Author: Anvita Dwivedi
As cyber fraud investigations continue to expand across multiple jurisdictions, the Supreme Court of India has delivered an important ruling clarifying that the mere transfer of defrauded money into the same bank account does not automatically convert several criminal cases into one transaction warranting the clubbing of multiple First Information Reports (FIRs). In a judgment that significantly strengthens the legal distinction between interconnected criminal conspiracies and independent offences, a Division Bench comprising Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Augustine George Masih refused to consolidate multiple FIRs registered against a person whose proprietary bank account allegedly received portions of money defrauded from…
In an important judgment reaffirming the distinction between procedural irregularity and substantive illegality, the Supreme Court of India has held that the mere failure of a Trial Court or a High Court to specifically mention the applicable sub-section of Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) does not invalidate either the conviction or the sentence when the factual findings unmistakably attract the statutory provision. Delivering judgment in Suptan Marak v. State of Tripura, a Division Bench comprising Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice Shree Chandrashekhar refused to interfere with the conviction of the…
More than three years after ethnic violence engulfed Manipur, leaving hundreds dead, thousands displaced and entire communities fractured, the Supreme Court of India has indicated that the criminal justice process must now move beyond prolonged investigation towards meaningful adjudication. During the hearing of a batch of petitions concerning the 2023 Manipur violence, a Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohan expressed serious concern over the slow pace of investigations and the limited progress in trials despite the enormity of the crimes under investigation. Observing that justice cannot remain indefinitely suspended merely because…
In a significant development that has brought the constitutional right to protest back to the forefront of judicial discourse, the Supreme Court of India has agreed to hear on Monday two petitions alleging excessive use of police force against students participating in protests across the country over the alleged NEET examination paper leak and broader concerns regarding examination integrity. The matter was mentioned before a Bench led by Chief Justice of India Justice Surya Kant, when Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan informed the Court that two properly instituted writ petitions concerning police action against student protesters had now been formally filed…
The constitutional validity of internet shutdowns has once again come under judicial scrutiny, this time before the Delhi High Court, where a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has challenged the Union Government’s decision to suspend mobile internet services in and around Jantar Mantar during the ongoing student protests over alleged irregularities in the NEET examination. The petition, filed by Software Freedom Law Center, India (SFLC.in), raises questions that extend far beyond a temporary disruption of mobile data services. It asks whether the executive can repeatedly suspend internet access merely by invoking broad expressions such as “public emergency” and “public safety” without…
In a landmark interim order that is likely to shape the future of judicial transparency in the digital age, the Supreme Court of India has prohibited the extraction, editing, dissemination, posting, reposting, uploading and monetisation of audio and video recordings of judicial proceedings on social media and other digital platforms without prior permission from the competent judicial authority. The order was passed by a Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohan, while hearing a public interest litigation seeking comprehensive guidelines to regulate the clipping and circulation of live-streamed court proceedings. Clarifying that…
The lawns of the Supreme Court of India became the venue for an extraordinary constitutional moment when members of the legal fraternity gathered during the lunch recess to collectively recite the Preamble to the Constitution of India under the banner of the campaign “Save Democracy, Save Constitution.” The event was organised amidst widespread student protests across the country concerning alleged examination paper leaks and the subsequent police action in Delhi. Senior Advocate Indira Jaising, Justice (Retd.) S. Muralidhar, Supreme Court Bar Association President Senior Advocate Vikas Singh, several senior advocates, Advocates-on-Record and young members of the Bar participated in the…
The growing national controversy surrounding examination paper leaks has now entered the realm of institutional reform. Amid widespread student protests over alleged irregularities in competitive examinations, Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced that the Union Government has decided to establish fast-track courts to ensure the swift trial and stringent punishment of those responsible for examination paper leaks. Describing the future of the country’s youth as the Government’s highest priority, the Prime Minister declared that all necessary directions had already been issued to the concerned authorities and that individuals attempting to “play with the future of the youth” would not be spared.…
The functioning of constitutional courts does not depend solely upon judges and lawyers. It equally depends upon the ability of litigants, court staff and members of the Bar to physically access the courts. This seemingly administrative concern acquired constitutional significance when the Supreme Court of India took note of the closure of several Delhi Metro stations, including the Supreme Court Metro Station, amid large-scale student protests in the national capital. Responding to concerns raised by the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), Chief Justice of India Surya Kant observed that if the issue remained unresolved by lunchtime, the Court itself would…
In a significant development in one of the country’s most widely followed criminal prosecutions, the Supreme Court of India has cancelled the bail granted to Sonam Raghuvanshi, the prime accused in the alleged murder of her husband, Raja Raghuvanshi, during their honeymoon in Meghalaya. The decision marks an important shift from the Court’s earlier reluctance to interfere with the bail order after Sonam had already been released from custody. Holding that the case required a closer examination of the legal principles governing bail in serious offences, the Court directed Sonam to surrender and face trial, while observing that the criminal…