AS Law Office

Home
India
Delhi
AS Law Office

Comprehensive legal services across 15+ practice areas including commercial law, family matters, criminal defense, and more.

Reach us : +91-8929327500 | [email protected]
📍 B-37/4, 1st Floor, Ramesh Nagar, New Delhi - 110015

19/08/2026

Sheela Gehlot v. Mohini Hardayal Singh & Ors.

The Supreme Court of India has clarified that the requirement to serve notice on legal representatives under Order XXI Rule 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) does not apply to auction sales conducted by the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT).
A Bench comprising Justice P.S. Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe held that upon the transfer of ex*****on proceedings to the DRT under Section 31 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, the procedure under Section 29 read with the Second Schedule to the Income Tax Act, 1961 supersedes the CPC.

Order XXI Rule 22 CPC Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 Auction Sale Validity Sheela Gehlot v. Mohini Hardayal Singh Ex*****on Proceedings Supreme Court of India Notice to Legal Representatives Section 31 RDB Act

18/08/2026

In a significant ruling, the Madras High Court has held that a DNA test cannot be directed to establish the offence of bigamy where paternity of a child is not directly in issue.
Justice Mohammed Shaffiq observed that DNA testing may be ordered only when there is an "eminent need" for it, and that the ingredients of Sections 494 and 495 IPC do not warrant recourse to such analysis.
Setting aside the trial court's order permitting a DNA test in a bigamy case, the Court reiterated that such directions must not proceed on a misapprehension of the statutory framework and constitutional safeguards involved.

Madras High Court, DNA test, bigamy, Section 495 IPC, Section 494 IPC, paternity dispute, Justice Mohammed Shaffiq, criminal revision, eminent need, M v Government of Tamil Nadu, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 390, trial court order set aside, constitutional safeguards, statutory framework

17/08/2026

Section 23 lets senior citizens reclaim property transferred to relatives if the recipient fails to provide promised care protecting elders from neglect and exploitation.

MaintenanceTribunal ElderlyRights LegalAwareness PropertyTransfer ParentsRights KnowYourRights IndianLaw ASLawOffice ElderAbuseAwareness LegalEducation FamilyLaw PropertyRightsIndia RightsOfParents LawForSeniors JusticeForElders

Section 23 Senior Citizens Act, Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act 2007, property transfer revocation, senior citizen property rights, void property transfer, Maintenance Tribunal India, elderly parents legal rights, gift deed cancellation senior citizens, elder care law India, abandonment of parents legal remedy

15/08/2026

The Supreme Court of India has delivered a significant order quashing all criminal proceedings against comedian Samay Raina and four co-accused Vipul Goyal, Balraj Paramjeet Singh Ghai, Sonali Thakkar, and Nishant Tanwar in the case concerning insensitive remarks about persons with disabilities on India's Got Latent.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice J.V. Mohana acknowledged the respondents' compliance with prior court directions, including disability awareness initiatives and fundraising exceeding ₹55 lakh.
While the individual matter stands closed, the Court has retained the larger issue of digital content regulation for further judicial consideration.

Supreme Court judgment India, Samay Raina FIR quashed, India's Got Latent case, disability rights ruling, Cure SMA Foundation v Union of India, digital content regulation, CJI Surya Kant bench, criminal proceedings quashed comedians, online platform accountability, SMA fundraising awareness, judicial directions social media platforms

14/08/2026

Ravi Kant Gupta v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.

In a significant ruling reinforcing elder rights in India, the Supreme Court has held that tribunals constituted under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 possess the power to order eviction where necessary to secure the maintenance, protection and dignity of senior citizens. A Bench of Justices P S Narasimha and Alok Aradhe restored an eviction order against a son, emphasising that the right to live with dignity is intrinsic to human existence under Articles 21 and 41 of the Constitution.
The judgment reaffirms earlier precedents safeguarding vulnerable elderly citizens from neglect and insecurity.

Supreme Court judgment, senior citizen eviction, tribunal eviction powers, Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act 2007, senior citizen rights, Article 21, Article 41, Ravi Kant Gupta, Allahabad High Court, right to dignity, elderly protection, S Vanitha v Deputy Commissioner Bengaluru

13/08/2026

G. Ganesh v. State of Tamil Nadu & Ors

The Supreme Court has clarified that its earlier direction mandating immediate registration of an FIR upon receiving information about a missing person applies uniformly to every individual, regardless of age or gender.
The Bench held that the term "person" cannot be narrowly construed to mean only children, and cautioned States and Union Territories against non-compliance, warning of potential contempt action for failure to register FIRs even in cases involving missing adults.
The ruling reinforces accountability in tackling human trafficking and reaffirms the State's constitutional duty to protect every citizen's right to be searched for and found.

Supreme Court of India, missing person FIR, immediate FIR registration, Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Justice R Mahadevan, G Ganesh v. State of Tamil Nadu, human trafficking, Anti Human Trafficking Units (AHTU), Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023, contempt proceedings, State accountability, missing adults, police negligence, gender-neutral protection, Ministry of Home Affairs directive

12/08/2026

Did you know?
That under Section 23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, a senior citizen retains the legal right to reclaim property transferred to their children through gift or otherwise.

PropertyLaw LegalAwareness ElderlyRights ParentsRights KnowYourRights LegalRightsIndia GiftDeed PropertyTransfer ElderAbuseAwareness ASLawOffice IndianLaw LegalEducation FamilyLaw SeniorCitizens LawForAll

Section 23 Senior Citizens Act, revocation of gift deed by senior citizen, property taken back from children, Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act 2007, elderly parents property rights, Maintenance Tribunal India, void transfer of property senior citizen, legal rights of elderly parents, gift deed cancellation India, neglect of parents legal consequences, senior citizen property dispute, elder rights law India

11/08/2026

In a significant observation, the Delhi High Court has criticised a defence counsel's line of cross-examination in a sexual harassment case, holding that questions directed at the survivor's clothing were "wholly irrelevant" to the matter and appeared aimed at embarrassing, humiliating and morally judging her.
Justice Chandrasekharan Sudha observed that a woman's choice to wear jeans is a matter of personal choice, reaffirming that courts cannot permit cross-examinations that shift focus from the accused's conduct to the survivor's attire.
The ruling reinforces jurisprudence protecting survivors from character-based scrutiny during trial and reasserts bodily autonomy as a matter of individual dignity.

Delhi High Court judgment, sexual harassment case, survivor's clothing cross-examination, personal choice of dress, Justice Chandrasekharan Sudha, women's autonomy law, victim-blaming in courts, gender sensitivity judiciary, character assassination cross-examination, Indian criminal law, POCSO/sexual harassment jurisprudence, women's rights India

10/08/2026

In our recent bail application, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi, has granted bail to an accused in a case investigated by the Special Cell, under Section 480 of the BNSS.
While the prosecution opposed the plea citing alleged links to a syndicate, the Court noted that the chargesheet stood filed, investigation was complete, and the accused had remained in custody since arrest, with trial proceedings likely to take time.
Bail was granted subject to conditions including furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 20,000 with a surety, cooperation with investigation, and disclosure of residence details, underscoring the balance between personal liberty and due process.

Bail order, Section 480 BNSS, Special Cell, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi, chargesheet, custody, bail bonds, surety, investigation, syndicate, personal liberty, due process, criminal case, Delhi courts, judicial order, bail conditions

07/08/2026

The Supreme Court has reaffirmed a significant principle under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, holding that the burden of proving a lack of financial capacity lies squarely on the accused.
The Court emphasized that such a defence must be raised at the earliest possible opportunity specifically, in the reply to the statutory demand notice rather than being introduced belatedly during trial proceedings.
This ruling underscores the importance of timely and proactive legal representation when responding to cheque dishonour notices, as delayed defences may weaken an accused's credibility before the court. A crucial precedent for cheque bounce litigation in India.

Section 138 NI Act, cheque bounce case, financial capacity defence, burden of proof, Supreme Court judgment, demand notice reply, Negotiable Instruments Act 1881, cheque dishonour, criminal complaint, legal defence strategy, Indian judiciary, trial court proceedings, statutory notice period, accused rights, case law update

Address

B-37/4, 1st Floor Ramesh Nagar
Delhi
110015

Website

http://aslawoffice.in/, https://aslawoffice.in/

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when AS Law Office posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Want your practice to be the top-listed Law Practice in Delhi?