Case Comment on Rajesh Chaddha v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2025 INSC 671)
In Rajesh Chaddha v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2025 INSC 671), the Supreme Court acquitted the accused under Section 498A IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act, holding that vague, uncorroborated allegations cannot sustain a conviction. The ruling raises the evidentiary threshold in matrimonial cruelty cases to prevent misuse of dowry laws.
Case Comment: Vihaan Kumar v. State of Haryana & Anr. (2025 INSC 162)
The Supreme Court in Vihaan Kumar v. State of Haryana & Anr. (2025 INSC 162) held the arrest illegal for failure to communicate grounds, reinforcing Article 22(1) safeguards and condemning inhumane treatment under Article 21. This judgment strengthens constitutional protections against unlawful detention and sets a precedent for custodial dignity and procedural fairness.
Kiren Raju Penamacha Vs Tejuswini Chowdhary: A Brief Case Analysis
The Supreme Court in Kiren Raju Penamacha v. Tejuswini Chowdhary (2025 INSC 358) clarified principles on child custody and visitation rights after divorce. Emphasizing the “best interest of the child,” the Court directed fresh consideration by the Family Court, balancing parental rights with the welfare and psychological wellbeing of minors.
Case Brief: Pragya Prasun & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. and Amar Jain v. Union of India & Ors.
Read the case brief of Pragya Prasun & Ors. v. Union of India & Amar Jain v. Union of India (2025 INSC 599), where the Supreme Court of India recognized digital accessibility as a fundamental right under Article 21. The judgment addressed exclusion of persons with disabilities from e-KYC due to liveness tests, directing RBI,…
Bansal Milk Chilling Centre v. Rana Milk Food Private Ltd. (2025 INSC 899) – Section 200 CrPC and Amendment of Complaints
Introduction In 2025, the Supreme Court of India delivered a significant judgment in Bansal Milk Chilling Centre v. Rana Milk Food Private Ltd. (2025 INSC 899), a case that clarifies the procedural aspects of amending complaints under Section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). This case, involving two dairy industry players, is a must-know…
Case Analysis of R v Hancock and Shank land (27 Feb 1985)
FACTS During the miner’s strike of 1984-5, two miners dropped concrete objects onto the path of an incoming convoy bearing a strike-breaking miner.[1]One day two miners were working on a bridge. They tried to push a concrete block onto a three lane highway. Where there is one miner who has been taking work from a…
Something went wrong. Please refresh the page and/or try again.
Lawcutor 