The Supreme Court has ruled that psychological evaluation of a child should not be treated as a routine measure in custody disputes before Family Courts. The Court clarified that no assessment should be conducted if a psychologist’s report finds it unnecessary or undesirable for the child’s welfare.
Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra recused himself from hearing Jacqueline Fernandez’s plea in the Rs 200-crore money laundering case involving Sukesh Chandrashekhar, citing a conflict of interest arising from a connected matter. The Supreme Court directed that the case be listed on June 25 before a different Bench.
The Supreme Court held that loss of a wife’s domestic care constitutes an independent head of compensation in motor accident claims. Granting enhanced compensation to a widower, the Court recognised homemakers’ invaluable contribution and observed that they should be regarded as “nation-builders” in society.
Today, On 11th June , The Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear on Friday a petition filed by Congress leader Meenakshi Natarajan challenging the rejection of her Rajya Sabha nomination from Madhya Pradesh. Natarajan has sought judicial intervention against the decision, bringing the nomination dispute before the apex court for urgent consideration.
Senior Congress leader Meenakshi Natarajan has moved the Supreme Court challenging the rejection of her Rajya Sabha nomination from Madhya Pradesh. The plea raises important questions on candidate disclosure obligations, election transparency, pending court proceedings, and the legality of the Returning Officer’s decision.
The Supreme Court expressed concern over threats and attacks targeting retired Bombay High Court judge Justice Gautam Patel and his family, warning that such incidents threaten judicial independence and the administration of justice. The Court observed that fear and intimidation could discourage judges from delivering impartial judgments.
A Supreme Court-appointed amicus curiae blamed the MCD for the Saidulajab building collapse that killed six people and injured fourteen. The report stated that authorities were aware of unauthorised construction for years but failed to take effective action, making the tragedy a result of prolonged regulatory neglect.
The Supreme Court set aside the conviction of a KSRTC bus driver, holding that following a conductor’s signal to move the vehicle cannot by itself amount to criminal negligence. The Court ruled that a driver acting on the conductor’s instructions performs a normal duty and cannot be faulted without evidence of recklessness.