WELCOME TO AASHAYEIN LAW EDUCATION CENTER

05 Apr 2025

Posted by: Aishwarya Chourasia

Tarif Rashidbhai Qureshi v. Asmabanu Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 3357/2022

Introduction 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 More
02 Apr 2025

Posted by: Aishwarya Chourasia

I.K. MERCHANTS PVT. LTD. & ORS. VERSUS THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. 2025 (SC) 377

The 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 More
02 Apr 2025

Posted by: Aishwarya Chourasia

Ranjit Sarkar vs. Ravi Ganesh Bhardwaj and Others 2025 (SC) 369

The 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 More
02 Apr 2025

Posted by: Aishwarya Chourasia

The State of Jharkhand & Ors. vs. Rukma Kesh Mishra 2025 (SC) 368

The 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 More
28 Mar 2025

Posted by: Aishwarya Chourasia

Vasanta Sampat Dupare vs Union of India (W.P.(Crl.) No. 371/2023)

A 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 More
28 Mar 2025

Posted by: Aishwarya Chourasia

KULANDAISAMY & ANR. v. STATE REPRESENTED BY ITS INSPECTOR OF POLICE & ANR. 2025 (SC) 357

The 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
28 Mar 2025

Posted by: Aishwarya Chourasia

N.P. Saseendran v. N.P. Ponnamma & Ors. 2025 (SC) 345

Introduction: The Supreme Court. held that possession is not essential to validate a gift or settlement deed, and once accepted, it cannot be unilaterally revoked. The case involved a father’s registered settlement deed to his daughter, later revoked before selling the property to his son. Upholding the High Court's ruling, the Court confirmed the deed as a valid gift, making the revocation and sale invalid. Section 122 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 – Defines a gift and establishes....

Read More
28 Mar 2025

Posted by: Aishwarya Chourasia

Ashish Mishra Alias Monu v. State of U.P. SLP(Crl) No. 7857/2022

A Bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh  Introduction The Lakhimpur Kheri case pertains to the killing of five people in October 2021, when vehicles from a convoy allegedly led by Ashish Mishra, son of former Union Minister Ajay Kumar Mishra, ran over protesting farmers. The case has been highly controversial, with allegations of political influence and intimidation of witnesses. The Supreme Court has been actively monitoring the case and has recently passed an order concerning allegations of witness....

Read More
21 Mar 2025

Posted by: Aishwarya Chourasia

RAJU NAIDU VERSUS CHENMOUGA SUNDRA & ORS. 2025 (SC) 331

  The Bench Comprising Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Prasanna B. Varale Introduction: The Supreme Court held that protection under Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, is unavailable to a person who knowingly enters into an agreement despite being aware of pending litigation. The Court held that such a transferee cannot obstruct decree holders' rights. Section 53A, Transfer of Property Act, 1882 – Doctrine of part performance. Section 52, Transfer of Property Act, 1882 – Lis pendens principle.....

Read More
20 Mar 2025

Posted by: Aishwarya Chourasia

State of Rajasthan v. Chatra 2025 (SC) 323

The Bench Comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sanjay Karol Introduction The Supreme Court of India reinstated the conviction, where a minor was raped in 1986. It criticized the Rajasthan High Court for acquitting the accused solely due to the victim’s silence during cross-examination. The Court ruled that a traumatized child’s silence cannot favor the accused when medical and circumstantial evidence supports conviction, sentencing him to 7 years under Section 376 IPC. Section 376 IPC(Now Section 64 Of BNS)  – Punishment....

Read More