- Home
- About ALEC
- Course Offered
- About Exam
- Blog
- Judgements
- Enquiry
- Syllabus
- Online Class
- Privacy Policy
- Enroll Now
Bench: Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice K. Vinod Chandran Introduction: In this significant criminal law ruling, the Supreme Court held that a conviction based solely on the 'last seen together' theory is unsustainable if the accused has raised a plausible plea of alibi, and the prosecution has failed to disprove it. The Court emphasized that the burden of disproving the alibi lies with the prosecution, especially when the accused has raised the plea at the earliest possible stage. Section....
Read MoreThe Bench Comprising Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma Introduction: The Supreme Court reaffirmed that prior sanction under Section 197 of the CrPC (Now Section 218 of The Bharatiya NAgarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) is mandatory for prosecuting public servants if the alleged act, even if excessive or unlawful, has a reasonable nexus with their official duties. The Court held that the statutory protection cannot be denied merely because a public servant may have exceeded authority, provided the act is....
Read MoreIntroduction: The Supreme Court ruled that if an appointment is illegal, the candidate cannot seek equitable relief under Article 142 of the Constitution. The Court emphasized that if a candidate gains entry through an invalid process, the Court cannot use its special powers under Article 142 to regularize or rescue such an appointment. Facts of the Case: The appellant was appointed to the post of "Boat Lascar" in the Kerala State Water Transport Department. The minimum qualification prescribed for the....
Read MoreA Bench of Justices BR Gavai and AG Masih Introduction The case was a public interest litigation (PIL) filed before the Supreme Court of India, seeking a statutory prohibition on social media usage by children below 13 years of age. The petition was based on concerns regarding the severe mental, psychological, and physical impact of social media on young users. The petitioner also sought mandatory parental controls for children aged 13-18 and stricter age verification mechanisms. However, the Supreme Court refused....
Read MoreIntroduction The case revolves around the question of whether a Muslim woman, whose marriage has been dissolved under the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939, is entitled to permanent alimony and whether such alimony can be modified upon her remarriage. The Supreme Court, recognizing the significance of the issue, has appointed Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Senior Advocate Siddhartha Dave as amicus curiae to assist in the legal deliberation. Facts of the Case A Muslim woman obtained a divorce decree....
Read MoreThe Bench Comprising of Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan Introduction: The Supreme Court, examined the scope of Section 34 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), particularly regarding the rate of interest in commercial transactions. The Court ruled that in the absence of an agreement between the parties, the interest rate could exceed 6% per annum, considering the facts and circumstances of the case. Facts: In 1973, the appellants sold their shares to the State of Rajasthan at ₹11.50....
Read MoreThe Bench Comprising Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Manmohan Introduction: The Supreme Court addressed the issue of whether the absence of a complainant on a date fixed by the court should necessarily result in the acquittal of the accused under Section 256 of the CrPC and its equivalent in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). The Court examined the applicability of acquittal provisions when the complainant fails to appear, and whether such a failure should automatically lead to an acquittal. Facts:....
Read MoreThe Bench of Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Manmohan Introduction: The Supreme Court held that Article 311(1) of the Indian Constitution does not mandate that only the appointing authority can initiate disciplinary proceedings against a government servant. The Court clarified that while the appointing authority must approve dismissal, the initiation of disciplinary action can be done by any superior authority unless explicitly restricted by relevant service rules. The ruling overturned a High Court decision that had quashed the respondent’s dismissal based....
Read MoreA Bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol and Sandeep Mehta, Senior Advocate Gopal Shankaranarayan, Introduction In this case a significant legal question regarding the maintainability of a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution for reconsideration of a death sentence in light of the Supreme Court’s 2022 judgment in Manoj v. State of MP. The petition was filed after all judicial remedies, including review and mercy petitions, had been exhausted. The Supreme Court is examining whether the Manoj guidelines on....
Read MoreThe Bench of Justice AS Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan Introduction The Supreme Court held that there is no absolute restriction on the High Court's power to interfere in a petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) (Now Section 528 of The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023), even if the investigation is at a preliminary stage. Facts of the Case The petitioners were accused of misappropriating funds from the Coimbatore Education Foundation for personal use. A....
Read More
