The Supreme Court’s bench, comprising Justices BV Nagarathna and Justices Ujjal Bhuyan, highlighted the ‘usurpation of power’ and ‘abuse of discretion’ by the Gujarat government in its decision to release the convicts. Gujarat government seeks to have certain adverse comments expunged from the Supreme Court’s judgment, the legal community and the public await further developments. […]
The Allahabad High Court quashed a rape case against a police constable after the complainant clarified it was due to a ‘misunderstanding’. The decision underscored the court’s discretionary power to administer justice based on facts. It emphasizes the need for thorough investigation and concrete evidence in serious offenses, contributing to the discourse on fair trials.
The Supreme Court of India dismissed the case of Sheikh Arif vs. The State of Maharashtra, emphasizing the importance of clear consent in relationships. The court instructed Arif to pay Rs5 lakh to the woman without impacting her right to seek maintenance, recognizing her as his wife and the mother of his child. This ruling sets a crucial precedent for understanding consent and legal implications in relationships.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court acquitted a man convicted of rape due to a false promise of marriage, citing mutual consent and lack of evidence. The case, revolving around a couple’s relationship formed on a matrimonial website, shed light on legal complexities in online relationships. This judgment sets a precedent in understanding consent and promises in the digital age.