The Legal Affair’s Post

Honourable Supreme Court of India has held that while interpreting a provision the court only interprets the law and cannot legislate it. If a provision of law is misused and subjected to the abuse of process of law, it is for the legislature to amend, modify or repeal it, if deemed necessary. The legislative Casus Omissus cannot be supplied by judicial interpretative process unless Statute vires is subject to challenge via Writ of Certiorari. Abhijit Mishra #supremecourt #highcourt #law #legal #lawyer #legislature #legislative #judicial #justice #constitution #India

On September 2, the government established 23rd Law Commission of India for a three-year term. The Commission works on projects based on the references received from the Central Government and/or from the Supreme Court and High Courts. Our Partner (Head - Disputes) Indranil Deshmukh in an article published in the The Economic Times shares his views on Inclusion of measures to improve Judicial Administration within the scope of reference of the 23rd Law Commission. Read it at: https://lnkd.in/g22BwdUF #DisputeResolution #LawCommission #JudicialAdministration

Discover the 25 essential things every law student must know about the Constitution of India Don't miss out! Tap the link to learn more https://lnkd.in/d6kiT7YZ #ConstitutionOfIndia #LegalKnowledge #LawStudents

In a critical judgment, the Supreme Court of India in Vijay Laxman Bhawe vs. P & S Nirman Pvt. Ltd. reinforced that "entertaining an application filed by a stranger is totally unsustainable in law." This decision, delivered by Honorable Justice B.R. Gavai, underscores the importance of procedural integrity. This ruling sets a crucial precedent for ensuring that only directly involved parties can influence legal proceedings, thereby maintaining the sanctity of the judicial process. Dive into our detailed analysis to understand the profound impact of this judgment on future litigation in India. https://lnkd.in/gUkCkUMT

Understanding the Admissibility of Evidence: Insights from Section 17 of the Indian Evidence Act Curious about what makes evidence admissible in court? Learn all about Section 17 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and how judges determine what evidence can be considered. Our expert breaks it down in this detailed video. Don’t miss out on this essential legal knowledge! Watch now and stay informed! #AdmissibilityOfEvidence #IndianEvidenceAct #Section17 #LegalAdmissions #EvidenceLaw #CourtEvidence #LegalProcedure #JudicialDecision #RelevanceInLaw #EvidenceAdmissibility #LegalReliability #CourtroomEvidence #EvidenceCriteria #LawAndJustice #LegalRights #JudicialSystem #EvidenceAssessment #CriminalLawIndia #CivilLawIndia #LawEducation #LegalFramework #JusticeSystem #CaseLaw #JudicialReview #EvidenceAnalysis #LegalPrinciples #LawyersOfIndia #LawAndOrder #CourtProcedures #UnderstandingLaw

Flexibility in Legal Timelines: Condonation of Delay for Acquittal Appeals In a landmark decision, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Mohd Abaad Ali v. Directorate of Revenue Prosecution Intelligence has clarified the applicability of s. 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, to appeals against acquittal under s. 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Authored by our associate Mr. Aditya Gupta, the judgment underscores that delays in filing such appeals can be condoned, offering prosecutorial authorities a broader scope for seeking justice. This pivotal ruling revisits and distinguishes from past precedents under the older 1908 Act, highlighting a progressive interpretation that aligns with contemporary legal frameworks. It represents a significant step in ensuring that procedural limitations do not hinder the pursuit of justice, especially in cases with substantial public interest. For a detailed analysis and further insights, please read the full article here: https://lnkd.in/gBemFC7q #MetalegalAdvocates #MetalegalCourtRulings #SupremeCourtIndia #LimitationAct #CriminalLaw #AppealRights #LegalAnalysis #TimelineFlexibility

In the intricate web of legal proceedings, time often plays a pivotal role, dictating the fate of cases and the dispensation of justice. The recent judgment by the Supreme Court of India in the case of Purni Devi & Anr. vs. Babu Ram & Anr. sheds light on the nuanced application of limitation laws, particularly regarding the exclusion of time spent pursuing remedies in good faith before the wrong forum. This blog delves into the significance of time exclusion provisions in ensuring fairness and equity within the legal system, and how they serve as a beacon of hope for litigants navigating the complexities of litigation. #LegalCase #LimitationAct #JusticeServed https://lnkd.in/gECzNf2C

Every Lawyer must read this

Suppose you’re a senior manager at a company involved in a commercial dispute that is being adjudicated by a regulatory tribunal. As the case progresses, you notice that the tribunal has started considering issues that are clearly within the jurisdiction of a different court, like a criminal court or a higher civil court.This overreach could result in severe consequences for your company, including penalties that are not within the tribunal's power to impose. You wonder if there is a legal way to stop the tribunal from overstepping its boundaries. In such cases, the writ of Prohibition is a legal remedy designed to address this exact situation. A writ of Prohibition is a directive issued by a higher court to a lower court or tribunal, ordering it to halt proceedings in a case where it is acting beyond its legal authority. The purpose of this writ is to prevent lower courts or tribunals from continuing with a proceeding that falls outside their jurisdiction or authority. •Conditions for Issuance: -> Jurisdictional Overreach -> Risk of Unlawful Action -> Lack of Other Remedies The writ of Prohibition is essential for maintaining the correct jurisdictional boundaries within the judicial system, preventing lower courts and tribunals from exceeding their legal authority. It serves as a crucial check on judicial power, protecting individuals and organizations from unlawful decisions and ensuring that the rule of law is upheld. Feel free to share your thoughts on how the writ of Prohibition can be used to protect against judicial and administrative overreach! #legaltips #businesstips #constitutionofindia #indianconstitution #legalawareness

Eminent advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, who spearheaded legal reforms by PILs, has told the Supreme Court during the black days of the emergency, the government by the Constitution (42nd Amendment) Act inserted ‘Socialist Secular Integrity’ in Preamble without changing the adoption date i.e. November 26, 1949 and on behalf of the Constituent Assembly, which did not exist in 1976 and even without following due process of law. “Such a substantial factual brazen mistake and manifest arbitrariness cannot be allowed to continuously exist in the Constitution of the largest and oldest democracy of the world. In fact, such a post facto alteration of the facts needs to be restored with immediate effect,” he said. To read full article, click link below 👇 https://rb.gy/359tv0 . . Lawstreet Journal Ashwini Upadhyay #lsjjudiciary #lawstreetj #PreambleDebate #ConstitutionalAmendment #SupremeCourt #LegalChallenge #ConstitutionalLaw #SCArguments #BJP #ConstitutionFraud #IndianConstitution #LegalUpdate #india #legalnews