The Karnataka High Court refused to quash criminal proceedings against three individuals accused of facilitating illegal sex determination leading to female foeticide.

Justice M Nagaprasanna observed that female foeticide is not merely a statutory offense but a moral blight and an affront to the Constitution.

The case involves agents who allegedly used coded marks to signal a radiologist to reveal the foetus's gender. The Court found prima facie evidence of complicity, noting that leniency in such matters risks emboldening gender discrimination under the guise of medical expertise.

The Court held that these allegations must be tested in trial.

[Sardamma & Anr. v. The State of Karnataka]

The Karnataka High Court granted an interim stay on criminal proceedings against a brewery partner accused in a case linked to the suicide of a 15-year-old boy in Bengaluru.

The teenager had visited a pub with friends after a school farewell and allegedly consumed alcohol before later dying by suicide. The pub’s owner and staff were booked under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, and the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965. 

While granting temporary relief, the Court questioned how a minor was allowed to enter and consume alcohol at such establishments.

It also stressed the need for strict age verification at pubs and suggested mandatory ID checks to prevent underage drinking.

[V Chittibabu v. State of Karnataka & Anr.]

The Supreme Court granted bail to Vishal Agarwal, father of the minor involved in the 2024 Pune Porsche crash, noting he had spent 22 months in custody.

A bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan ruled that the seriousness of the evidence-tampering allegations, specifically conspiring to swap blood samples, cannot justify indefinitely curtailing personal liberty before conviction.

Justice Nagarathna remarked on the societal mindset of "getting the better of the law," but emphasized that bail should not be denied solely to send a message.

The Court directed Agarwal to cooperate with the trial and prohibited any contact with witnesses.

[Vishal Surendrakumar Agarwal v. The State of Maharashtra]

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.]

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.

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.]

The Orissa High Court ruled that village Panchayats and Sarpanches lack the judicial authority to settle serious crimes like child sexual abuse through brokered marriages.

The Court upheld the 20-year conviction of a man who repeatedly assaulted a minor, noting that a subsequent marriage does not act as a "legal solvent" for initial criminal liability.

The Court condemned the rural practice of village elders convening to stifle criminal complaints, emphasizing that Section 19 of the POCSO Act mandates reporting such cases to the police.

Directing District Magistrates to sensitize local representatives that sexual offences are not subject to private settlement.

[Sanat Kumar Pradhan v. State of Odisha]

The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir & Ladakh initiated a suo motu investigation into vulturish practices where young girls are allegedly lured into marriage traps by older men.

The Court raised these concerns while hearing a plea by a 19-year-old seeking protection for her marriage to a 46-year-old married man.

Suspecting a criminal racket involving self-proclaimed religious preachers and sorcerers (tantriks), the Court appointed an amicus curiae and sought a senior woman IPS officer to lead an inquiry.

Emphasizing that such practices in rural areas cannot be ignored, ensuring the girl was restored to her mother’s custody for her safety.

[Sania Nazir & Anr. v. UT of J&K & Ors.]

The Delhi High Court today stayed adverse remarks and directions for a departmental inquiry made by a trial court against the CBI and its investigating officer.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma issued notice to all 23 accused, including Arvind Kejriwal and Manish Sisodia, on the CBI's revision petition challenging their discharge.

The Court also directed the trial court to postpone hearings in the connected PMLA case. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued the discharge order effectively amounted to an "acquittal without trial" and ignored scientific evidence.

The matter is now scheduled for further hearing on March 16, 2026.

[Central Bureau of Investigation v. Arvind Kejriwal & Ors.]

The Karnataka High Court stayed criminal proceedings against Deputy CM DK Shivakumar concerning a 2024 Facebook post allegedly containing morphed and provocative content against BJP leaders.

The Court passed the interim order on a plea to quash the FIR, which was registered following a private complaint.

The post, appearing on the INC Karnataka page, allegedly featured BJP leaders holding placards with altered text during protests related to the 1992 Ayodhya riots case.

The complaint alleged the post aimed to promote enmity and tarnish the image of senior leaders. The Court has now sought a response from the State regarding the matter.

[D.K. Shivakumar v. State of Karnataka & Anr.]

The Madras High Court observed that young men frequently face criminalization under the POCSO Act due to parental opposition to consensual adolescent relationships.

While setting aside the conviction of a man sentenced to 20 years in prison, Justice N Mala noted that such cases often arise when girls are pressured by parents to initiate proceedings.

The Court acquitted the accused after finding that the prosecution failed to legally prove the victim’s age, relying on photocopies instead of original documents.

Further directing the Tamil Nadu government to conduct awareness campaigns to prevent the misuse of the Act in genuine teenage relationships.

[Mahesh v. State of Tamil Nadu]