sadalawpublications.com

A DYNAMIC LAW JOURNAL

Menu

May 29, 2025

Supreme Court Limits SIT Probe to FIRs in Prof Ali Khan Mahmudabad Case, Warns Against Overreach

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today India to Introduce Digital Address IDs with DIGIPIN for Precise Location Mapping Why Muhammad Yunus’ June 2026 Election Plan Faces Backlash from BNP and Raises National Concerns Supreme Court Limits SIT Probe to FIRs in Prof Ali Khan Mahmudabad Case, Warns Against Overreach Supreme Court Finds DDA Officials in Contempt for Illegal Tree Felling in Delhi Ridge Road Project Supreme Court Upholds 20-Year Minimum Sentence Under POCSO for Aggravated Sexual Assault LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT STANZA LIVING JOB OPPORTUNITY AT ESYA CENTRE LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT SBICAP SECURITIES LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT NUMEN LAW OFFICE INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT G D BANSAL & ASSOCIATES Supreme Court Limits SIT Probe to FIRs in Prof Ali Khan Mahmudabad Case, Warns Against Overreach PRABAHAT KUMAR BILTORIA 29 May 2025 The Supreme Court of India has directed the SIT investigating Prof. Ali Khan Mahmudabad to limit its probe strictly to two FIRs, cautioning against scope expansion. Learn what the bench said and how the legal battle unfolds. Supreme Court Directs SIT to Stay Within FIR Limits in Prof. Ali Khan Mahmudabad Case In a key development on May 28, 2025, the Supreme Court of India restricted the scope of the investigation by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) into Professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad’s case. The case concerns social media posts made by the Ashoka University professor regarding the controversial ‘Operation Sindoor’. The court stated unequivocally that the investigation must be confined solely to the two FIRs already filed. The SIT’s report, according to the bench, should be submitted directly to the Supreme Court before reaching any lower jurisdiction. Justice Surya Kant and Justice Dipankar Datta Emphasize Probe Boundaries The directive came from a bench headed by Justice Surya Kant and Justice Dipankar Datta. They asserted:“We mandate that the SIT’s investigation be limited to the contents of the two FIRs involved in these proceedings. The interim protection is to continue until further notice.” Kapil Sibal Raises Concern Over Overreach Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal voiced concern that the SIT, established by the State of Haryana, might exceed its legal limits. He highlighted the attempt to gain access to Mahmudabad’s digital devices, suggesting it could lead to an unjustified expansion of the investigation. Justice Kant responded sharply:“Both FIRs are on record. Why are devices necessary? Avoid attempting to broaden the scope. Don’t go left and right.”The court directed the Additional Advocate General of Haryana to ensure that the probe stays within its intended boundaries. Clarification on Interim Bail and Freedom of Expression As Sibal requested relaxation of conditions tied to Mahmudabad’s interim bail, Justice Kant clarified that the restrictions were merely part of a “cooling-off” period. He stressed that Mahmudabad is free to publish on any topic, except the matter under current litigation:“There are no restrictions on his right to speak. We do not desire a parallel media trial.” National Human Rights Commission’s Involvement The bench also questioned the Haryana government regarding the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC)’s observations on the FIR registration process.“You tell us about that as well,” the bench directed the Haryana AAG, underlining the growing national attention on the fairness of the legal process. Conclusion: Upholding Legal Boundaries and Protecting Rights The Supreme Court’s firm stance in the case of Prof. Ali Khan Mahmudabad sends a clear message about the importance of judicial oversight and the protection of constitutional rights. By limiting the SIT’s probe to the two registered FIRs, the Court aims to prevent investigative overreach while safeguarding freedom of speech and due process. The case continues to highlight the delicate balance between state authority and individual liberties in India’s evolving legal landscape. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases India to Introduce Digital Address IDs with DIGIPIN for Precise Location Mapping India to Introduce Digital Address IDs with DIGIPIN for Precise Location Mapping Sada Law • May 29, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Why Muhammad Yunus’ June 2026 Election Plan Faces Backlash from BNP and Raises National Concerns Why Muhammad Yunus’ June 2026 Election Plan Faces Backlash from BNP and Raises National Concerns Sada Law • May 29, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Supreme Court Limits SIT Probe to FIRs in Prof Ali Khan Mahmudabad Case, Warns Against Overreach Supreme Court Limits SIT Probe to FIRs in Prof Ali Khan Mahmudabad Case, Warns Against Overreach Sada Law • May 29, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Supreme Court Limits SIT Probe to FIRs in Prof Ali Khan Mahmudabad Case, Warns Against Overreach Read More »

Supreme Court Finds DDA Officials in Contempt for Illegal Tree Felling in Delhi Ridge Road Project

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Supreme Court Finds DDA Officials in Contempt for Illegal Tree Felling in Delhi Ridge Road Project Supreme Court Upholds 20-Year Minimum Sentence Under POCSO for Aggravated Sexual Assault LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT STANZA LIVING JOB OPPORTUNITY AT ESYA CENTRE LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT SBICAP SECURITIES LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT NUMEN LAW OFFICE INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT G D BANSAL & ASSOCIATES JOB OPPORTUNITY AT S&T LAW INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT VISHRUT AND ASSOCIATES JOB OPPORTUNITY AT NATIONAL PROJECTS CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION Supreme Court Finds DDA Officials in Contempt for Illegal Tree Felling in Delhi Ridge Road Project PRABAHAT KUMAR BILTORIA 29 May 2025 The Supreme Court holds DDA officials in contempt for unauthorized tree felling in the Delhi Ridge during a road expansion project. Learn about the environmental and legal implications, the court’s directives, and the significance of public interest in this landmark case. Supreme Court Finds DDA Officials in Contempt Over Delhi Ridge Tree Felling In a significant ruling on May 28, 2024, the Supreme Court of India found officials from the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) in contempt for unauthorized tree cutting in the ecologically sensitive Delhi Ridge. The tree felling was carried out for a road widening project meant to improve access to the CAPFIMS Paramilitary Hospital, without the Court’s prior approval. Violation of Judicial Orders and Environmental Laws The Court strongly criticized the DDA for willful concealment and non-compliance. According to Justices Surya Kant and N. Kotiswar Singh, deliberate non-disclosure undermines the rule of law and constitutes criminal contempt. Officials responsible were each fined ₹25,000, and the Court emphasized that such disregard for environmental procedures reflects institutional missteps and administrative overreach. Instructions for Transparency in Future Projects To prevent future violations, the Court mandated that all future notices and orders concerning afforestation, tree cutting, or road construction must explicitly mention any ongoing legal proceedings. This is to ensure transparency and prevent the excuse of ignorance. Afforestation and Environmental Restoration Ordered The Court instructed the DDA and the Government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD) to collaboratively develop an afforestation plan within three months. The plan must be implemented by the Forest Department under the supervision of a court-appointed committee. The DDA will bear the full cost. Regular compliance reports are now a legal obligation for both agencies. Dismissal of Case Against Former DDA Vice Chairman The contempt case against Subhashish Panda, former DDA Vice Chairman, was dismissed since he is no longer in office. However, the remaining officials faced both financial penalties and official censure. Balancing Environmental Impact with Public Interest The Court acknowledged the public interest behind the road expansion—ensuring better access to healthcare for paramilitary personnel. While prioritizing constitutional morality and social justice, the Court reiterated that procedural violations and ecological harm cannot be overlooked. Other Pending Contempt Cases in the Area Two other contempt petitions concerning tree felling in the same region remain under consideration—one from the bench of Justice Abhay Oka (MC Mehta case) and the other from Justice B. R. Gavai (TN Godavarman case). An expert report revealed that tree felling for roads between Main Chhattarpur Road, SAARC Chowk, and the CAPFIMS Hospital occurred without proper ecological assessments, including rainwater harvesting and restoration plans. Critics argued that the alternate route—avoiding land acquisition—was chosen to expedite construction, raising further questions about transparency and accountability. Conclusion This ruling underscores the importance of judicial oversight, ecological accountability, and the balance between development and sustainability. As India’s urban infrastructure evolves, legal and environmental compliance must go hand-in-hand to ensure that progress does not come at the cost of nature and public trust. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Supreme Court Finds DDA Officials in Contempt for Illegal Tree Felling in Delhi Ridge Road Project Supreme Court Finds DDA Officials in Contempt for Illegal Tree Felling in Delhi Ridge Road Project Sada Law • May 29, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Supreme Court Upholds 20-Year Minimum Sentence Under POCSO for Aggravated Sexual Assault Supreme Court Upholds 20-Year Minimum Sentence Under POCSO for Aggravated Sexual Assault Sada Law • May 29, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments IB Officer’s Death Case: Accused Sukanth Suresh Moves Kerala High Court Against Police Leak of Sensitive Evidence IB Officer’s Death Case: Accused Sukanth Suresh Moves Kerala High Court Against Police Leak of Sensitive Evidence Sada Law • May 28, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Supreme Court Finds DDA Officials in Contempt for Illegal Tree Felling in Delhi Ridge Road Project Read More »

Supreme Court Upholds 20-Year Minimum Sentence Under POCSO for Aggravated Sexual Assault

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Supreme Court Upholds 20-Year Minimum Sentence Under POCSO for Aggravated Sexual Assault LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT STANZA LIVING JOB OPPORTUNITY AT ESYA CENTRE LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT SBICAP SECURITIES LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT NUMEN LAW OFFICE INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT G D BANSAL & ASSOCIATES JOB OPPORTUNITY AT S&T LAW INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT VISHRUT AND ASSOCIATES JOB OPPORTUNITY AT NATIONAL PROJECTS CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION IB Officer’s Death Case: Accused Sukanth Suresh Moves Kerala High Court Against Police Leak of Sensitive Evidence Supreme Court Upholds 20-Year Minimum Sentence Under POCSO for Aggravated Sexual Assault PRABAHAT KUMAR BILTORIA 29 May 2025 The Supreme Court of India has reaffirmed that under the POCSO Act, no sentence less than 20 years can be awarded for aggravated penetrative sexual assault. Learn about the Court’s key observations and legal implications in this case. Supreme Court Upholds 20-Year Minimum Sentence Under POCSO Act On May 26, 2025, the Supreme Court of India dismissed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) that sought to reduce a 20-year rigorous imprisonment sentence awarded to a 23-year-old convict under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO). The case involved a charge of aggravated penetrative sexual assault against a six-year-old minor. Minimum Punishment Under Section 6 of the POCSO Act The petition was rejected by a two-judge bench comprising Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma, who cited Section 6 of the POCSO Act. Following the 2019 amendment, the law mandates a minimum sentence of 20 years for aggravated sexual assault. The Court clarified that it has no authority to reduce this punishment, as the statute is clear and binding. Arguments by the Defense and the Court’s Rebuttal The defense argued for leniency based on “extraordinary circumstances,” noting the petitioner’s age (23) and potential life-long impact of the sentence. They also cited a delay of six days in filing the First Information Report (FIR) and questioned the medical awareness of the victim’s parents—both medical assistants—who reportedly did not notice injuries. Justice Nagarathna firmly responded that both lower courts had already applied the minimum punishment allowed by law. She stressed that such claims of exceptional circumstances are routinely made, but in this case, they do not warrant judicial intervention. She also emphasized that the act occurred after the 2019 amendment that increased sentencing for aggravated sexual assault, making the minimum punishment non-negotiable. Claim of Juvenility Denied The convict also claimed to be a juvenile at the time of the offense. After reviewing documentation, the Court determined he was 18 or older, thereby dismissing the juvenility claim as invalid. Final Verdict and Legal Implications The Supreme Court reaffirmed that under the amended Section 6 of the POCSO Act, it cannot use its inherent jurisdiction to alter the mandatory minimum punishment. Consequently, the SLP against the Bombay High Court order dated January 8, 2024, was dismissed. This verdict strengthens legal safeguards for minors and reinforces the serious legal consequences of child sexual abuse. Conclusion: A Clear Message on Child Protection and Judicial Boundaries The Supreme Court’s judgment sends a powerful message: crimes under the POCSO Act will be met with the strictest penalties, as mandated by law. By upholding the 20-year minimum sentence for aggravated penetrative sexual assault, the Court underlines its role in protecting children and respecting the authority of legislative mandates. This case sets a critical precedent, affirming that judicial discretion cannot override clear statutory requirements in the face of such grave offenses. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Supreme Court Upholds 20-Year Minimum Sentence Under POCSO for Aggravated Sexual Assault Supreme Court Upholds 20-Year Minimum Sentence Under POCSO for Aggravated Sexual Assault Sada Law • May 29, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments IB Officer’s Death Case: Accused Sukanth Suresh Moves Kerala High Court Against Police Leak of Sensitive Evidence IB Officer’s Death Case: Accused Sukanth Suresh Moves Kerala High Court Against Police Leak of Sensitive Evidence Sada Law • May 28, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Allahabad High Court Denies Appointment to Jamia Urdu Degree Holders Over Questionable Credentials Allahabad High Court Denies Appointment to Jamia Urdu Degree Holders Over Questionable Credentials Sada Law • May 28, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Supreme Court Upholds 20-Year Minimum Sentence Under POCSO for Aggravated Sexual Assault Read More »

Get A Quote
Get A Quote