Know Thy Newly Appointed Supreme Court Judge: Justice N.V. Anjaria
Justice Nilay Vipinchandra Anjaria was serving as the 34th Chief Justice of Karnataka High Court prior to being appointed as Judge of Supreme Court in May 2025.
Continue reading
Justice Nilay Vipinchandra Anjaria was serving as the 34th Chief Justice of Karnataka High Court prior to being appointed as Judge of Supreme Court in May 2025.
Continue reading
A wayward pet feline ‘Daisy’ went missing, leading to a complaint by the pet owner and subsequent filing of chargesheet against the petitioner levelling serious allegations such as insulting a woman’s modesty.
Continue reading
The Court opined that the appellant was entitled to a level of maintenance that is reflective of the standard of living she enjoyed during the marriage, and which reasonably secures her future.
Continue reading
Tracing the development of LGBTQ+ rights in India with the help of statutory provisions and notable judgments by Supreme Court and High Courts.
Continue reading
The Commission strictly opined that if the complainants were strictly vegetarian and that non-vegetarian foods hurt their religious sentiments, then why did they opt to order food from an outlet that delivers both veg and non-veg food items.
Continue reading
“The subsequent acts of cleaning up the crime scene and making false enquiries amount to disappearance of evidence and raise grave suspicion against the convict. However, mere suspicion, no matter how grave, cannot take the place of proof in a criminal trial”.
Continue reading
Tragedy struck the IPL victory celebrations for RCB, when a stampede occurred outside the M. Chinnaswamy stadium, killing 11 people.
Continue reading
It was submitted that IPL events are conducted by Royal Challengers Bengaluru through their service provider and the role of KSCA is very limited as it accommodates only by extending the venue and infrastructure.
Continue reading
The applicant had raised concerns related to excess crowds at Trinetra Ganesh Temple; illegal mining and commercial constructions and lack of conservation, thereby affecting the delicate ecology of Ranthambore Tiger Reserve.
Continue reading
Pursuant to the order of the Supreme Court on 30-5-2025, the NBE had filed an application seeking time extension saying that it needs to increase the number of centres by two-fold.
Continue reading
The Court further directed the Registry to register the instant suo-motu cognizance as suo motu writ petition and relist the matter on 10-6-2025.
Continue reading
“The purpose of the letter is to promote a unified voice within the Bar, ensuring seamless collaboration and respect of institutional integrity, while maintaining harmony between the Bar and Bench”.
Continue reading
Vijaya Bank while issuing the appointment letter to the respondent, included a restrictive covenant carrying an indemnity clause, wherein the respondent had to pay the Bank if he leaves the service before completion of 3 years.
Continue reading
The Court opined that the chats depicted the stark reality about the behavioural pattern of the complainant who appeared to be having manipulative and vindictive tendency.
Continue reading
The appointments were made in consequence of elevation of Chief Justices of Gauhati and Karnataka High Court as Supreme Court Judges.
Continue reading
The Collegium recommended the name of the 3 Judges on 26-5-2025 and their appointment was confirmed by the Ministry of Law and Justice on 29-5-2025.
Continue reading
On 26-5-2025, the Supreme Court Collegium had recommended the appointment of 3 new Judges to the Supreme Court.
Continue reading
The DCDRC stated that it is the duty of Amazon that it should verify the whereabouts as well as the status of the seller before accepting the order of a respective product.
Continue reading
The Trial Court hadn’t given any separate sentence to the convict under Sections 376(3), 377, 506 of the IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act in view of Section 42 of the POCSO Act.
Continue reading
In the instant case, the appellant was denied maternity leave for a third child on account of her re-marriage. The Supreme Court held that the appellant was entitled to grant of maternity leave.
Continue reading