Keeping Pace with Legal Change
Here is a polished article suitable for a legal jobs and internships website: Maddila Gurumoorthy, Member of Parliament, Lok Sabha, has invited applications for an…
Section 34 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, exempts acts done in private defence from criminal liability, provided they are proportionate, necessary, and in response to imminent danger to person or property. The provision excludes excessive force or premeditated intent beyond self-protection.
Section 33 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, exempts acts causing slight harm from criminal liability, provided they lack criminal intent or knowledge of likely harm. This provision prioritizes minor harm without malicious intent, ensuring proportionality in legal accountability.
Section 32 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, exempts acts done under threat of instant death from criminal liability, except for heinous crimes like murder or terrorism. The provision recognizes coercion as a defense when immediate danger compels action, provided the act isn’t inherently grave.
Section 31 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, protects communications made in good faith that unintentionally cause harm, provided they are intended for the recipient’s benefit. Such acts incur no criminal liability, emphasizing the importance of honest intent in communication.
Section 30 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, exempts acts done in good faith for a person’s benefit without consent, when consent is impossible or the person is incapable, and no guardian is available. Exceptions exclude intentional death, grievous harm, or abetment.
In a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court under Justice Abhay S. Oka held that urban demolition authorities must strictly adhere to natural justice principles, including notice and hearing, rejecting summary ‘bulldozer’ actions that deprive citizens of homes without due process.
In a crucial judgment, the Supreme Court under Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia upheld AICTE’s statutory power to prescribe qualifications and pay scales for technical education. The Court clarified Ph.D. requirements for promotions and emphasized judicial restraint in reviewing expert academic regulations.
In a pivotal decision, the Supreme Court under Justice Bela M. Trivedi upheld the DHFL resolution plan, affirming the primacy of creditor-approved commercial decisions while curbing tribunal intervention under Sections 30 and 31 of the IBC to preserve insolvency resolutions.
In a pivotal verdict, the Supreme Court under Justice Sandeep Mehta directed the Chandigarh Administration to construct a protective verandah and install eco-friendly green paver blocks at the Capitol Complex, balancing UNESCO heritage obligations with sustainable urban development needs responsibly.
The Centre approved the elevation of Justices NV Anjaria, Vijay Bishnoi, and Atul Chandurkar to the Supreme Court, as recommended by the Collegium, filling judicial vacancies to strengthen the apex court’s bench and enhance judicial efficiency.
