LegalWiki - Latest Legal News & Court Rulings

Mere Quarrel with Daughter-in-Law Not Cruelty or Dowry Harassment: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court held that a mere quarrel with a daughter-in-law does not by itself amount to cruelty or dowry harassment under Section 498A IPC and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

The Court quashed criminal proceedings against the parents-in-law after finding that the allegations against them were vague and limited to claims that they used to quarrel with the complainant.

A Bench comprising of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta observed that general and omnibus allegations without specific acts of harassment or dowry demand cannot justify prosecution under these provisions.

[Dr. Sushil Kumar Purbey & Anr. v. State of Bihar & Ors.]

Read Judgement / 16 minutes ago

S PavithraBookmark

Criminal Law Cannot be Used to Vent Personal Grievances: Chhattisgarh HC Quashes Complaint Against Judges

The Chhattisgarh High Court quashed a criminal complaint filed against a former Chief Justice, a sitting High Court judge, and several judicial officers, holding that criminal law cannot be used to settle personal grievances.

A bench led by Justice Ramesh Sinha observed that the complaint lacked material particulars and was based merely on suspicion and conjecture.

The complaint had been filed by the wife of a judicial officer alleging a conspiracy to prevent the filing of a chargesheet in a criminal case.

The Court held that the allegations did not disclose any cognizable offence and that allowing such proceedings would amount to misuse of the criminal justice process.

Read Order / 18 minutes ago

S PavithraBookmark

Study Leave for Higher Education Not a Matter of Right: Chhattisgarh High Court

The Chhattisgarh High Court held that study leave for higher education cannot be claimed as a matter of right by government employees.

The Court dismissed the appeal of a mathematics lecturer from a government polytechnic college whose request for study leave to pursue a PhD had been rejected by the authorities.

A Division Bench comprising Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Bibhu Datta Guru upheld the earlier decision, observing that granting study leave depends on administrative discretion and institutional requirements.

Since the competent authority had validly rejected the request, the Court found no reason to interfere.

[Chitranjan Lal v. State of Chhattisgarh]

Read Judgement / an hour ago

S PavithraBookmark

Republic TV Journalists Move Kerala Court Seeking Bail in Cochin Port Spying Case

Two Republic TV journalists arrested for allegedly filming an Iranian vessel in a restricted area of Cochin Port, have approached the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Kochi for bail.

The prosecution alleges the duo entered the high-security Southern Coal Berth to capture visuals of the ship, claiming their actions intended to threaten national security.

The journalists were booked under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Official Secrets Act. In their plea, the petitioners argued their presence was purely for legitimate journalistic purposes and that the arrest violated Supreme Court safeguards.

The Magistrate heard the arguments on Monday and reserved the verdict.

[Sankar C.G. & Anr. v. State of Kerala & Anr.]

Read Details / an hour ago

AnvishaaBookmark

Supreme Court Dismisses PIL on Infrastructure Deaths, Warns Against ‘Publicity’ Litigation

The Supreme Court dismissed a public interest litigation regarding deaths caused by neglected public infrastructure, cautioning young lawyers against filing "baseless petitions" for social media visibility.

A bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi observed that practitioners should focus on learning the law rather than seeking national media attention.

The Court found the petition vague and evasive, noting that the petitioner failed to file complaints against specific authorities before invoking PIL jurisdiction.

The Court held that the prayers were realistically unmanageable for any court to supervise, urging the counsel to concentrate on the legal profession seriously.

[Dushyant Sejwal v. UOI]

Read Details / an hour ago

AnvishaaBookmark

Supreme Court Allows Extension of Tribunal Members’ Tenure till Sept 8, 2026

The Supreme Court allowed the Centre to extend the tenure of various Tribunal Chairpersons and members until September 8, 2026.

This interim arrangement follows the Attorney General’s submission that a new Tribunal Bill, aligning with previous judicial mandates, is expected by the Monsoon Session.

A bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi raised concerns regarding the accountability and performance evaluation of tribunal members. The Court emphasized the need for a comprehensive law to monitor integrity and ensure administrative members contribute effectively to adjudicatory functions.

The matter will be reviewed fortnightly to monitor legislative progress.

[Revenue Bar Association v. UOI]

Read Details / an hour ago

AnvishaaBookmark

Supreme Court Refuses to Strike Down Income Tax Search Powers Under New 2025 Act

The Supreme Court refused to entertain a challenge to the constitutional validity of search and seizure powers under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and Section 247 of the new Income Tax Act, 2025.

The Bench observed that since judicial review by High Courts remains available, the provisions cannot be deemed unconstitutional.

The petitioner flagged concerns over "anticipatory searches" and the expansion of powers into "virtual digital spaces" without prior judicial oversight.

While acknowledging concerns regarding potential misuse, the Court declined to "second-guess the wisdom of Parliament" and allowed the petitioner to withdraw the plea to represent before the Government.

[Vishwaprasad Alva v. UOI]

Read Details / an hour ago

AnvishaaBookmark

Delhi High Court Upholds Lacoste's Trademark Victory in Decades-Old Dispute

The Delhi High Court upheld a permanent injunction against Crocodile International, barring it from using a logo that infringes upon the trademark and copyright of the French luxury brand, Lacoste.

A division bench of Justice Hari Shankar and Justice Om Prakash Shukla ruled that Lacoste successfully proved infringement of its iconic crocodile emblem.

However, the Court noted that Lacoste failed to meet the requirements for a passing-off claim due to inadequate evidence of goodwill.

The bench dismissed the defense of acquiescence, ending a legal battle initiated in 2001 over the visual similarity of the two reptile logos in the Indian market.

[Lacoste S.A. v. Crocodile International Pte Ltd. & Anr.]

Read Details / an hour ago

AnvishaaBookmark

Supreme Court Seeks ASI Response on Plea to Allow Urs and Namaz at Gwalior Tomb

The Supreme Court sought a response from the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) on a plea to permit Urs and Namaz at the tomb of Hazrat Sheikh Muhammad Ghaus in Gwalior.

A bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan was hearing a challenge to a Madhya Pradesh High Court order upholding the ASI's refusal.

While the petitioner cited a 400-year-old tradition and pointed to recent music festivals held at the site, the ASI argued the monument is protected and not a designated place of worship.

The Court adjourned the matter, directing the Union and ASI to file a counter-affidavit.

[Sabla Hasan v. UOI]

Read Details / an hour ago

AnvishaaBookmark

Madras High Court Laments ‘Rat Race’ for Medical and Engineering Seats, Permits Student to Write Maths Exam

The Madras High Court expressed concern over the "terrible rat race" in education, noting that parents often prioritize medical and engineering admissions over holistic learning.

The Court observed that students are frequently pressured to drop challenging subjects or mother tongues to focus exclusively on NEET preparation.

The Court was hearing a plea from a father seeking permission for his daughter to write Mathematics as an additional subject after she initially dropped it for Physical Education under NEET pressure.

Noting that the student had studied Mathematics in Class XI, the Court directed CBSE to allow her to appear for the supplementary examination.

[B Shajimon v. UOI & Ors.]

Read Order / an hour ago

AnvishaaBookmark

Supreme Court Directs Centre to Frame No-Fault Compensation Policy for COVID-19 Vaccine Adverse Events

The Supreme Court directed the Union Health Ministry to formulate a no-fault compensation policy for individuals suffering serious adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination.

The Bench clarified that the policy allows claims without proving negligence and does not imply an admission of liability by the Government.

The Court further directed that adverse event data must be periodically placed in the public domain. While the bench refused to appoint a separate expert body, it noted that the existing monitoring framework would continue.

The order ensures that affected persons can still pursue other legal remedies for vaccine-related injuries.

[Rachana Gangu & Anr. v. UOI & Ors.]

Read Details / an hour ago

AnvishaaBookmark

Supreme Court Closes Contempt Case Against Journalist Ajay Shukla Over Remarks on Justice Bela Trivedi

The Supreme Court closed the suo motu criminal contempt proceedings against journalist and YouTuber Ajay Shukla over remarks made against former Supreme Court judge Justice Bela M. Trivedi.

Shukla had referred to her as a “Godi Judge” in a video posted on his YouTube channel.

A Bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma disposed of the case after Shukla tendered an unconditional apology and removed the video.

While accepting the apology, the Court cautioned him to exercise restraint in the future, warning that any similar conduct or complaints could lead to serious consequences.

Read Details / an hour ago

S PavithraBookmark

Supreme Court: UCC May be Appropriate to Address Gender Bias in Muslim Inheritance Law

The Supreme Court observed that a Uniform Civil Code (UCC) is the appropriate answer to address inheritance provisions in Muslim personal law that are allegedly discriminatory against women.

A bench of CJI Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi & Justice R. Mahadevan raised concerns that striking down the Shariat Act might create a legal vacuum.

While Advocate Prashant Bhushan argued that inheritance is a civil right not protected as an essential religious practice, the Court emphasized deferring to legislative wisdom regarding Directive Principles.

The bench suggested the petitioners amend the plea to include specific remedies before adjourning the matter for further consideration.

[Poulomi Pavini Shukla v. UOI]

Read Details / an hour ago

AnvishaaBookmark

Allahabad High Court: Recruitment Exam Marks Disclosable Under RTI, Not Private Information

The Allahabad High Court held that marks obtained in public recruitment examinations are not confidential information and can be disclosed under the Right to Information Act, 2005, without requiring third-party consent.

The Division Bench of Justice Ajit Kumar and Justice Swarupama Chaturvedi observed that marks secured in a public examination relate to a public activity and therefore cannot be treated as private information under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.

The Court noted that when candidates participate in public recruitment processes, their marks ultimately become part of the merit list and public domain, and disclosing them does not violate privacy.

[UOI Thru G.M. Diesel Locomotive & Anr. v. Central Information Commission, New Delhi & Ors.]

Read Details / an hour ago

S PavithraBookmark

BCI Moves Supreme Court Against FIR Targeting Panel Supervising Bar Council Elections

The Bar Council of India (BCI) has approached the Supreme Court challenging an FIR registered against the High-Powered Committee (HPC) overseeing the Bar Council elections in Maharashtra and Kerala.

BCI Chairperson Senior Advocate Manan Kumar Mishra mentioned the matter before the Chief Justice of India seeking urgent listing.

The BCI argued that the FIR was lodged at the instance of an advocate whose nomination was rejected and could disrupt the ongoing election process.

It contended that the High-Powered Committee was constituted under the Supreme Court’s directions to supervise Bar Council elections, and therefore criminal proceedings against its members would interfere with the court-mandated electoral process.

Read Details / an hour ago

S PavithraBookmark