Author: Anvita Dwivedi
In a significant legal development affecting cross-border matrimonial disputes, the Family Court at Patiala House Courts, Delhi has directed former Indian cricket captain Shikhar Dhawan’s estranged wife Aesha Mukherjee to return approximately ₹5.72 crore that he had been compelled to pay her under a “property settlement” decree issued by an Australian family court. The Delhi court held that the foreign court’s order based on Australian family law concepts is alien to Indian matrimonial jurisprudence and therefore unenforceable on Indian soil. Court Holds Foreign ‘Property Settlement’ Not Recognised in India While adjudicating Dhawan’s civil suit challenging enforcement of the Australian judgment,…
New Delhi, 25 Feb 2026: The Supreme Court of India delivered a trenchant reminder that no religion, caste, region or community including Brahmins can be targeted, denigrated, or vilified through public expression, whether by art, speech, film, literature, or by public office-holders such as ministers. The observations came during hearing of petitions challenging the title and promotional content of a Netflix film alleged to offend sections of society. A Bench comprising of Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan heard the matter in Atul Mishra v. Union of India and stressed that the Constitution’s scheme requires a delicate balance between freedom…
New Delhi, 24 Feb 2026: In a significant development in a high-profile anti-terror law case, the Supreme Court of India has declined to disturb the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court’s order refusing bail to senior lawyer Mian Abdul Qayoom, the former president of the Kashmir High Court Bar Association, who is incarcerated in a matter registered under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA). A bench comprising Justice M. M. Sundresh and Justice N. Kotiswar Singh made it clear that it would not intercede with the merits of the bail rejection. However, recognizing Qayoom’s advanced age and serious…
New Delhi, 23 February 2026: The Supreme Court of India on Monday took up a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking to extend Other Backward Classes (OBC) reservation benefits to Pasmanda Muslims a term used to collectively describe socially and economically marginalised Muslim sub-groups — but refrained from immediate substantive orders, instead posting the matter for detailed hearing after four weeks. A Bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant along with Justice Joymalya Bagchi heard the plea, filed by Mohd Waseem Saifi (W.P.(C) No. 230/2026), which urges that Pasmanda Muslims be sub-categorized within the OBC quota and granted a…
New Delhi, 23 February 2026: The Supreme Court of India on Monday declined to intervene against the Andhra Pradesh Government’s decision to appoint a one-man committee reviewing the investigation into alleged adulteration of ghee used in preparing the iconic Tirupati laddus a prasadam distributed at the Sri Venkateswara Swamy Temple in Tirumala dismissing claims that such an administrative review would interfere with the ongoing criminal probe. A Bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant along with Justice Joymala Bagchi heard a writ petition by senior politician Dr. Subramanian Swamy, challenging the State’s formation of a committee headed by…
In a significant legal development touching on the contours of capital punishment jurisprudence, the Gujarat High Court has commuted a death sentence to life imprisonment till natural life in a gruesome case involving the rape and murder of a two-and-a-half-year-old child. While upholding the conviction, the Division Bench of Justice Ilesh J. Vora and Justice R.T. Vachhani found the sentencing procedure flawed and incompatible with constitutional requirements governing the imposition of the death penalty. This ruling aligns with emerging judicial treatment of similar offences, including a notable judgment by the Madhya Pradesh High Court, which recently commuted a death sentence…
The Supreme Court of India has taken an unusual step by agreeing to hear in open court a set of review petitions challenging its own ruling that re-introduced a minimum three years of practice at the Bar as a qualifying criterion for entry-level judicial service posts such as Civil Judge (Junior Division). These review hearings are scheduled for 26 February 2026 before a Constitution Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Augustine George Masih, and Justice K. Vinod Chandran. Notices have been issued to all States and High Courts to appear and respond in the matter. The controversy…
In a recent judgment, the Rajasthan High Court confirmed that a wife has no automatic right to access her husband’s salary records through a Right to Information (RTI) request. The case arose after a woman filed an RTI application seeking copies of her husband’s pay slips and details of his earnings for specific months while he was employed with the police in Bhilwara. The department refused her request, saying these records were personal information of a third party and exempt from disclosure under the Right to Information Act, 2005. This denial was upheld by the Rajasthan State Information Commission.…
A Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court, led by Justice M. Nagaprasanna, on 21st February, 2026 quashed a First Information Report (FIR) registered against online gaming company WinZo Games Private Limited in relation to an allegation of PAN card misuse on its platform. The Bench ruled that the continuation of criminal proceedings against the company was unsustainable in law, although it clarified that the order will not prejudice other accused or separate criminal matters pending before the trial court. The FIR in question was lodged on 4 July 2024 by a woman who alleged that her Permanent Account…
On 20 February 2026, a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court (Justice Shekhar B. Saraf and Justice Manjive Shukla) delivered a landmark ruling holding the State “absolutely liable” for the unnatural custodial death of a prisoner who died by suicide while in prison custody, and directed compensation of ₹10 lakh to the deceased’s legal heirs. The bench also directed the formulation of guidelines for fixing compensation in custodial death cases. This principle is crucial because it places a non-delegable duty on the State as the custodian of life to protect all persons in custody, regardless of their guilt,…