LawLoveLegal

Introduction: A Novel Step Toward Linguistic Precision in Justice In a landmark administrative reform, the Supreme Court of India has launched an unprecedented initiative to address one of the judiciary’s long-standing challenges — the poor quality of English translations of judicial records originally written in Indian languages . Recognising the direct impact of inaccurate translations on the dispensation of justice, the apex court has decided to engage practising lawyers as translators . This move seeks to combine legal acumen with linguistic accuracy , ensuring that translations of pleadings, judgments, and other documents preserve the “true meaning and spirit” of the original records. Background: The Problem of Inaccurate Judicial Translations The problem of inaccurate translations has persisted for decades in the Indian judicial system. Many trial court records, particularly from lower courts in states where proceedings are conducted in regional languages, reach the Supreme...

The ongoing debate over Jammu & Kashmir’s restoration of statehood has taken a significant turn as Chief Minister Omar Abdullah announced that he is exploring the possibility of becoming a party to the petitions pending before the Supreme Court . The top court is currently hearing multiple pleas seeking the reinstatement of Jammu and Kashmir’s statehood, which was revoked on August 5, 2019 , following the abrogation of Article 370 and the bifurcation of the state into two Union Territories (J&K and Ladakh) . Supreme Court Proceedings on Statehood Restoration On October 10, 2025 , the Supreme Court of India granted the Centre four weeks to file its response in the ongoing hearings related to the restoration of Jammu and Kashmir’s statehood. The petitions argue that the prolonged Union Territory status undermines federalism , representative democracy , and constitutional autonomy once guaranteed under Article 370 and Article 35A of the Constitution. Chief Minister Oma...

The Himachal Pradesh High Court, in a significant judgment delivered on October 14, 2025 , upheld the state government’s complete ownership of Mashobra Resort Limited (MRL) —the joint venture that once co-owned the prestigious Wildflower Hall property with East India Hotels (EIH) , part of the Oberoi Group . The verdict marks the end of a nearly three-decade legal battle between the state and the EIH Group, affirming the government’s exclusive rights over the property, assets, and profits associated with the luxury resort. Court Ruling: State Declared Sole Owner of Mashobra Resort Limited According to the Himachal Pradesh High Court’s order , the entire ownership of the joint venture company (MRL) and its assets now rest with the Himachal Pradesh government . The court declared that: The bank balance of approximately ₹320 crore belonging to the joint venture company would be transferred to the state . An additional ₹25 crore is to be paid to the state as per an arbitra...

The Supreme Court of India, in a batch of writ petitions led by Writ Petition (Civil) No. 276 of 2025 , examined the constitutional validity of key provisions of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 . The petitioners argued that several amendments were violative of Articles 14, 15, 19, 21, 25, 26, 29, 30 and 300A of the Constitution, while the Union of India defended the law as a necessary reform to address misuse of Waqf provisions. Background of the Case Multiple writ petitions challenged amendments to the Waqf Act, 1995 (renamed as the Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development Act, 1995). The contentious provisions included Sections 3(r), 3C, 3D, 3E, 9, 14, 23, 36, 104, 107, 108, 108A , among others. The primary challenges were against: Deletion of “Waqf by User” (customary usage-based waqf). Government property exemption (Section 3C). Protected monuments provision (Section 3D). Restrictions on Scheduled Tribe land (Section 3E). Inclusion o...

The Supreme Court of India is currently deliberating a significant constitutional question: whether it can prescribe fixed timelines for Governors and the President to act on state bills, despite the Constitution’s explicit language requiring them to act only “as soon as possible.” Background: The Presidential Reference under Article 143 The issue stems from an April 8 ruling by a two-judge bench of the Supreme Court that imposed deadlines — three months for the President to decide on bills and one month for governors to act on re-enacted bills. The judgment sparked intense debate, leading to a Presidential Reference under Article 143 . The reference, sent by President Droupadi Murmu in May, places 14 questions before the Court, including whether judicially crafting procedural rules where the Constitution is silent amounts to rewriting constitutional provisions . The matter is being heard by a five-judge constitution bench led by Chief Justice Bhushan R. Gavai , with Justic...

📜 Background: Supreme Court’s April 8 Verdict On April 8, 2024, the Supreme Court of India delivered a significant ruling in the case involving the Tamil Nadu Government vs the Governor , setting specific deadlines for the Governor and President to decide on pending state legislation . This decision was perceived as a move to curb executive delay in state lawmaking processes. However, this directive faced a constitutional rebuttal from President Droupadi Murmu , who has now formally questioned the legal validity of imposing such deadlines through judicial orders. 🏛️ President Murmu's Constitutional Standpoint In her response, President Murmu asserted that neither Article 200 nor Article 201 of the Constitution prescribes any timelines for the Governor or the President to act upon state Bills. Article 200: Role of the Governor This provision allows the Governor to: Grant assent to a Bill, Withhold assent, Return the Bill to the state legislature (if it is no...

  Context and Background The Supreme Court of India has granted interim bail to Vikas Yadav , a convict in the high-profile Nitish Katara murder case , until May 8, 2025 , due to the deteriorating health of his mother. Vikas Yadav, who is currently serving a 25-year sentence without remission , has been incarcerated for his role in the 2002 murder of Katara, which was deemed an honour killing. Vikas Yadav is the son of former UP politician DP Yadav , and was convicted along with his cousin Vishal Yadav for the abduction and brutal killing of Nitish Katara , a business executive who was reportedly in a romantic relationship with Bharti Yadav , Vikas's sister. Supreme Court's Directions and Conditions for Bail The bench led by Justice Abhay S Oka issued the interim bail considering humanitarian grounds, stating that the court was “only considering the case in the context of the health condition of the convict’s mother.” The conditions for interim bail are as follows: ...

SC Rules: Only States Can Tax Lotteries – No Service Tax by Centre Introduction In a significant verdict , the Supreme Court of India ruled that lottery distributors are not liable to pay service tax to the Central Government . The apex court upheld the Sikkim High Court's 2012 decision , stating that only state governments have the power to impose taxes on lotteries under Entry 62, List II of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution of India. This ruling brings clarity to the taxation of lotteries , reinforcing the exclusive authority of states over gambling-related activities. The Supreme Court's Judgment Key Observations by the Bench 🔹 The bench of Justices BV Nagarathna & N Kotiswar Singh dismissed the Centre’s appeal, citing that the Finance Act amendments of 2012, 2015, and 2016 , which sought to levy service tax on lottery distributors, were ineffective . 🔹 The SC upheld that the business of lotteries operates on a Principal-to-Principal basis , meani...

SC Dismisses Petitions to Review Article 370 Verdict The Supreme Court has dismissed petitions seeking a review of its judgment that upheld the Union government's 2019 decision to abrogate Article 370 of the Constitution, which conferred special status on Jammu and Kashmir. The five-judge Constitution bench, comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justices Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai, Surya Kant, and AS Bopanna, dismissed the review petitions in chamber, noting no apparent error in the original verdict delivered on December 11, 2022. Supreme Court's Decision on Review Petitions On May 1, the Supreme Court stated, "Having perused the review petitions, there is no error apparent on the face of the record. There is no case for review under Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Supreme Court Rules 2013. The review petitions are, therefore, dismissed." This ruling reaffirmed the court's earlier decision that upheld the abrogation of Article 370, labeling it a "tempor...

Supreme Court Issues Notice to Centre on Marital Rape Exception Challenge in New Criminal Law The Supreme Court of India on Friday issued a notice to the Centre regarding a plea challenging the retention of the marital rape exception in the new criminal law, Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita. This significant move came as a bench headed by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud decided to tag the matter with an existing petition challenging the same provision under the Indian Penal Code (IPC), scheduling further hearings for July. Petition by All India Democratic Women's Association The plea challenging the marital rape exception was filed by the All India Democratic Women's Association (AIDWA), with Senior Advocate Karuna Nundy representing the petitioner. The AIDWA's petition is part of a broader movement seeking the removal of legal protections that currently exempt husbands from rape charges within marriage. Background of the Issue Several petitions have previously been filed in th...

Delhi Excise Policy Case: ED Opposes Arvind Kejriwal's Plea Against Arrest, Cites Evidence Enforcement Directorate's Affidavit: The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has filed an affidavit opposing Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's plea against his arrest. Alleging non-cooperation, the agency stated that Kejriwal avoided interrogation despite multiple summons, further exacerbating the necessity of his arrest. The ED underscored instances where Kejriwal allegedly failed to appear before the investigating officer despite being summoned nine times. Kejriwal's Conduct and Evidence: In its affidavit, the ED contends that Kejriwal's conduct significantly contributed to the grounds for his arrest, alongside the material evidence gathered during the investigation. Additionally, the agency highlighted instances where crucial evidence, including data from approximately 170 mobile phones, was allegedly destroyed by individuals involved in the scam. Recovery of Key Evidence: De...