![[BREAKING] SC Criticizes Cal HC Order on 'Sexual Urges of Female Adolescents' as Objectionable and Erroneous | Directs WB Govt to Support Minor Rape Survivors](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/MicrosoftTeams-image-50.png?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
Today, 2nd May, The Supreme Court criticized the Calcutta High Court’s remarks on female adolescent sexual urges, emphasizing the need for sensitivity. It directed the West Bengal government to support minor rape survivors. Justices highlighted the importance of supporting survivors in nurturing environments, despite societal challenges. They also stressed the necessity for rigorous enforcement of the POCSO Act.
Today, 30th April, The Supreme Court ruled that the twin tests under the PMLA can affect bail, emphasizing the authority of a criminal court. The debate centers on whether bail conditions still apply after a special court acknowledges the offence and the ED’s authority to arrest post-complaint acknowledgment. Legal discourse stems from a previous refusal of pre-arrest bail in a money laundering case.
Today,22nd April, The Supreme Court seeks the ASI’s input for a Taj Mahal conservation plan, emphasizing the need for long-term preservation. The ASI’s expertise is crucial for safeguarding the iconic monument. Other directives include addressing the cleaning of the Yamuna river and granting Agra the World Heritage City tag. Further hearings are scheduled for July 11.
![[Nithari Killings Case]| Supreme Court to Hear Plea Against Acquittal](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/image-43-1.png?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
Today,22nd April, Tamil Nadu rejected Survey of India’s findings in the Mullaperiyar Dam Case, leading to a July 10 deadline. The Supreme Court demanded detailed affidavits from both sides. The conflict involves land disputes near the dam and Kerala’s parking project. Justices Oka and Bhuyan will finalize the legal issues by mid-July. Tamil Nadu disputed the survey report’s accuracy, demanding its dismissal.
The Supreme Court Today reserved judgment on whether mineral royalties are considered a tax under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act of 1957. The nine-judge bench, led by CJI DY Chandrachud, engaged in extensive deliberations over eight days, addressing appeals from state governments, mining entities, and public sector undertakings. This decision is highly anticipated for its potential impact on India’s regulatory landscape.
The Supreme Court of India on Monday has initiated a crucial hearing to resolve the longstanding debate on whether the royalty paid on mineral extraction, as outlined in the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, constitutes a tax. This significant legal question, which has seen conflicting interpretations over the years, could have wide-reaching […]
The case came to the Supreme Court’s attention following an appeal by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) against the Bombay High Court’s June 2023 order A landmark ruling on Friday has caught the attention of legal circles across India, the Supreme Court expressed its disapproval of the Bombay High Court’s decision to grant bail to an […]
Supreme Court Questions Fundamental Nature of Remission Rights in Bilkis Bano Case: A Detailed Look at the Legal Debate The Supreme Court of India has raised questions about the nature of a convict’s right to seek remission of their sentence, specifically whether it falls under any of the fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution. The […]
Supreme Court Clarifies Legislature’s Role in Addressing Judicial Verdicts The Supreme Court of India has provided clarity on the powers of the legislature in relation to judgments passed by constitutional courts. The apex court emphasized that while the legislature cannot directly overrule a judgment, it holds the authority to enact laws that can alter the […]
Supreme Court Criticizes Gujarat High Court’s Handling of Rape Survivor’s Abortion Plea The Supreme Court has expressed its disapproval over the Gujarat High Court’s handling of a rape survivor’s plea for abortion. The apex court’s bench, comprising Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan, criticized the High Court for its “lackadaisical manner” in dealing with the […]