Legal Representative under M V Act is the One Who Suffers Loss
A legal representative under M V Act A legal representative is one, who suffers on account of death of a person due to a motor vehicle accident and need not…
Not to Reject Permission for Human Organ Transplantation Without Cogent Evidence
The permission to donate human organs cannot be rejected by the Authorization Committee unless there is cogent material to establish a commercial element, says the High Court of Kerala in Uvais Muhammad K.C. & Another v State of Kerala & Another [2025: KER:195].
Sexual Harassment Complaint by a Lady Need not be Treated as Gospel Truth
The High Court of Kerala (HCK), in Noushad K v State of Kerala and Another [2025:KER:16338], says merely because the complainant is a lady, there is no presumption that her version is the gospel truth.
Nowadays, there has been a tendency to make serious allegations of sexual assault against innocent people.
Motor Vehicle Accident Compensation for A Minor
The notional income of a minor aged 5 years in a motor accident claim should be fixed based on the minimum wages for skilled workers as per the state notification for Kerala, as per GO (P) No 56 /2017 Fin dated 28/4/2017 as the Second Schedule has been omitted, says the Kerala High Court in Master Jyotish Raj Krishna @ Jyothi Krishna v Sunny George & Others [ 2024:KER:87009].
A Suicide Note is Insufficient to Convict an Accused for Abetment of Suicide
A suicide note alone is not sufficient to establish abetment unless it is corroborated by other evidence, says the Supreme Court (SC) in Patel Babubhai Manohardas & Others v State of Gujarat [ 2025 INSC 322].
In a Case for Return of Gold, the Wife has Initial Duty to Prove Entrustment
In a claim for return of gold ornaments and money, the wife has to initially prove the entrustment. Mere assertions, without any trace of evidence, are not sufficient to grant a decree by the family court, says the High Court of Kerala (HCK) in Mohandas v Sunitha Mohandas [2024:KER:81527].
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].
Conviction Solely on the Evidence of Handwriting Expert Would be Hazardous
The Supreme Court (SC) reaffirms that basing a conviction solely on the opinion of a handwriting expert’s evidence without substantial corroboration would be hazardous, in C. Kamalakkannan v State Of Tamil Nadu [2025 INSC 309].
In DV Act, the Party need not be Personally Present
The proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DV Act) is basically civil in nature. Therefore there is no requirement for a party to be personally present as such proceedings are quasi-criminal in nature, says the SC in Vishal Shah v Monalisha Gupta & Others.
No Deemed Sanction u/s 197 CrPC but it is there under BNSS
BNSS has the concept of deemed sanction
The Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), unlike the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), provides for the concept of deemed sanction for prosecuting a public servant.