Constitutional Law with Article 145

Supreme Court Clarifies Duties of Advocates-on-Record and Raises Concerns on Senior Advocate Designations: Jitender @ Kalla vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) (20 February 2025)

/ Abhay S. Oka, Advocates Act, 1961, Advocates Act, 1961 with Section 16, Advocates Act, 1961 with Section 29, Advocates Act, 1961 with Section 30, Augustine George Masih, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 145, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 307, Judges

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 20 February 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 249 Judges: Abhay S. Oka, J., Augustine George Masih, J. What are the duties and obligations of an Advocate-on-Record in the Supreme Court? The Supreme Court of India, in Jitender @ Kalla vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi), addressed this critical question while […]

Supreme Court Clarifies Duties of Advocates-on-Record and Raises Concerns on Senior Advocate Designations: Jitender @ Kalla vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) (20 February 2025) Read Post »

Curative Petitions: Supreme Court clarifies procedure when Review Petition is dismissed after Open Court Hearing (26 February 2024)

/ Constitution of India, Constitutional Law with Article 137, Constitutional Law with Article 145, Order XLVIII, Supreme Court Rules, 2013, Order XV, Supreme Court Rules, 2013, Supreme Court Rules, 2013

Supreme Court Clarifies Procedure for Curative Petitions After Open Court Review Dismissal LEGAL ISSUE: Procedure for filing curative petitions when the review petition has been dismissed after an open court hearing. CASE TYPE: Civil Procedure Case Name: M/S Brahmaputra Concrete Pipe Industries Etc. Etc. vs. The Assam State Electricity Board and Others Judgment Date: 26

Curative Petitions: Supreme Court clarifies procedure when Review Petition is dismissed after Open Court Hearing (26 February 2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court Commutes Death Sentence in Kidnapping and Murder Case: Sundar @ Sundarrajan vs. State (21 March 2023)

/ Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 235, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 137, Constitutional Law with Article 145, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Hima Kohli, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 65B, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 364A, Judges, Offences Against Human Body, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha

Supreme Court Commutes Death Sentence in Kidnapping and Murder Case: Sundar @ Sundarrajan vs. State (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Review of death penalty and consideration of mitigating circumstances. CASE TYPE: Criminal. Case Name: Sundar @ Sundarrajan vs. State by Inspector of Police. Judgment Date: 21 March 2023. Introduction Date of the Judgment: 21 March 2023 Citation:

Supreme Court Commutes Death Sentence in Kidnapping and Murder Case: Sundar @ Sundarrajan vs. State (21 March 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Commutes Death Sentence in Kidnapping and Murder Case: Sundar vs. State (21 March 2023)

/ Code of Criminal Procedure, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 235, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 354(3), Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 137, Constitutional Law with Article 145, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Hima Kohli, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 65A, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 65B, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 364A, Judges, Offences Against Human Body, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha

Supreme Court Commutes Death Sentence in Kidnapping and Murder Case: Sundar vs. State (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Review of a death sentence based on errors apparent on the face of the record and the adequacy of sentencing hearings. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Sundar @ Sundarrajan vs. State by Inspector of Police Judgment Date: 21 March

Supreme Court Commutes Death Sentence in Kidnapping and Murder Case: Sundar vs. State (21 March 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Commutes Death Sentence to 30 Years in Gruesome Family Murder Case: Mofil Khan & Anr. vs. The State of Jharkhand (26 November 2021)

/ B. V. Nagarathna, B.R. Gavai, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 137, Constitutional Law with Article 145, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 34, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Offences Against Human Body

Supreme Court Commutes Death Sentence to 30 Years in Gruesome Family Murder Case LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the death penalty should be upheld or commuted to life imprisonment, considering the possibility of reformation and rehabilitation of the convicts. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Mofil Khan & Anr. vs. The State of Jharkhand Judgment Date: 26 November

Supreme Court Commutes Death Sentence to 30 Years in Gruesome Family Murder Case: Mofil Khan & Anr. vs. The State of Jharkhand (26 November 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court allows Advocate on Record to use “Law Chambers” style: In Re: Advocate on Record (20 January 2021)

/ Advocates on Record, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 145, Dinesh Maheshwari, Hrishikesh Roy, Judges, Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Supreme Court Rules, Supreme Court Rules, 2013 with Order IV

Supreme Court Allows Advocate on Record to Use “Law Chambers” Style: In Re: Advocate on Record (2021) Date of the Judgment: 20 January 2021 Citation: (2021) INSC 22 Judges: Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J., Dinesh Maheshwari, J., Hrishikesh Roy, J. Can an Advocate on Record (AOR) register their practice using a style like “Law Chambers of

Supreme Court allows Advocate on Record to use “Law Chambers” style: In Re: Advocate on Record (20 January 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the use of RTI Act for obtaining High Court documents: Chief Information Commissioner vs. High Court of Gujarat (2020)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 145, Constitutional Law with Article 225, Hrishikesh Roy, Judges, R. Banumathi, Right to Information Act, 2005, Right to Information Act, 2005 with Section 22, Right to Information Act, 2005 with Section 6(2)

Supreme Court clarifies the use of RTI Act for obtaining High Court documents: Chief Information Commissioner vs. High Court of Gujarat (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the Right to Information (RTI) Act can be used to obtain certified copies of documents from High Courts, bypassing the specific rules framed by the High Courts for this purpose.

Supreme Court clarifies the use of RTI Act for obtaining High Court documents: Chief Information Commissioner vs. High Court of Gujarat (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Death Penalty in Delhi Gang Rape Case: Akshay Kumar Singh’s Review Petition Dismissed (2019)

/ A. S. Bopanna, Ashok Bhushan, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 137, Constitutional Law with Article 145, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 376, Judges, Offences Against Human Body, R. Banumathi, Supreme Court Rules, 2013, Supreme Court Rules, 2013 with Order XLVII Rule 1

Supreme Court Upholds Death Penalty in Delhi Gang Rape Case: Akshay Kumar Singh’s Review Petition Dismissed (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Review of a judgment confirming conviction and death penalty in a criminal case. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Akshay Kumar Singh v. State (NCT of Delhi) Judgment Date: 18 December 2019 Date of the Judgment: 18

Supreme Court Upholds Death Penalty in Delhi Gang Rape Case: Akshay Kumar Singh’s Review Petition Dismissed (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Validity of State Transport Authority Decision by Majority: State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Mahendra Gupta (2018)

/ A.K. Sikri, Ashok Bhushan, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 145, Judges, Judicial Review, Madhya Pradesh Motor Vehicles Rules, 1994, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 with Section 68, State Transport Authority

Supreme Court Upholds Validity of State Transport Authority Decision by Majority: State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Mahendra Gupta (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a decision by a multi-member body like the State Transport Authority is valid if it is made by a majority of members present during the hearing, even if one member is transferred before

Supreme Court Upholds Validity of State Transport Authority Decision by Majority: State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Mahendra Gupta (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Chief Justice’s Roster Authority in Judicial Bribery Case: Kamini Jaiswal vs. Union of India (2017)

/ A.K. Sikri, A.M. Khanwilkar, Arun Mishra, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 144, Constitutional Law with Article 145, Judges, R.K. Agrawal

LEGAL ISSUE: The authority of the Chief Justice of India to allocate cases and constitute benches. CASE TYPE: Criminal Writ Petition Case Name: Kamini Jaiswal vs. Union of India & Anr. [Judgment Date]: November 14, 2017 Can a judicial order dictate the composition of a bench in the Supreme Court? This question arose in a

Supreme Court Upholds Chief Justice’s Roster Authority in Judicial Bribery Case: Kamini Jaiswal vs. Union of India (2017) Read Post »

Chief Justice’s Authority: Supreme Court Settles Roster Allocation in Judicial Accountability Case (2017)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Amitava Roy, Arun Mishra, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 145, Dipak Misra, Judges, R.K. Agrawal, Supreme Court Rules, Supreme Court Rules with Order VI Rule 2

LEGAL ISSUE: Authority of the Chief Justice in allocating cases and constituting benches. CASE TYPE: Public Interest Litigation (Constitutional Law). Case Name: Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms vs. Union of India and Another. Judgment Date: November 10, 2017 Can a two-judge bench direct the Chief Justice of India on how to constitute a bench?

Chief Justice’s Authority: Supreme Court Settles Roster Allocation in Judicial Accountability Case (2017) Read Post »

Scroll to Top