- Supreme Court of India

Supreme Court set aside the remission of 11 convicts in the Bilkis Bano case and issued detailed guidelines for consideration Remission of Sentences.


- Supreme Court of India

A notice of demand made under the N.I. Act demand shall not be omnibus, there must be a clear demand for the cheque amount lest notice will be invalid.


- Supreme Court of India

Hon'ble Supreme Court of India issued Direction to subordinate courts for speedy disposal of Civil Cases.


- Supreme Court of India

A five-judge Bench held that fundamental rights can be enforced not only against the State, but also against non-State actors.


- Supreme Court of India

Re Article 370 of Constitution of India. The Court held that Article 370 was only intended as a transitory provision and was temporary in character and thus, the President was empowered to abrogate it.


- Supreme Court of India

Hon'ble Supreme Court of India refused to recognize same sex marriage & held it to be invalid and unconstitutional.


- Supreme Court of India

The Supreme Court in September held that judgment Subramanian Swamy v. Director CBI, 2014 which struck down Section 6A of the 1946 Delhi Special Police Establishment Act (DSPE Act), would have a retrospective effect.


- MADRAS HIGH COURT

A person forwarding social media messages is responsible for its contents.


- Supreme Court of India

Marriages can be dissolved by apex court on ground of irretrievable breakdown under Article 142 of Constitution of India.


- Supreme Court of India

Constitution Court can impose fixed term sentence in case of Life sentence, as contemplated by “secondly” in Section 53 of the IPC, shall be of a fixed period of more than fourteen years viz., of twenty years, thirty years and so on.


- Supreme Court of India

A five-judge Constitution Bench modified the 2018 Euthanasia Guidelines to ease the process of granting passive euthanasia to terminally ill patients. Passive euthanasia involves withholding treatment or artificial life-support for a terminally ill patient until the remainder of their life.


- ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT, UP

Held - Allahabad High Court Allowed 15% Fees Reduction in all Private And Public School During The Period Of Covid-19 For Session 2019-2020


- Supreme Court of India

Criminal Complaint under section 2(d) Cr.PC can be amended before taking cognizance by the court.


- DELHI HIGH COURT

Quashing of FIR under section 482 Cr.PC / Articles 226 of Constitution of India u/s 376, 377, 498 A of Indian Penal Code possible in matrimonial disputes


- Supreme Court of India

Para 29-The principles relating to the determination of the claim of juvenility under the Juvenile Justice Act 2015.


- SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

High Courts has a power to quash FIR of non-compoundable offences if it has no impact or depraving effect on the society at large, on the basis of a compromise between the accused and the victim or ­complainant.


- Supreme Court of India

We caution the High Courts again against passing such orders of not to arrest or “no coercive steps to be taken” till the investigation is completed and the final report is filed, while not entertaining quashing petitions under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and/or Article 226 of the Constitution of India


- SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Held - 15% fees reduction is allowed to all private and Public School during the period of Covid-19 for session 2019-2020


- Supreme Court of India

There was a failure of the High Court to discharge its adjudicatory function at two levels – first in declining to evaluate prima facie at the interim stage in a petition for quashing the FIR as to whether an arguable case has been made out, and secondly, in declining interim bail, as a consequence of its failure to render a prima facie opinion on the first. The High Court did have the power to protect the citizen by an interim order in a petition invoking Article 226. Where the High Court has failed to do so, this Court would be abdicating its role and functions as a constitutional court if it refuses to interfere, despite the parameters for such interference being met. The doors of this Court cannot be closed to a citizen who is able to establish prima facie that the instrumentality of the State is being weaponized for using the force of criminal law. Our courts must ensure that they continue to remain the first line of defense against the deprivation of the liberty of citizens. Deprivation of liberty even for a single day is one day too many. We must always be mindful of the deeper systemic implications of our decisions.


- Supreme Court of India

General Guidelines and Directions - I. Issue of Overlapping Jurisdictions , II. Payment of interim maintenance, III. Criteria for determining quantum of maintenance, IV. Date from which Maintenance to be awarded, V. Enforcement of orders of maintenance, VI. Final Directions


- SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Held that no time limit could be fixed while granting anticipatory bail


- Supreme Court of India

Internet Shutdown & Restrictions under Section 144, Cr.P.C. in Kashmir Case


- SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Held - No Absolute Right Of Appointment For Minority Educational Institutions


- MADRAS HIGH COURT

There are no laws or regulations forbearing unmarried persons of opposite sex to occupy hotel rooms, as guests. While live-in-relationship of two adults is not deemed to be an offence, terming the occupation of hotel room by an unmarried couple, will not attract a criminal offence.


- Supreme Court of India

WHETHER NON-GAZETTED MEMBERS OF THE DELHI POLICE FORCE CAN FORM UNION UNDER ARTICLE 19(1)(C) OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA


- Supreme Court of India

Section 27-Indian Evidence Act- Recovery Obtained by coerced confessional statement is illegal - If confessional statement is made under section 27, Indian Evidence Act is under undue pressure and compulsion from the investigating officer, the evidentiary value of such a statement leading to the recovery is nullified. - PARA 21 OF JUDGMENT


- Supreme Court of India

Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 198 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 are violative of Articles 14, 15(1), and 21 of the Constitution of India.
 


- DELHI HIGH COURT

Mere Physical Contact does not amount to Sexual Harassment-

Delhi High Court held -"The Complaint Committee concluded that respondent no.3 might have held the petitioner’s arm and thrown the material in her hand in a fit of anger; although, the said incident may be a case of harassment and is deplorable, the same would not qualify as a sexual harassment. Plainly, all physical contact cannot be termed as sexual harassment and only a physical contact or advances which are in the nature of an “unwelcome sexually determined behavior” would amount to sexual harassment.”


- Supreme Court of India

Hon'ble Supreme Court held "Talaq is manifestly arbitrary in the sense that the marital tie can be broken capriciously and whimsically by a Muslim man without any attempt at reconciliation so as to save it. This form of Talaq must, therefore, be held to be violative of the fundamental right contained under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. In our opinion, therefore, the 1937 Act, insofar as it seeks to recognize and enforce Triple Talaq, is within the meaning of the expression “laws in force” in Article 13(1) and must be struck down as being void to the extent that it recognizes and enforces Triple Talaq".


- Supreme Court of India

The Supreme Court has held that an intra-court appeal cannot be filed before a division bench of the high court if a single judge has passed the order in a criminal case


- Supreme Court of India

Bail application shall not remain pending in subordinate court for more than one week and in high court for not more than 2-3 weeks


- Supreme Court of India

This Court has held that a joint disclosure or simultaneous disclosures, per se, are not inadmissible under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. Joint or simultaneous disclosure is a myth, because two or more accused persons would not have uttered informatory words in chorus.


- SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

SEEKING VOTES ON GROUND OF RELIGION IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL -

Hon'ble Supreme Court ban on seeking votes over religion, race or caste. Held- “religion, race, caste, community or language would not be allowed to play any role in the electoral process”. Section 123(3) of the Representation of the People Act defines as “corrupt practice” appeals made by a candidate or his agents to vote or refrain from voting for any person on the ground of “his” religion, race, caste, community or language.  The Constitution forbids state from mixing religion with politics,” ruled a seven-judge constitution bench headed by Chief Justice T.S. Chief Justice Thakur, judges S.A. Bobde, Adarsh Kumar Goel and L. Nageswara Rao and Madan B. Lokur formed the majority opinion. Three judges—Adarsh Kumar Goel, U.U. Lalit and D.Y. Chandrachud—argued against it maintaining this was the prerogative of Parliament


- Supreme Court of India

NATIONAL ANTHEM CASE- it is the duty of every person to show respect when the National Anthem is played or recited or sung. Apex court passed following directions -

(a) There shall be no commercial exploitation to give financial advantage or any kind of benefit.

(b) There shall not be dramatization of the National Anthem and it should not be included as a part of any variety show.

(c) Not be printed on any object and also never be displayed in such a manner at such places which  may be disgraceful to its status and tantamount to disrespect. 

(d) All the cinema halls in India shall play the National Anthem before the feature film starts and all present in the hall are obliged to stand up to show respect to the National Anthem. 

(e) Prior to the National Anthem is played or sung in the cinema hall on the screen, the entry and exit doors shall remain closed so that no one can create any kind of disturbance which will amount to disrespect to the National Anthem. After the National Anthem is played or sung, the doors can be opened. 

(f) When the National Anthem shall be played in the Cinema Halls, it shall be with the National Flag on the screen. 

(g) The abridge version of the National Anthem made by any one for whatever reason shall not be played or displayed.


- SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

BONE OSSIFICATION TEST MEDICAL IS NOT CONCLUSIVE PROOF OF AGE- Medical evidence as to the age of a person though a very useful guiding factor is not conclusive and has to be considered along with other circumstances. Bench said "We hold that ossification test cannot be regarded as conclusive when it comes to ascertaining the age of a person"


- SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CONVICTION DESPITE WITNESS TURNED HOSTILE-

it is held by Apex court "In my fieldwork experiences, witnesses become “hostile” not only when  they are directly implicated in a case filed by the police, but  also  when  they are on the side of the plaintiff's  party. During  the  often  rather  long period that elapses between the police investigation and the  trial  itself, often observed, the party who has lodged the complaint  (and  who  becomes the main witness) can irreparably compromise the case with the  other  party by means of compensation, threat or blackmail."

The State has a definite role to play in protecting the  witnesses,  to start with at least in sensitive cases involving those  in  power, who  has political patronage and could wield muscle and money power, to  avert  trial getting tainted and derailed and truth becoming a casualty. As  a  protector of its citizens it has to ensure that during a trial in  Court  the  witness could safely depose truth  without  any  fear  of  being  haunted  by  those against whom he had deposed. Every State  has  a  constitutional  obligation and duty to protect the life and  liberty  of  its  citizens.


- Supreme Court of India

Sex Workers cannot lodge a sexual assualt (Rape) complaint against their customers if they refuse to pay money. Further held though the evidence given by a woman alleging rape must get importance from the trial court, but it could not be taken as 'GOSPEL TRUTH'


- Supreme Court of India

IMPORTANT SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT-

GOLDEN PRINCIPLES IN CASE OF CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCES-

1.The circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn should be fully established.

2. The facts so established should be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused, that is to say, they should not be explainable on any other hypothesis except that the accused is guilty.

3. The circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and tendency.

4. They should exclude every possible hypothesis except the one to be proved and;

5. There must be a chain of evidence so complete as not o leave any reasonable ground for the conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused and must show that in all human probability the act must have been done by the accused.


- Supreme Court of India

Copy of first information report shall be made available online except heinous offences


- SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ISSUED GUIDELINES TO SAVE LIFE OF VICTIMS OF ROAD ACCIDENTS BY SAMARITANS i.e ByStanders who are helping them. The petition has been filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India in public interest for the development of supportive legal framework to protect Samaritans i.e. bystanders and passers-by who render the help to the victims of road accidents. These individuals can play a significant role in order to save lives of the victims by either immediately rushing them to the hospital or providing immediate life saving first aid


- Supreme Court of India

Examiners Identity cannot be revealed under Right to Information Act- Held by Supreme Court of India


- Supreme Court of India

RESERVE BANK OF INDIA COMES WITHIN THE AMBIT OF RTI ACT-

"RBI being the Central Bank is one of the instrumentalities available to the public which as a regulator can inspect such institutions and initiate remedial measures where necessary. It is important that the general public, particularly, the share holders and the depositors of such institutions are kept aware of RBI’s appraisal of the functioning of such institutions and taken into confidence about the remedial actions initiated in specific cases. This will serve the public interest. The RBI would therefore be well advised to be proactive in disclosing information to the public in general and the information seekers under the RTI Act, in particular. The provisions of Section 10(1) of the RTI Act can therefore be judiciously used when necessary to adhere to this objective."


- Supreme Court of India

Whether Polygraph Test to accused is an intrusion to personal liberty of accused person or investigative use is justifiable. ? Evidentary Value of polygraph Test


- Supreme Court of India

HELD- Conversion to Islam and marrying again would not, by itself , dissolve the hindu marriage. The second marriage by a convert without having first marriage dissolved under the law would therefore be in violation of the act and as such void in terms of section 494 IPC


- Supreme Court of India

Judiciary is not STATE within the purview of article 12 of Constitution of India.- the judiciary in India, acting on its judicial side cannot be considered as a State under Article 12 of the Constitution, and that only when the courts deal with their employees or act in other matters purely in administrative capacity, they may fall within the definition of the State for attracting writ jurisdiction. The Supreme Court also ruled that writs against the judiciary would lie against their administrative actions alone.


- Allahabad High Court

Appointment of Dr Anil Kumar Yadav as Chairman of UPPSC is ultra vires, arbitrary and in breach of provisions of Article 316 (1) of the Constitution.


- Allahabad High Court

Constitutional validity of UP Panchayat Raj(Reservation & Allotment of Seats & Offices) (10th Amendment) Rules 2015 re election of Gram Pradhan upheld


- Supreme Court of India

HELD - "in the scholar’s register and the secondary school examination have no probative value, as no person on whose information the dates of birth of the aforesaid candidates were mentioned in the school record was examined.”


- Supreme Court of India

HELD - NO LINIENCE TO THOSE INVOLVED IN CORRUPTION CASE -

"we perceive, the delinquent employee has harboured the notion that when the cancerous growth has affected the system, he can further allow it to grow by covering it like an octopus, with its tentacles disallowing any kind of surgical operation or treatment so that the lesion continues. The whole act is reprehensible and such a situation does not even remotely commend any lenience."


- Supreme Court of India

HELD - No Compromise in Rape Cases


Mains Crash Course for Judiciary Exams 2024

Short term mains crash course for judicial exams

Join at just Rs.3000 plus gst per month

Join Now View Demo

India's No.1 Online Test for Judicial Exams

Join India's best Online Mock Test for Judiciary Exams

Join at Rs.1458/ only

Join Now View Demo