Manupatra Academy

Explore. Learn. Upskill. All Things Law

Courses, Cases, Research, and Resources in One Place

New

Internships

Opportunities : Playbook : Videos

Learn More

Law Notes (1^st - 5^th Year)

Structured notes with flashcards to help law students grasp core subjects quickly.

Know More

Manupatra Certified Legal Research Program

Module-based learning : Legal research skills : Certification test

Learn More

Courses

Structured learning : Practice-oriented modules : Different stages of legal practice

Learn More

News and Recent Judgment Gist

News
Gist

1. Uttarakhand HC dismisses plea by minister Rekha Arya's husband to quash FIR

Uttarakhand HC dismisses plea by minister Rekha Arya's husband to quash FIR

The Uttarakhand high court on Wednesday dismissed a petition filed by Girdhari Lal Sahu, alias Pappu Girdhari, husband of state cabinet minister Rekha Arya, seeking to quash a first information report registered against him at the Cantt police station in Dehradun. Justice Alok Mahra observed that the allegations prima facie disclosed serious cognisable offences and could not be dismissed as a mere matrimonial dispute. According to the FIR registered last month, Arya accused Sahu of concealing his previous marriage and children at the time of their wedding, maintaining relationships with other women, and subjecting her to physical assault, verbal abuse and caste-based derogatory remarks; she also alleged he forged her signatures on administrative documents to falsely reflect her resignation or retirement as a company director, and the complaint referred to audio recordings in which he allegedly discussed a plot to kill her. Sahu's counsel argued that the couple had been married since July 6, 2004, and that the dispute was essentially domestic, while the state government's counsel and Arya's legal representative highlighted the severity of the charges and submitted that Sahu had failed to cooperate with the investigation. The court noted that the authenticity of the alleged forged documents and audio recordings would require examination during trial, that the duration of a marriage did not rule out subsequent cruelty or criminal conduct, and, citing Supreme Court precedents in State of Haryana vs Bhajan Lal and the Niharika Infrastructure case, that it could not conduct a mini-trial at this stage. The FIR was registered under sections 120-B, 323, 420, 467, 468, 471, 495, 498-A, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, alongside relevant provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Denying all allegations, Sahu claimed Arya had amassed illegal assets worth ₹210 crore and that the audio recordings were generated using artificial intelligence.

2. Supreme Court seeks Centre, ECI reply on plea against Section 16 immunity for CEC, ECs

Supreme Court seeks Centre, ECI reply on plea against Section 16 immunity for CEC, ECs

The Supreme Court on Wednesday issued notice to the Central government and the Election Commission of India on a petition filed by activist and lawyer Arun Kumar Agrawal challenging the constitutional validity of Section 16 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023. A Bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana sought responses on the plea, which contends that the provision grants the CEC and Election Commissioners lifelong blanket immunity from civil or criminal proceedings for acts done in discharge of official duties, unlike protections for other constitutional functionaries that usually extend only to acts done or intended to be done in good faith. The petitioner argued that the Commission functioned effectively for decades without such immunity, that less restrictive measures such as safeguards against frivolous complaints and prior judicial scrutiny could address the objective, and that the provision leaves voters, candidates and citizens without remedy. The plea stated that the original Bill contained no such immunity clause, that the amendment introducing it was not accompanied by reasons, and that the final version was passed when a large number of Opposition MPs were suspended. It also referred to alleged irregularities in the ongoing Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls, reported objections by two Election Commissioners, concerns over the integrity of the software used, and questions raised about the conduct of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar relating to allegations from his tenure as Secretary of the Public Works Department, Government of Kerala. Advocate Neha Rathi appeared for the petitioner, who urged the court to declare Section 16 unconstitutional.

3. Supreme Court directs Centre to secure return of child taken to Russia; says dignity at stake

Supreme Court directs Centre to secure return of child taken to Russia; says dignity at stake

In Viktoriia Basu v. State of West Bengal, the Supreme Court on November 3 directed the Central government to take urgent steps to bring a 6-year-old child back to India after his Russian mother, Viktoriia Basu, allegedly took him to Russia despite the child having been placed in the Court's custody. A Bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Sheel Nagu took serious exception to the mother's conduct, saying the Court's dignity was at stake and that she could not be allowed to take advantage of leniency shown during the proceedings. The Court orally remarked that the mother had left through Nepal with the help of the Russian Embassy and told the Centre to throw all its weight behind the effort. The matter arose from a custody dispute between Viktoriia Basu and her estranged husband, Saikat Basu, over their son. Viktoriia had approached the Supreme Court in 2023 under Article 32 seeking a writ of habeas corpus for production of her son and custody, alleging she had been deprived of access after differences with her husband. The Supreme Court passed interim orders to facilitate access and shared custody, initially providing separate accommodation at Banga Bhawan in Delhi and referring the couple to mediation. On May 22, 2025, the Court formalised shared custody under which the child was to remain in the mother's exclusive custody three days a week and with the father for the remaining four days. On July 7, 2025, the father informed the Court that the mother and child were missing. A Delhi Police investigation revealed that Viktoriia had travelled from Delhi to Narkatiaganj in Bihar, entered Nepal and reached Russia through Sharjah in the United Arab Emirates. On August 1, 2025, the Supreme Court clarified that the child was, for all practical purposes, in its custody, and said it had been exercising parens patriae jurisdiction while regulating custody arrangements. It directed the Ministry of External Affairs to ask the Indian Embassy in Moscow to immediately establish contact with Viktoriia and the child. On September 26, 2025, the Court was informed that Interpol had issued a Blue Corner Notice against Viktoriia and a Yellow Corner Notice in the child's name. The Court directed the Delhi Police to pursue the matter with the Nepalese authorities and the Russian Embassy in India, and to seek custody of persons suspected of being involved in the alleged offence and contempt of court. It noted that the Indian Embassy in Moscow had written to the Russian Prosecutor General on September 18 and 22 seeking assistance in the investigation, and no response had been received at the time. The Bench later suggested an interim measure to connect the child and his mother with the father through a video call while maintaining anonymity and without requiring repatriation, and asked the Indian Embassy in Russia to take up the proposal with Russian authorities. The Ministry of External Affairs was directed to place the questionnaire and outcome of discussions on record. In a separate criminal proceeding before the Saket court, the Delhi Police informed the court on October 23 that a Red Corner Notice had been issued against Viktoriia and that a formal extradition request had been sent through the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Ministry of External Affairs and the Indian Embassy in Moscow, as part of the police investigation and not a direction issued by the Supreme Court. The matter came before a Bench of Justices Datta and Nagu, which insisted that the child be brought back to India and underlined that the mother's escape constituted a direct affront to judicial proceedings, observing that her alleged escape without permission, apart from amounting to interference in administration of justice, would lead to other consequences.

4. Jammu & Kashmir High Court: Higher-post duty with charge allowance entitles employee to promotion from formal charge date

Jammu & Kashmir High Court: Higher-post duty with charge allowance entitles employee to promotion from formal charge date

The Division Bench of the Jammu & Kashmir High Court, comprising Chief Justice Pushpendra Singh Bhati and Justice Rajesh Sekhri, held that an employee who performs the duties of a higher post with charge allowance is entitled to substantive promotion from the date the charge was formally assigned. The employee, initially a daily wager and later regularised as a Safai Karamchari in 1988, claimed promotion as Jamadar/Sanitary Supervisor after his counterpart Khazir Mohammad Shah was promoted in 1994. After earlier court directions, the Executive Officer did not comply and in 2000 allowed him to work as Assistant Sanitary Jamadar in his own pay and grade without financial benefits. He later worked as Sanitary Supervisor with charge allowance from 28.04.2005, but the Director, Urban Local Bodies, declined upgradation citing the J&K Urban Local Body Institutions (Management) Service Recruitment Rules, 2008. The writ court had deemed him appointed and promoted as Sanitary Supervisor in substantive capacity w.e.f. 28.04.2005 with consequential benefits and directed creation of a retrospective post or adjustment against a vacant/equivalent post. The Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir appealed. The appellants argued that he was never given independent charge, only asked to assist the Jamadar, and that inclusion in the Incharge Sanitary Supervisors list did not automatically entitle him to the post. The employee contended that he had performed Jamadar/Sanitary Supervisor duties from 08.06.2000, first in his own pay and grade and later from 28.04.2005 with charge allowance. The Division Bench observed that ordinarily an employee is entitled only to the pay of the post to which he is appointed, but an exception applies when he is formally ordered to hold charge of a higher post. It noted that before the 2008 Rules there were no recruitment rules for Urban Local Bodies and recruitments and promotions were regulated by the head of department's choice, and that the employee's right to promotion accrued much earlier, in 1994 and 2000. The Bench held that making an employee perform higher-level responsibilities while paying a lower salary amounts to workplace exploitation and that the appellant should have considered his claim under the rule applicable on 28.04.2005, not the prospective 2008 Rules.

5. Raipur special court grants CBI eight-day custody of Mahadev betting app case accused Saurabh Chandrakar

A special court in Raipur on Wednesday granted the CBI eight-day custody of Saurabh Chandrakar, the alleged promoter of the ₹6,000-crore Mahadev online betting syndicate, who was extradited from Oman

1. Akanksha Devi vs. State of U.P. and Ors. (02.11.2026 - SC)(MANU/SC/1253/2026)

The Supreme Court of India addressed the issue of Akanksha Devi's disqualification from recruitment as a Constable in the U.P. Police due to alleged medical unfitness related to a squint eye. Despite

2. A. Arun vs. Varsha Sharma and Ors. (02.11.2026 - SC)(MANU/SC/1252/2026)

The Supreme Court of India addressed the appeal by A. Arun, an IPS officer, seeking expunction of adverse remarks made by the Madras High Court regarding his order classifying Varsha Sharma's father a

3. Hiroo Hotchand Advani vs. Integrated Finance Company Limited and Ors. (28.10.2026 - SC)(MANU/SC/1251/2026)

The Supreme Court of India addressed the dispute between Hiroo Hotchand Advani and Integrated Finance Company Limited regarding the condonation of a 423-day delay in filing an application to set aside

4. Piyush vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. (02.11.2026 - SC)(MANU/SC/1250/2026)

The Supreme Court of India addressed the appeal by Piyush against the State of Maharashtra and others, focusing on whether the criminal proceedings related to dowry death and other charges should be q

5. Arjun Gopal and Ors. vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors. (29.10.2026 - SC)(MANU/SC/1249/2026)

The Supreme Court of India addressed the regulation of firecracker use during the Diwali festival, focusing on balancing religious practices with environmental concerns. The case involved Arjun Gopal

View More Gist.. View More News..

Law Students Hub

Notes : Flashcards : Landmark Cases & more…

Learn More

New

Legal Glossary

Complex terms decoded : Easy explanations

Learn More

On-demand Courses

Recorded classes : Comprehensive reading material :Quiz

Learn More

Self-Paced Certification

Courses to upskill or reskill

Learn More

Webinars

Recordings of experts views :Diverse topics

Learn More

Law Teachers Hub

Readings : Resources for legal educators

Learn More

Legal Posts

Explainers : Blogs : Articles : Case Analysis

Learn More

Survey Reports

AI Adoption : Technology in law

Learn More

Illustrated Cases

Legal Design : Supreme Court Cases : Multilingual Exploration

Learn More

New

Case Infographics

Quickly understand key facts, court decisions, and legal principles through easy-to-follow infographics.

Know More

Our Partners

Why Join Manupatra Academy

Brought to you by Manupatra the leaders in legal tech domain.

Curated Resources: A vast repository of meticulously compiled resources tailored for educators and learners.
Diverse Courses: An array of courses designed to cater to various levels of expertise, from beginners to advanced.
User-Friendly Interface: Accessible on any device, our intuitive interface ensures seamless navigation.

What Our Learners Say

User-Friendly Interface: Accessible on any device, our intuitive interface ensures seamless navigation.

Certification Courses 3-Day Civil Drafting Workshop

It was extremely beneficial and practical… really helped me understand the nuances of civil drafting and boosted my confidence in preparing real pleadings.

Certification Courses 3-Day Civil Drafting Workshop

The sessions were so insightful and well-structured… the faculty explained every concept with patience and clarity, which made learning much easier.

Certification Courses 3-Day Civil Drafting Workshop

Honestly, it was a great learning experience… the course covered everything from plaints to petitions in such a smooth and engaging way.

Certification Courses 3-Day Civil Drafting Workshop

The workshop was very hands-on and practical… I really liked the live feedback and the real examples shared during drafting exercises.

Certification Courses 3-Day Civil Drafting Workshop

Very well conducted and informative… I just wish it could’ve been a bit longer because the sessions were that helpful.

Certification Courses Mastering Microsoft Word for Legal Work

The session was honestly eye-opening! I never realized how much time I was wasting on formatting until now.

Certification Courses Mastering Microsoft Word for Legal Work

Really practical and focused on what lawyers actually need… I can already see how it’ll save hours in my daily work.

Certification Courses Mastering Microsoft Word for Legal Work

The trainer made even the technical tools so easy to understand… and I loved how they used real pleading examples.

Certification Courses Mastering Microsoft Word for Legal Work

Very relevant for lawyers and interns alike… it bridges the tech gap we all face while working on documents.

Certification Courses Mastering Microsoft Word for Legal Work

A concise and super useful masterclass… I now feel confident managing citations, templates, and formatting with ease.