Two men convicted in a 2016 assault and property damage case from Salem gained relief after the Supreme Court reduced their remaining jail term following a compromise. The Court kept their conviction intact but ruled the sentence be treated as time already served.
The Delhi High Court ruled that banks failed to prove intentional misuse of borrowed funds by Ratul Puri and Nita Puri, striking down their wilful defaulter status. This decision highlights the need for solid evidence before labeling borrowers, protecting them from serious financial and reputational damage.
The Delhi High Court has annulled an arbitral award against Oravel Stays (OYO) in a dispute with Zostel over a 2015 acquisition deal. The ruling highlights the necessity for formal agreements in business transactions, emphasizing that non-binding term sheets may not ensure enforceability in legal proceedings. Final order details are pending.
The Kerala High Court has ruled that gold and cash given to a woman during marriage are her personal property, known as ‘Streedhan’. The court emphasized the need for practical approaches in such cases due to the lack of documented evidence. This landmark decision aims to protect women’s rights regarding their wedding gifts.
The Orissa High Court upheld a Family Court ruling requiring a husband to pay Rs.3,000 monthly maintenance to his wife, who left due to his unfounded character allegations. Justice Satapathy emphasized a woman’s right to dignity and declared that without proof, accusations against her loyalty justify her decision to live separately.
Today(9th September), The Supreme Court of India ruled that an accused already in custody can still seek anticipatory bail in a separate case if not arrested for that specific matter. The verdict, delivered by a Bench including CJI DY Chandrachud, clarifies the right to pre-arrest bail despite existing judicial custody.
The Delhi High Court ruled that WhatsApp chats cannot be admitted as evidence in court without proper certification under the Indian Evidence Act. This decision came in the case of Dell International Services India Private Limited v. Adeel Feroze, addressing delays in filing a written statement in a consumer dispute complaint. The ruling highlights the need for certification of electronic evidence and adherence to procedural timelines in consumer disputes.
The Calcutta High Court addressed the misuse of IPC Section 498A, emphasizing the burden of proof in matrimonial disputes. It highlighted the need for cautious consideration of baseless allegations and the importance of specific, corroborative evidence. The ruling overturned a conviction in a dowry death case, stressing the necessity of concrete evidence to establish guilt.