LawLoveLegal

Background of the Case The Supreme Court of India has reserved its judgment on a petition seeking permission for passive euthanasia of Harish Rana , a 31-year-old man who has remained in a permanent vegetative state (PVS) for over a decade. The case has emerged as a potential first instance of judicially sanctioned passive euthanasia in India , where the Supreme Court may operationalise the legal framework laid down in its landmark Common Cause v Union of India (2018) judgment. A bench comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice KV Viswanathan heard the matter, repeatedly acknowledging the ethical, moral, and constitutional dilemmas involved in adjudicating questions of life and death. Medical History and Present Condition of the Patient Harish Rana, a former student of Panjab University , suffered catastrophic head injuries in 2013 after falling from the fourth floor of his paying guest accommodation. Since the accident: He has remained completely unresponsive He is bedridden a...

Introduction: When Justice Is Delayed Beyond Reason In a significant reaffirmation of its role as the final arbiter of justice, the Supreme Court of India invoked its extraordinary constitutional powers under Article 142 to bring closure to a 35-year-old civil property dispute , ensuring that the successful litigant finally enjoys the fruits of a decree granted in his favour as far back as 1990 . The case highlights systemic delays in civil litigation, abuse of procedural remedies, and the judiciary’s increasing willingness to step in decisively when ordinary legal processes fail. Background of the Dispute: A Sale Agreement from 1973 The litigation traces its origins to 1973 , when Hemchandra Rajaram Bhonsale entered into an agreement to purchase 36 gunthas of land situated in Dhayari village, Pune , from the original owner Rajaram Bajirao Pokale . Despite receiving consideration, Pokale failed to execute the sale deed, compelling Bhonsale to initiate specific performance proceedin...

Introduction In a decisive intervention aimed at ending prolonged democratic paralysis, the Supreme Court of India has fixed June 30, 2026 as the outer and non-extendable deadline for completing civic elections in Bengaluru. The ruling brings much-needed clarity and finality to elections for the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) and the newly created municipal corporations under the Greater Bengaluru Area (GBA) , which have remained without elected representatives since 2020. Supreme Court’s Directions and Timelines A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi issued binding directions to the Karnataka government and the State Election Commission (SEC) to adhere strictly to a phased election schedule. Key Deadlines Set by the Court February 20, 2026 : Final publication of ward-wise reservation March 16, 2026 : Publication of final electoral rolls Post-May 26, 2026 : Polling to be conducted after completion of board examinations June 3...

Background of the Case The Supreme Court of India has delivered a strong message against unauthorised constructions, holding that courts must not legitimise illegal structures merely because municipal regulations allow compounding on payment of fees. The observations were made while dismissing a petition challenging the demolition of unauthorised constructions in Secunderabad, Telangana. The appeal arose from a judgment of the Telangana High Court which had ordered the removal of illegal constructions raised without permission from the Secunderabad Cantonment Board. A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi emphasised that post-facto regularisation of illegal constructions defeats the rule of law and encourages rampant encroachment on public and private land. Supreme Court’s Observations: Rule of Law Cannot Be Compromised The apex court categorically held that demolition is the correct legal course where unauthorised constructions are raised, a...

Introduction In a landmark judgment underscoring the constitutional obligation to eliminate dowry, the Supreme Court of India has observed that eradicating the dowry system is not merely a matter of statutory enforcement but a constitutional imperative . The Court has urged the Union and State governments to consider amending educational curricula to raise awareness among young citizens about the social evil of dowry and has directed High Courts to compile data on pending dowry-related cases to ensure their expeditious disposal. Background of the Case The directions were issued while deciding a 24-year-old criminal appeal arising from a dowry death case registered in 2001 in Bijnor, Uttar Pradesh . The accused, Aslam Beg , was convicted for setting his wife, who was barely 20 years old , on fire. In October 2003 , a trial court convicted Aslam Beg and his mother Jamila , sentencing them to life imprisonment . In 2017 , the Allahabad High Court acquitted both accused. The Supreme...

Background of the Case In a significant judgment strengthening workplace safety for women, the Supreme Court of India has clarified that proceedings under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act) can be initiated at the workplace of the complainant , even if the accused employee belongs to a different department or employer . The ruling settles a long-standing ambiguity on the jurisdiction of Internal Complaints Committees (ICCs) and rejects the narrow interpretation that only the ICC of the accused employee’s department can inquire into allegations of sexual harassment. Facts of the Case The appellant was a 2010-batch Indian Revenue Service (IRS) officer . The complainant was a 2004-batch Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officer , posted in the Department of Food and Public Distribution . The alleged incident of sexual harassment took place in May 2023 at Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi , a common government workplace. The ...

Introduction In a significant reaffirmation of personal liberty and criminal procedure safeguards, the Bombay High Court has held that an accused cannot be remanded to judicial custody merely for not applying for bail , particularly when the individual was never arrested during investigation and consistently appeared before the court pursuant to summons . The ruling underscores the constitutional limits on judicial power and reinforces the settled principle that custody is a legal status, not a procedural assumption . Background of the Case The ruling arose from a criminal case registered in 2023 , involving allegations that partners of AS Agri and Aqua Limited Liability Partnership defrauded investors of approximately ₹350 crore by promising unusually high returns. Alleged Offences The FIR invoked the following provisions: Section 406, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 – Criminal breach of trust Section 420, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 – Cheating Section 427, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhi...

Introduction In a significant reaffirmation of constitutional safeguards against custodial violence, the Jharkhand High Court has ordered a comprehensive probe and directed the immediate payment of ₹1.5 lakh as compensation to Jharkhand Loktantrik Krantikari Morcha (JLKM) leader Tarun Kumar Mahato , who was allegedly subjected to custodial thrashing by the police. The Court emphasised individual accountability of erring police officials , reinforcing the principle that custodial torture is a grave violation of fundamental rights . Background of the Case Arrest and Alleged Custodial Torture Date of Arrest : Night of November 28 Police Station : Ichagarh Police Station, Seraikela-Kharsawan district Allegation : Severe physical assault while in police custody Reason for Arrest : Dispute related to alleged illegal mining and transportation of sand Following his arrest, Tarun Kumar Mahato reportedly sustained serious injuries and has since been undergoing treatment at Seraikela Sadar Hos...

Introduction The Supreme Court of India has strongly reaffirmed the finality and binding nature of Constitution Bench judgments , rejecting a writ petition that sought to reopen the settled issue of minority educational institutions’ exemption from the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (RTE Act) . In a stern order, the Court not only dismissed the plea but also imposed costs of ₹1 lakh on the petitioner NGO , calling the petition a “gross abuse” of judicial process and a threat to the institutional integrity of the judiciary. Background of the Petition Petitioner and Relief Sought The petition was filed by an NGO, United Voice for Education Forum , invoking Article 32 of the Constitution , seeking: A declaration that the exemption granted to minority educational institutions from the RTE Act is unconstitutional Inclusion of minority schools— aided and unaided —within the ambit of Section 12(1)(c) of the RTE Act , which mandates 25% reservation at entry leve...

Introduction The Supreme Court of India has refused to grant bail to Mihir Shah , the prime accused in the July 2024 Mumbai BMW hit-and-run case , making strong observations on parental responsibility, privilege, and reckless conduct. The Court’s remarks—“such boys need to be taught a lesson”—underline a growing judicial intolerance towards grave road crimes involving wealthy and influential individuals. Case Background: Mumbai BMW Hit-and-Run Incident (July 2024) Incident Details In July 2024, Mihir Shah, aged 24, was allegedly driving a BMW at high speed on Worli Sea Face Road, Mumbai , when his vehicle struck a couple riding a scooter. Victims : Pradeep Nakhwa (survived) His wife (died on the spot) Manner of Accident : After the collision, Pradeep Nakhwa was flung off the bonnet. His wife’s body was allegedly dragged for nearly two kilometres . Despite hearing screams, the accused allegedly continued driving . Post-Accident Conduct : The accused went absconding after the incident...

Introduction The ongoing conflict between the Madras High Court and the Tamil Nadu government over the Karthigai Deepam lamp-lighting ritual at Thiruparankundram hill has intensified. Despite repeated judicial directions, district authorities and police have allegedly prevented devotees from performing the annual ritual atop the ancient Deepathoon lamp pillar. The issue has now escalated to the Supreme Court after the state government challenged the High Court’s orders. This article examines the factual chronology, legal provisions, constitutional questions, and judicial precedents involved, while highlighting the political tensions surrounding the controversy. Background of the Dispute The Deepathoon Lamp Ritual at Thiruparankundram The Thiruparankundram hill in Madurai district is a historically syncretic religious site containing: Arulmighu Subramania Swamy Temple Kasi Viswanathar Temple Sikkander Badusha Dargah For decades, there has been no dispute over the hill...

Supreme Court judge Justice B.V. Nagarathna delivered a significant address at the international convention titled “The Independence of Judiciary: Comparative Perspective on Rights, Institutions and Citizens” held at O.P. Jindal Global University, Sonipat. Her remarks highlighted the core elements that safeguard the rule of law in a constitutional democracy—judicial independence and supremacy of the law. Judicial Independence and Supremacy of Law: The Twin Guarantees of Rule of Law Justice Nagarathna emphasised that judicial independence and the supremacy of law function together to ensure that the rule of law remains insulated from political pressures. According to her, insulating judges from extraneous and political influences is essential to preserve the integrity of judicial decision-making. She reiterated that these two principles form the foundation of a democratic legal system and must never be taken for granted. Faith in the Constitution and Faith in the Courts Justice ...