Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Aug-04-1992
Reported in : AIR1993P& H263; (1993)103PLR701
..... prayer:(i) not to auot work to respondent-judges, whose kith and kins are practising in the high court or are working in advocate generals'office; (ii) direct the senior advocates elevated to the bench, either to refund the fees charged with interest or direct the senior advocates of the ..... tirade against the judiciary and the motivation for denigrading the same is beyond us to decode.40. a mandamus can be issued to act in accordance with law or statute or statutory rules but discretion cannot be regulated by declarations or declaratory, prohibitory or certiorari writs. for seeking transfer of a ..... and all, who are interested in the orderly society and have faith in democracy, which is the basic creed of our constitution.42. before parting with the judgment, we may express our pious wish that the state would implement the policy of appointment of judges if at all to ..... to be independent and above board in all respects.22. it is discernible from the provisions of the constitution referred to in the earlier part of the judgment that the constitution has provided an elaborate and detailied scheme for the functionaing of the judiciary right from the stage for consideration ..... that judiciary is the sentinel for the proper working of the constitution which is a must for efficacious democratic system of governance. it is a part of the basic structure of the constitution. though copious provisions have been made in the constitution for ensuring independence of the judiciary and securing .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jun-15-1992
..... case.26 24 henkin, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind, 25 john marshall l. rev. 215, 231 (1992) (footnote omitted). 25 thus, the restatement states in part: "(2) a state's law enforcement officers may exercise their functions in the territory of another state only with the consent of the other state, given by duly authorized officials of that state. "c ..... prohibiting international abductions. respondent and his amici may be correct that respondent's abduction was "shocking," tr. of oral arg. 40, and that it may be in violation of general international law principles. mexico has protested the abduction of respondent through diplomatic notes, app. 33-38, and the decision of whether respondent should be returned to mexico, as a matter outside of ..... case, respond- 668 ent would imply terms in the extradition treaty from the practice of nations with regards to international law more generally. 14 respondent would have us find that the treaty acts as a prohibition against a violation of the general principle of international law that one government may not "exercise its police power in the territory of another state." brief for respondent 16 ..... united states v. rauscher, o. t. 1885, no. 1249, pp. 6-10 (citing united states v. caldwell, 8 blatchford 131 (sdny 1871); united states v. lawrence, 13 blatchford 295 (sdny 1876); adriance v. lagrave, 59 n. y. 110 (1874)); brief for respondent in united states v. rauscher, o. t. 1885, no. 1249, pp. 8-16. 20 this principle is embodied in .....Tag this Judgment!