H O Gupta & Associates

 In a bold affirmation of free speech, democratic engagement , and judicial transparency , the Supreme Court of India has held that public debate, media commentary, and criticism of court proceedings — including matters that are sub judice — are not only permissible, but necessary in a vibrant democracy. 🧑‍⚖️ Case: Wikimedia Foundation Inc. v. Ani Media Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. 📜 Key Observation: “Courts, as a public and open institution, must always remain open to public observations, debates, and criticisms. In fact, courts should welcome debates and constructive criticism. Every important issue needs to be vigorously debated by the people and the press, even if the issue of debate is sub judice before a court.” 🔍 What This Means This judgment comes as a powerful reaffirmation of: 🟢 Freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) 🟢 Freedom of the press to report on and critique ongoing legal proceedings 🟢 The principle that judicial functioning is not imm...

In a significant judgment reinforcing the constitutional safeguards against arbitrary preventive detention, the Supreme Court of India ordered the immediate release of a 24-year-old law student from Central Jail, Bhopal , who had been detained for nearly a year under the National Security Act, 1980 (NSA) . A bench comprising Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and Vinod Chandran held that the grounds for detention did not meet the stringent threshold of Section 3(2) of the NSA. The order came in response to SLP (Crl) No. 9285/2025 , where the petitioner challenged his prolonged detention under the Act. 📌 Background of the Case The petitioner, Annu @ Aniket , was involved in an alleged altercation with a professor on June 14, 2024 , at a university campus in Betul, Madhya Pradesh , leading to registration of an FIR for attempt to murder and other IPC offences . He surrendered on June 16 and was placed in judicial custody . While in custody, the District Magistrate of Betul issued a preven...

 In a recent judgment that reinforces fundamental principles of criminal jurisprudence, the Supreme Court of India has clarified that the ‘last seen’ theory cannot form the sole basis for conviction unless it is supported by a complete and consistent chain of circumstantial evidence. 🧑‍⚖️ Case Title: Padman Bibhar v. State of Odisha ⚖️ Key Observations by the Supreme Court: “It is settled law that in a case based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution is obliged to prove each circumstance, taken cumulatively to form a chain so complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that within all human probabilities, crime was committed by the accused and none else. Further, the facts so proved should unerringly point towards the guilt of the accused.” The Bench held that the ‘last seen together’ circumstance , though relevant, cannot independently establish guilt in the absence of other corroborative links — such as motive, recovery of incriminating material, forensi...

In a significant ruling impacting trade and customs classification, the Supreme Court has held that crude degummed soybean oil is a manufactured product and does not retain the character of agricultural produce . This decision has implications for the interpretation of customs duty exemptions under relevant trade laws. The judgment came in the case of Noble Resources and a Trading India Private Limited (Earlier Known as Andagro Services Pvt. Ltd.) v. Union of India & Ors. , where the petitioners challenged the denial of customs duty exemption for crude soybean oil on the ground that it should be treated as agricultural produce. A bench comprising Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan rejected the Gujarat High Court’s earlier view that the oil retains its agricultural nature. The Supreme Court observed: “Crude degummed soybean oil undergoes a manufacturing process that alters its essential character, distinguishing it from raw soybeans. The fact that it is derived from an agr...

 In a significant ruling that reinforces employee rights in India, the Delhi High Court has held that employees cannot be forced to choose between returning to a former employer or remaining unemployed due to restrictive contractual clauses. The judgment in Varun Tyagi v. Daffodil Software Private Limited underscores the legal invalidity of non-compete restrictions that survive post-termination of an employment contract under Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. ⚖️ Background: The Employment and Dispute The petitioner, Varun Tyagi, served as a software engineer at Daffodil Software Pvt. Ltd. from January 2022 to April 2025 , where he worked primarily on the government’s POSHAN Tracker project —a flagship initiative under the Digital India program designed to monitor and improve nutritional outcomes across the country. This project was undertaken through the Digital India Corporation (DIC) . After completing his notice period, Tyagi joined DIC directly on April 8, 2025 ...

 In a significant reaffirmation of principles governing circumstantial evidence in criminal trials, the Supreme Court of India in State of Rajasthan v. Hanuman , Criminal Appeal No. 631 of 2017, dismissed the appeal filed by the State of Rajasthan challenging the acquittal of a murder accused. A bench comprising Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Prasanna B. Varale upheld the Rajasthan High Court’s decision dated May 15, 2015 , setting aside the conviction and life sentence imposed by the trial court on the respondent-accused, Hanuman . Background of the Case The case stemmed from the murder of one Chotu Lal , which occurred during the intervening night of March 1 and 2, 2007 . The initial FIR was registered against unknown persons . Subsequently, based on suspicion and alleged circumstantial links, Hanuman was arrested and charged under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (murder). The trial court , vide judgment dated December 10, 2008 , found the respondent guilty and sente...

 In a significant reaffirmation of individual autonomy and constitutional rights, the Allahabad High Court recently came to the aid of a 27-year-old woman who faced threats and fear of abduction from her own family for choosing to marry a partner of her choice. The case arose when the woman approached the court, stating that her family was opposing her relationship and she feared for her safety due to her decision to marry someone not approved by them. Recognising the gravity of the situation, the Court directed the police to provide her with immediate protection. The Bench did not mince words in condemning the family’s interference. It categorically held that a person’s decision to marry is a deeply personal choice and is protected by the fundamental right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India . Any attempt to curtail or suppress this right—whether by family or the State—goes against the core principles of the Constitution. The Court reitera...

In a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court has clarified that non-public servants can be held guilty of abetment under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 , particularly in cases involving disproportionate assets. The case, P. Shanthi Pugazhenthi v. State Represented by the Inspector of Police, SPE/CBI/ACB, Chennai , involved allegations that a private individual aided a public servant in acquiring and concealing illicit wealth. The Court made a significant observation: “Any person who persuades a public servant to take bribes, decides to raise money through bribes along with a public servant, and prompts such public servant to keep the wealth with him/her or keeps the amassed wealth of a public servant in his/her own name is guilty of committing the offence of abetment of offence under Section 13(1)(e) of the 1988 Act.” This decision reinforces that criminal liability for corruption-related offences is not limited to public servants alone . Private individuals who facilitate, co...

Victims chose not to testify; Kerala High Court expresses concern over systemic barriers In a troubling update on the long-standing issue of workplace sexual harassment in the Malayalam film industry, the Kerala High Court was informed on June 26, 2025 , that the Special Investigation Team (SIT) constituted to probe allegations of sexual harassment had closed all 35 cases it had registered. The closure was attributed to the unwillingness of victims to come forward and give formal statements , despite repeated assurances of support and confidentiality from the State. The Context: Hema Committee and the SIT The SIT was formed as a direct response to findings from the Justice K. Hema Committee Report , which was commissioned by the Kerala Government in 2017 following a representation by the Women in Cinema Collective (WCC) . The WCC—a group of female professionals from the Malayalam film industry—had raised serious concerns about widespread sexual harassment, lack of grievance redre...

In a significant development in Indian matrimonial jurisprudence, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has ruled that private WhatsApp chats of a spouse, even if obtained without their consent, may be admissible as evidence to establish adultery in family court proceedings. The Court held that such chats fall within the scope of "information that throws light on the nature of a dispute" under Section 14 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 . 🔍 Context and Key Legal Issue The case involved a husband seeking to introduce his wife’s WhatsApp chats to substantiate his allegations of adultery in a matrimonial dispute. The wife challenged the admissibility of these chats, contending that they were illegally accessed , violated her right to privacy , and thus, could not be accepted as evidence. 🧑‍⚖️ Court’s Reasoning: A Balancing of Fundamental Rights Justice Ahluwalia observed that no fundamental right is absolute , and in situations of conflict between two rights under Article 21 of ...

In a pivotal ruling with far-reaching implications for the online gaming industry, the Madras High Court has upheld key provisions of the Tamil Nadu Government’s regulations on online real money gaming. The Court endorsed both the nighttime ban on online real money games and the mandatory Aadhaar-based Know Your Customer (KYC) verification for players. The decision came in response to a legal challenge mounted by several gaming companies, including Play Games 24x7 Private Limited . The petitioners argued that the mandatory KYC requirement infringes upon the fundamental right to privacy , as articulated in the landmark Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India verdict. However, the Court firmly rejected this contention. In a detailed judgment, it observed: “The right to privacy as upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Puttaswamy's case must be understood not as an absolute right. Once declared as a fundamental right, it is subject to reasonable restrictions like other funda...

   Headline Takeaway In  Dr. Rosy Arora @ Dr. Rosy Dhawan Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh , the Punjab & Haryana High Court declined to transfer a medical-tourism fraud probe to the CBI—underscoring that the Agency’s  extraordinary powers  must be invoked  sparingly ,  cautiously  and  only in exceptional circumstances . 📚 Case Snapshot Parties: Petitioners:  Dr. Rosy Arora (also known as Dr. Rosy Dhawan) Respondent:  Union Territory, Chandigarh Allegation:  A multi-crore medical-tourism fraud involving misappropriation of patient funds. Relief Sought:  Handing over the investigation from local police to the CBI. ⚖️ Court’s Key Observations Exceptional, Not Routine “This extraordinary power must be exercised sparingly, cautiously and in exceptional situations…” The bench cautioned against routine referrals, reserving CBI intervention for cases that: Demand  enhanced credibility  or public confidence, Have...

  I. Headline Takeaway The Kerala High Court has once again emphasized the strictly conditional nature of the exclusion of limitation periods under Section 14(1) of the Limitation Act. In M/S National Collateral Management Service Ltd. & Ors. Vs. Valiyaparambil Traders & Ors., the Court held that you cannot invoke Section 14 to save a subsequent suit unless every requirement in the provision is satisfied—no broad-brush application is permitted. II. Background of the Dispute • Parties: – M/S National Collateral Management Service Ltd. & Ors. (plaintiffs) – Valiyaparambil Traders & Ors. (defendants) • Core Issue: The plaintiffs filed a second suit after a prior suit had been dismissed as time-barred. They sought to exclude the previous period under Section 14(1), arguing that their second suit was maintainable “as if” the first suit had never been filed. III. What Section 14(1) Says “Where, before the expiration of a prescribed limitation period, any suit or appli...