LawLoveLegal

1. Introduction A significant legal contest concerning the rights of slum dwellers, urban rehabilitation policy, and constitutional protections for shelter has emerged before the Bombay High Court. Over 100 families residing on the footpath outside Beaumont HFSI Pre-Primary School and Podar School in Powai, Mumbai , have approached the High Court seeking a recall of its earlier eviction order dated February 13 directing the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) to remove their hutments. The residents contend that they are not fresh encroachers , but displaced inhabitants of Jai Bhim Nagar , whose original homes were demolished by the municipal authorities in June 2024 . According to them, enforcing the February 13 order without hearing them would amount to violation of constitutional safeguards and rehabilitation policies for slum dwellers . The dispute raises several crucial legal questions: What procedural safeguards apply before evicting slum residents? Do displaced residents h...

I. Introduction The Supreme Court of India recently delivered strong observations while quashing an FIR registered by the Rajasthan Police against Ashish Dave, former regional head of Zee Rajasthan. The Court criticised the state police for acting like “James Bond” and adopting a “shoot first, ask questions later” approach. The bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta termed the FIR “as bogus an FIR as it can get” and held that allowing such a complaint to survive would send a disturbing message about unequal access to justice. The ruling revisits fundamental questions about the legality of FIR registration, the limits of criminal law, and judicial safeguards against abuse of process. II. Factual Background In September 2023, an FIR was registered at Ashok Nagar Police Station, Jaipur, based on a complaint filed by Zee Media Corporation Limited through its representative Sanju Raju. The complaint alleged that Ashish Dave misused his position as regional head to: Demand money fro...

1. Introduction: A Defining Constitutional Moment The Supreme Court of India has fixed May 5, 2026 for the final hearing of petitions challenging the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (CAA) and the Citizenship (Amendment) Rules, 2024 . This hearing is expected to be one of the most consequential constitutional adjudications in recent decades, involving questions of citizenship, equality, secularism, immigration policy, and the limits of judicial review . 2. Procedural Background and Case Management A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M. Pancholi directed that the matters be listed seriatim for final hearing in the week commencing May 5, 2026 . Hearing Schedule Petitioners: May 5 and May 6 (first half) Respondents (Union of India): May 7 Rejoinder arguments: May 12 The Court noted that the petitions fall into two broad categories: Assam and Tripura cases Cases from the rest of India Nodal counsel have been directed to classify p...

1. Background of the Dispute: Mundra Grazing Land Allotment The Supreme Court of India has set aside a Gujarat government order reclaiming 108 hectares of grazing land allotted to Adani Ports and Special Economic Zone Ltd (APSEZ) in Mundra, Gujarat. The dispute traces back to 2005 , when the Gujarat Revenue Department and the Collector allotted approximately 231 acres of grazing land in Navinal village, Kutch district , to private entities associated with the Mundra Port project. In 2011 , a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed before the Gujarat High Court challenging the land allotment, alleging improper diversion of grazing land and environmental concerns such as dredging, filling of creeks, and destruction of mangroves. 2. Supreme Court Judgment: Violation of Natural Justice A bench comprising Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice Atul Chandurkar held that the Gujarat government’s July 4, 2024 order resuming 108 hectares of land was passed without granting Adani Ports an op...

Introduction The Supreme Court of India has directed the Union Government to place before it, within four weeks, a comprehensive and uniform proposal on the functioning of tribunals across the country. The Court emphasised that tribunals, as specialised quasi-judicial bodies, cannot be allowed to become dysfunctional or defunct due to administrative or legislative lapses. This directive follows a series of constitutional challenges and judicial interventions concerning the tribunal system and its independence.

Background of the Pune Porsche Crash Case (2024) The Pune Porsche crash case arose out of a tragic road accident that occurred in the early hours of 19 May 2024 near Kalyani Nagar, Pune . According to the prosecution, a 17-year-old boy , allegedly under the influence of alcohol, was driving a high-end Porsche car after attending a late-night party with two friends. At around 2:00 AM , the car rammed into a two-wheeler, resulting in the death of two young IT professionals, Anis Awadhiya and Ashwini Koshta . The incident sparked nationwide outrage, not only due to the loss of innocent lives but also because of the subsequent allegations that influential individuals attempted to manipulate the criminal justice process . Allegations of Evidence Tampering and Role of the Accused The present Supreme Court proceedings concerned three accused persons alleged to have tampered with evidence after the accident: The father of one of the juveniles present in the car , Ashish Satish Mittal , and A...

Background: A Historic Overhaul of India’s Direct Tax Law During the presentation of the Union Budget 2026–27 , Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman announced that the Income Tax Act, 2025 will come into force from 1 April 2026 , replacing the existing Income Tax Act, 1961 , which has governed India’s direct tax regime for over six decades. The stated objective of the new law is simplification without revenue loss , with a focus on removing interpretational ambiguities that have historically fuelled litigation between taxpayers and the tax administration. Notably, the reform is structural and procedural , not fiscal in nature— no changes have been made to income tax slabs or rates . Legislative Authority and Constitutional Basis Statutory Power to Enact the New Law The Income Tax Act, 2025 has been enacted under Article 246 read with Entry 82 of List I (Union List) of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India, which grants Parliament exclusive power to legislate on “taxes on ...

In a sensitive and legally complex ruling, the Bombay High Court has refused permission to terminate a 28-week pregnancy , holding that doing so would amount to foeticide as the foetus is healthy, viable, and capable of independent life . The decision underscores how reproductive autonomy, statutory limits, and foetal rights intersect under Indian constitutional law . The Case in Brief The petition was filed by the mother of an 18-year-old girl , seeking termination of pregnancy that arose from a relationship when the girl was 17 years old . The plea stated that: The relationship involved a promise of marriage An FIR was registered on January 2 after the pregnancy was discovered The teen did not wish to continue the pregnancy Despite acknowledging the personal hardship involved, the Court refused to permit medical termination at this advanced stage. What the Medical Board Found The High Court relied heavily on the medical board’s opinion , which stated that: The pregnancy was at 28 w...

Background of the Case The Supreme Court of India, in a significant rights-based judgment, has categorically held that the right to menstrual hygiene forms an intrinsic part of the right to life and dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution . The ruling was delivered by a Bench comprising Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan while deciding a writ petition seeking directions to the Union of India and States to ensure free sanitary pads and separate toilets for girl students (Classes 6 to 12) in government-aided schools. The Court expanded the scope of constitutional guarantees by linking menstrual health, dignity, equality, privacy, and access to education into a single enforceable rights framework. Core Constitutional Questions Before the Court The Bench framed and conclusively answered the following constitutional questions: Whether the absence of gender-segregated toilets violates Article 14 (Right to Equality) Whether denial of access to menstrual hygiene products v...

Introduction The Supreme Court’s decision to list for hearing a plea challenging the University Grants Commission (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026 has reopened a critical debate on how caste-based discrimination is defined, addressed, and remedied in Indian higher education institutions (HEIs). The challenge, filed in Rahul Dewan and Ors. v. Union of India , raises fundamental constitutional questions: Can anti-discrimination regulations selectively protect certain caste groups while excluding others? And can regulatory dilution be justified in the name of administrative flexibility? Background of the Supreme Court Proceedings While agreeing to list the matter, the Chief Justice of India observed that defects in the petition must be cured before formal listing. The petitioner’s core grievance is that the 2026 Regulations create a narrow and exclusionary framework for caste-based discrimination by limiting its scope primarily to Scheduled Cast...

Introduction Chief Justice of India Justice Surya Kant has delivered a powerful reminder of the constitutional promise of timely justice, warning that delay does not merely deny justice but destroys it altogether . Speaking at the Fali Nariman Memorial Lecture , organised by the Bombay Bar Association , the Chief Justice underscored the pivotal role of High Courts under Article 226 in ensuring meaningful access to justice for ordinary citizens. His remarks come at a time when mounting judicial arrears, procedural complexity, and geographical barriers continue to undermine the lived experience of constitutional rights. Context of the Address: The Fali Nariman Memorial Lecture The lecture, titled “The Sentinel on Qui Vive: Article 226 as the Guardian of Access to Justice” , was delivered in Mumbai and focused on the constitutional architecture that places High Courts as the first and most effective protectors of individual liberty. Justice Surya Kant’s address was both reflective and r...

I. Background of the Supreme Court Directions The Supreme Court of India has directed all States and Union Territories to frame and notify comprehensive media briefing policies for criminal cases within three months . The objective of the direction is to prevent media trials , protect the fairness of investigations , and safeguard the dignity and privacy of victims, witnesses, and accused persons . The direction was issued by a Bench comprising Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice N. Kotiswar Singh , while dealing with a long-pending public interest litigation filed by the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) in 1999 . The PIL highlighted the absence of structured guidelines governing police encounters and police communication with the media , especially during ongoing criminal investigations. Despite earlier judicial interventions and executive advisories, the Court noted that States had failed to demonstrate adequate seriousness in regulating police briefings, resulting in repeated...