The Legal Laureate

The Legal Laureate Legal updates and news under one roof

27/06/2026

In M. Paramesh v. VRL Logistics Ltd. (2026 INSC 655), the Supreme Court held that while physical disability may be assessed at a fixed percentage, functional disability affecting earning capacity may be assessed at a higher percentage, even 100%, depending on the victim's occupation. Holding that amputation of mason M. Paramesh's right leg completely destroyed his earning capacity, the Court assessed his functional disability at 100% and enhanced compensation to ₹40.29 lakh.

27/06/2026

In X v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (name of the petitioner not disclosed in the report), the Supreme Court declined to interfere with the Rajasthan High Court's order upholding the fee structure of private medical colleges. Observing that self-financing institutions cannot be equated with government colleges in charging fees, the Court dismissed the SLP, remarked that the country needs more doctors, and kept the question of law open.

27/06/2026

In The State of Madhya Pradesh v. Ravi Shankar Singh (2026 INSC 650), the Supreme Court held that a High Court, while exercising jurisdiction under Article 226, cannot rewrite the procedural framework of the CrPC by directing trial courts to examine the sanctioning authority before framing charges. Setting aside the Madhya Pradesh High Court's guidelines, the Court ruled that criminal trials must strictly follow the procedure prescribed under the CrPC/BNSS and the Prevention of Corruption Act.

27/06/2026

In Smt. Asha & Anr. v. Ramakrishna S. Ghatge & Ors., the Karnataka High Court held that the expression "legal representative" under the Motor Vehicles Act is not confined to the spouse, parents or children, but includes all persons financially dependent on the deceased. Recognising the second wife and minor daughter as dependents, the Court enhanced the compensation by reassessing the deceased's income and awarding consequential benefits.

27/06/2026

In Puja Hari v. State of West Bengal & Anr., the Calcutta High Court set aside the attachment of the petitioner's properties, holding that Section 107 BNSS mandates multiple executive and judicial safeguards before pre-trial attachment. The Court ruled that non-application of mind and failure to issue statutory notice violate natural justice and may render the provision constitutionally vulnerable.

27/06/2026

In Jittu Yadav v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others, the Supreme Court held that Section 5 of the Limitation Act applies to appeals under special statutes unless expressly or impliedly excluded. It ruled that the Chhattisgarh Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990 contains no such exclusion, condoned the delay, restored the appellant's statutory appeal, and directed its disposal on merits.

27/06/2026

In Rajesh R v. State of Kerala & Anr., the Kerala High Court upheld the rejection of the accused's discharge application, holding that whether pushing the deceased leading to cardiac arrest amounted to culpable homicide and whether the accused knew of her cardiac condition were matters to be determined on evidence at trial. The Court reiterated that a discharge application under Section 227 CrPC cannot involve a mini-trial.

27/06/2026

In VRN v. L, the Kerala High Court held that a second marriage after a divorce decree is not void merely because a divorce appeal is pending. It ruled that Section 15 of the Hindu Marriage Act does not revive the dissolved marriage but only restricts remarriage in specified situations. The Court dismissed the husband's challenge to the divorce and remitted the issue of permanent alimony for fresh adjudication.

27/06/2026

In Ahmedbhai Sharafatali Sai & Anr. v. Keshubhai Mohanbhai Parmar & Ors., the Gujarat High Court held that brothers of a deceased person are entitled to maintain a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act as legal representatives, even if they were not financially dependent on the deceased. Dismissing the appeal, the Court upheld the MACT award and directed the appellants to satisfy it with interest within six weeks.

27/06/2026

Prakashchand Miri v. State of Chhattisgarh (2026:CGHC:25249): The Chhattisgarh High Court denied bail to Prakashchand Miri and co-accused in a cricket betting case, holding that online gambling is an organised crime with serious economic consequences. Observing that extensive digital devices and banking records revealed a well-organised betting network, the Court ruled that the gravity of the offence disentitled the accused from bail.

Address

Kolkata

Website

Alerts

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

Shortcuts

Share

Category