Supreme Court - The Legal Chamber

Supreme Court Upholds Freedom of Speech: Protects Online Discussion Rights in Wikimedia vs. ANI Case

11May

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Upholds Freedom of Speech: Protects Online Discussion Rights in Wikimedia vs. ANI Case

The Supreme Court ruled that the Delhi High Court's order directing Wikimedia to remove content criticizing judicial proceedings violated freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a). Citing precedents like Sahara India Real Estate Corp., the Court held that prior restraint on publications must meet strict tests of necessity and proportionality, and only apply if there's a "real and substantial risk" to justice. It emphasized that open criticism of court proceedings, unless scandalizing or obstructing justice, is protected. The judgment reaffirmed intermediaries' limited liability under IT Act Section 79, while cautioning courts against disproportionate takedown orders chilling free expression. Facts Of The Case: The case arose from a defamation suit filed by ANI Media Private Limited agains...

Supreme Court Protects NGO Workers: Quashes Criminal Case Against Anti-Trafficking Activists, Slams ‘Vexatious Prosecution'”

9May

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Protects NGO Workers: Quashes Criminal Case Against Anti-Trafficking Activists, Slams ‘Vexatious Prosecution'”

The Supreme Court quashed criminal proceedings under Sections 186 (obstruction) and 353 IPC (assault on public servant) against anti-trafficking activists, holding the allegations lacked mens rea and essential ingredients of the offences. It ruled the prosecution was legally barred under Section 195 CrPC (requiring complaint by aggrieved public servant) and non-cognizable without magistrate approval under Section 155(2) CrPC. The Court emphasized that inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC must prevent vexatious prosecutions, especially where prima facie allegations fail to disclose offences. The judgment reaffirmed that disputed facts in FIRs must be scrutinized to safeguard liberty against abuse of process. Facts Of The Case: The case involved Umashankar Yadav and another appellant, me...

Supreme Court Allows Unregistered Sale Agreement: Permits Unregistered Document as Proof of Oral Contract

9May

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Unregistered Sale Agreement: Permits Unregistered Document as Proof of Oral Contract

The Supreme Court ruled that an unregistered and unstamped sale agreement (dated 01.01.2000) could be admitted as evidence under the proviso to Section 49 of the Registration Act, 1908, in a specific performance suit. The Court clarified that such documents are permissible to prove collateral transactions or oral agreements, even if inadmissible for transferring title. It overturned the High Court's rejection, emphasizing that admissibility for limited purposes does not require stamping or registration. The judgment reaffirmed the precedent in S. Kaladevi v. V.R. Somasundaram (2010) 5 SCC 401, allowing unregistered documents as evidence in suits for specific performance or collateral claims. No costs were awarded. Facts Of The Case: The dispute arose from an agreement to sell dated 01.01...

Supreme Court Rules on Property Dispute: Unregistered Agreements Can’t Be Dismissed Without Trial

9May

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Rules on Property Dispute: Unregistered Agreements Can’t Be Dismissed Without Trial

The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred in dismissing substantive prayers (declaratory reliefs) in the appellants' suit while deciding an interim injunction appeal. It ruled that unregistered documents' validity must be examined during trial, not at the interim stage under Section 49 of the Registration Act, 1908. The Court emphasized that interim proceedings cannot adjudicate the suit's merits, restoring the matter for proper trial with protection against dispossession. The judgment reaffirms the distinction between interim relief and final determination of rights. Facts Of The Case: The case involved a dispute over tenancy rights in a shop (Shop No. 5, Bajarang Krupa Building, Mumbai) among the descendants of three brothers—Magruram, Deepnarayan, and Baburam Chotanki Gup...

Supreme Court Upholds Mandatory District Survey Report for Sand Mining: Draft DSR Not Valid

9May

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Upholds Mandatory District Survey Report for Sand Mining: Draft DSR Not Valid

The Supreme Court upheld the National Green Tribunal’s quashing of a sand mining e-auction, ruling that only a final, valid District Survey Report (DSR) permits environmental clearance. It reinforced mandatory DSR compliance under EIA Notifications, stressing strict adherence to environmental regulatory frameworks and prohibiting reliance on draft DSRs. Facts Of The Case: The case arose when the District Magistrate of Saharanpur, Uttar Pradesh, issued an e-auction notice dated 13.02.2023 for sand, gravel, and boulder mining in the riverbeds under the U.P. Sub Mineral (Remedy) Rules, 2021. Gaurav Kumar, a resident of Haryana, challenged this notice before the National Green Tribunal (NGT), arguing that the auction was illegal as there was no valid District Survey Report (DSR) at the time....

Supreme Court Upholds Quashing of 498A Case Against In-Laws : Calls It ‘Abuse of Process'”

9May

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Upholds Quashing of 498A Case Against In-Laws : Calls It ‘Abuse of Process'”

The Supreme Court dismissed a Special Leave Petition challenging the High Court's quashing of criminal proceedings under Sections 498A, 325, 506 IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act. The Court upheld the invocation of Section 482 CrPC, finding the complaint contained material inconsistencies and amounted to an abuse of process, while emphasizing the need for cautious scrutiny of matrimonial cases involving extended family members. The judgment reaffirmed judicial discretion to prevent misuse of criminal proceedings in family disputes. Facts Of The Case: The petitioner, Disha Kapoor, filed a criminal complaint under Section 156(3) CrPC against her husband and nine relatives, including in-laws and extended family members, alleging offenses under Sections 498A (cruelty), 325 (voluntarily causing g...

Supreme Court Upholds Higher Compensation for Loss of Income in Road Accident Claim

9May

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Upholds Higher Compensation for Loss of Income in Road Accident Claim

The Supreme Court enhanced compensation for a road accident victim with 50% disability, revising multiple heads under the Motor Vehicles Act. It increased future income loss by applying a 40% future prospects multiplier and upheld medical expense reimbursement with additional allowances. The judgment reaffirmed principles from Pranay Sethi and Ramachandrappa, ensuring just compensation with 9% interest. Facts Of The Case: The case involves M. Seetharama, a 38-year-old man who suffered severe injuries in a road accident on 25.06.2015 when his bike collided with a rashly driven jeep. An FIR was registered against the jeep driver, confirming negligence. Seetharama sustained multiple fractures, including in his right femur, clavicle, tibia, and fibula, leading to vascular compromise and even...

“‘No Valid Title, No Relief’ : Supreme Court Rules Against Fraudulent Land Transfers, Upholds State’s Vesting Rights

8May

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

“‘No Valid Title, No Relief’ : Supreme Court Rules Against Fraudulent Land Transfers, Upholds State’s Vesting Rights

The Supreme Court ruled that unregistered agreements of sale and subsequent revalidations cannot confer valid title under the Registration Act, 1908, emphasizing that only registered deeds of conveyance transfer immovable property rights. It upheld the State's statutory vesting of land under land reform laws, rejecting claims based on fraudulent documents and unproven possession. The judgment clarified that interim court orders cannot establish lawful possession, and discretionary writ relief under Article 226 is unavailable where title is suspect. The Court reaffirmed the principles from Suraj Lamp regarding invalid "GPA sales" while preserving the State's right to initiate proceedings under land ceiling laws. Facts Of The Case: The case involved a dispute over 53 acres of land in...

Supreme Court Mandates Full Document Disclosure by Enforcement Directorate at Complaint Stage, Strengthens Fair Trial Rights

8May

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Mandates Full Document Disclosure by Enforcement Directorate at Complaint Stage, Strengthens Fair Trial Rights

The Supreme Court ruled that accused persons in PMLA cases have the right to receive copies of all documents seized during investigation, including those not relied upon by the Enforcement Directorate. The judgment clarified that this right flows from Sections 207/208 CrPC principles and is essential for ensuring fair trial rights under Article 21. The Court held that while documents can be restricted during ongoing investigations, accused are entitled to full disclosure at later stages, especially when facing the reverse burden of proof under Sections 24 and 45(1)(ii) of PMLA. The decision balances investigative needs with constitutional protections. Facts Of The Case: The case involved two criminal appeals concerning the rights of accused persons under the Prevention of Money Launderin...

Supreme Court Grants Pension to Schizophrenia-Affected Veteran, Criticizes Flawed Medical Process

8May

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Grants Pension to Schizophrenia-Affected Veteran, Criticizes Flawed Medical Process

The Supreme Court held that denial of disability pension based on a Medical Board's unreasoned opinion violates Regulation 423 of the Medical Services Regulations, which mandates detailed reasoning for attributability/aggravation findings. The Court emphasized strict compliance with procedural safeguards for service-linked disabilities and ruled that conclusory medical opinions without justification cannot deprive veterans of pensionary benefits. Liberal interpretation of beneficial provisions was underscored, with the burden shifting to authorities when discharge is initiated institutionally. The judgment reinforces the statutory requirement of causal connection between service conditions and disability, while mandating reasoned analysis from medical authorities. Facts Of The Case: The ...