The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition by Aditya Kumar Mallick challenging the CAT 2024 results, despite 272 objections raised regarding an answer key error. The court stated it would not interfere in competitive exam disputes unless significant wrongdoing was present, affirming confidence in the expert committee’s review of the exam results.
The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court acquitted two boys of stalking a minor girl, stating that a single instance of following does not constitute stalking under the IPC and POCSO Act. However, one boy was upheld on charges of sexual assault based on credible evidence, while the other faced reduced sentencing.
The Rouse Avenue Court has given BJP MP Bansuri Swaraj one week to file her response in a defamation case. The case involves allegations made against her, and the court has allowed time for her to present her side. This development is part of ongoing legal proceedings. The court’s decision ensures both sides have an opportunity to be heard fairly.
The Jammu and Kashmir High Court recognized that the Bar Council of India guidelines do not permit female advocates to appear in court with their faces covered. This was highlighted after a claimant, Advocate Syed Ainain Qadri, refused to remove her covering. Ultimately, the Court dismissed the related case on December 13.
Today, On 12th December, the Supreme Court criticized the Union of India for inadequate legal representation in important cases, notably regarding a student with disabilities seeking MBBS admission. The Court emphasized accountability, emphasizing the need for timely representation to ensure justice and maintain public confidence, ultimately granting the student’s admission.
The Supreme Court annulled a Rs.1 lakh fine imposed on advocate Mehmood Pracha by the Allahabad High Court, which criticized him for “forum shopping” and attire while representing himself. Pracha’s plea was dismissed by the High Court, deemed to waste the court’s time. The Supreme Court found no basis for the fine.
Today, On 6th December, the Supreme Court dismissed a petition against lawyers affiliated with political parties participating in Bar Council elections, asserting that political beliefs do not disqualify their involvement. The Court emphasized the independence of bar associations and allowed individuals to hold office despite political ideologies, highlighting the need for balancing responsibilities and beliefs.
Former Chief Justice DY Chandrachud called for urgent government action to fill 21% of vacant district court positions, emphasizing the need for increased judicial investment. He proposed an “All India Judicial Service Examination” to address staffing shortages and urged for better infrastructure to ensure timely justice and effective governance, particularly for the underprivileged.
![[Roche vs Zydus] Apex Court Refuses To Revoke Injunction Against Sale Of Zydus Lifesciences' Breast Cancer Drug](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Zydus-Lifesciences_-Zydus-barred-from-selling-cancer-biosimilar-for-now-The-Economic-Times.png?resize=420%2C315&ssl=1)
The Supreme Court on Monday(18th Nov) directed the Delhi High Court to swiftly resolve a patent dispute involving Zydus Lifesciences’ breast cancer drug, ‘Sigrima.’ Roche alleges patent infringement, with an interim injunction restraining Zydus from selling the drug. The Court emphasized the real-world impact of judicial decisions while maintaining the injunction until a December hearing.
![[Bulldozer Justice] "Wrongful Demolitions Warrant Compensation; Officials Should Not Be Shielded from Accountability": Supreme Court](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Watch-What-is-Bulldozer-Justice-And-Why-Does-the-SC-Want-Guidelines-Against-It_-on-News9-Plus.png?resize=447%2C348&ssl=1)
Today, On 13th November, the Supreme Court condemned “bulldozer justice,” stating that legal actions should not imply guilt before a fair trial. It ruled demolishing properties of accused individuals is unlawful, emphasizing due process, accountability, and the protection of family homes from arbitrary state action, regardless of accusations or convictions.