- Home
- About ALEC
- Course Offered
- About Exam
- Blog
- Judgements
- Enquiry
- Syllabus
- Online Class
- Privacy Policy
- Enroll Now
Bench Comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta Introduction: The case deals with the legal question of whether a prolonged consensual sexual relationship, continuing for 16 years, can amount to rape on the ground of a false promise of marriage. The Supreme Court quashed the criminal proceedings against the accused, ruling that there was no evidence of force, deceit, or mala fide intent at the beginning of the relationship. Facts of the Case: The complainant alleged that the accused had sexually....
Read MoreOn February 10, 2005, the petitioner and respondent were married at Devgad Temple, Hivargav-Pavsa, following Hindu marriage rituals. After their marriage, they lived together, but while the respondent was pregnant, a woman named Shobha arrived at their home, claiming to be the petitioner’s wife. The petitioner allegedly told the respondent that she must either accept living with Shobha or leave. Choosing to stay due to her pregnancy, the respondent suffered physical and mental abuse. The petitioner questioned the paternity of....
Read MoreThe Bench Comprising Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan Introduction: The Supreme Court of India recently discharged two employers accused under Section 304 Part II (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) of the IPC (Now Section 105 of BNS,2023) in connection with the electrocution deaths of two workers engaged in decoration work. The Court held that the essential ingredients of the offence were not met, as the appellants lacked the requisite knowledge or intent to cause death. Facts: Two....
Read MoreFacts of the case Durga Prasad built two-grain markets in Etawah at the request of the District Collector. These markets were named Hume Ganj and Ram Ganj. Durga invested a lot of money in setting up a shop and acquiring property in these markets. The respondent rented a shop there. Since Durga had made significant investments in the business, he also became a commission agent. Eventually, after discussions, the appellant and local shopkeepers agreed to pay Durga a commission of....
Read MoreThe Bench Comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta Introduction The Supreme Court ruled that when an offence is punishable under both the POCSO Act and IPC(Now BNS,2023), the offender must be sentenced under the provision prescribing the higher punishment, as per Section 42 of the POCSO Act. The Court also held that the High Court erred in enhancing the sentence without a State appeal for enhancement. Facts The appellant was convicted for sexually assaulting his minor daughter under Sections....
Read MoreIn this case, a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed in the Supreme Court raising concerns about noise pollution caused by loudspeakers, and firecrackers during religious events, including bhajans and other performances, in busy commercial areas. The petitioners argued that these loudspeakers, especially when used on weekly holidays, created a serious nuisance for residents living nearby. They claimed that the excessive noise disrupted daily life and made it difficult for people to enjoy peace and rest in their homes. Issues....
Read MoreBench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan Introduction The Supreme Court of India, in its judgment clarified that the contents of a FIR are inadmissible as evidence if the informant dies a natural death and cannot be proved through the investigating officer. The Court ruled that a FIR is not a substantive piece of evidence and can only be used to corroborate or contradict statements under the Evidence Act, 1872. It further stated that a FIR may be treated as a....
Read MoreFacts of the case The case involved admissions to undergraduate (UG) and postgraduate (PG) medical courses across various states and union territories in India. The general policy followed by these institutions was to give preference to students who either held domicile status or had been permanent residents of the state for a significant period, ranging from 3 to 20 years, or had completed their education in that state for a period between 4 to 10 years. The dispute arose when....
Read MoreBench of Justice KV Viswanathan and Justice SVN Bhatti Introduction The Supreme Court of India, in its judgment ruled that the mere mention of Section 307 IPC (Now Sec 109 of BNS, 2023) (attempt to murder) in a FIR does not prevent the High Court from quashing criminal proceedings based on a settlement if the facts do not substantiate the charge. The Court emphasized that the nature of the injury, weapon used, conduct of the accused, and societal impact must be....
Read MoreA.K. Chopra, the respondent, was employed as a private secretary to the chairman of the Apparel Export Promotion Council (the appellant). On August 12, 1988, he used his position of authority to compel a female employee, Miss X, to accompany him to the Business Centre at the Taj Palace Hotel for dictation, despite her lack of training in taking dictation. Taking advantage of the secluded setting, Chopra attempted to molest her by sitting too close and touching her inappropriately, despite....
Read More
