Nuances and necessity of a “notification”: The law from Harla to Chatha Rice Mills
by Siddharth R. Gupta† and Riya Khanna††
Supreme Court
Supreme Court Collegium | 8 Judicial Officers to be elevated as Judges of Calcutta High Court
Supreme Court Collegium has approved the proposal for elevation of the following Judicial Officers as Judges of the Calcutta High Court: 1.
High Court convicts a man for corruption without cogent reasons after Trial Court acquits him. Supreme Court reminds courts to take utmost care in scanning evidence before recording conviction
“Initial presumption of innocence in the criminal jurisprudence gets doubled by acquittal recorded by the trial court.”
Observing “gross deficiencies” SC denies Chintpurni Medical College permission for admission for the academic year 2021-2022
Supreme Court: The 3-Judge Bench comprising of L. Nageswara Rao*, S. Abdul Nazeer and Indu Malhotra, JJ., dismissed the appeal filed by
Supreme Court Monthly Roundup – January 2021
TOP STORIES Supreme Court gives a go-ahead to Central Vista Project in a 2:1 verdict “What purpose will a public interest proceeding
Punjab Govt to pay pension to all 214 beneficiaries of 1991 Pension Scheme: SC
Supreme Court: The 3-Judge Bench of S.A. Bobde, CJ and L. Nageswara Rao and Vineet Saran, JJ., heard the instant application filed
SC directs DU to declare Supplementary exam result & issue provisional degree to woman who fell short of attendance due to birth of her child & subsequent Teacher’s strike
Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of SA Bobde, CJ, AS Bopanna and V. Ramasubramanian*, JJ has set aside the judgment of Delhi
S. 6 of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 is mandatory in nature, which acts as an injunction for Courts to follow; Supreme Court clarifies legal position
Supreme Court: The Division Bench of Sanjay Kishan Kaul* and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ., has observed that Section 6 of Probation of Offenders
SC allows video conferencing in matrimonial matter, though not as a matter of course
Supreme Court: The 3-Judge Bench of S.A. Bobde, CJ and L. Nageswara Rao and Vineet Saran, JJ., dismissed a review petition while
Succour to rape survivor whose identity was disclosed by media, SC Directs free education for minor children, house under PMAY
Supreme Court: The 3-Judge Bench of Ashok Bhushan, R. Subhash Reddy and M.R. Shah, JJ., issued directions in a case wherein a
Daughters: The New Equals?
by Niyati Karia and Urvi Jinsiwale*
Upheld, albeit with directions. Why was IBC (Amendment) Act, 2020 challenged? What prompted SC to invoke Art. 142? Read comprehensive point-wise analysis of the 465-pages judgment
Supreme Court: The 3-Judge Bench of Rohinton Fali Nariman, Navin Sinha and K.M. Joseph, JJ., in a 465-pages long judgment, upheld the
“Sale agreement does not remain a stand-alone document if it is mentioned in the disputed Will, and obligations thereunder are purportedly passed on to the legatee”; SC restores findings of Trial Court
Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Dinesh Maheshwari and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ., has set aside the order of High
SC | Wilful disobedience or Wilful breach: Are these necessary requisites for bringing in action for ‘Civil Contempt’? Read on
Supreme Court: B.R. Gavai, J., while addressing a contempt petition expressed that: “…contempt proceeding is not like an execution proceeding under the
“Already dismissed from service on being convicted”; Supreme Court reduced quantum of sentence of 70 years old appellant, convicted under Prevention of Corruption Act
Supreme Court: In a case relating to Prevention of Corruption Act, the 3-judge bench of Ashok Bhushan, R. Subhash Reddy and M.R.
“Unless there are any specific reasons for not opening, all Anganwadi Centres beyond the containment zones should be made functional by all the States/Union Territories at an early date”; SC directs
“Children are the future of our country and if there is some stinginess in providing them with adequate nutrition, the country as a whole is deprived in future of taking the benefit of their potential.”
Whether the arbitral process could be interfered under Article 226/227 of the Constitution, and under what circumstance? Supreme Court explains
“If the Courts are allowed to interfere with the arbitral process beyond the ambit of the enactment, then the efficiency of the process will be diminished.”
Farm Laws | “Court cannot be said to be completely powerless to grant stay of any executive action under a statutory enactment”; Supreme Court stays implementation of Farm Laws
Supreme Court: The 3-Judge Bench of S.A. Bobde, CJ and A.S. Bopanna and V. Ramasubramanian, JJ., stays the implementation of farms laws
Know Thy Judge| Justice R. Subhash Reddy
by Ritu Singh*
Know Thy Judge | Justice S. Abdul Nazeer
by Ritu Singh*