This article looks at the ‘Pune Porsche’ case and answers the questions – first, what exactly does the law lay down? Second, was the law followed in this case? Third, is the public outrage, though understandable, placed correctly in the demands being made – in terms of bail for the juvenile, as well as exploration of the ‘judicial waiver’ – the option to ‘treat the child as an adult’ in the judicial process?
This article dissects the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India, highlighting the significant change of the judiciary’s stance on arrest protocols under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. It also highlights how this improved understanding has brought in more transparency while also safeguarding civil liberties.
On 26th January, the International Court of Justice issued an order on provisional measures in the case initiated by South Africa against Israel under the Genocide Convention. Following hearings on 11th and 12th January, the Court determined that provisional measures were necessary to safeguard the parties’ respective rights pending a final decision on the merits. The Court ruled in favor of South Africa, indicating six provisional measures against Israel. While there was near-unanimous support for the measures, with Judges Xue, Bhandari, and Nolte appending declarations to the order, Judge ad hoc Barak issued a Separate Opinion supporting certain measures, and Judge Sebutinde dissented, opposing all six measures.
Summary of arguments put forth by Israel on 12th January 2024 against South Africa’s Request for indication of provisional measures in the Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip (South Africa v. Israel).
Summary of arguments put forth by Israel on 12th January 2024 against South Africa’s Request for indication of provisional measures in the Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip (South Africa v. Israel).
On December 29, 2023, South Africa instituted legal proceedings against Israel at the International Court of Justice, asserting Israel’s breach of obligations under the Genocide Convention in relation to Palestinians in Gaza. In its application, South Africa has requested the ICJ to indicate provisional measures to ensure immediate relief in Gaza and protect the integrity of the ongoing legal proceedings. On January 11, 2024, South Africa made arguments on provisional measures as part of the first round of proceedings before the ICJ in this matter. This post briefly summarizes South Africa’s submissions.
This article probes the inconsistency in the Supreme Court’s professed commitment towards assessing reformation in capital sentencing against its reliance on life sentences excluding remission as a commuting sentence in death penalty cases.
On 12 December, revised criminal law bills were introduced in the Lok Sabha, viz. Bharatiya Nyaya (Second) Sanhita Bill, 2023, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha (Second) Sanhita Bill, 2023, and Bharatiya Sakshya (Second) Bill, 2023. This document highlights the key changes proposed.
Digital evidence has been growing in relevance over the past several years. Most recently, in the ‘Newsclick’ investigation there were several reports of devices of journalists being seized. This raises an important question: can the police under the garb of investigation force one to open their electronic devices. The article argues that the right against self-incrimination protects against such compulsion by demonstrating that unlocking of devices (whether by password or biometrics) amounts to giving testimony. The article goes further to ask what happens in case a person willingly or without compulsion opens their device. The article explores the possibility of tampering of digital evidence and social realities in India to argue that all the contents of one’s device cannot be attributed to a person merely by virtue of being on a person’s device.
The goal of this article is to ask, how do Courts judge whether or not the methodology through which a piece of evidence is presented is scientific or not (i.e. how does a Court make a determination about the foundational validity of scientific evidence)? What separates something like DNA evidence, in which our judicial system puts such high faith, from narco-analysis, which is generally deemed to be unreliable?
This post analyses the implications of the changes proposed to the provisions pertaining to the admissibility of electronic evidence under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Bill, 2023.