Keeping Pace with Legal Change
In this post the case of the Delhi High Court handling the deception around the Patanjali Chyawanprash advertisement is analysed in view of its legal precedent related to false efficacy claims and disparagement. It goes into the pace of development of commercial speech under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian constitution, the landmark cases which outline its extent and restriction in advertising.
Delhi High Court decision on Dabur v Patanjali enlightened the Ayurvedic medicines with regard to advertising. It highlighted the need for tighter truthfulness on health products as the ads were considered by Patanjali as demeaning on Dabur Chyawanprash and other brands. The court also noted how misleading comparisons are not permissible and fair competition should be guarded against.
The article discusses the results of the case analyzed by the High Court on the issue of the constant and infamous designation of someone as a rowdy and the open disclosure of their criminal record. It throws some light on the reformation inclined focus of the court, the right to privacy of a citizen and the delicate position of police surveillance, which eventually decides to have the name of a petitioner off a rowdy list after a long history of well-behaved behavior.
In a speech during the Chamber of Tax Consultant’s centenary celebration, former CJI DY Chandrachud lambasted retrospective tax amendments as destabilizing and unfair. He stressed the necessity of legal certainty, equity, and investor confidence within India’s tax system. Referencing the negative effects of precedents such as Vodafone and Cairn, he appreciated the effort to simplify the proposed Income Tax Bill, 2025, but cautioned against introducing new uncertainties. His appeal represents an acute call for thorough tax reform.
I have mentioned in some articles I wrote that China today is not a socialist but an imperialist country, and…
A Public Interest Litigation has been moved in the Kerala High Court in the wake of the building collapse at the old bathroom block at Kottayam Medical College Hospital that resulted in the death of one woman and left three others injured. The PIL points to gross administrative failures, infrastructure deterioration, and seeks judicial intervention for ensuring hospital safety and responsibility.
The Supreme Court Collegium on 2 July 2025 suggested five senior judicial officers namely Rajesh Kumar Gupta, Alok Awasthi, Ratnesh Chandra Singh Bisen, Bhagwati Prasad Sharma and Pradeep Mittal as Judges of the Madhya Pradesh High Court.
I have already written several articles explaining caste, which are given below : http://justicekatju.blogspot.com/2016/01/the-caste-system-in-india-this-is-old.html https://www.facebook.com/justicekatju/posts/brahminsin-my-article-the-caste-system-in-india-which-is-on-my-blog-justicekatju/892114150829132/ https://justicekatju.com/the-monster-called-caste… Now I am going…
In G Nagarathna Vs. G Manjunatha, the Supreme Court held that legal heirs of a driver who died as a result of his own rash and negligent driving could not claim compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act. The Court confirmed orders of the Tribunal and Karnataka High Court, placing reliance upon precedents which rule out the possibility of one deriving benefit from one’s own wrong. The ruling makes it clear that insurance firms are not responsible in such situations and supports fundamental tort law and public policy tenets.
In this article, we are going to examine the Abdul Hameed v. State case, a landmark judgment explaining anticipatory bail under the new BNSS in India. It focuses on the maintenance of consecutive bail applications, the retrospective effect of procedural legislations such as BNSS and principle of beneficial law in the sense that the evolution of the law legally deserves reconsideration of bail considering the new legal considerations.
