Citation: Vihaan Kumar v. State of Haryana, 2025 INSC 162 Court: Supreme Court of India Bench: Hon’ble Justice Abhay S. Oka and Hon’ble Justice Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh Date of Judgment: 7 February, 2025 1. FACTS On June 10, 2024, Vihaan Kumar, a businessman from Gurugram, was arrested by the local police on allegations of financial …
Case Comment : Vihaan Kumar V. State of Haryana (2025) Read More »
Citation: Jayamma & Anr V. The State of Karnataka, MANU/SC/0347/2021 Facts The case revolves around Mrs. Jayamma, wife of Sanna Ramanaika ,deceased, who was burned alive by the appellant Mrs. Jayamma, wife of Reddinaika, Appellant 1 after fighting over a family matter involving alleged assault of Reddinaika, by Thippeswamynaika ,son of the deceased. This incident …
Case Comment: Jayamma V. State of Karnataka 2021 Read More »
1. FACTS The case of *Gene Campaign v. Union of India*, (2024) SC, marked a significant milestone in the Indian environmental and agricultural jurisprudence. Gene Campaign, a prominent non-governmental organization advocating for farmers’ rights and bio-diversity conservation, challenged the Union Government’s decision to allow the commercial cultivation of genetically modified (GM) mustard, DMH-11, developed by …
CASE COMMENT Gene Campaign v. Union of India, (2024) Read More »
Case Citation: Criminal Appeal No. 2608 Of 2024Court: Supreme Court of IndiaBench: A.S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ.Date of Judgment: May 16, 2024 1. FACTS On June 16, 2023, Tarsem Lal was implicated in a case involving the alleged illegal allotment of Shamlat Lands to ineligible private parties in Punjab. However, de facto, these lands …
CASE COMMENT: TARSEM LAL V. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT, JALANDHAR ZONAL OFFICE (2024) Read More »
Facts The case A (Mother of X) v. State of Maharashtra & Anr., 2024, concerns a 14-year-old girl (‘X’) who became pregnant following a rape in September 2023. Due to trauma and fear of stigma, she did not disclose the incident or the pregnancy until she experienced irregular menstruation. When she informed her parents, she …
A(Mother of X) v. State of Maharashtra & Anr (2024) INSC 371 Read More »
Decided : March 29,2019 Bench : Justice N.V Raman Justice M.M. Shantanagoudar Justice Indira Banarjee Facts: Appellant Pattu Rajan, who is recognized as the founder of the renowned Saravana Bhawan hotels in Tamil Nadu, was embroiled in a controversial and heinous case that captured public attention. Allegedly, Rajan developed an inappropriate attraction toward Jeevajyoti, the …
Pattu Rajan & Ors vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2019) Read More »
Citation: 2019 SCC OnLine SC 520 Court: Supreme Court of India Case No.WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No. 306/2019 Bench: Justice Hemant Gupta and Dr D.Y. Chandrachud Date of judgement: 11 April 2019 Advocate Sanjay Parikh appeared for the appellant/petitioners. The main contentions were: Senior Advocate Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi appeared for the respondents. The main contentions …
CASE COMMENT: INDIBILITY CREATIVE PVT. LTD. & ORS. V. GOVT. OF WEST BENGAL Read More »
Facts The case of Shajan Skaria v. State of Kerala is one of disagreement between freedom of the press and the shielding offered under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereafter “SC/ST Act”). Appellant Shajan Skaria is a journalist as well as the editor of an online news channel, “Marunadan Malayali.” On …
1. Facts 2. Issues 3. Contention 3.1 Petitioner’s Arguments 3.2 Respondent (State) Argument 4. Rationale of Supreme Court Decision A bench headed by CJI D.Y. Chandrachud and Justice J.B. Pardiwala largely favoured the petitioner, laying down important legal doctrines and policy directions: 4.1 Guiding vs. Binding Norms 4.2 Women’s Workforce Participation as a Constitutional Right …
Case Comment – Shalini Dharmani v. State of Himachal Pradesh (2024 SCC OnLine SC 653) Read More »
Citation: (2021) 5CC ONLINE All 255 Court: Allahabad High Court Date: March 22, 2021 The March 2021 decision by the Allahabad High Court marked a critical moment in the discourse on judicial accessibility in India. This marked a significant shift in how the judiciary addresses accessibility with far-reaching implications for the judicial system. For all the fancy talk …
Citation: 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1010 Date of the Judgement: 2nd May 2025 Authority: Supreme Court of India Bench: The Bench comprising of Justice Bela M. Trivedi and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma FACTS: ISSUES: CONTENTIONS BY APPELLANTS: CONTENTIONS BY RESPONDENT: RATIONALE: Ratio Decidendi: Obiter Dicta: DEFECTS OF LAW: INFERENCE: The Supreme Court’s ruling in the …
Case Comment: Kalyani Transco vs M/S Bhushan Power and Steel Ltd Read More »
1.FACTS: In July 2021, a global investigative report called the Pegasus Project was published by a group of media houses, coordinated by the non-profit group Forbidden Stories along with Amnesty International. The project involved 17 news organizations worldwide, including The Wire from India. This report brought to light the possible misuse of Pegasus spyware across …
(Special Leave Petition – Challenge to OBC Reservation in Local Authorities) FACTS OF THE CASE In the landmark case of Vikas Kishan Rao Gawali v. State of Maharashtra, multiple writ petitions were submitted before the judiciary contesting the constitutional validity of Section 12(2)(c) of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis Act, 1961. The challenge …
VIKAS KISHAN RAO GAWALI Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASTRA, 2021 Read More »
Citation: (2023) SCC Online SC 1245 Court: Supreme Court of India Bench: A.S. Bopanna & P.V. Sanjay Kumar, JJ. Date of Judgment: 3 October 2023 1. FACTS • Background FIR (April 2023): • Pankaj Bansal Not Mentioned in FIR: • First ECIR – IREO Investigation: •ED Summons and Arrests in 2023: • Second ECIR Filed by ED: • Summons …
Case Commentary on Pankaj Bansal Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors. Read More »
CASE CITATION- 2022 SCC Online SCC 1321 CASE TYPE- SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION FACTS OF THE CASE The petitioner is a 24-year-old unmarried woman who was a resident of Manipur and approached the Delhi High Court with the request to terminate her pregnancy, which was at 24 weeks, under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 …
Facts The medical trust, which was the appellant, bought 29 flats from buildings developed by Respondent No. 1 to provide housing for nurses employed by its hospital. However, within a few years the structure fell into disrepair, and the appellant vacated the flats in 2002. A structural report by M/s Raje Consultants discovered that reconstruction …
Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust vs M/S Unique Shanti Developers Read More »
BENCH: Justice N.V. Ramana, Justice B.R. Gavai, and Justice Subhash Reddy JUDGEMENT:10 January 2020 FACTS OF THE CASE In January 2019, the Jammu and Kashmir Home Department released a warning urging tourists to shorten their stay in the state and organize for a safe return. The administration then issued directives for the state’s offices and …
CASE COMMENTARY ON ANURADHA BHASIN V UNION OF INDIA, AIR 2020 SC 1308 Read More »
Citation: Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma, (2020) 9 SCC 1 (India). Court: Supreme Court of India (Three-Judge Bench) Judges: Arun Mishra, S. Abdul Nazeer, and M.R. Shah, JJ. Date of Judgment: August 11, 2020 1. FACTS The case of Vineeta Sharma v Rakesh Sharma & Ors was an analysis of the right of Hindu daughters …
Case Note: Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma & Ors. Read More »
Facts The M Siddiq (Deceased) Through Legal Representatives v. Mahant Suresh Das & Others (2019), widely recognized as the Ayodhya Dispute or Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid Case, concerned a 2.77-acre plot in Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh, held sacred by Hindus as the birthplace of Lord Rama and by Muslims as the site of the Babri Masjid, a …
M Siddiq (D) THR LRS v. Mahant Suresh Das & Ors (2019) case comment Read More »
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No. 2636 OF 2013 TEJ PRAKASH PATHAK & ORS. …. APPELLANT (S) VERSUS RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT & ORS. …. RESPONDANT (S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2635 OF 2013 CIVIL APPEAL …
Citation: (2023) INSC 1051 Court: Supreme Court of India Counsel for Petitioner: Hiroo Advani, Divyakant Lahoti Counsel for Defendant: Dheeraj Nair Bench: D.Y Chandrachud, Hrishikesh Roy, P.S Narsimha, J.B Pardiwala, Monoj Misra, JJ. Date of Judgment: December 06, 2023 Facts: Issues Raised Contentions Petitioner (Cox and Kings Ltd.) Respondent (SAP SE) Rationale The Supreme Court of …
Case Comment- Cox and Kings Ltd. vs SAP India Pvt Ltd., (2023) Read More »
ABOUT THE CASE: Case Title – Prabha Tyagi v Kamlesh Devi Citation – Prabha Tyagi v Kamlesh Devi (2022) 11 SCC 352 Jurisdiction- Appellate Criminal Jurisdiction Date of Judgment- May 12, 2022 Bench- M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ Petitioner- Prabha Tyagi Respondent- Kamlesh Devi FACTS The aggrieved woman (Prabha Tyagi) married Kuldeep Tyagi …
Case Title: Deepika Singh v. Central Administrative Tribunal Case type: Civil Appeal Case Number: No. 5308 of 2022 Name of the Court: Supreme Court of India Bench: Justice D.Y. Chandrachud & Justice A.S. Bopanna Jurisdiction: Appellate Jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India 1. FACTS 2. ISSUES RAISED 3. CONTENTIONS Petitioner’s Contentions (Deepika …
CASE BRIEF: Deepika Singh v. Central Administrative Tribunal & Others (2022) Read More »
ABOUT THE CASE: CASE TITLE: Ranveer Gautam Allahabadia v. Union of India (2025) CITATION- 2025 SCC OnLine SC 698 NATURE OF THE CASE- A writ petition under Article 32 before the Supreme Court to protect freedom of speech on digital platforms. FINAL VERDICT: Interim order partly modified on 3rd March 2025, podcast allowed conditionally; foreign travel …
CASE COMMENT: Ranveer Gautam Allahabadia v. Union of India (2025) Read More »
Particulars Details Parties Anuradha Bhasin (Petitioner) vs. Union of India (Respondent) Type of Case Writ Petition (Civil) under Article 32 of the Constitution Case Number Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1031 of 2019 Date of Judgment 10th January 2020 Bench (Judges) Justice N.V. Ramana, Justice R. Subhash Reddy, Justice B.R. Gavai Advocates (Prominent) For Petitioner: Sr. …
Appellant: Prabir Purkayastha Respondent: State (NCT of Delhi) Nature of The Case: Criminal Case Jurisdiction: Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction Date of Judgement: 15th May, 2024 Bench: J. B. R. Gavai and J. Sandeep Mehta Legal Provisions: UAPA- Sec. 13, 16, 17, 18, 22(C); IPC – Sec. 153(A) [196, BNS], 120(B) [61(2), BNS]; PMLA – Sec. 3, …
Case Commentary Prabir Purkayastha v. State of NCT of Delhi Read More »
Facts On 5 August 2019, the Government of India abrogated Article 370 of the constitution by removing special status of Jammu and Kashmir region.[1] To preserve law and order, extreme limitations were put on movement, assembly, and communication withun the locale by the government as a implies of preventive measures; an online shutdown was portion …
Case Comment: Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020) Read More »
Original Application No. 141/2014 BENCH– Hon’ble Mr. Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel, chairperson Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.P Wangdi, judicial member Hon’ble Dr. Nagin Nanda, expert member Before the National Green Tribunal (NGT) Principal Bench, New Delhi Date of hearing: 04.12.2019 Date of order: 12.12.2019 Parties– Appellant: Saloni Singh & Anr. Respondent: Union of India & Ors. …
CASE COMMENTARY Saloni Singh vs Union of India on 12 December, 2019 Read More »
Court: Supreme Court of India Bench: Justices JB Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan Legal provision: the constitution of India Parties: Petitioner: State of Tamil Nadu through Chief Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu Lawyers: Sabarish Subramaniam, AOR; Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Sr. Adv; Mukul Rohatgi, Sr. Adv; P. Wilson, Sr. Adv Respondents: Governor of Tamil Nadu through the Secretary …
THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU V GOVERNOR OF TAMIL NADU (2025) 4 SCC 123 Read More »
Date of Judgment: 10 January 2020 Petition Type: Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1031 of 2019 CASE FACTS: The Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir has had a long-standing history of special status, as mentioned in Article 370 of the Indian Constitution, which granted autonomy, separate Constitution, restrictions for ownership of land by outsiders, etc. The …
Case Comment: Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020) 3 SCC 637 Read More »
Bench: CHIEF JUSTICE B.R GAWAI AND JUSTICE AG MASIH DATE OF JUDGEMENT : MAY 22 , 2025 CITATION – SLP (CRL) NO. 5480/2025 Introduction – The supreme court of India’s decision in Lakshaya Tawar versus Central bureau of investigation stands as a potent reminder of the fundamental rights to personal liberty and strand in article …
CASE COMMENT LAKSHAYA TAWAR V. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION . Read More »
1. Fact of the case Jindal Steel & Power Ltd (JSPL) is a leading conglomerate in India engaged in large steel and power generation units. The company is operating captive power generation plant due to insufficient and inconsistent power supply by State Electricity Board (SEB) to ensure uninterrupted power supply to its manufacturing units, as …
Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s Jindal Steel & Power Ltd., 2023, SC Read More »
Court Supreme Court of India Case Type & No Criminal Appeal [SLP (Crl.) No. 3995 of 2022 and 13579 of 2023] Date of Judgment 26 November 2024 Bench Justice C.T. Ravikumar, Justice Rajesh Bindal. FACTS Payal Sharma v. State of Punjab is a landmark judgment delivered by the Supreme Court of India on November 26, …
PAYAL SHARMA V. STATE OF PUNJAB & Anr, (26 November 2024) Read More »
Citation: 2025 INSC 735Bench: Chief Justice B.R. Gavai, Justices A.G. Masih, and K. Vinod ChandranDate of Judgment: May 20, 2025 Introduction The All India Judges Association case has been a landmark in the evolution of policies and legal framework concerning subordinate judiciary in India. The judgment in this case, rendered in 2025, is part of …
All India Judges Association and ors v. Union of India Read More »
CASE COMMENT M SIDDIQ (D) THR LRS. VS MAHANT SURESH DAS & ORS. Equivalent Citation: 2020-1 SCC 1 Date of Judgement: November 9, 2019 Case Number: 10866-10867 of 2010 Petitioner: M Siddiq (deceased) Respondent: Mahant Suresh Das & Ors The Ayodhya Dispute is one of the most historically significant and communally sensitive legal issues in …
M SIDDIQ (D) THR LRS. VS MAHANT SURESH DAS & ORS. Read More »
Facts Issues Contentions The argument of the appellant lies upon the Defence of insanity enshrined under Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code, which allows exemption of offenders from conviction, as they are incapable of understanding the nature of the act due to their unsoundness of mind. The respondent primarily argued for the conviction of …
Case Comment – Dashrath Patra v. State of Chhattisgarh, 2025 Read More »
Facts Issues Raised Contentions APPELLANT- Sukhdev Singh The Learned Counsel of The Appellant argued that when the marriage once declared void it lost the existence in the eyes of law. So, the spouse should not be entitled to get the permanent alimony under Section 25 of The Hindu Marriage Act because they are not considered …
CASE COMMENTARY ON SUKHDEV SINGH V. SUKHBIR KAUR (2025) Read More »
Facts Issues Contentions State Of Uttar Pradesh Ms. Ruchira Goel appeared for the State and the UPPRPB. Mohit and Kiran submitted the OBC certificate in the format required for appointments to the Central Government, not for the State Government. Thus Mohit and Kiran were considered unreserved. Also she quoted the judgements in Bedanga Talukdar v. …
Case Commentary- Mohit Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. (2025 INSC 704) Read More »
Introduction The case of Mohit Subhash Chavan v. State of Maharashtra (2021) represents a critical judicial examination of the annuity of expectant bail in cases involving sexual offences against minors under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. This case gained significant attention due to the Bombay High Court’s strong deprecation of …
Mohit Subhash Chavan vs The State of Maharashtra (2021) Read More »
Facts On 5 August 2019, the Government of India abrogated Article 370 of the constitution by removing special status of Jammu and Kashmir region. To preserve law and order, extreme limitations were put on movement, assembly, and communication withun the locale by the government as a implies of preventive measures; an online shutdown was portion …
Case Comment: Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020) Read More »
1. FACTS In Lt. Col. Nitisha v. Union of India, a petition was filed by eighty-six female Short Service Commission (SSC) officers of the Indian Army, who challenged the discriminatory application of Permanent Commission (PC) policies, post the Supreme Court’s decision in Secretary, Ministry of Defence v. Babita Puniya In Babita Puniya, the Supreme Court …
LT. Col Nitisha v. Union of India, 2021 SCC Online SC 261 Read More »
Case Commentary on the Supreme Court’s Verdict on the Electoral Bond Scheme FACTS The Electoral Bond Scheme (EBS) was launched by the Indian Government in 2018 as an alleged electoral reform intended to solve the age-old problem of black money in political donations. The scheme, which was notified under the Finance Act, 2017, allowed individuals, …
ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMS V. UNION OF INDIA (2024 INSC 113) Read More »
ANKHEE CHOUDHURY PRESIDENCY UNIVERSITY 1. Facts 2. Issues Raised 3. Contentions Appellant (Mrs. Urmila Dixit): Respondent (Mr. Sunil Sharan Dixit): 4. Rationale The Supreme Court meticulously analyzed the provisions of Section 23 of the Act, which declares that property transfers made under conditions of maintenance can be voided if the transferee neglects or refuses to …
Case Comment Urmila Dixit v. Sunil Sharan Dixit, (2025) 2 SCC 787 Read More »
Case Title: S. Gopakumar Nair & Anr vs Obo Bettermann India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr Tribunal: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi Date of Judgement: 9th of July, 2019 Bench: Justice A.I.S. Cheema (Judicial Member), Mr. Balvinder Singh (Technical Member) Appellant Counsels: Shri Sanjeev Puri, Sr. Advocate with Shri Sidharth Sodhi, Shri Kumar Kislay, …
Case Commentary on S. GOPAKUMAR NAIR & ANR V. OBO BETTERMANN INDIA PVT. LTD. & ANR Read More »
Case Title: State of Kerala & Others v. Leesamma Joseph Citation: Civil Appeal No. 59 of 2021 Court: Supreme Court of India Date of Judgment: 28 June 2021 Bench: Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice R. Subhash Reddy Appellants: State of Kerala and Others Respondent: Leesamma Joseph Nature of Case: Service Law : Reservation in …
CASE COMMENT – State of Kerala vs. Leesamma Joseph (2021) Read More »
ABOUT THE CASE:Case Title Mahendra Awase vs The State of Madhya PradeshCitation 2025 INSC 76Jurisdiction Criminal Appellate JurisdictionDate of the Judgment 17th January 2025Bench Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice KV ViswanathanPetitioner Mahendra AwaseRespondent The State of Madhya PradeshLegal Provisions Involved Section 107 and Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code ii. No Direct Act …
Mahendra Awase v. The State of Madhya Pradesh, 2025 Read More »
Citation:(2020) 3 SCC 637Court:Supreme CourtofIndiaBench: N.V. Ramana, R. Subhash Reddy, and B.R. Gavai, JJ.Date of Judgment: January 10, 2020 1. FACTS The Indian government revoked the special status of Jammu and Kashmir under Article 370 of the Constitution in August 2019. In anticipation of unrest and to quell protests, the government imposed a complete lockdown …
Case Comment: Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020) Read More »
1. FACTSThe case of Janhit Abhiyan v. Union of India is one of the constitutional validity of the 103rd Constitutional Amendment Act, 2019. This amendment brought about 10% reservation for Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) in government employment and higher education. Importantly, this quota was for those not covered by the current reservations of Scheduled Castes …
1. FACTS The present case arises from a private complaint filed by Kuldeep Mishra, who alleged that Sanjay Kumar Rai, the appellant, had threatened him during a telephonic conversation. The backdrop of this allegation involves Mishra’s purported investigation into alleged irregularities and malpractices at a gas agency operated by Rai. Mishra claimed that in the …
Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 1239/2023 FACTS: On November 10, 2023, the Supreme Court of India addressed a critical constitutional issue regarding the delay caused by the Governor of Tamil Nadu, Ravindra Narayana Ravi, in granting assent to twelve bills enacted by the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly. The Court expressed that this delay caused a “serious …
CASE TITLE: THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU V. THE GOVERNOR OF TAMIL NADU Read More »
Introduction The historic R. Srinivas Kumar vs. R. Shametha ruling, delivered on 4th October 2019 by the Supreme Court of India, is a milestone development in matrimonial jurisprudence by acknowledging the aspect of irretrievable breakdown of marriage. Although this basis is not expressly formulated under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the Court invoked its special …
Introduction Case Name: Foundation for Media Professionals vs. Union of India Citations: (2020) 3 SCC 637, AIR 2020 SC 3051 Petitioners: Foundation for Media Professionals, Soayib Qureshi and Private School Association Jammu & Kashmir & Anr. Respondents: Union of India Date of the Judgment: 11 May, 2022 Court: In the Supreme Court of India Bench: …
FOUNDATION FOR MEDIA PROFESSIONALS VS. UNION OF INDIA (2020) Read More »
The raising issues of martial rape in India got highlighted in a landmark case of RIT Foundation Vs Union of India. The martial rape exception is laid under Section 375 of IPC 1860. In this Delhi high Court gave a split verdict and implications of removing or maintaining the martial rape exception. We are going …
This case commentary analyses the landmark Supreme Court judgment in Aruna Ramchandra Shanbaug v. Union of India (2011), which addressed the legality of passive euthanasia in India. It examines the key issues, arguments presented, judicial reasoning, and the implications of the judgment. Facts: Issues Raised Contentions Petitioners arguments Ms. Pinki Virani filed a writ petition …
Aruna Ramchandra Shanbaug vs Union Of India & Ors 2011 Read More »
Table Of Contents Facts This case revolves around the theory put up by the government in 2017 that then finance minister Late Arun Jaitley did present in the parliament about a new law to be introduced at the budget session which will make a case about the funding of elections valid and transparent in the …
Case Comment Association of Democratic Reforms v/s Union of India (Electoral Bonds Case) Read More »
Introduction: The X v. Principal Secretary judgment is a landmark case that expands the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act to include unmarried women, recognizing their reproductive autonomy and rights. This ruling emphasizes a woman’s right to control her own destiny, make choices about her body, and access safe abortion services without societal or judicial …
The outcome of Kejriwal vs. the Directorate of Enforcement will have far-reaching consequences for India’s legal framework on money laundering investigations. If the larger bench affirms the “need and necessity to arrest” as a valid ground for challenging arrests, it will usher in a new era of judicial scrutiny over the powers exercised by investigative …
Arvind Kejriwal vs Directorate of Enforcement (12 July 2024) Read More »
CASE SUMMARY Appellant M.R. Krishna Murthi was only 18 years of age when he suffered a severe accident on the 26th of May in the year 1988 while traveling with his mother from Delhi to Mussoorie. A crash had occurred where the other vehicle was negligent in driving it crushed his left leg. After three …
FACTS ISSUES The following issues crop up in the determination of the validity of the order made by MIB denying renewal of the uplinking and downlinking permission given to MBL to run the TV channel, Media One: CONTENTION PETITIONER (Madhyamam Broadcasting Ltd.): RESPONDENT (Union of India): RATIONALE The interim order of the Supreme Court was …
MADHYAMAM BROADCASTING LTD. V. UNION OF INDIA (2023) Read More »
The appellant, Urmila Dixit, gifted her property to Sunil Sharan, who was her son. The gift was with the condition that the son would take care of her and meet her requirements. But the son failed to abide by these terms, prompting Urmila Dixit to move an application under Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and …
Bench: M. S. Sanklecha, A. K. Menon INTRODUCTION The case of Ms. Naman Varma vs. the Director of the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Mumbai is a significant legal milestone in India’s disability rights framework. The case involved the denial of Ms. Varma’s admission to the Master of Design program under the Persons with Disabilities …
Citation: Kaushal Kishor v. State of U.P., (2023) 4 S.C.C. 1 (India) 1. Facts of the Case The case of Kaushal Kishor v. State of U.P., (2023) 4 S.C.C. 1, is a landmark decision coming from the Supreme Court of India that seeks to discover that elusive reconciliation between the right to free speech under …
CASE TITLE: Kaushal Kishor v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2023) 4 SCC 1 Read More »
Case Title: The Temple of Healing v. Union of IndiaCitation: 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1950Court: Supreme Court of IndiaBench: Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, Justice J.B. Pardiwala, Justice Manoj MisraDate of Judgment: November 20, 2023 I. Introduction The Supreme Court ruling in The Temple of Healing v. Union of India is a landmark in the jurisprudence …
FACTS In 1997, a normal police patrol resulted in the arrest of Mohan Lal, a resident of Punjab, the 4 kg opium (an illegal narcotic) found in his possession while in custody. Sub Inspector Chand Singh led the seizure and in his presence with a senior officer found the opium and prepared seizure documents. As …
MOHAN LAL V. STATE OF PUNJAB (2021) – CASE COMMENT Read More »