Legal 60

INTRODUCTIONIn its Judgment dated 29 January 2026, the Supreme Court of India, speaking through a Division Bench comprising Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vikram Nath and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Mehta, has held that disciplinary proceedings against an advocate cannot be sustained where the complainant has withdrawn the complaint, expressed satisfaction with the advocate’s services and no

INTRODUCTIONIn a significant constitutional adjudication, the Supreme Court of India, by its Judgment dated 20 January 2026, in Dr. Jaya Thakur v. Government of India & Ors., Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1000 of 2022, decisively affirmed that menstrual health and hygiene are integral to the fundamental rights to life, dignity, equality and education. The Judgment

IntroductionIn a decision that fundamentally reshapes the discourse surrounding contractual public sector employment, the Supreme Court of India, through a Judgment delivered by Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta, has pronounced a substantial shift in constitutional jurisprudence. The case is titled Bhola Nath v. The State of Jharkhand and Others (SLP(C) No. 30762 of

Welcome back to another week of Bells & Whistles. As always, we’ve rounded up a mix of developments, opportunities, and thoughtful reads from across the IP world along with a Bell of the Week that’s well worth revisiting. Bell of the Week “RiP: A Remix Manifesto” Some bells don’t just ring, they remix. This week, we

INTRODUCTIONIn its Judgment dated 20 January 2026, the Supreme Court of India, speaking through a Division Bench of Hon’ble Mr. Justice Aravind Kumar and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Prasanna B. Varale in Beri Manoj v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Anr. (Criminal Appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 14741 of 2025), has reaffirmed that the

Entering February by announcing the second edition of the SpicyIP Summer School in 2026! A three part book review of “Intellectual Property Debates in South Asia“, edited by Dr. Pratyush Nath Upreti. Case summaries and IP developments from the country and the globe in this week’s SpicyIP Weekly Review. Anything we are missing out on?

The Supreme Court in XXX v. State of Kerala & Ors. (2026) delivered a landmark ruling interpreting Section 175(4) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which introduces procedural safeguards before directing an investigation against public servants. The case arose from allegations of serious sexual offences against police officers and raised important questions regarding the

The Waqf Act, 1995 was enacted to provide a specialised statutory framework for the administration, supervision, and adjudication of disputes concerning waqf properties. Over time, however, an expansive interpretation of the jurisdiction of Waqf Tribunals led to considerable uncertainty, particularly in cases where properties were claimed to be waqf by user, but were neither notified

A recurring procedural objection raised by employers in industrial adjudication is that no valid industrial dispute exists unless the workmen or union first serve a prior written demand on the employer and the same is rejected. This contention, often deployed as a preliminary objection, has historically been used to stall conciliation, derail references under Section

This landmark judgment delivered by the Supreme Court of India addresses a crucial conflict between environmental preservation and private construction rights in the culturally sensitive Santiniketan region of West Bengal. The Court examined whether the construction undertaken by M/s Aarsuday Projects & Infrastructure (P) Ltd. on a plot near Santiniketan was illegal on account of