Laws are Prospective but Case Laws are Retrospective

A law made by the legislature is always prospective in nature unless it has been specifically stated in the statute itself about its retrospective operation. But the reverse is true for the law which is laid down by a Constitutional Court, or law as it is interpretated by the court. The judgment of the court will always be retrospective in nature unless the judgment itself specifically states that the judgment will operate prospectively, says the Supreme Court (SC) in Kaniskh Sinha v State of West Bengal [2025 INSC 278].

Law Relating to Conversion of Paddy or Wetland in Kerala

The owner or the person in custody of any paddy land or wet land in Kerala shall not have any power to convert or reclaim such lands, since the enactment of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 (2008 Act) on 12th August 2008 and the allied rules enacted in 2008. The removal of sand from wetland is also prohibited by the 2008 Act. However, there are two exceptions to this general rule. One is that the owner of the land can seek permission to convert paddy land and construct a residence, and the other is conversion of land for public purposes.

Attachment of Property under BUDS Act

The delay in filing application for confirmation of the provisional attachment of property by the Competent Authority, under Section 14(1) of the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes (BUDS) Act, 2019 (BUDS Act), to the Designated Court cannot be condoned, as Section 5 of the Limitation Act is not applicable to the Section, says the High Court of Kerala, in paragraph 19 in the judgement in Highrich Online Shoppe Private Limited v The Competent Authority.

If Reason for Arrest not Informed Court must Grant Bail

Informing an arrested person clearly and effectively of the grounds for his/her arrest is a fundamental right under Article 22(1) of the Constitution and the right to live with dignity is a part of the rights guaranteed under Article 21, says the Supreme Court (SC) in Vihaan Kumar v The State of Haryana & Another [2025 INSC 162].