CLICK HERE TO READ THE LATEST LAW NEWS
We have paused daily law news for the near future.
1. In the case of Saleem Alias Kaliya vs the State of UP, While granting bail to a man accused of committing offences under the Uttar Pradesh Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955, the Allahabad High Court on Thursday directed him to deposit ₹1 lakh in favour of any one registered Gaushala (cow shelter) and to serve cows for one month. Full Story
2. In the case of Anand vs Chandramma, the Karnataka High Court recently held that the consent of the first wife would be immaterial for consideration of the offence of bigamy. Full Story
3. In the case of Jagjit Singh vs the State of Punjab, a petition has been filed before the Supreme Court seeking the transfer of the probe into the killing of singer Sidhu Moose Wala from the Punjab Police to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). Full Story
4. In the case of Ramshankar vs the State of UP, the Allahabad High Court on Thursday granted bail to a person accused under the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act after he undertook that he would take care of the survivor, whom he had married, and their child who was born out of the alleged assault. Full Story
Team on break.
1. The Kerala High Court Advocates’ Association (KHCAA) has asked junior lawyers and law interns to maintain decorum and follow the dress code prescribed for lawyers by the Bar Council of India (BCI) and the Kerala High Court. Full Story
2. In the case of Aradhana & Ors. (LRs of Kamlesh Dubey) vs Untraced and Pushpa & Ors. (LRs of Omkar) vs Untraced, a Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal (MACT) in the national capital has asked the Central and Delhi governments to develop measures to deal with motor vehicle accidents happening at a particular stretch of the city, infamously known as the “killer stretch”. Full Story
3. In the case of Rajesh Kumar Abrol vs the UT of J&K, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has granted bail to Rajesh Kumar Abrol (appellant), a sub-judge, who was convicted by a fast track court in Jammu for raping and cheating a woman who had sought legal help from him in 2018. Full Story
4. In the case of Ardhendu Kumar Das and Anr vs the State of Odisha and Ors, the Supreme Court will deliver its verdict in a plea relating to construction around the Jagannath Puri Temple on Friday, allegedly causing cracks in its foundations. Full Story
1. The Delhi High Court disposed of a petition raising a grievance that the titular character ‘Prithviraj’ in the Bollywood film starring Akshay Kumar is portrayed as a Rajput when he was, in fact, a Gujjar. Full Story
2. In the case of Mohammad Saimullah vs the State Of Meghalaya, the Meghalaya High Court recently held that the act of a man holding the hands of a minor girl, stroking it and saying the same is beautiful, wouldn’t amount to the offence of sexual assault under the Protection Of Children From Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act unless there was sexual intent on his part. Full Story
3. In the case of Lorik Ram vs the State of Assam, the Gauhati High Court recently granted bail to a driver of a courier company on the ground that the rigours of section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS) wouldn’t apply to drivers of courier services who are not aware as to what has been loaded in the vehicle they drive. Full Story
4. In the case of Rhea Chakraborty vs Union of India, a special court in Mumbai has allowed Bollywood actress Rhea Chakraborty to travel to Dubai, United Arab Emirates (UAE), to attend the International Indian Film Academy (IIFA) awards from June 2 to June 5. Full Story
1. In the case of Vijay Babu vs the State of Kerala, the Kerala High Court on Tuesday granted interim bail to Malayalam actor-producer Vijay Babu in a rape case registered against him based on the complaint of an actress. Full Story
2. In the case of Shubham Awasthi & Anr vs Union of India, a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition has been filed before the Supreme Court seeking a direction from the Central government to come up with plans to tackle cigarette and smoking addiction. Full Story
3. The Uttar Pradesh government has laid down that no woman worker shall be bound to work without her written consent before 6 am and after 7 pm and shall not be terminated if she denies working during these hours. Full Story
4. In the case of Balusha Bhasal & Anr vs the State of Maharashtra & Ors, the Bombay High Court on Monday asked the State of Maharashtra to decide on a uniform pattern for examinations held in state universities. Full Story
1. In the case of Kantaro Kondagari @ Kajol vs the State of Odisha & Ors, the Odisha High Court recently held that transgender persons have the right to choose their own gender and are entitled to avail of family pension benefits that accrue accordingly. Full Story
2. In the case of Pawan Kumar and Another vs Sri Dewa Nand Tiwari, Nayab Tehsildar, Ambedkar Nagar, the Allahabad High Court recently issued contempt notices to the office bearers of the Ambedkar Nagar Bar Association for purportedly indulging in frequent strikes. Full Story
3. In the case of Babu Khan vs the State of UP, the Allahabad High Court recently observed that it is quite unnatural in Indian culture that a father-in-law would rape his own daughter-in-law along with some other person. Full Story
4. The Delhi High Court on Monday directed the Delhi Police to hand over the status report concerning its investigation into the vandalism outside Chief Minister (CM) Arvind Kejriwal’s house to the CM’s Secretariat. Full Story
1. In the case of Cook Studio vs Coke Studio, the Delhi High Court has referred for mediation a trademark infringement dispute between international music franchise ‘Coke Studio’ and cooking platform named ‘Cook Studio’. Full Story
2. In the case of Sholay Media Entertainment & Anr. vs Yogesh Patel and Ors, the Delhi High Court, in a significant order in a trademark infringement suit, recently imposed costs and damages of ₹25 lakh on a website ‘Sholay.com‘ for infringing the trademark of the legendary Amitabh Bachchan starrer, Sholay. Full Story
3. In the case of Bulbuli Saikia vs Jadav Saikia, the Gauhati High Court recently held that right to receive maintenance from the husband under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) is a statutory right of a wife, and the husband cannot escape from his liability by signing an agreement to the contrary. Full Story
4. In the case of Snigdha Majumdar vs Union of India, the Allahabad High Court recently sought a reply from the Central government on the issue of custody of a child born out of surrogacy before the implementation of the Surrogacy (Regulations) Act, 2021. Full Story
1. In the case of R Ramaraja Varma vs the State of Kerala, the Kerala High Court on Friday said that organisers of political rallies are also responsible for the provocative slogans raised by any of the participants during such rallies. Full Story
2. In the case of PC George vs the State of Kerala, the Kerala High Court on Friday granted bail to former Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA) PC Geroge in the two separate hate speech cases registered against him for making communal remarks against Muslim community. Full Story
3. In the case of Rajkaran Patel vs the State of UP, the Allahabad High Court on Thursday refused to grant bail to a lawyer accused of sexually assaulting a law student training under him. The plea was refused on the ground that no reasons were given by the accused in his plea to buttress the submission that this was a false accusation, and the investigation against the other accused remained pending. Full Story
4. The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh high court recently ruled in the case of Waheed ur Rehman Parra vs the UT of J&K through Investigating Officer, P/S Counter Intelligence, that spotting an individual with a member of a terrorist organisation will not be sufficient to attract the provisions of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). Full Story
1. In the case of Serious Fraud Investigation Office & Ors. vs Sahara Housing Investment Corporation Limited and Ors, a vacation bench of the Supreme Court on Thursday set aside the stay granted by the Delhi High Court on the operation, execution and implementation of the two orders passed by the central government for an investigation into nine companies related to Sahara Group. Full Story
2. In the case of Employees State Insurance Corporation and Another vs Dr Vinay Kumar and Others, the Supreme Court recently held that in the case of direct recruitment, a candidate who has applied does not have any legal right to insist that the recruitment process set in motion should be carried to its logical end. Full Story
3. In the case of the State of Kerala vs Kirankumar, the Kerala Court made some pertinent observations while convicting and sentencing the husband of Vismaya, a 24-year-old Ayurveda student who died by suicide, regarding the manner in which lives are shattered by the menace of dowry. Full Story
4. In the case of NIA vs Yasin Malik, Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front chief Yasin Malik was on Wednesday sentenced to life imprisonment by a Special National Investigation Agency (NIA) judge Parveen Singh in a terror funding case. Full Story
1. In the case of Nimish Agrawal vs Ruhi Agrawal, the Chhattisgarh High Court, while hearing a custody dispute, recently held that the financial status of a parent or their ability to admit the child to a reputed school are not benchmarks for the happiness of the child. Full Story
2. In the case of Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay vs Union of India and Ors, the Delhi High Court on Wednesday sought the response of the central government in a public interest litigation (PIL) petition praying that the national song Vande Mataram be given the same status as the national anthem Jana Gana Mana. Full Story
3. In the case of Shree Vishnu Constructions vs Engineer in Chief, Military Engineering Service & Ors, the Supreme Court last week directed all High Courts to decide and dispose of within 6 months, all applications for appointment, substitution or change arbitrators which have been pending for over a year. Full Story
4. In the case of the State of UP vs Sharad Kumar Gupta, the Allahabad High Court recently issued a contempt notice to an advocate for uttering “ugly and harsh words” in the court of the District Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hardoi. Full Story
1. The Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) has told a Delhi court that though there was no denial about the existence of Hindu sculptures inside the Qutub Minar complex, a fundamental right to workshop can’t be claimed with respect to the protected monument. Full Story
2. In the case of Zubeeda vs Union Territory of J&K, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court last week refused to grant bail to a 63-year-old woman booked for aiding her 65-year-old husband to commit rape on a minor girl, observing that just because she is an old lady, she isn’t entitled to get any relief. Full Story
3. The Delhi High Court on Tuesday issued a notice in a petition filed by the Punjab Police seeking quashing of the first information report (FIR) registered by the Delhi Police against it in relation to the recent arrest of BJP spokesperson Tajinder Pal Singh Bagga. Full Story
4. A Delhi Court on Tuesday reserved the plea challenging the decision of a civil court dismissing a suit seeking restoration of Hindu and Jain temples at the Qutub Minar complex in the capital. Full Story
Team on leave.
1. A Delhi court observed while sentencing a man to life imprisonment for the rape of his minor daughter who had given birth to his child after the assault that abusive behaviour by a father, albeit a step one, in the initial stages of a girl’s life can negatively impact the way she views relationships in future. Full Story
2. In the case of the State vs Sheikh Sehzad & Anr, a Delhi court remarked while allowing interim bail to a terror accused that every millisecond of unnecessary detention interferes with the rights of the accused. Full Story
3. In the case of Udaipur Chamber of Commerce & Industry vs the State of Rajasthan, the Jodhpur Bench of the Rajasthan High Court on Wednesday issued notice to the State government on a public interest litigation (PIL) petition challenging the validity of ‘frequent and wanton’ suspension of internet services in Udaipur. Full Story
4. The First Appellate Authority of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India, in the case of Ishrat Ali vs Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), IBBI has held that information pertaining to the name and designation of IBBI officials is exempted under section 8(1)(j) of the Right to Information (RTI) Act. Full Story
1. In the case of Ganpatrao Patil vs the State of Maharashtra, the Bombay High Court last month denied anticipatory bail to the chairman of an international school, booked for allegedly abetting the suicide of a class 10 student by scolding, insulting and using filthy language against the child. Full Story
2. In the case of SD Windlesh vs Government of NCT Delhi & Ors, the Delhi High Court on Tuesday took exception to illegal encroachments in the form of Mazars (Islamic religious structures) on public roads in the Bhajanpura area in the national capital. Full Story
3. In the case of Prabha Tyagi vs Kamlesh Devi, the Supreme Court has held that every woman in a domestic relationship has a right to reside in the shared household of her husband even after the death of her husband. Full Story
4. The Delhi High Court asked the Central government whether it would take responsibility for any loss of life in Sainik Farm because of the embargo on carrying out repairs to old buildings in the area. Full Story
1. In the case of Chitra Ramkrishna, Anand Subramaniam vs CBI, “Money doesn’t talk, it swears,” wrote legendary singer Bob Dylan and these lines were reproduced in the order of the Delhi Court, which denied bail to former National Stock Exchange (NSE) head Chitra Ramkrishna. Full Story
2. The India Today reported that after videography of Gyanvapi mosque discovered a Shivling (idol of Lord Shiva) inside its premises, a local court in Varanasi has ordered the area where the idol was found to be sealed. Full Story
3. L&L Partners has set up an Environment, Social and Governance (ESG) practice and a ‘Green Project’ committee to integrate its business strategies and processes with green initiatives, both internally and externally, and has set a carbon-zero target across all its offices. Full Story
4. In the case of Gomantak Mazdoor Sangh vs the State of Goa and Another, the Supreme Court recently observed that under section 10 of the Minimum Wages Act, only clerical or arithmetical mistakes towards fixing or revising minimum rates of wages can be corrected. Full Story
1. In the case of Allaparthi Venkata Chalapathi Rao vs the State of Andhra Pradesh, the Andhra Pradesh High Court last week asked the State government to consider exempting temples with an annual income of less than ₹5 lakh from making mandatory contributions to the State’s Endowment Department. Full Story
2. The Delhi High Court recently issued summons to former Union Minister and serving Member of Parliament Maneka Gandhi in a defamation suit by the Indian Veterinary Association claiming that she abused and threatened doctors. Full Story
3. In the case of Prashant Lomate & Anr vs Union of India & Ors and connected pleas, the Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court recently directed Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited to compensate over 3.5 lakh farmers from Osmanabad district of Maharashtra after Soyabean crop loss due to heavy rainfall in the Kharif season of 2020. Full Story
4. In the case of Committee of Management of Anjuman Intezamia Masajid vs Rakhi Singh & Others, a bench headed by Justice DY Chandrachud will hear the appeal filed before the Supreme Court against an order of Allahabad High Court permitting a court-appointed commissioner to inspect, conduct survey and videography of the Gyanvapi mosque in Varanasi to which Hindus and Muslims have laid claim for the right to worship. Full Story
1. In the case of Arshika S vs the State of Kerala, while declining to order a probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) into the murder of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) member A Sanjith, the Kerala High Court recently made some scathing observations regarding the Social Democratic Party of India (SDPI) and Popular Front of India (PFI) who are suspected to be behind the murder. Full Story
2. In the case of Haji Abdul Ghani Khan and Anr. vs Union of India and Ors, the Supreme Court on Friday sought the response of the central government and the Election Commission of India to the plea challenging the notifications for the delimitation of assembly constituencies in the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir. Full Story
3. In an unprecedented development, in the case of Delhi Andaman and Nicobar Island Civil Services Officers Association vs Ministry of Home Affairs, a lawyer barged inside the chamber of the chairperson of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Manjula Das and threatened her for passing an order against the central government in a case pending before the tribunal. Full Story
4. A Mumbai court on Friday rejected the petition filed by former Home Minister Anil Deshmukh seeking permission for transfer to a private hospital of his choice for getting shoulder surgery. Full Story
1. In the case of Dr Rajneesh Singh vs Union of India and Ors, the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court on Thursday dismissed a plea seeking the opening of certain rooms of the Taj Mahal to put to rest the “alleged history” of the monument. Full Story
2. In the case of Jitender Narayan Tyagi alias Wasim Rizvi vs the State of Uttarakhand & Anr, the Supreme Court on Thursday batted for peace and love between communities while hearing a bail plea filed by Jitendra Tyagi (formerly known as Waseem Rizvi) arrested in connection with the investigation into the hate speeches at the Hardiwar Dharam Sansad held in December 2021. Full Story
3. In the case of CBI vs Sanjay Gupta and Ors, Former Managing Director (MD) of the National Stock Exchange (NSE), Chitra Ramkrishna, accused of frequently revising the designation and compensation of another former NSE employee Anand Subramanian, was on Thursday denied bail by a Special CBI Court in the NSE co-location scam case. Full Story
4. In the case of RIT Foundation vs Union of India, a division bench of Delhi High Court on Wednesday delivered a split verdict regarding the criminalisation of marital rape. Justice C Hari Shankar, who was one of the two judges on the bench, ruled against criminalising marital rape and refused to strike down Exception 2 to section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, which exempts non-consensual sex by a man with his wife from the ambit of rape. Full Story
1. In the case of CBI vs Ajoy Bar and connected pleas, the Calcutta High Court on Tuesday pulled up the counsel appearing for the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for not being aware of the facts in the West Bengal post-poll violence case. Full Story
2. In Subrata Mazumdar vs Dr Vidya Yeravdekar & Ors, an employee of Symbiosis International (Deemed University), Pune, has approached the Bombay High Court against a communication by the university compelling employees who are not vaccinated against COVID-19 to go on unpaid leave until they are fully vaccinated. Full Story
3. In the case of State of Madhya Pradesh vs Golu, the Madhya Pradesh High Court last week directed appropriate action to be taken against a special judge hearing cases under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) after he failed to consider crucial medical evidence while acquitting an accused. Full Story
1. A division bench of the Delhi High delivered a split verdict in the marital rape case on the validity of exception 2 to section 375 of the Indian Penal Code. The exception effectively provides that charges of rape cannot be attracted against a man who has non-consensual sex with his wife. Full Story
2. In the case of SG Vombatkere vs Union of India, the Supreme Court of India on Tuesday asked the central government and states to refrain from registering any cases for the offence of sedition under section 124A of the Indian Penal Code. Full Story
3. In the case of Hindu Front for Justice vs Union of India, the Indore Bench of Madhya Pradesh issued notice to the central and state governments and the Archaeological Survey of India in a petition seeking to reclaim the Bhojshala complex located in Madhya Pradesh’s Dhar for Hindus and prohibit Muslims from offering Namaz in its premises. Full Story
4. In the case of Naziya B & Ors. vs the State of Kerala, while directing the Kerala University of Health Sciences to disburse maternity benefits to three contract employees, the Kerala High Court on Tuesday observed that employers have an obligation to ensure that maternity is not detrimental to the professional career of female employees. Full Story
1. In the case of SG Vombatkere vs Union of India, the Supreme Court told the Central Government, in a significant development, that it has decided to re-examine and reconsider section 124A of the Indian Penal Code, which criminalises the offence of sedition. Full Story
2. In the case of West Bengal State Election Commission and Anr. vs Soumendu Adhikari and Ors, the Supreme Court stayed the order passed by the Calcutta High Court directing the West Bengal State Election Commission to send the CCTV footage of Contai Municipal Election for forensic audit to the Central Forensic Science Laboratory (CFSL). Full Story
3. In the case of Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind vs NDMC, the North Delhi Municipal Corporation (NDMC) informed the Supreme Court that the Jahangirpuri demolition drive was given an unwarranted communal colour by the petitioners. Full Story
4. In the case of M/s Kelkar and Kelkar vs M/s Hotel Pride Executive Private Limited, the Supreme Court recently held that a High Court should not entertain a writ petition under Article 226 if a statute provides an appellate remedy and the same is not exhausted. Full Story
1. In the case of Rima Chawla vs Manager, ESBEDA showroom, Phoenix market city, a Mumbai District Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission recently imposed over ₹35,000 costs on a store of ESBEDA, a premium leather accessories selling company, for charging ₹20 for a carry bag over and above the price paid by a customer for an item purchased from the store. Full Story
2. In the case of Amol Vyavhare vs Purnima Shrirangi, publishing a news article about a rift within two sections of the police department would not amount to an offence under section 505 (statements conducing to public mischief) of the Indian Penal Code, the Bombay High Court held on Friday. Full Story
3. The Delhi High Court in the case of Universal City Studios vs Vegamovies.run & Ors, recently ordered the blocking of 12 websites that were illegally streaming, hosting and disseminating the original content of Universal Studios LLC without the company’s authorisation. Full Story
4. In the case of Chandresh Marskole vs the State of Madhya Pradesh, the Madhya Pradesh High Court acquitted and granted ₹42 lakh compensation to a former medical student from a Scheduled Tribe community who was wrongly convicted of murder. Full Story
1. In the case of Canara Bank Staff Union vs Union of India & Ors, the Bombay High Court on Friday came down upon the central government for failing to fill vacancies in tribunals. A Bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice VG Bisht was frustrated that the central government had been delaying the appointment of officers in various tribunals causing inconvenience to the litigants. Full Story
2. In the case of Thampi VS vs the State of Kerala, the Kerala High Court on Friday dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) petition which sought to prevent alleged forced vaccination of children across the state. Full Story
3. In the case of Prashant Bhushan vs Union of India and Anr, Justice UU Lalit of the Supreme Court on Friday offered to recuse from hearing a matter related to appeals against criminal contempt pleas after stating that he had been involved as Amicus Curiae in one of the cases before his elevation to the Bench. Full Story
4. In the case of A Divya Reddy vs Union of India, the Supreme Court on Friday issued notice to the central and state governments in a plea seeking directions to carry out artificial insemination of indigenous cows as opposed to foreign breeds. Full Story
1. In the case of Wokeflix Through Megha Choubey vs Union of India and Ors, Facebook (now Meta Platforms) has informed the Delhi High Court that it is a private party and, therefore, the right to freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19 of the Indian Constitution cannot be asserted against it. Full Story
2. In the case of TJ vs NDMC & Ors, a three-month-old toddler has moved to the Delhi High court seeking the right to maternal care after his mother was denied maternal leave by her employer, North Delhi Municipal Corporation (NDMC). Full Story
3. The Supreme Court recently allowed for the release of Amitabh Bachchan starrer ‘Jhund’ on over the top (OTT) platform by staying a status quo order of the Telangana High Court. Full Story
4. In the case of the State of Maharashtra vs Rohit Chandrakant Jadhav, a special court in Mumbai recently convicted a 26-year-old man for offences under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act for sexually assaulting and impregnating a 15-year-old. Full Story
1. The Delhi High Court recently issued fresh notices to filmmaker Vivek Agnihotri, scientist Anand Ranganathan, and news outlet Swarajya in a suo motu criminal contempt petition initiated over their comments alleging bias on the part of its former judge, Justice S Muralidhar. Full Story
2. In the case of SG Vombatkere vs Union of India and Ors, the Central government has sought another week’s time to file a reply to the petitions challenging the constitutional validity of section 124A IPC, which deals with sedition. Full Story
3. The Kerala High Court recently initiated a suo motu Public Interest Litigation (PIL) on the issue of food safety after reports surfaced about the death of a 16-year-old girl and the hospitalisation of at least 57 others, possibly due to consumption of shawarma from a particular eatery in Kasargod district. Full Story
4. In the case of Dr Vikram Sampath vs Audrey Truschke and Ors, the Delhi High Court last week directed historian Audrey Truschke to delete five more tweets that had allegedly defamatory content against historian Vikram Sampath. Full Story
1. In the case of State of Assam and Anr vs Jignesh Mevani and Anr, the Gauhati High Court stayed the adverse remarks made by a District Judge against the Assam Police while granting bail to Congress leader Jignesh Mevani in an assault case. Full Story
2. In the case of Ajit Kale vs the State of Maharashtra & Anr, the Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court recently issued directions to the State government to implement its policy decision to withdraw pending criminal cases against farmers and social activists filed in the course of their agitations. Full Story
3. In the case of Advocate Firoz Babulal Sayyed vs the Union of India & Anr, the Bombay High Court on Monday dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) petition seeking a blanket restriction on the printing of photographs of Gods and Goddesses in newspapers. Full Story
4. In the case of Simi CN vs the State of Kerala, the Kerala High Court recently held that decriminalisation of the offence of attempt to commit suicide under section 309 of the Indian Penal Code is a more humane and effective way of dealing with the issue. Full Story
1. In the case of Reshma vs Union of India and Ors, the Delhi High Court on Monday sought the response of the Central government on a petition seeking a declaration that a Muslim man has to obtain written permission from his wife/wives before contracting another marriage. Full Story
2. In the case of Ajmal Ahmed R vs Union of India, the Supreme Court on Monday sought the response of the Central government on a plea challenging the decision of the Lakshadweep administration to close dairy farms and omit meat from the menu of mid-day meal in schools on the Lakshadweep islands. Full Story
3. In the case of Dr Jacob Puliyel vs Union of India, the Supreme Court recently ruled that while no individual can be forced to get vaccinated, the current vaccination policy followed by the government as regards restrictions imposed on individuals is not arbitrary. Full Story
4. In the case of Peoples Union for Civil Liberties & Anr. vs the State of Maharashtra, the Bombay High Court on Monday called for a response from the Home department of the Maharashtra government in a public interest litigation petition seeking immediate steps to ensure that telephonic or electronic modes of communication are implemented in all prisons in the state. Full Story
- April 2022 Law News
- March 2022 Law News
- February 2022 Law News
- January 2022 Law News
- December 2021 Law News
- November 2021 Law News
- October 2021 Law News
- September 2021 Law News
- August 2021 Law News
- July 2021 Law News
- June 2021 Law News
- May 2021 Law News
- April 2021 Law News
- March 2021 Law News
- February 2021 Law News
- January 2021 Law News
- December 2020 Law News
- Article 334A of the Constitution of India - 14th April 2024
- Article 332A of the Constitution of India - 14th April 2024
- Article 330A of the Constitution of India - 14th April 2024
