Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
“The exemption under Section 8 of the RTI Act is available to information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders.”
While quashing multiple FIRs under UP Conversion Act, 2021, the Court observed that statutory requirement of making public the personal details of each person who has converted to a different religion, may require a deeper examination.
“Both in the context of images and videos, the morphing is so sophisticated and deceptive that it is virtually impossible to discern that the same are not genuine images/videos of the Akshya Kumar.”
“The balance of convenience does not persuade this Court to grant a blanket stay on the impugned Survey.”
“The concerned Court has treated the DNA test as a frolicsome act and ordered as a matter of course. Right to privacy and dignity is lost sight of.”
“The evidence is to be led by both the sides, but the question arises, when the paternity can be affixed by surer test, then why decision based on legal presumption or gathering of inference, on the basis of the evidence or any gap, on account of misjudgment, be left.”
Stay informed on the latest Supreme Court judgments of July 2025 on Bihar’s Electoral Roll revision, recording of spousal conversations; Tribal woman’s rights over ancestral property; Guidelines on collection of DNA evidence and mental health of college students. Explore notable rulings shaping the legal landscape.
“The accused is entitled to a fair opportunity to disprove the allegations against him. Denial of access to forensic comparison in the face of specific electronic material forming part of defence evidence amounts to curtailment of such a right.”
“The husband cannot compel the wife to share her passwords of the cellphone or bank account and such an act would amount to a violation of privacy and potentially, domestic violence. There should be a balance between marital privacy and the need for transparency and at the same time trust in the relationship.”
“The distribution and transmission of the video reached such an extent that the advocate was subjected to scrutiny about the video and its contents by various individuals including her clients and peers in the same profession.”
“Spousal communications were deemed privileged under Section 122 of Evidence Act for the purpose of protecting the sanctity of the marital relationship, and not for safeguarding individual privacy rights.”
“This case raises seminal constitutional questions touching the scope of the right to privacy and the power of the Law Enforcement Agencies to resort to covert surveillance by tapping the mobile phones to obtain information regarding the commission of an alleged crime.”
“Every man’s house is his castle or temple, the sanctity of which cannot be vilified by knocking on the door at odd hours. A person’s right to life encompasses the right to live with dignity and dignity is non-negotiable.”
“Merely admitting evidence on record is not proof of a fact-in-issue or a relevant fact… Admitting evidence is mere inclusion of evidence in record, to be assessed on a comprehensive set of factors, parameters and aspects, in the discretion of the court.”
Sitting Judge of the Supreme Court of India, Justice Pankaj Mithal began his career in law in the 1980s and subsequently went on to become Chief Justice of High Courts of J&K and Ladakh and Rajasthan.
“The right of personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India has held that unmarried woman has right to decide in respect of the pregnancy.”
“If permission is granted to examine the Facebook or Instagram account of the prosecutrix and play the audio recording concerning the prosecutrix, then privacy of the prosecutrix may be compromised.”
EBC celebrated the release of ‘Informational Privacy: Constitutional and Common Law Remedies’ by Nina Rohinton Nariman, with Justice (Retd.) V. Ramasubramanian, as Chief Guest and Sr. Adv. Madhavi Goradia Divan as Guest of Honour.
“Merely because the Central Board of Film Certification (‘CBFC’) certificate is obtained for the film, the same does not restrict the applicant’s right to take action against the film for violation of his rights.”
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.