Author: Anvita Dwivedi

In a significant judgment that may influence future recruitment policies across police and uniformed services, the Supreme Court has held that a consensual premarital physical relationship between two unmarried adults cannot, by itself, be treated as evidence of poor moral character. Setting aside the cancellation of a police constable candidate’s selection, the Court observed that personal relationships between consenting adults cannot become a basis for denying public employment unless they involve conduct prohibited by law or reveal a genuine lack of integrity relevant to the post in question. The ruling arose from a challenge to the decision of the Telangana…

In an unexpected highly turn of events inside a courtroom, the Kerala High Court has ordered a full-scale registry probe, backed by CCTV analysis, to hunt down an anonymous advocate. The lawyer’s unauthorized approach to a six-year-old boy during a custody battle left the child deeply traumatized and effectively paralyzed a scheduled judicial interaction. A Division Bench comprising Justice J. Nisha Banu and Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen took a deep view of the structural breach of ethics, noting that the unnamed lawyer’s actions seemed to carry suspicious undertones. The Bench observed: “The lawyer, who unauthorisedly approached the child in the…

In a significant development for insolvency law, banking litigation, and commercial dispute resolution, the Supreme Court has referred to a larger Bench a crucial question that has generated conflicting judicial opinions across the country: whether the moratorium available under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) completely bars cheque dishonour proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (NI Act) against company directors and other natural persons. The reference has the potential to settle one of the most important legal controversies arising from the intersection of insolvency law and criminal liability. The issue arose before a Bench comprising Justice J.B.…

In a significant ruling at the intersection of free speech, criminal law, and digital accountability, the Uttarakhand High Court has declined to quash two FIRs registered against former BJP MLA Suresh Rathore over controversial social media posts that allegedly linked senior BJP leader Dushyant Kumar Gautam to the high-profile Ankita Bhandari murder case. While granting relief in respect of certain proceedings, the Court refused to interfere with two FIRs that it found disclosed prima facie allegations warranting investigation, observing that attempts to malign an individual’s reputation by connecting him to a concluded criminal case raise serious concerns requiring judicial scrutiny.…

In a significant development highlighting judicial intolerance towards non-compliance by public authorities, the Supreme Court has issued a contempt notice to the Acting Director of the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi, over the institution’s failure to file an affidavit despite repeated directions from the Court. The order underscores a principle that courts have repeatedly emphasized in recent years: compliance with judicial directions is not optional, particularly for public institutions entrusted with constitutional and statutory responsibilities. The proceedings arose during the hearing of an ongoing matter concerning the functioning and administration of AIIMS, where the Supreme Court…

In a significant judgment that is likely to reshape the trajectory of indirect tax litigation across the country, the Supreme Court has held that disputes concerning the “excisability” or “taxability” of goods under the Central Excise Act fall within the exclusive appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and cannot be entertained by High Courts. The ruling not only resolves a long-standing jurisdictional debate but also provides important clarity on the relationship between questions of manufacture, taxability, and the statutory appellate framework under the Central Excise Act, 1944. The judgment was delivered by a Bench comprising Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice…

In a development that has brought renewed attention to the darker side of assisted reproductive technologies, the Supreme Court has sought the response of the Union Government after concerns were raised regarding the possibility of child trafficking networks operating through IVF clinics, Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) centres, and surrogacy facilities. The issue surfaced during the Court’s continuing monitoring of a large child trafficking case, where the amicus curiae highlighted serious regulatory gaps that could potentially be exploited for illegal procurement, transfer, and sale of children under the guise of fertility treatment and surrogacy arrangements. The matter came before a Bench…

In a major ruling that strengthens the hands of insurance companies against fraudulent claims, the Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has overturned a lower forum’s order and upheld the decision of an insurance firm to reject a medical claim due to fabricated hospital and laboratory records. The State Commission set aside a district forum’s directive that had previously ordered Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd. to payout a policyholder claim. The apex state consumer body ruled that when an insurance claim is built on manipulated documents, the insurer is entirely within its legal rights to reject it. The matter…

In a significant development in the ongoing effort to transform menstrual health from a policy objective into an enforceable constitutional guarantee, the Supreme Court has directed the Union Government and State authorities to address shortcomings in the implementation of its landmark judgment recognizing menstrual hygiene as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Court made it clear that merely declaring a right is not enough; the real test lies in ensuring that it becomes meaningful, accessible, and workable for millions of adolescent girls across the country. The observations were made by a Bench comprising Justice J.B. Pardiwala…

In a significant constitutional judgment with far-reaching implications for India’s rapidly expanding online gaming and betting industry, the Supreme Court has clarified the scope of the expression “public order” under Entry 1 of the State List in the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution and upheld the legislative competence of States to regulate and prohibit certain forms of online betting and gambling. The ruling is important not merely because it concerns online gaming, but because it revisits foundational constitutional questions relating to federalism, legislative competence, public order, and the division of powers between the Union and the States. The judgment was…