Keeping Pace with Legal Change
The Supreme Court in a historic suo motu judgment gave the systemic directions to ensure just disbursement of unclaimed compensation worth more than 1,000 crore rupees that is lying with Motor Accident Claims Tribunals and the Labour Courts so as to eliminate the gap between the justice delivery and implementation.
Through this short yet procedurally influential order, the Supreme Court allowed liberty to the petitioner, Danish Zaheer Siddiqui, to withdraw his Special Leave Petition and avail of a fresh audience in Bombay High Court. The case exposes major procedural issues in the appellate litigation.
As part of its decision, which was handed down on June 12, 2025, the Madhya Pradesh High Court granted bail to Dr. Nasheem Bano, highlighting the fact that Article 21 safeguards the private liberty of individuals. In speech-related offenses, Justice Avanindra Kumar Singh enforced safeguards, striking a balance between the right to free speech and the need to maintain religious unity.
The Supreme Court’s amendment in 2025 establishes standard court and registry hours of 10 A.M. – 5 P.M. on weekdays, adds Saturday sessions from 10 A.M. – 1 P.M., and grants Chief Justice the authority to modify court hours for partial working days and holidays, beginning July 14.
A significant decision was made by the Rajasthan High Court, which confirmed that retired doctors from the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) are considered to be “re-employed persons.” This decision mandated the implementation of the statutory “pay-minus-pension” formula for future compensation, while also prohibiting retrospective deductions prior to the date of judgment, which was May 15, 2025.
In a historic judgment on 23rd May 2025, the Supreme Court of India ruled that maternity leave is a constitutional right and cannot be denied based on the number of children. The Court emphasized that such leave is integral to women’s reproductive rights, overriding state-imposed limits and aligning with both national and international legal standards.
The Supreme Court through suo motu writ petition ordered all the High Courts and State Governments to make proper procedure to release any unclaimed amounts of compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act and also under Workmans Compensation Act Act to protect the rights of the beneficiaries and accountability.
To this extent the Supreme Court observed that a plaintiff relying on Order IX Rule 4 CPC is entitled to file a fresh suit after a restoration plea is dismissed, and such dismissal does not create res judicata. This ruling affirms problems with procedural rights in civil lawsuits.
The Telangana High Court has suspended Gali Janardhana Reddy’s conviction and seven-year sentence in the coal and iron‑ore allocation scam, granting him bail. Justice Lakshman ordered his release on a ₹10 lakh bond with conditions, citing risks of possible irreversible legislative disqualification.
In Aejaz Ahmad Sheikh v., the Supreme Court held that, The case State of Uttar Pradesh was a case on the basis of which it was held that failure of putting the vital prosecution evidence to the accused u/s 313 CrPC resulted in prejudice and trial invalidated, and as a result, the acquittal was upheld on the basis of serious allegations like multiple murders.
