The Supreme Court has raised concerns over inconsistent work ethics among High Court judges, stating, “Some judges work very hard, others take unnecessary coffee breaks,” and stressed the urgent need for a performance audit.
The Bombay High Court condemned police for copy-pasting witness statements, labeling it a “dangerous culture” that threatens justice. The court emphasized the need for independent recording of statements to maintain investigation integrity. It urged the Maharashtra government to implement strict guidelines to ensure fairness in serious criminal cases, vital for public trust.
![[BREAKING] Supreme Court Digital Services Affected Due to National Government Cloud Disruption](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/image-312.png?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
The Supreme Court upheld the life sentences of five convicts from a 2002 murder case, rejecting their appeal on procedural flaws and witness inconsistencies. The court emphasized the importance of eyewitness accounts, asserting that minor contradictions do not undermine their credibility. This decision reaffirms the commitment to maintaining societal order and justice.
Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud emphasized caution in integrating AI into the criminal justice system due to potential biases. Speaking at a conference, he stressed the need for ethical AI deployment, noting its impact on marginalized communities. He also highlighted how climate change exacerbates inequities, particularly for disadvantaged groups.
The Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry opposes the proposed replacement of three criminal laws with new ones, expressing concerns about the difficulties they pose for various stakeholders in the justice system. They have urged the Bar Council of India to organize a meeting involving all State Bar Councils and Bar Associations to discuss the implications and potentially challenge the new laws in the Supreme Court.
Former Madras High Court judge Justice PN Prakash criticized the appointment of public prosecutors, pointing out that their political affiliations undermine the legal system. He also highlighted issues of perjury, civil suits, and language barriers faced by migrant workers in criminal cases. The discussion also covered the impact of civil disputes on criminal cases and the challenges faced by magistrates.
Days after the Karnataka government opposed the implementation of New Criminal Laws-Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) and the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), Law and Parliamentary Affairs Minister H K Patil said the state would make 23-25 amendments to these laws before being implemented in the state.
Karnataka opposes new criminal laws, plans state-level amendments to address concerns, ignoring recommendations made by Chief Minister Siddaramaiah. The state aims to postpone enforcement until its suggestions are considered. The new laws replace British-established codes, sparking a broader debate on central versus state power balance in India and the need for adaptable national policies.
Today, On 1st July, India’s Home Minister, Amit Shah, has unveiled three new criminal laws that prioritize justice over punishment, marking a departure from colonial-era statutes. These laws aim to streamline legal processes, ensure swifter justice delivery, and prioritize rehabilitation over stringent penalties. The reforms highlight a significant shift towards a more responsive and inclusive legal framework in India, addressing contemporary societal needs and evolving criminal challenges.