Today, on 27th January, In a setback for JioStar, the Supreme Court refused to halt the Competition Commission of India’s probe into alleged abuse of dominance and discriminatory pricing in Kerala’s television distribution market, holding the investigation remains preliminary and must continue lawfully.
The Supreme Court held that state police may investigate and prosecute Central government employees for bribery and corruption under the Prevention of Corruption Act. It clarified that no prior approval from the CBI is required to register cases nationwide.
The Supreme Court clarified that once a sentence is suspended, a convicted person need not appear at every appellate hearing. Justices Aravind Kumar and Prasanna B. Varale observed that appeals take years, making mandatory physical presence purposeless in practice.
The Supreme Court has ruled that State governments cannot prescribe additional or different eligibility conditions for appointing Drug Inspectors beyond what is provided under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act and Rules. Recruitment must strictly follow the qualifications notified by the Central Government, and State service rules cannot override central law.
Today,The Supreme Court dismissed Telangana’s Article 32 writ challenging expansion of the Polavaram Multipurpose Irrigation Project, while permitting the state to pursue its grievances before an appropriate forum. CJI Surya Kant’s bench heard claims alleging diversion of Godavari waters.
Today, The Supreme Court granted regular bail to Alemla Jamir after six years’ custody under the stringent Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, considering prolonged detention and her status as a woman. The Bench noted trial progress with many witnesses already examined.
The Supreme Court highlighted important principles for applying the common or trade parlance test in classification disputes under taxation laws. Previously, the CESTAT ruled that imported ‘aluminium shelves’ should be classified as parts of agricultural machinery under CTI 84369900.
The Supreme Court has clarified that in cases of usufructuary mortgage, the limitation period does not begin from the date of mortgage creation. Instead, it starts only from the date when the mortgage amount is paid or adjusted, reaffirming the mortgagor’s continuing right of redemption.
The Supreme Court has ruled that hiding criminal antecedents while seeking bail is an abuse of judicial process, warranting rejection.
Dismissing a murder accused’s plea, it held that applicants concealing pending or past cases deserve no indulgence whatsoever.
The Supreme Court ruled that government policy decisions issued through circulars are binding and cannot be ignored without lawful amendment or justification. Any action taken in violation of such policy is arbitrary and breaches Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
