- Home
- About ALEC
- Course Offered
- About Exam
- Blog
- Judgements
- Enquiry
- Syllabus
- Online Class
- Privacy Policy
- Enroll Now
The case arose from a criminal proceeding involving the accused, P. Gopalkrishnan (Appellant), who was charged under various sections of the IPC and IT Act, including charges of rape and conspiracy. The prosecution's key evidence was a video clip stored on a memory card, allegedly recording the incident of sexual assault. This footage was copied onto a pen drive by the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) and submitted with the charge sheet. The appellant sought a cloned copy of the memory....
Read MoreBench of Justice Manoj Misra and Justice K.V. Viswanathan Introduction This case pertains to the scope of vicarious liability of directors under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, in cheque dishonour proceedings under Section 138 NI Act. The primary issue was whether a complaint must specifically state the administrative role of a director to proceed under Section 141(1) NI Act. Section 138, NI Act – Dishonour of cheque for insufficiency of funds. Section 141(1), NI Act –....
Read MoreThe Oleum gas leak happened at Shriram Food and Fertiliser Industries, a branch of Delhi Cloth Mills Ltd., in the crowded area of Kirti Nagar, Delhi. The gas leak caused serious harm to people living nearby. In response, a lawyer named M.C. Mehta filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court on December 4 and 6, 1985, under Articles 21 and 32 of the Constitution. He asked the Court to shut down the Shriram Caustic Chlorine and Sulphuric Acid Plant....
Read MoreBench: Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Introduction: The Supreme Court in this case reiterated that the "last seen together" theory, by itself, is not sufficient to convict an accused unless it is corroborated by other compelling evidence. The Court set aside the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 IPC due to major gaps in the prosecution's circumstantial evidence. Section 302 IPC(Now Section 102 of BNS,2023): Punishment for murder Section 27 of Indian Evidence Act(Now Section 23....
Read MoreIn the case of Ashby v White, Mr. Ashby, a qualified voter, was stopped from voting in an election by Mr. White, a local constable, who wrongly claimed that Ashby was not eligible. Ashby believed this was a violation of his basic right to vote and took legal action. The case became very well-known and was even discussed in Parliament. It raised important questions about whether someone could sue a public officer in common law for being unfairly denied the....
Read MoreBench of Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice MM Sundresh Introduction: This case concerned the legality and fairness of the Consumer Protection Rules, 2020, particularly those regulating the appointment, qualification, selection, and tenure of Presidents and Members of the State and District Consumer Commissions. The Supreme Court examined whether the existing rules compromised judicial independence by providing excessive control to the Executive in the appointment process. Consumer Protection Act, 2019 Consumer Protection Rules, 2020 Rojer Mathew v. South Indian....
Read MoreBench of Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan Introduction The Supreme Court, in a significant ruling on the powers of Juvenile Justice Boards (JJBs), held that JJBs have no authority to review their own orders, and any such attempt is illegal and beyond their statutory jurisdiction. The Court also reiterated that documentary evidence such as school records prevail over medical opinion in determining juvenility under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. Section 94(2), Juvenile....
Read MoreShah Bano, a 62-year-old woman from Madhya Pradesh, was divorced by her husband in 1978. After the divorce, she filed a case seeking maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), which allows a person unable to maintain themselves to claim support. The Supreme Court ruled in her favor and held that she was entitled to maintenance, even though she was a Muslim woman. This judgment recognized the rights of Muslim women to claim alimony under general....
Read MoreIn August 1928, Mrs. Donoghue went to a café in Paisley, Scotland, with a friend. Her friend bought her a bottle of ginger beer along with some ice cream. The bottle was made of dark glass, so they couldn’t see what was inside. The café staff opened the bottle and poured some of the ginger beer over the ice cream, which Mrs. Donoghue ate. Later, when the rest of the ginger beer was poured into a glass, a dead and....
Read MoreThe case of Girjesh Dutt v. Datadin is an important judgment under Indian property law, especially related to the rules about transferring property to unborn persons. In this case, a woman (A) gifted her property to her nephew’s daughter (B). According to the terms of the gift, after B, the property was supposed to go to any male descendant of B. If there were no male descendants, it would then go to B’s daughter, and if that too failed, it....
Read More
