Consequence of Non-mentioning or Wrong Mentioning of Law in Petition or Order
It is settled law that once it is found that the power exists, the exercise of power under a wrong provision will not render the order illegal or invalid.
A Candidate with Higher Qualifications Has No Right to Be Considered for a Post Requiring Lower Qualifications
When a post is specifically intended for candidates possessing lower educational qualifications, allowing a person with higher qualifications to secure such employment would deprive a genuinely eligible and deserving candidate of the opportunity, the Supreme Court observed in General Manager (HR) & Anr v. K. Poovarasan [2026 INSC 581].
Scheduled Caste/Tribe Status of a Child Born to Inter-Caste Parents
The Supreme Court, in Rameshbhai Dabhai Naika v. State of Gujarat & Others [(2012) 1 KLT 383], observed that in the case of an inter-caste marriage, or a marriage between a tribal and a non-tribal person, there may be a presumption that the child belongs to the caste of the father.
A Party to a Civil Suit Cannot Travel Beyond the Pleadings
In L. Ponnayal @ Lakshmi v. Karuppannan (Dead) Thr. L.R. Sengoda Gounder & Anr. [AIR ONLINE 2018 SC 191], the Supreme Court of India held that civil suits are decided on the basis of pleadings and the issues framed thereon, and the parties to the suit cannot be permitted to travel beyond their pleadings.
Appoint Govt Pleaders and Public Prosecutors on Merit: Kerala High Court
The Division Bench of the Kerala High Court ruled in Suo Motu vs State Of Kerala [2025: KER:30823] that the State Government must give primacy to the opinion of the concerned District Judge during the consultative process for the appointment of Public Prosecutors, and mandated that the State frame internal guidelines ensuring strict conformity with the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The judgment underscored the Supreme Corut direction that such appointments should be made only taking into consideration the merit of the candidate and no other consideration.
Failure to Mention Amount in Demand Notice in a Cheque Dishonour Case Renders the Notice Incomplete: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court, in Rajesh K. v. Asokan P.K. [2026: KER:36763], held that a demand notice issued under Section 138 (b) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act), is incomplete if it does not specify the amount demanded.
Victims of Heinous Crimes Cannot Be Subjected to Repeated Trauma of Cross-Examination: Supreme Court
While setting aside an order permitting the recall of a rape survivor for further cross-examination, the Supreme Court, in The State of Tripura v. Panna Ahmed [2026 INSC 584], observed that witnesses, particularly survivors of heinous crimes such as rape, should not be repeatedly subjected to the ordeal of cross-examination merely because of a change in defence counsel or an earlier oversight. The Court made this observation while considering the exercise of powers under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).
Courts and Advocates Must Exercise Caution in Frivolous POCSO Cases Arising from Matrimonial Disputes
The Supreme Court, in Ishwar Chand Sharma & Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another [2026 INSC 587], has cautioned that legal practitioners must not advise estranged spouses to file false matrimonial cases or frivolous complaints under the POCSO Act as a means to harass the opposite party or to secure favourable settlements in matrimonial and family disputes.
Suit for Damages for Malicious Prosecution Abates When Defendant Dies
A claim for damages arising from malicious prosecution does not survive against the legal heirs of a defendant who dies during the pendency of the trial. Under the long-standing common law maxim actio personalis moritur cum persona (a personal right of action dies with the person), actions for personal torts—such as malicious prosecution and defamation—abate entirely upon the death of either the plaintiff or the defendant.
Magistrate’s Permission Required for Police to Conduct Further Investigation: Supreme Court
In the absence of express permission from the Magistrate, the police cannot proceed with further investigation under Section 173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), after filing a closure report, the Supreme Court has reiterated in Paliniswamy Veeraraja & Ors. v. State of Karnataka & Anr. [2026 INSC 561].