What Was Closed Was the Money Lending Case—Not the Law: SC Shatters the Misunderstanding
The Supreme Court of India has clarified that its earlier order dated February 16, 2026, by which it closed suo motu proceedings on unlawful money lending, should not be understood to mean that there is no existing law on the subject. The case began in July 2024, when the Supreme Court took suo motu cognizance […]
“A Mother’s Habeas Corpus Plea, a Defied Order, and a Court That Rewrote the Rules of Custody”
The Allahabad High Court set aside a single judge’s order that had rejected a mother’s habeas corpus petition seeking custody of her child from the father. The Court clarified that the mother’s plea should not have been denied merely because a remedy was available under the Guardians and Wards Act. It further observed that a […]
“‘After 15 December, Nothing’: SC Questions Centre’s Silence on North East Issues”
The Supreme Court recently criticized the Centre for “taking things lightly” when it comes to the continued racial discrimination faced by people from the North East. The Court said that this kind of bias is against constitutional equality and needs urgent action from the government to ensure protection, awareness, and accountability across the country. Centre […]
He Was the Lawyer—Then Became the Accused: SC Ends a ‘Mahabharata’ Weaponised Divorce Battle
The Supreme Court has recently ended a decade-long divorce dispute, describing it as a “matrimonial battle of Mahabharata.” A Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta ordered a lawyer to pay ₹5 crore as alimony. The Court noted that he had misused his legal knowledge to file more than 80 proceedings against his wife, […]
“No Appearance in Court—Bombay HC Puts Interim Brake on ‘Script Theft’ Claims in Dhurandhar Row”
The Bombay High Court issued an interim order restraining filmmaker Santosh Kumar RS from making statements about the script of the Hindi film Dhurandhar that were alleged to be defamatory by its writer-director, Aditya Dhar. Justice Arif S. Doctor issued the order while hearing a defamation case filed by Dhar against Kumar. The Court observed […]
“They Built It in Broad Daylight—And No One Stopped It: Bombay HC Slams ‘Bystander’ State”
On 7 April 2026, the High Court of Bombay at Goa, with Justice Valmiki Menezes and Justice Amit S. Jamsandekar, passed an interim order in favour of the Mormugao Port Authority. What the Case Is About: The case was about a statue of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj that was put up on Port land at Headland […]
Courtroom to ICU: The Crisis That Forced a High Court to Intervene”
Faced with repeated cases where lawyers could not afford emergency medical care, the Allahabad High Court has initiated a suo motu Public Interest Litigation(PIL). The Court is looking into the lack of a statewide insurance system for advocates. A Division Bench of Justice Rajan Roy and Justice Manjive Shukla converted individual petitions into a […]
The Apology That Didn’t End It: SC Reconsiders Oza’s Senior Designation
The Supreme Court on Tuesday heard a heated debate over restoring Senior Advocate Yatin Oza’s designation permanently and quashing his contempt conviction, as argued before Justices J.K. Maheshwari and A.S. Chandurkar. The bench observed that while damage to judicial institutions must be carefully examined, Oza’s repeated apologies might finally end the six-year-long case. Court remarks […]
The Apology That Didn’t End It: SC Reconsiders Oza’s Senior Designation
The Supreme Court on Tuesday heard a heated debate over restoring Senior Advocate Yatin Oza’s designation permanently and quashing his contempt conviction, as argued before Justices J.K. Maheshwari and A.S. Chandurkar. The bench observed that while damage to judicial institutions must be carefully examined, Oza’s repeated apologies might finally end the six-year-long case. Court remarks […]
“The Slash in the Consent Form That Saved a Surgeon: Supreme Court Rules”
The Supreme Court of India recently set aside criminal proceedings against a paediatric surgeon who was accused of removing a testicle (orchidectomy) from a 1.5‑year‑old child without proper consent. The case was heard by Justice P.S. Narasimha and Justice Manoj Misra. The child’s father maintained that he had only agreed to an orchidopexy (a corrective […]