Author: Anvita Dwivedi

In a landmark ruling strengthening India’s position as an arbitration-friendly jurisdiction, the Supreme Court of India has held that a foreign arbitral award cannot be resisted in India on grounds already rejected by the court at the seat of arbitration, invoking the doctrine of “transnational issue estoppel.” The judgment, delivered by a bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and K. Vinod Chandran, clarifies the limited scope of judicial interference in enforcement of foreign awards under Section 48 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and reinforces India’s obligations under the New York Convention. The dispute arose from a commercial agreement involving…

In a significant ruling reinforcing the constitutional autonomy of the Election Commission, the Calcutta High Court has dismissed a Public Interest Litigation challenging the large-scale transfer of IAS and IPS officers in West Bengal ahead of the Assembly elections, holding that such administrative decisions fall squarely within the domain of the Election Commission of India (ECI). The Division Bench of Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Partha Sarathi Sen made it clear that courts cannot sit in appeal over the administrative wisdom of the Election Commission, unless clear arbitrariness or mala fide intent is established. The PIL, filed by advocate…

In a recent development that sits at the intersection of corporate law and media regulation, Anil Ambani has instituted a civil defamation suit alleging that sustained reportage by Republic TV has caused irreparable injury to his reputation. The matter is slated for hearing before Justice Milind Jadhav on April 1, where the court will consider interim relief, including injunctive measures. At the core of the dispute lies Ambani’s contention that repeated broadcasts and digital publications have wrongly linked him to regulatory investigations involving certain Reliance Group entities, thereby creating a misleading public perception of personal culpability. Allegations of Misrepresentation and…

In a landmark moment reflecting the judiciary’s expanding vision of access to justice beyond conventional courtrooms, the Chief Justice of India, Justice Surya Kant, addressed Indian Army personnel at Leh, asserting a powerful constitutional principle that the law must travel to the soldier, because the soldier cannot always travel to the law.” The address delivered at a high-altitude military base in Ladakh marks the first time a sitting Chief Justice of India has directly engaged with armed forces personnel in such a setting, signalling a transformative shift in how justice delivery is conceptualized for those serving in extreme and remote…

In a significant development reflecting the judiciary’s evolving response to digital identity misuse and celebrity rights, the Delhi High Court has granted interim protection to acclaimed actor Mohanlal, recognising the urgent need to safeguard personality rights against unauthorised commercial and digital exploitation. The case, filed by the veteran Malayalam actor, raises critical questions about ownership of identity in the era of artificial intelligence, deepfakes, and online impersonation, marking another important milestone in India’s growing body of personality rights jurisprudence. The actor approached the Delhi High Court seeking protection against the unauthorised use of his name, image, likeness, voice, and persona,…

In a strong rebuke underscoring the gravity of dowry-related offences, the Supreme Court of India has criticised the Patna High Court for granting bail in a dowry death case through what it termed a “mechanical and unreasoned order”, reiterating that such serious crimes demand heightened judicial scrutiny and reasoned discretion. A bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Vijay Bishnoi not only set aside the bail granted to the accused husband but also directed that a copy of its order be placed before the Chief Justice of the Patna High Court an unusual step signalling institutional concern. The case concerned the…

In a significant ruling at the intersection of free speech, religion, and criminal law, the Allahabad High Court has refused to quash proceedings under Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), holding that claiming one religion to be the “only true religion” can prima facie amount to disparagement of other faiths. The judgment, delivered by Justice Saurabh Srivastava, underscores the constitutional commitment to secularism and religious plurality, while clarifying the legal threshold for offences relating to outraging religious sentiments. The case arose from a 2023 FIR registered in Mau district, Uttar Pradesh, against a Christian priest who was accused…

In a significant ruling reinforcing judicial restraint and victim dignity in sexual offence cases, the Supreme Court of India has expunged adverse remarks made by the Kerala High Court against a woman complainant in a rape case involving Kerala MLA Rahul Mamkootathil, while simultaneously declining to interfere with the anticipatory bail granted to the accused. The judgment, delivered by a bench comprising Justices M.M. Sundresh and N.K. Singh, strikes a careful balance between protecting the rights of the accused at the bail stage and safeguarding the dignity of the survivor during judicial proceedings. The case arose from allegations of rape,…

In a significant ruling balancing constitutional patriotism with individual liberty, the Supreme Court of India has dismissed a plea challenging the Union Government’s circular on the singing of Vande Mataram, clarifying that no citizen can be penalised for choosing not to sing the national song. The Court, while disposing of the petition, held that the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) guidelines are advisory in nature and do not impose any coercive obligation, thereby preserving the fundamental right to freedom of conscience and expression. The petition arose in the backdrop of a recent MHA directive standardising the protocol for singing Vande…

In a significant and legally consequential order, the Allahabad High Court has refused to quash criminal proceedings arising out of the 1984 anti-Sikh riots in Kanpur, observing that the allegations if proven may constitute genocide, thereby warranting full trial rather than premature judicial intervention. The Court, while dealing with petitions seeking quashing of proceedings, held that the material on record discloses a prima facie case of large-scale, targeted violence against a particular community, and therefore cannot be dismissed at the threshold stage. The case relates to one of the many prosecutions stemming from the 1984 anti-Sikh riots, which followed the…