naresh

Verified account @jspbvmnaresh ·
24 Oct

ఎప్పుడైనా కానీ మోడీ గారు ముస్లింని ఖతం చేస్తా అన్నాడా లేదు కదా..
అయినా
ఒక్కసారి అయినా మోడీకి ఓటు వేస్తారా ముస్లింలు. అలాంటిది రాహుల్ గాంధీ హిందువులని హిందూ వాదులని దేశం నుంచి తరిమియాలని 100 సార్లు అన్నారు అయినా హిందువులు వాడికి ఓట్లు వేస్తున్నారు.వాడి చెప్పులు నాకుతూ

Reply on Twitter 2113909101835243981 Retweet on Twitter 2113909101835243981 400 Like on Twitter 2113909101835243981 1064 X 2113909101835243981

Recent Posts

  • Orders on Interim Maintenance Applications under various laws October 24, 2026
  • Rama Vs Sandeep Purkayastha and Anr on 01 May 2025 October 24, 2026
  • Mahima Vs Ved Prakash Patel on 27 May 2024 October 24, 2026
  • Rakesh Sharma Vs Manju Devi and Ors on 12 May 2026 October 24, 2026
  • Brijesh Rajkumar Suri Vs Navita Brijesh Suri on 16 Sep 2026 October 20, 2026

Most Read Posts

  • Parvinder Singh Khurana Vs Enforcement of Directorate on 19 May 2026 (1,240 views)
  • Application for Exemption from Personal Appearance During Investigation – Format, Procedure & Sample Draft (1,134 views)
  • Application for Modification of Bail Conditions – Format, Procedure & Sample Draft (1,026 views)
  • Representation for Deletion of Name from FIR – Format, Procedure & Sample Draft (952 views)
  • Pune Bar Association Vs Union of India on 22 May 2026 (881 views)
  • Life Cycle Stages of a Criminal Writ Petition Before a High Court (825 views)
  • Dr. Garima Dubey and Ors Vs Dr. Saurabh Anand Dubey on 21 Apr 2026 - Judgement Summary (774 views)
  • Surety Affidavit Format – Draft, Legal Requirements & Sample Template (767 views)
  • Compromise-Based Quashing in Matrimonial Cases – Complete Legal Strategy (720 views)
  • Cross-Examination Strategy in 498A Trials – Defence Tactics That Can Change the Outcome (677 views)

Tags

Reportable Judgement or Order (451)2-Judge (Division) Bench Decision (435)Legal Procedure Explained - Interpretation of Statutes (390)Landmark Case (390)1-Judge Bench Decision (384)Catena of Landmark Judgments Referred/Cited to (303)Work-In-Progress Article (215)3-Judge (Full) Bench Decision (102)Sandeep Pamarati (92)Article 21 - Protection of life and personal liberty (80)Issued or Recommended Guidelines or Directions or Protocols to be followed (72)Perjury Under Section 340 CrPC (71)Absurd Or After Thought Or Baseless Or False Or General Or Inherently Improbable Or Improved Or UnSpecific Or Omnibus Or Vague Allegations (63)Reprimands or Setbacks to YCP Govt of Andhra Pradesh (49)Summary Post (47)CrPC 482 - Quash (44)Abuse Or Misuse of Process of Court (44)CrPC 125 or BNSS 144 - Order for Maintenance of Wives Children and Parents (43)HM Act Sec 13 - Divorce Granted to Husband (42)Divorce Granted on Cruelty ground (42)

Categories

Supreme Court of India Judgment or Order or Notification (772)Bare Acts or State Amendments or Statutes or GOs or Notifications issued by Central or State Governments (329)High Court of Andhra Pradesh Judgment or Order or Notification (193)High Court of Delhi Judgment or Order or Notification (168)High Court of Bombay Judgment or Order or Notification (112)High Court of Karnataka Judgment or Order or Notification (96)Legal Procedure/Tool (86)High Court of Madras Judgment or Order or Notification (71)High Court of Allahabad Judgment or Order or Notification (63)LLB Study Material (60)General Study Material (56)Assorted Court Judgments or Orders or Notifications (55)High Court of Punjab & Haryana Judgment or Order or Notification (53)High Court of Kerala Judgment or Order or Notification (48)Judicial Activism (for Public Benefit) (47)Prakasam DV Cases (46)District or Sessions or Magistrate Court Judgment or Order or Notification (45)High Court of Madhya Pradesh Judgment or Order or Notification (39)High Court of Telangana Judgment or Order or Notification (29)High Court of Calcutta Judgment or Order or Notification (28)

Recent Comments

  • Aman Kumar on Case Lifecycle Explorer – BNS s.85, DV Act and Maintenance
  • ShadesOfKnife on How to Challenge Ex Parte Orders in Criminal and Matrimonial Proceedings – Legal Remedies
  • pradeep jain on How to Challenge Ex Parte Orders in Criminal and Matrimonial Proceedings – Legal Remedies
  • Lawyer Sonia on Regular Bail Application Format (Section 437/439 CrPC)
  • vinod gupta on Reply to Section 41A CrPC Notice – Format with Legal Explanation

Archives of SoK

  • October 2026 (16)
  • September 2026 (13)
  • August 2026 (6)
  • July 2026 (19)
  • June 2026 (19)
  • May 2026 (24)
  • April 2026 (33)
  • March 2026 (42)
  • February 2026 (30)
  • January 2026 (21)
  • December 2025 (2)
  • November 2025 (3)
  • October 2025 (17)
  • September 2025 (12)
  • August 2025 (5)
  • July 2025 (10)
  • June 2025 (15)
  • May 2025 (3)
  • April 2025 (10)
  • March 2025 (7)
  • February 2025 (8)
  • January 2025 (1)
  • December 2024 (3)
  • November 2024 (4)
  • October 2024 (16)
  • September 2024 (15)
  • August 2024 (14)
  • July 2024 (11)
  • June 2024 (18)
  • May 2024 (13)
  • April 2024 (9)
  • March 2024 (23)
  • February 2024 (15)
  • January 2024 (11)
  • December 2023 (11)
  • November 2023 (9)
  • October 2023 (13)
  • September 2023 (12)
  • August 2023 (15)
  • July 2023 (17)
  • June 2023 (11)
  • May 2023 (6)
  • April 2023 (5)
  • March 2023 (10)
  • February 2023 (9)
  • January 2023 (12)
  • December 2022 (12)
  • November 2022 (8)
  • October 2022 (13)
  • September 2022 (17)
  • August 2022 (10)
  • July 2022 (21)
  • June 2022 (27)
  • May 2022 (23)
  • April 2022 (32)
  • March 2022 (17)
  • February 2022 (6)
  • January 2022 (2)
  • December 2021 (7)
  • November 2021 (7)
  • October 2021 (6)
  • September 2021 (10)
  • August 2021 (31)
  • July 2021 (45)
  • June 2021 (17)
  • May 2021 (17)
  • April 2021 (18)
  • March 2021 (58)
  • February 2021 (14)
  • January 2021 (50)
  • December 2020 (35)
  • November 2020 (68)
  • October 2020 (67)
  • September 2020 (28)
  • August 2020 (41)
  • July 2020 (20)
  • June 2020 (36)
  • May 2020 (40)
  • April 2020 (38)
  • March 2020 (26)
  • February 2020 (43)
  • January 2020 (35)
  • December 2019 (34)
  • November 2019 (4)
  • October 2019 (18)
  • September 2019 (57)
  • August 2019 (33)
  • July 2019 (12)
  • June 2019 (18)
  • May 2019 (5)
  • April 2019 (19)
  • March 2019 (58)
  • February 2019 (11)
  • January 2019 (90)
  • December 2018 (97)
  • November 2018 (43)
  • October 2018 (31)
  • September 2018 (73)
  • August 2018 (47)
  • July 2018 (143)
  • June 2018 (92)
  • May 2018 (97)
  • April 2018 (59)
  • March 2018 (8)

Blogroll

  • Daaman Promoting Harmony 0
  • Fight against Legal Terrorism Fight against Legal Terrorism along with MyNation Foundation 0
  • Good Morning Good Morning News 0
  • Insaaf India Insaaf Awareness Movement 0
  • MyNation Hope Foundation Wiki 0
  • MyNation.net Equality, Justice and Harmony 0
  • Sarvepalli Legal 0
  • Save Indian Family Save Indian Family Movement 0
  • SIF Chandigarh SIF Chandigarh 0
  • The Male Factor The Male Factor 0
  • Unitedmen Foundation a dedicated community forged with the mission to unite men facing legal challenges in marital disputes. 0
  • Vaastav Foundation The Social Reality 0
  • Vinayak my2centsworth – This blog is for honest law abiding men, married or planning to get married 0
  • Voice4india Indian Laws, Non-profits, Environment 0
  • Writing Law Writing Law by Ankur 0

RSS feed: Cloudflare Status Cloudflare Status

  • KTM (Kathmandu) on 2026-11-02 November 2, 2026
    Oct 8, 16:40 UTCScheduled - We will be performing scheduled maintenance in KTM (Kathmandu) datacenter between 2026-11-02 21:00 and 2026-11-03 01:00 UTC. Traffic might be re-routed from this location, hence there is a possibility of a slight increase in latency during this maintenance window for end-users in the affected region. For PNI / CNI customers […]
    Cloudflare Status

RSS feed: List of Spam Server IPs from Project Honeypot List of Spam Server IPs from Project Honeypot

  • 91.238.104.214 | SD October 25, 2026
    Event: Bad Event | Total: 22,762 | First: 2023-06-19 | Last: 2026-10-25
Owned and Operated by Advocate Sandeep Pamarati and Advocate Suprajaa Rajan
Proudly powered by WordPress
Theme: Flint by Star Verte LLC

Bad Behavior has blocked 545 access attempts in the last 7 days.

pixel