Supreme Court

Supreme Court Rules No Insurance for Legal Heirs in Rash Driving Fatalities

According to a decision by the Supreme Court, the legal heirs can not demand insurance in case of death caused by rash driving of the deceased. This choice solidifies individual responsibility, blocks the possibility of generating revenue out of a wrong as well as encourages responsible driving, which affects the insurance policy holders and the scrutiny of insurance claims, as well.

Supreme Court

Firing AK-47 at Colleagues Implies Intent to Kill: Justice Pankaj Mithal Clarifies Section 307 IPC

The applicability of Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code was clarified by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Himachal Pradesh vs. Shamsher Singh. The court ruled that the case does not need a grave harm in order to show intent to murder. Following the reversal of the High Court’s acquittal, the Court reinstated the conviction for attempted murder that was handed down by the trial court.

Current Legal Update

Why Gujarat High Court Cited Pink Floyd in their Judgement?

The Gujarat High Court’s citation of Pink Floyd in its judgment serves as a poignant reminder of the detrimental effects of bureaucratic delays on justice delivery. By quashing the decade-old show-cause notices, the court upheld the principles of timely adjudication and accountability. This decision not only addresses the individual complaints of Rohan Dyes and Intermediates Limited but also establishes a precedent focusing on the need for expeditious action in legal and administrative cases. The synthesis of cultural aspects with legal argumentation in this case indicates the judiciary’s creative response to solving issues of long-standing nature in the legal system.