Keeping Pace with Legal Change
On May 23, 2025, the Supreme Court held that denying disabled employees in supernumerary posts benefits like probation, seniority, and promotion violates Article 14 of the Constitution. The Court ruled that while there was a distinction, it lacked a rational link to the law’s purpose, making the government’s order discriminatory and restoring equal rights to these employees.
The Honourable Supreme Court established the fact that provided there is circumstantial evidence in the case, it would suffice to convict the person of an offence provided the circumstances when joined together creates a complete and unbroken chain of guilt. Maintaining the decision made by the Chetan case, the Supreme Court has taken into consideration important precedents, supporting the view that the credible circumstantial evidence provided, together with inability of the accused to signify the facts that proved his guilt are enough to convict the case without direct witnesses.
The instance of the Thangavel Vs. The State, Through Inspector Of Police & Anr., A school official, Thangavel, was charged with abetment of suicide when the child committed suicide, after receiving a scolding on his poor behavior on a report made by one of his fellows. The Supreme Court had to think whether the scolding was an act of criminal abetment under Section 306 IPC (now Section 108 BNS). The Court referred to the action of Thangavel as reasonable use of disciplinary power without personal hostility and intent to make suicide.
