Keeping Pace with Legal Change
The Supreme Court on June 30, 2025, directed Lalit Modi to civil courts for his ₹10.65 crore claim against BCCI. Upholding the Bombay High Court, the ruling clarified BCCI is not a “State” for all writ purposes, emphasizing that financial disputes are for civil remedies.
In Ravindra v. State of Maharashtra, the Bombay High Court set aside a conviction under POCSO and IPC, ruling that saying “I love you” and holding hands without sexual intent does not constitute sexual assault or harassment. The Court emphasized that criminal liability under POCSO requires proof of sexual intent and physical contact of a sexual nature. It clarified that mere expressions of affection, without more, cannot satisfy the statutory threshold for criminal prosecution.
The Delhi High Court, on May 30, 2025, issued an interim injunction against firms making fake Volvo buses. Justice Amit Bansal’s ruling in Aktiebolaget Volvo & Ors v. Shri Ganesh Motor Body Repairs & Ors protects Volvo’s trademark and brand identity, curbing deceptive practices in the market.
Chief Justice Shri Ramesh Sinha of the Chhattisgarh High Court denied bail on June 13, 2025, to Shashank Chopda, accused in a ₹411 crore medical procurement scam. The court emphasized that economic offenses gravely threaten the nation’s financial health.
Sources
Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, of the Himachal Pradesh High Court, ruled on June 6, 2025, that a valid BPL certificate is sufficient for awarding BPL marks, eliminating the need for a separate income certificate. This decision came in the case of Sahil Kumar v. HPSEBL and others.
The Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission upheld a Rs. 3.5 lakh compensation against Dr. Lal Path Labs. The ruling holds the lab liable for “deficiency in service” due to “grossly erroneous” test results that caused distress and unnecessary hospitalization. The judgment reinforces accountability for diagnostic errors.
The Bombay High Court affirmed slum dwellers’ constitutional rights, emphasizing their entitlement to live with dignity and safety. This landmark ruling underscores the state’s obligation to ensure humane living conditions, protecting vulnerable communities from forced evictions and promoting inclusive urban development.
The chief executive officer of HDFC entitled as Abhishek Verma appeared before Bombay High Court in the case of HDFC CEO and related to Lilavati Trust FIR where the three judges of Bombay high court have recused themselves as a major development. This is an unprecedented series, which has become a legal matter of concern, questioning the job of judicial neutrality and confrontation.
On a petition by Ananth Kumar Hegde, a former Union Minister and Karnataka state BJP President, the High Court of Karnataka has stayed coercive action pursuant to a road rage case against him. The order has given short-term relief at a time when there is a legal case against the assault and abuse of power claims.
This article examines a recent judgement of the Madras high court which indicates the importance of giving rights to mentally incompetent dependents to obtain their family pension without any undue obstacles. It focuses on how the court has interpreted the rules on pensions, its very tough stand against bureaucratic delays in the delivery of goods and services and its demand of a humane nature as directed by the constitution. The case brings out the importance of the judiciary in supporting social welfare provisions for vulnerable groups in society.
