The Supreme Court’s decision in this case is a significant restatement of the limits of disciplinary jurisdiction over advocates and the procedural safeguards that must govern findings of professional misconduct. The judgment serves as a cautionary note to disciplinary authorities against mechanically sustaining complaints once their factual foundation has collapsed, and against diluting basic principles of natural justice in the name of professional regulation . What's The

The decision of the Singapore Magistrate’s Court in Century Housing Services Pte Ltd v Koh Chiep Chong (Xu Jiecong)   offers a clear and timely reaffirmation of orthodox landlord tenant principles in an era where co-living business models increasingly test the limits of traditional tenancy agreements. At its core, the case turns on a deceptively simple question : whether a tenant can rely on past informal arrangements and commercial practice to override clear contractual pro

The Supreme Court’s decisions in Babasaheb Maruti Kamble v. State of Maharashtra  occupy a significant place in India’s evolving death penalty jurisprudence, not merely for the ultimate commutation of a death sentence but for the constitutional principles articulated on judicial responsibility, review powers, and the sanctity of human life within criminal procedure. The case reflects a deeper judicial introspection on how capital punishment is imposed, reviewed and justified

The Supreme Court’s decision in offers a careful reminder of the limits of criminal law at the stage of bail, particularly in emotionally charged cases involving allegations of suicide, marital discord and dowry-related offences. While the facts of the case evoke deep sympathy for the deceased, the judgment reiterates that bail jurisprudence cannot be driven by moral outrage or post-event suspicion alone , but must remain anchored in evidentiary thresholds and procedural fair

The Supreme Court’s latest intervention on student suicides marks one of its most expansive engagements with the crisis of mental health in India’s higher education system. In Amit Kumar v. Union of India a Bench of the Supreme Court of India led by Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan moved decisively beyond criminal law formalism to confront the structural and institutional failures that continue to place students at risk. The case arose from an earlier clarification

The Supreme Court’s decision in Dinesh Biwaji Ashtikar v. State of Maharashtra  (2026 INSC 56) is a quiet but profound reminder that the right to education under Article 21A is not meant to exist only on paper. It is a judgment that speaks less about an individual grievance that has already become infructuous, and more about a systemic constitutional failure that continues to deny children from weaker and disadvantaged sections meaningful access to schooling promised by law.

In this case the Supreme Court has once again cautioned courts against allowing procedural rigidity to defeat substantive justice in suits for specific performance. Setting aside the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s refusal to permit execution of a decree on the ground of delay, the Court reaffirmed that minor lapses in complying with timelines fixed in a decree do not, by themselves, extinguish a litigant’s substantive rights particularly where readiness and willingness

The Supreme Court’s decision in Kousik Pal's Case  (2025 INSC 1487) settles an important and recurring question in health-law regulation: where does “patient care deficiency” end and “medical negligence” begin, and who decides each? In answering this, the Court restored the authority of statutory clinical establishment regulators and warned against judicial interpretations that hollow out welfare legislation meant to protect patients. What's The Matter? The case arose fr

The Supreme Court has reaffirmed the primacy of service discipline and the narrow limits of judicial review in disciplinary matters by setting aside the interference of the High Court in the dismissal of a Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) constable for contracting a second marriage during the subsistence of his first. What's The Matter? In this Case the Court held that once misconduct is clearly established under statutory service rules, courts exercising writ juris

In this case the Supreme Court delivered a pointed reminder that constitutional values of equality and non-arbitrariness bind not only the executive, but judicial institutions as employers as well. The decision addresses long-standing grievances of ad-hoc employees who were denied regularisation despite being identically placed with others who received permanent status . What's The Matter? The dispute concerned several Operator-cum-Data Entry Assistants and Routine Grade Cl

The Supreme Court’s decision in this case is a clear reaffirmation of long-settled principles governing cheque dishonour prosecutions and the limited scope of inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The judgment draws a firm line against premature judicial intervention that short-circuits statutory presumptions under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. What's The Matter? The case arose from a complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiabl

The recent judgment in Bharat Mittal case marks an important moment in the evolving jurisprudence under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 , particularly on the uneasy interface between vicarious criminal liability and appellate conditions of deposit. At its core, the case raises a deceptively simple but legally fraught question: can an appellate court insist on a mandatory 20% deposit under Section 148 of the NI Act from a convicted director when the company the jurist

The judgment of the Supreme Court of India in Bhagyashree Bisi v. Animesh Padhee , reflects a careful yet humane recalibration of matrimonial adjudication, where the Court chose finality and dignity over rigid adherence to fault-based labels. While the Family Court and the Orissa High Court had dissolved the marriage on the statutory ground of desertion under the Hindu Marriage Act, the Supreme Court consciously stepped in to alter the juridical basis of divorce, dissolvin

The decision of the Supreme Court of India in Jatinder Kumar v. Jeewan Lata , delivered on 18 December 2025, once again foregrounds the Court’s evolving approach to matrimonial disputes where the marriage has long ceased to exist in substance, even if it survives in law. By dissolving a marriage of more than two decades under Article 142 of the Constitution, despite concurrent findings of the Trial Court and the High Court rejecting divorce on statutory grounds, the Court ha

The Supreme Court’s decision in this case , revisits the uneasy balance between personal liberty and the gravity of criminal culpability once a conviction has been recorded. Setting aside the Patna High Court’s orders suspending sentence and granting bail to two convicts sentenced to life imprisonment for murder, the Court has sent out a clear message: suspension of sentence in cases under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code cannot be treated as a ro

The Supreme Court’s ruling in Ashok Kumar Dabas (Dead) v. Delhi Transport Corporation  presents a careful delineation of the legal consequences of resignation in public service, while simultaneously reaffirming statutory entitlements that survive severance of employment. The judgment draws a firm line between pensionary rights governed by service rules and terminal benefits protected by welfare legislation, resisting both over-expansive equity and rigid administrative denial

The Supreme Court’s decision in Salil Mahajan v. Avinash Kumar  marks a pointed reaffirmation of the discipline required while granting anticipatory bail, particularly in cases involving large-scale economic offences and allegations of deliberate evasion from investigation . Setting aside the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s order granting anticipatory bail, the Court underscored that discretion in bail matters is neither unstructured nor immune from appellate correction whe

The first person has been sentenced in the federal case connected to the 2023 ketamine overdose death of actor Matthew Perry. On December 3, 2025, Dr. Salvador Plasencia was sentenced to 30 months in federal prison for distributing the controlled substance. The licensed physician, who operated an urgent care clinic, admitted to providing ketamine to Perry and teaching the actor's personal assistant, who had no medical training, how to administer it. In a text exchange with a

The Supreme Court’s decision in Mission Accessibility v. Union of India  (2025 INSC 1376) marks another incremental but significant step in the Court’s ongoing project of transforming formal guarantees of equality into substantive mechanisms of inclusion. Delivered in the context of public examinations spaces that often operate as gateways to socio-economic mobility the judgment reinforces that constitutional protections for persons with disabilities are not ornamental pro

The Supreme Court’s decision in Samadhan S/o Sitaram Manmothe v. State of Maharashtra   marks yet another significant reaffirmation of the doctrinal boundaries governing prosecutions for rape on the allegation of “false promise to marry.” The judgment, delivered by Nagarathna J., scrutinises a long-term intimate relationship between a married woman and an advocate, ultimately concluding that the invocation of Section 376 including its aggravated form under Section 376(2)(n) I