June 13, 2025

Telangana High Court Grants Bail, Stays Conviction of Gali Janardhan Reddy in Illegal Mining Case

Trending Today Telangana High Court Grants Bail, Stays Conviction of Gali Janardhan Reddy in Illegal Mining Case Chhattisgarh High Court Backs SBI’s POSH Action in Sexual Harassment Case CBI Gets One-Day Custody of NCLT Deputy Registrar in ₹3 Lakh Bribery Probe Linked to Lonavala Hotel Dispute Supreme Court Affirms Right to Anticipatory Bail Across States in Matrimonial Disputes: Priya Indoria v. State of Karnataka (2023) Supreme Court Rules on Governor’s Limited Discretion to Withhold Assent and Summon Punjab Legislative Assembly | State of Punjab v. Principal Secretary (2023) LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT ZEN MEDIA Supreme Court Judgment on Chargesheets: Not Public Documents, No Mandatory Online Upload by Investigating Agencies | Saurav Das v. Union of India (2023) Delhi High Court Dismisses PIL on Batla House Demolitions; Allows Individual Petitions INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT CLLRA NLU, DELHI Chief Justice of India Warns Against Judicial Terrorism Amid Government Overreach Concerns Telangana High Court Grants Bail, Stays Conviction of Gali Janardhan Reddy in Illegal Mining Case KASHISH JAHAN 13 June 2025 The Telangana High Court has stayed the conviction and granted interim bail to mining baron and former minister Gali Janardhan Reddy in the Obulapuram illegal mining case, safeguarding his MLA status and stirring major political implications. Telangana High Court Grants Interim Bail to Gali Janardhan Reddy in Illegal Mining Case On June 12, 2025, the Telangana High Court delivered a significant ruling by staying the conviction and sentence of former Karnataka minister and mining baron Gali Janardhan Reddy in the notorious Obulapuram illegal mining case. Previously sentenced to seven years, Reddy now receives interim bail—an order that allows him to retain his MLA position, temporarily shielding him from political disqualification. Legal Arguments and Judicial Grounds for Relief Legal counsel representing Reddy argued that the conviction’s suspension was crucial for preserving his legislative privileges. The threat of disqualification under the Representation of the People Act loomed large following the earlier verdict by the Special CBI Court. With appeals pending and notices issued by the Election Commission of India, the High Court recognized the broader political consequences. Justice K. Lakshman responded by staying the sentence and granting interim bail. Impact on Political Career and Pending Appeals The court’s order directly prevents Reddy’s immediate removal from his elected post, offering him political protection while the appeals process continues. This stay also postpones further action under disqualification provisions, allowing Reddy to remain active in Karnataka politics. Simultaneously, related legal proceedings are still underway, which could influence the final outcome of this high-profile mining case. Conclusion: A Landmark Case in Political Judiciary This case stands as a critical example of how interim judicial reliefs intersect with political representation in India. The Telangana High Court’s decision highlights the tension between enforcing legal accountability and maintaining democratic participation. As Gali Janardhan Reddy’s legal battles continue, the implications for Indian political and judicial systems are profound. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Telangana High Court Grants Bail, Stays Conviction of Gali Janardhan Reddy in Illegal Mining Case Sada Law • June 13, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Chhattisgarh High Court Backs SBI’s POSH Action in Sexual Harassment Case Sada Law • June 13, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments CBI Gets One-Day Custody of NCLT Deputy Registrar in ₹3 Lakh Bribery Probe Linked to Lonavala Hotel Dispute Sada Law • June 13, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Telangana High Court Grants Bail, Stays Conviction of Gali Janardhan Reddy in Illegal Mining Case Read More »

Chhattisgarh High Court Backs SBI’s POSH Action in Sexual Harassment Case

Leave a Comment / Live cases / Sada Law

Trending Today Chhattisgarh High Court Backs SBI’s POSH Action in Sexual Harassment Case CBI Gets One-Day Custody of NCLT Deputy Registrar in ₹3 Lakh Bribery Probe Linked to Lonavala Hotel Dispute Supreme Court Affirms Right to Anticipatory Bail Across States in Matrimonial Disputes: Priya Indoria v. State of Karnataka (2023) Supreme Court Rules on Governor’s Limited Discretion to Withhold Assent and Summon Punjab Legislative Assembly | State of Punjab v. Principal Secretary (2023) LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT ZEN MEDIA Supreme Court Judgment on Chargesheets: Not Public Documents, No Mandatory Online Upload by Investigating Agencies | Saurav Das v. Union of India (2023) Delhi High Court Dismisses PIL on Batla House Demolitions; Allows Individual Petitions INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT CLLRA NLU, DELHI Chief Justice of India Warns Against Judicial Terrorism Amid Government Overreach Concerns Supreme Court Rules Unregistered Sale Agreement Cannot Confer Title Despite Later Registration Chhattisgarh High Court Backs SBI’s POSH Action in Sexual Harassment Case KASHISH JAHAN 13 June 2025 The Chhattisgarh High Court has upheld disciplinary action by SBI under the POSH Act, reinforcing the importance of institutional compliance with anti-harassment protocols in the workplace. Bank’s Disciplinary Action on Sexual Harassment Upheld In a strong affirmation of workplace ethics and compliance, the Chhattisgarh High Court has dismissed the appeal of a State Bank of India (SBI) employee, who challenged the removal of two salary increments. This disciplinary action was imposed after credible findings of sexual harassment involving both fellow employees and external customers. The bank’s POSH (Prevention of Sexual Harassment) committee investigated the allegations thoroughly and imposed the sanctions following internal policy protocols. Court Validates POSH Compliance and Fair Inquiry The court bench noted that SBI followed the proper legal and procedural framework under the POSH Act. It acknowledged that the internal inquiry process was transparent, provided the accused a fair chance to represent himself, and upheld the right to appeal. The verdict emphasized that the committee’s conclusion was supported by substantial evidence, and the process was devoid of bias or procedural lapses—marking a clear endorsement of due diligence in workplace investigations. Legal Reinforcement for Employers and Institutions Justice XYZ ruled that judicial interference is unwarranted when an institution like SBI operates within the statutory guidelines of the POSH Act. This judgment sends a strong message to corporations and financial institutions, underlining the importance of robust anti-harassment mechanisms and meticulous documentation. It serves as a precedent, encouraging employers to uphold organizational integrity by ensuring transparency and fairness in handling sexual harassment complaints. Conclusion: Strengthening Workplace Ethics Through Law This decision by the Chhattisgarh High Court reinforces the judicial backing for organizations committed to safe and respectful workplaces. It highlights the judiciary’s support for procedural adherence and promotes the effective enforcement of anti-harassment policies in line with India’s legislative standards. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Chhattisgarh High Court Backs SBI’s POSH Action in Sexual Harassment Case Sada Law • June 13, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments CBI Gets One-Day Custody of NCLT Deputy Registrar in ₹3 Lakh Bribery Probe Linked to Lonavala Hotel Dispute Sada Law • June 13, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Delhi High Court Dismisses PIL on Batla House Demolitions; Allows Individual Petitions Sada Law • June 13, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Chhattisgarh High Court Backs SBI’s POSH Action in Sexual Harassment Case Read More »

CBI Gets One-Day Custody of NCLT Deputy Registrar in ₹3 Lakh Bribery Probe Linked to Lonavala Hotel Dispute

Leave a Comment / Live cases / Sada Law

Trending Today CBI Gets One-Day Custody of NCLT Deputy Registrar in ₹3 Lakh Bribery Probe Linked to Lonavala Hotel Dispute Supreme Court Affirms Right to Anticipatory Bail Across States in Matrimonial Disputes: Priya Indoria v. State of Karnataka (2023) Supreme Court Rules on Governor’s Limited Discretion to Withhold Assent and Summon Punjab Legislative Assembly | State of Punjab v. Principal Secretary (2023) LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT ZEN MEDIA Supreme Court Judgment on Chargesheets: Not Public Documents, No Mandatory Online Upload by Investigating Agencies | Saurav Das v. Union of India (2023) Delhi High Court Dismisses PIL on Batla House Demolitions; Allows Individual Petitions INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT CLLRA NLU, DELHI Chief Justice of India Warns Against Judicial Terrorism Amid Government Overreach Concerns Supreme Court Rules Unregistered Sale Agreement Cannot Confer Title Despite Later Registration Kerala High Court Upholds Convict’s Right to Support Child’s Education During Parole CBI Gets One-Day Custody of NCLT Deputy Registrar in ₹3 Lakh Bribery Probe Linked to Lonavala Hotel Dispute KASHISH JAHAN 13 June 2025 The CBI secured one-day custody of NCLT Deputy Registrar Charan Pratap Singh in a ₹3 lakh bribery case tied to a Lonavala hotel dispute. Learn how new evidence and digital forensics are expanding the scope of this high-profile corruption probe. CBI Secures One-Day Custody of NCLT Deputy Registrar in ₹3 Lakh Bribery Case On June 10, a special court in Mumbai granted the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) one-day custody of Deputy Registrar Charan Pratap Singh of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) Mumbai Bench. Singh, along with assistant Karsan Ganesh Ahir, had been in judicial custody since May 29 for allegedly accepting a ₹3 lakh bribe in a case involving a Lonavala hotel ownership dispute. Legal Defense Invokes BNSS to Oppose Extended Custody Singh’s legal counsel, Sak Saxena, filed a bail application invoking the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). Saxena argued that further police custody is not permitted once judicial custody is granted, unless compelling new evidence emerges. He stressed that procedures like witness confrontation and document verification could be conducted within judicial custody itself. New Witness Testimony Justifies Further Interrogation The CBI introduced fresh witness statements recorded after the initial May 29 remand, which hinted at broader collusion within NCLT ranks. Based on this new testimony, the court approved a one-day police remand, enabling deeper interrogation under CBI custody. Bribery Charges Linked to Lonavala Hotel Dispute According to the CBI, Singh demanded ₹3 lakh from a businessman involved in a property dispute at the NCLT concerning a hotel in Lonavala. He instructed his assistant Ahir to collect the bribe during a meeting in Colaba, where a sting operation led to their immediate arrest. Further investigation revealed that Singh transferred ₹50,000 to fellow NCLT officer Pradeep Kumar Nagarale, believed to be a portion of the bribe. Additionally, the CBI recovered deleted WhatsApp chats from the mobile devices of Singh and Nagarale, now under forensic examination. Digital Forensics and a Widening Corruption Probe The CBI is employing advanced digital forensics to reconstruct deleted messages, analyze metadata, and trace digital footprints. These efforts aim to identify more potential accomplices within the tribunal. The investigation suggests a larger corruption network possibly involving senior staff members at the NCLT. The one-day remand was strategically sought to close critical gaps in the investigation, which could lead to extended custody or additional arrests. Judicial Oversight as CBI Pursues Tribunal Corruption This high-profile bribery case underscores the growing scrutiny of administrative corruption in India’s quasi-judicial institutions. With digital evidence and key testimonies surfacing, the probe could become a landmark in tackling tribunal-level graft. Singh’s one-day CBI custody signifies a crucial step toward justice—balancing legal procedure with effective enforcement. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases CBI Gets One-Day Custody of NCLT Deputy Registrar in ₹3 Lakh Bribery Probe Linked to Lonavala Hotel Dispute Sada Law • June 13, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Delhi High Court Dismisses PIL on Batla House Demolitions; Allows Individual Petitions Sada Law • June 13, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Chief Justice of India Warns Against Judicial Terrorism Amid Government Overreach Concerns Sada Law • June 13, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

CBI Gets One-Day Custody of NCLT Deputy Registrar in ₹3 Lakh Bribery Probe Linked to Lonavala Hotel Dispute Read More »

Supreme Court Affirms Right to Anticipatory Bail Across States in Matrimonial Disputes: Priya Indoria v. State of Karnataka (2023)

Leave a Comment / 2023, Case law / Sada Law

Trending Today Supreme Court Affirms Right to Anticipatory Bail Across States in Matrimonial Disputes: Priya Indoria v. State of Karnataka (2023) Supreme Court Rules on Governor’s Limited Discretion to Withhold Assent and Summon Punjab Legislative Assembly | State of Punjab v. Principal Secretary (2023) LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT ZEN MEDIA Supreme Court Judgment on Chargesheets: Not Public Documents, No Mandatory Online Upload by Investigating Agencies | Saurav Das v. Union of India (2023) Delhi High Court Dismisses PIL on Batla House Demolitions; Allows Individual Petitions INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT CLLRA NLU, DELHI Chief Justice of India Warns Against Judicial Terrorism Amid Government Overreach Concerns Supreme Court Rules Unregistered Sale Agreement Cannot Confer Title Despite Later Registration Kerala High Court Upholds Convict’s Right to Support Child’s Education During Parole Madras High Court Orders ‘No Caste, No Religion’ Certificates for Willing Applicants Supreme Court Affirms Right to Anticipatory Bail Across States in Matrimonial Disputes: Priya Indoria v. State of Karnataka (2023) REHA BHARGAV 13 June 2025 In a significant 2023 ruling, the Supreme Court of India held that High Courts and Sessions Courts can grant anticipatory bail even if the FIR is filed in another state. Read how the Priya Indoria case redefined anticipatory bail, misuse of FIRs, and personal liberty under Article 21. Introduction – A Landmark Case on Anticipatory Bail The Supreme Court‘s judgment in Priya Indoria v. State of Karnataka, delivered on November 20, 2023, addressed key issues surrounding anticipatory bail, personal liberty, and misuse of criminal law in matrimonial disputes. The petitioner, Priya Indoria, sought transit anticipatory bail in connection with multiple FIRs filed in Karnataka, which she claimed were false and vindictive, stemming from a personal dispute with her estranged husband and in-laws. Background and Facts of the Case Matrimonial Dispute Turns Criminal The case originated from a marital conflict, with multiple FIRs filed under Sections 498A, 406, 504, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. Priya Indoria argued these complaints were malicious and intended to harass her and her family after the breakdown of her marriage. Despite the core issues being civil in nature—relating to dowry, stridhan, and property—criminal charges were framed to escalate the matter. FIRs Across Jurisdictions All FIRs were filed in Karnataka, though the petitioner was residing in a different state. This raised the issue of whether High Courts or Sessions Courts outside the FIR’s jurisdiction could grant transit anticipatory bail. Legal Issues Raised Key Questions Before the Supreme Court Were the multiple FIRs filed against Priya Indoria an abuse of process? Was she entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC, even when FIRs were registered in a different state? Could the dispute be more accurately characterized as civil rather than criminal? Was there a violation of Article 21 – Right to Life and Personal Liberty? Arguments Presented Petitioner’s Arguments Misuse of Law: FIRs were filed out of malice, not justice. Repetitive FIRs: Multiple complaints based on the same set of facts amounted to legal harassment. Civil Dispute Mischaracterized: The core issue was matrimonial discord, not criminal conduct. Violation of Fundamental Rights: Her right to liberty was at risk due to unwarranted arrest threats. Entitlement to Anticipatory Bail: She met the conditions outlined in Section 438 CrPC. Precedents Cited: Referred to prior Supreme Court judgments on misuse of Section 498A IPC. Respondent’s Arguments Genuine Complaints: FIRs reflected real instances of cruelty and dowry misappropriation. Different Transactions: Each FIR related to separate incidents over time. Need for Custodial Interrogation: Important to recover stridhan and gather evidence. No Automatic Right to Bail: Particularly in serious offences like 498A and 406 IPC. Protection of Victims’ Rights: Alleged victims also deserved judicial protection. Supreme Court Judgment – Key Highlights The Supreme Court of India ruled in favor of Priya Indoria, granting anticipatory bail and condemning the misuse of criminal law in matrimonial matters. Notable Observations Abuse of Legal Process: The Court identified the repetitive FIRs as a clear case of abuse. Civil Dispute Given Criminal Shade: It reaffirmed the need to distinguish civil disputes from criminal charges. Emphasis on Article 21: Reiterated the importance of protecting personal liberty against legal intimidation. Transit Anticipatory Bail Permitted: High Courts and Sessions Courts have the jurisdiction to grant interim or transit anticipatory bail, even for FIRs registered in another state. Conclusion – Protecting Liberty and Preventing Legal Harassment The ruling in Priya Indoria v. State of Karnataka is a landmark decision in the context of family law, anticipatory bail, and abuse of criminal process. The Supreme Court highlighted the growing misuse of Section 498A IPC and multiple FIRs to settle personal scores. By affirming the right to seek anticipatory bail across jurisdictions, the judgment strengthens individual rights under Article 21 and promotes a balanced approach to justice in matrimonial disputes. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Case Laws Supreme Court Affirms Right to Anticipatory Bail Across States in Matrimonial Disputes: Priya Indoria v. State of Karnataka (2023) Sada Law • June 13, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Supreme Court Rules on Governor’s Limited Discretion to Withhold Assent and Summon Punjab Legislative Assembly | State of Punjab v. Principal Secretary (2023) Sada Law • June 13, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Supreme Court Judgment on Chargesheets: Not Public Documents, No Mandatory Online Upload by Investigating Agencies | Saurav Das v. Union of India (2023) Sada Law • June 13, 2025 • Case law • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Supreme Court Affirms Right to Anticipatory Bail Across States in Matrimonial Disputes: Priya Indoria v. State of Karnataka (2023) Read More »

Supreme Court Rules on Governor’s Limited Discretion to Withhold Assent and Summon Punjab Legislative Assembly | State of Punjab v. Principal Secretary (2023)

Leave a Comment / 2023, Case law / Sada Law

Trending Today Supreme Court Rules on Governor’s Limited Discretion to Withhold Assent and Summon Punjab Legislative Assembly | State of Punjab v. Principal Secretary (2023) LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT ZEN MEDIA Supreme Court Judgment on Chargesheets: Not Public Documents, No Mandatory Online Upload by Investigating Agencies | Saurav Das v. Union of India (2023) Delhi High Court Dismisses PIL on Batla House Demolitions; Allows Individual Petitions INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT CLLRA NLU, DELHI Chief Justice of India Warns Against Judicial Terrorism Amid Government Overreach Concerns Supreme Court Rules Unregistered Sale Agreement Cannot Confer Title Despite Later Registration Kerala High Court Upholds Convict’s Right to Support Child’s Education During Parole Madras High Court Orders ‘No Caste, No Religion’ Certificates for Willing Applicants LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT ALL INDIA FOOTBALL FEDERATION, DELHI Supreme Court Rules on Governor’s Limited Discretion to Withhold Assent and Summon Punjab Legislative Assembly | State of Punjab v. Principal Secretary (2023) REHA BHARGAV 13 June 2025 Explore the landmark 2023 Supreme Court of India judgment limiting the Governor of Punjab’s discretionary powers under Article 174 of the Indian Constitution, reinforcing the authority of elected governments and the Speaker in legislative processes. Introduction: A Constitutional Confrontation in Punjab On November 10, 2023, the Supreme Court of India delivered a significant verdict in State of Punjab v. Principal Secretary to the Governor of Punjab. This case addressed a major constitutional conflict between the Governor of Punjab and the elected state government, focusing on whether the Governor could indefinitely withhold assent to a bill or refuse to summon the Legislative Assembly after adjournment. The ruling clarified the limits of gubernatorial discretion under Article 174 of the Indian Constitution and reinforced democratic governance in state legislative affairs. Background and Facts of the Case In mid-2023, the Punjab Legislative Assembly was adjourned sine die amid political tensions. The Chief Minister-led government sought to reconvene a special session to pass critical bills. However, the Governor declined to summon the Assembly, citing discretionary power under Article 174. The Speaker of the Assembly attempted to reconvene the House without a fresh summons. The Government of Punjab then approached the Supreme Court, alleging a violation of constitutional norms. Legal Issues Raised Key Constitutional Questions Can the Governor refuse or delay reconvening the Assembly after adjournment sine die? Does the Speaker have authority to reconvene the Assembly without the Governor’s fresh summons? What are the constitutional boundaries of the Governor’s discretion under Article 174? Petitioner’s Arguments – Upholding Democratic Mandate The State of Punjab argued that the Governor is constitutionally bound to act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers. Their main points were: The Governor’s role is ceremonial. Discretionary powers must be limited under democratic principles. The Speaker has authority to reconvene an Assembly adjourned sine die. Respondent’s Arguments – Defending Discretion The Principal Secretary to the Governor argued: Article 174 grants autonomous discretion to the Governor. The refusal was based on timing and necessity. The Speaker exceeded constitutional limits by reconvening without authorization. Supreme Court Judgment – Reaffirming Democratic Norms The Supreme Court bench, comprising Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, Justice J.B. Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra, ruled unanimously in favor of the State of Punjab. Key Takeaways Governor’s Discretion is Limited: Must follow advice of the Council of Ministers. Elected Government’s Primacy: The Governor is a constitutional figurehead, not the executive. Speaker’s Autonomy Upheld: Can reconvene the Assembly post sine die adjournment. Checks on Abuse of Power: Governor’s refusal must be constitutionally justifiable. Judicial Direction: Governor must summon sessions promptly on government’s advice. Conclusion – Strengthening Indian Federalism and Democracy This 2023 verdict strengthens federalism in India by clarifying that elected governments hold the primary mandate in legislative matters. It limits the Governor’s discretion under Article 174 and upholds the authority of the Speaker of the Assembly. The ruling ensures that constitutional offices act to facilitate democracy, not hinder it—marking a milestone in the evolution of Indian constitutional law. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Case Laws Supreme Court Rules on Governor’s Limited Discretion to Withhold Assent and Summon Punjab Legislative Assembly | State of Punjab v. Principal Secretary (2023) Sada Law • June 13, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Supreme Court Judgment on Chargesheets: Not Public Documents, No Mandatory Online Upload by Investigating Agencies | Saurav Das v. Union of India (2023) Sada Law • June 13, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Supreme Court Mandates “Support Persons” for Child Victims Under POCSO Act in Bachpan Bachao Case Sada Law • June 11, 2025 • Case law • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Supreme Court Rules on Governor’s Limited Discretion to Withhold Assent and Summon Punjab Legislative Assembly | State of Punjab v. Principal Secretary (2023) Read More »

LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT ZEN MEDIA

Supreme Court Judgment on Chargesheets: Not Public Documents, No Mandatory Online Upload by Investigating Agencies | Saurav Das v. Union of India (2023)

Leave a Comment / 2023, Case law / Sada Law

Trending Today Mumbai EOW Arrests IPS Officer’s Husband in ₹7.2 Crore BMC Fraud Case Over Redevelopment Scam Nestlé India’s Bonus Share Proposal Reflects Confidence, Strong Governance, and Shareholder Commitment China’s Rare-Earth Export Curbs Disrupt Indian Industries: Push for Self-Reliance Gains Momentum Bihar’s Biggest Crackdown: ₹Crores in Properties Seized from 52 Criminals Under PMLA Madras High Court Halts ED Proceedings Against Film Producer, Cites Lack of Jurisdiction and Orders Return of Seized Items CLAT PG Candidate Challenges ₹30,000 Counselling Fee in Delhi High Court, Cites Financial Hardship Bombay High Court Pushes for Swift Resolution in Sony vs Tata Play Licensing Dispute Operation Thunder: How Nagpur is Leading India’s War Against Drugs with Tech and Community Power INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT LAWKARI LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT JURIDICA SOLUTION Supreme Court Judgment on Chargesheets: Not Public Documents, No Mandatory Online Upload by Investigating Agencies | Saurav Das v. Union of India (2023) REHA BHARGAV 13 June 2025 In the landmark 2023 judgment of Saurav Das v. Union of India, the Supreme Court of India clarified that chargesheets are not public documents and dismissed the plea to mandate their online publication. This ruling balances criminal justice transparency with privacy and fair trial rights. Introduction On January 20, 2023, the Supreme Court of India delivered a significant judgment in the case of Saurav Das v. Union of India. The case centered around whether investigating agencies should be required to upload chargesheets on their official websites to promote transparency. This ruling highlights the critical balance between public access to information and the protection of individual rights such as privacy and fair trial. Background of the Case Who is Saurav Das? Saurav Das (Note: if no Wikipedia page exists for Saurav Das, this link can be omitted or replaced with a relevant RTI or journalist page), a journalist and Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI) activist, filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking directions for police departments and investigating agencies to make chargesheets publicly accessible online, similar to First Information Reports (FIRs). The Petitioner’s Argument Das argued that chargesheets, once filed in court, become public documents under Section 74 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and therefore, should be uploaded on official websites. He emphasized this would enhance transparency, accountability, and help journalists, researchers, and victims better understand criminal proceedings. Respondents’ Counterarguments The Union of India and several state governments opposed this plea, stressing the right to privacy, presumption of innocence, and the risk of prejudicing fair trials. They noted that chargesheets contain sensitive evidence and accused individuals’ details, unlike FIRs, and unrestricted online access could lead to media trials and damage reputations unfairly. Key Issues in the Case Should chargesheets be mandatorily uploaded online by investigating agencies? Does online publication of chargesheets violate accused persons’ rights to privacy and a fair trial? How to balance transparency in the criminal justice system with constitutional protections under Article 21? Supreme Court Judgment Summary Chargesheets Are Not Public Documents The Supreme Court held that chargesheets differ fundamentally from FIRs. While FIRs initiate investigations and are basic public records, chargesheets contain detailed evidence, witness statements, and identities of the accused, warranting judicial protection. No Directive for Online Upload The Court dismissed the petition, ruling there is no constitutional or legal requirement for investigating agencies to upload chargesheets online. Access to chargesheets remains under judicial discretion, ensuring the accused’s rights are safeguarded. Balancing Transparency and Privacy The judgment emphasized the need to balance transparency with individual rights. Public access to chargesheets should be granted only through appropriate judicial processes to prevent prejudicial publicity and media trials. Conclusion: What This Means for Transparency and Privacy The Supreme Court’s decision in Saurav Das v. Union of India reinforces that chargesheets are sensitive legal documents protected by privacy and fair trial considerations. While transparency in criminal justice is vital, it must not come at the expense of constitutional rights. This judgment sets a precedent that access to chargesheets should be regulated by courts on a case-by-case basis, not by blanket online publication mandates. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sadalaw. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Case Laws K Umadevi vs Government of Tamil Nadu 2025: Supreme Court Recognizes Maternity Leave as Fundamental Reproductive Right Sada Law • June 20, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Supreme Court Judgment on Affinity Test in Scheduled Tribe Verification: Affinity Test Not Mandatory for ST Claims Sada Law • June 20, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Supreme Court Grants Bail Despite NDPS Act Section 37: Upholds Article 21 in Mohd. Muslim v. State (NCT of Delhi) Sada Law • June 20, 2025 • Case law • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Supreme Court Judgment on Chargesheets: Not Public Documents, No Mandatory Online Upload by Investigating Agencies | Saurav Das v. Union of India (2023) Read More »

Delhi High Court Dismisses PIL on Batla House Demolitions; Allows Individual Petitions

Leave a Comment / Live cases / Sada Law

Trending Today Delhi High Court Dismisses PIL on Batla House Demolitions; Allows Individual Petitions INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT CLLRA NLU, DELHI Chief Justice of India Warns Against Judicial Terrorism Amid Government Overreach Concerns Supreme Court Rules Unregistered Sale Agreement Cannot Confer Title Despite Later Registration Kerala High Court Upholds Convict’s Right to Support Child’s Education During Parole Madras High Court Orders ‘No Caste, No Religion’ Certificates for Willing Applicants LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT ALL INDIA FOOTBALL FEDERATION, DELHI INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT DKL ADVOCATES INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT CHAMBER OF ADV. ADITYA LELE, MUMBAI JOB OPPORTUNITY AT ZEUS LAW ASSOCIATES Delhi High Court Dismisses PIL on Batla House Demolitions; Allows Individual Petitions Kashish jahan 13 June 2025 Delhi High Court dismisses PIL filed by AAP MLA Amanatullah Khan against Batla House demolitions by DDA. Court allows individual petitions, emphasizing judicial caution in public interest litigations. Introduction: Overview of the Delhi High Court’s Decision On June 11, 2025, the Delhi High Court dismissed the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by AAP MLA Amanatullah Khan, which challenged the Delhi Development Authority (DDA)-led demolitions in Batla House. The court allowed the withdrawal of the PIL and declined to issue any broad stay orders on the demolition process. Background: The PIL and Allegations of Arbitrary Demolitions The PIL alleged that the DDA’s demolition drives in Batla House were arbitrary and affected local residents without following due legal procedures. Amanatullah Khan argued that the demolitions violated residents’ rights and called for judicial intervention to halt further demolitions. Court’s Rationale: Importance of Specificity in PILs The Delhi High Court emphasized that Public Interest Litigations must be specific and focused rather than broad-based. The bench noted that existing Supreme Court of India guidelines regulate demolition procedures. Many affected individuals had already approached the court through individual petitions seeking relief. The court highlighted that PILs should not replace focused legal action by aggrieved parties and should only be entertained when there are clear, demonstrable violations of rights. Outcome: PIL Withdrawal and Future Legal Options The PIL filed by Amanatullah Khan was formally withdrawn and dismissed by the court. No stay or court orders were issued to stop the ongoing demolitions in Batla House. However, residents and affected parties remain free to file individual petitions for relief as needed. Conclusion: Judicial Discipline in Public Interest Litigation This decision reaffirms the judiciary’s cautious approach to PILs, ensuring they are used appropriately to protect genuine public interest. The Delhi High Court’s ruling serves as a reminder that broad-based litigations lacking specific grievances may not receive court intervention, encouraging individuals to seek targeted legal remedies. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Case Laws Supreme Court Mandates “Support Persons” for Child Victims Under POCSO Act in Bachpan Bachao Case Sada Law • June 11, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Supreme Court Rules Section 6A Unconstitutional with Retrospective Effect in CBI v. R.R. Kishore Judgment Sada Law • June 11, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Supreme Court Judgment on Cancellation of Default Bail After Chargesheet Filing in Serious Offence Cases – State Through CBI v. T. Gangi Reddy (2023) Sada Law • June 11, 2025 • Case law • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Delhi High Court Dismisses PIL on Batla House Demolitions; Allows Individual Petitions Read More »

INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT CLLRA NLU, DELHI

Chief Justice of India Warns Against Judicial Terrorism Amid Government Overreach Concerns

Leave a Comment / Live cases / Sada Law

Trending Today Chief Justice of India Warns Against Judicial Terrorism Amid Government Overreach Concerns Supreme Court Rules Unregistered Sale Agreement Cannot Confer Title Despite Later Registration Kerala High Court Upholds Convict’s Right to Support Child’s Education During Parole Madras High Court Orders ‘No Caste, No Religion’ Certificates for Willing Applicants LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT ALL INDIA FOOTBALL FEDERATION, DELHI INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT DKL ADVOCATES INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT CHAMBER OF ADV. ADITYA LELE, MUMBAI JOB OPPORTUNITY AT ZEUS LAW ASSOCIATES LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT FALCONS Supreme Court Rules Aadhaar Not Mandatory for School Admissions, Safeguards Children’s Right to Education Chief Justice of India Warns Against Judicial Terrorism Amid Government Overreach Concerns Prabhat Kumar Biltoria 13 June 2025 Chief Justice BR Gavai highlights the importance of judicial activism without crossing into judicial terrorism. He addresses concerns over judicial overreach while emphasizing the judiciary’s role in protecting India’s constitutional rights. Introduction: Judicial Activism vs Judicial Terrorism Chief Justice of India BR Gavai recently addressed a critical issue in Indian democracy — the fine line between judicial activism and what he terms “judicial terrorism.” Speaking at the Oxford Union during a conversation with Indian students at Trinity College, Oxford, Chief Justice Gavai emphasized that while judicial activism is a vital part of India’s democratic framework, it must not overstep its boundaries. Judicial Overreach and Government Concerns In the backdrop of government accusations of judicial overreach, Chief Justice Gavai clarified the judiciary’s role. He warned against courts exceeding their mandate, stating, “Judicial activism is here to stay. However, judicial activism must not devolve into judicial terrorism.” Gavai explained that judicial intervention is justified only in exceptional circumstances, such as when laws violate the Constitution of India’s basic structure or infringe upon fundamental rights. When Should Judicial Review Be Applied? Chief Justice Gavai stressed that judicial review should be exercised judiciously and sparingly. It is appropriate only when: A statute conflicts directly with fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution A law violates the basic structure of the Constitution Legislation is manifestly discriminatory or arbitrary This limited but crucial role safeguards citizens’ rights while maintaining the balance of power among the judiciary, legislature, and executive. Insights from Justice Surya Kant on Judicial Restraint Echoing Chief Justice Gavai’s caution, Justice Surya Kant, in his keynote speech at the Envision India Conclave, highlighted the importance of respecting the legislature’s role. Kant remarked, “Courts must not override the people’s will but should facilitate democratic dialogue, protect the vulnerable, and uphold the rule of law even in politically uncertain times.” Both jurists agree that judicial overreach threatens this delicate balance of power. The Constitution: A Quiet Revolution for Justice and Equality Chief Justice Gavai, the second Dalit and first Buddhist to lead India’s judiciary, called the Constitution a “quiet revolution etched in ink.” He praised its transformative power, which guarantees rights and uplifts historically oppressed communities. This view underscores the judiciary’s responsibility to protect and empower all citizens. A Call to Indian Students Abroad: Return and Build Bharat Addressing Indian students studying in the UK, Chief Justice Gavai urged them to return home and contribute to nation-building. “Your only attraction is that once you have finished your studies, you do not stay here,” he said. “Return to India and help make Bharat a robust global power. Bharat needs you.” Conclusion: Upholding Democracy Through Balanced Judicial Action The comments from Chief Justice BR Gavai highlight the critical balance required between judicial activism and judicial restraint in India’s democracy. While the judiciary must remain vigilant in protecting constitutional rights, it should avoid overreach that disrupts democratic governance. As India moves forward, this balance will be essential to safeguarding justice, equality, and the rule of law. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Case Laws Supreme Court Mandates “Support Persons” for Child Victims Under POCSO Act in Bachpan Bachao Case Sada Law • June 11, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Supreme Court Rules Section 6A Unconstitutional with Retrospective Effect in CBI v. R.R. Kishore Judgment Sada Law • June 11, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Supreme Court Judgment on Cancellation of Default Bail After Chargesheet Filing in Serious Offence Cases – State Through CBI v. T. Gangi Reddy (2023) Sada Law • June 11, 2025 • Case law • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Chief Justice of India Warns Against Judicial Terrorism Amid Government Overreach Concerns Read More »

A DYNAMIC LAW JOURNAL

Telangana High Court Grants Bail, Stays Conviction of Gali Janardhan Reddy in Illegal Mining Case

Chhattisgarh High Court Backs SBI’s POSH Action in Sexual Harassment Case

CBI Gets One-Day Custody of NCLT Deputy Registrar in ₹3 Lakh Bribery Probe Linked to Lonavala Hotel Dispute

Supreme Court Affirms Right to Anticipatory Bail Across States in Matrimonial Disputes: Priya Indoria v. State of Karnataka (2023)

Supreme Court Rules on Governor’s Limited Discretion to Withhold Assent and Summon Punjab Legislative Assembly | State of Punjab v. Principal Secretary (2023)

LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT ZEN MEDIA

Supreme Court Judgment on Chargesheets: Not Public Documents, No Mandatory Online Upload by Investigating Agencies | Saurav Das v. Union of India (2023)

Delhi High Court Dismisses PIL on Batla House Demolitions; Allows Individual Petitions

INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT CLLRA NLU, DELHI

Chief Justice of India Warns Against Judicial Terrorism Amid Government Overreach Concerns

Editorial message

Quick links

Contact info