The Supreme Court held that Courts can direct media organisations to take down online content about an ongoing case only when it poses a real and substantial risk to the fairness of the court proceedings. ANI Media had filed a suit against the Wikimedia Foundation in the Delhi High Court, seeking the removal of allegedly […]
Orders to Remove Online Content must be Necessary and Proportional Read More »
The Supreme Court held that physical recovery of contraband is not necessary to determine conspiracy and facilitation of a crime in a narcotics smuggling operation. Harpreet Singh Talwar was accused of facilitating the import of a consignment containing heroin and carrying out a transnational smuggling operation linked to Afghan-based syndicates, with proceeds alleged to have
Direct Evidence not Necessary to Determine Conspiracy in Terror cases -NDPS, UAPA Read More »
The Supreme Court held that volume-based discounts by a market player do not automatically amount to discriminatory pricing under Competition Law. There must be demonstrable evidence of harm to competition. In 2010, Kapoor Glass, a manufacturer of ampoules and vials, filed a complaint against Schott India, a dominant supplier of neutral borosilicate glass tubes. They
Effects-based Analysis Essential to demonstrate violation of Competition Act Read More »
The Supreme Court held that employees who are absorbed into a service under the State Government are entitled to pension benefits at par with regular employees, from the date of their absorption. In 1995, a large number of co-operative societies and their employees involved in the distribution of electricity were merged with the Madhya
Employees Absorbed Post-Merger Entitled to Pension Benefits Read More »
The Supreme Court emphasised the need for an impartial investigating agency in cases involving custodial deaths, citing the principle of ‘nemo judex in causa sua’ (‘no one should be a judge in his own cause’). 25-year old Deva Pardhi was taken into custody along with his uncle Gangaram Pardhi in connection with a theft investigation.
Transfer of Probe to Independent Agency When There Is Custodial Death Read More »
The Supreme Court held that a warrant is adequate to constitute the grounds for arrest. A reading of the warrant to the detained person is sufficient to satisfy the requirement of communicating the grounds of arrest. The accused’s father filed a writ of habeas corpus at the Andhra Pradesh High Court. He alleged that the
Separate Grounds not Required when Arrest is made with Warrant Read More »
The Supreme Court clarified that 90-day default bail under Section 167(2)(a)(i) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 applies only to offences with a minimum punishment of 10 years. The Delhi High Court granted default bail to Rajeev Sharma after 60 days under Section 167(2)(a)(ii) as the investigation was incomplete. Sharma was charged with an
Default Bail under Section 167(2) of CrPC Read More »
The Supreme Court set aside the sentence awarded to a Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO) convict, reasoning that it would cause further injustice to the victim, who was now committed to the convict. The Bench had previously overturned a Calcutta High Court decision which had indulged in “victim-shaming” while acquitting the accused in a POCSO
Union to form a Committee to increase institutional accountability in POCSO Cases Read More »
The Supreme Court held that excess payments made to an employee, without any misrepresentation or fraud on their part, cannot be recovered by an employer. The Court also quashed recovery orders directing the employees to deposit the excess arrears. Excess payments had been made to stenographers in Cuttack’s district judiciary. Recovery orders were issued six
Recovery of Excess Payments – employer /employee Read More »
The Supreme Court held that the procedural safeguards laid down in People’s Union for Civil Liberties v State of Maharashtra (2014) for police encounters are binding and must be enforced regardless of whether the victim or their family initiates the complaint. A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) at the Assam High Court sought an independent investigation into alleged
Enforcement of PUCL Guidelines not Contingent on Direct Victim Participation Read More »
Terms & Conditions
The rules of the Bar Council of India prohibit law firms from soliciting work or advertising in any manner. By clicking on ‘I AGREE’, the user acknowledges that:
The information provided under this website is for informational purposes only and solely available at your request. It should not be interpreted as soliciting or advertising. I AGREE