1. How legal was the demonetisation scheme of 2016? PG.

2. Can additional restrictions be imposed on public

PG. 4
officials' freedom of speech and expression?

3. Why was the landmark case on Passive Euthanasia PG. 5

again before the SC?

4. What did the SC hold for the release of prisoners after PG. 6
getting bail?

5. Can the Bar Council of India conduct the All India Bar PG. 7
Examination (AIBE)?

6. Who appoints the Chief Election Commissioner? PG. 8

7. Does being a member of an unlawful organisation

PG. 9
attract UAPA?

8. Can the SC waive the waiting period under the Hindu PG. 10
Marriage Act?

9. Do sealed-cover documents violate the principles of PG. 11

natural justice?

10. Should Ayurvedic and Allopathy doctors get equal pay PG. 12
for their work?

11. Does the sport of Jallikattu violate the Constitution of PG. 13

India?

12. Who should have been the CM of Maharashtra? PG. 14

13. Who has control over administrative services in NCT PG. 15

Delhi?

14. How will the Auditor's resignation affect proceedings PG. 16

u/s 140 (5) of the Companies Act?

15. What are the directions by SC on implementing the PG. 17

PoSH Act?

16. Does Coal India come under the Competition PG. 18

Commission of India?

17. What are the new guidelines for support persons PG. 19
under the POCSO Act?
Contents

18. What happens to maternity benefit claims if the PG. 20

contractual period is over?

19. What are SC's directions on the safety of courts? PG. 21

20. What did the SC hold on the retrospective effect of PG. 22

the DSPE Act?

21. What are the rights of children born out of invalid PG. 23
marriages in the Joint Hindu Family property?

22. Do same-sex couples have the right to marry in India? PG. 24

23. What are the new guidelines on manual scavenging PG. 25

by SC?

24. What did the SC decide on the special status of PG. 26

Jammu and Kashmir?

25. What is the arbitration clause's validity in an PG. 27

unstamped agreement?
 PG. 3

HOW LEGAL WAS THE

DEMONETISATION
SCHEME OF 2016?
Vivek Narayan Sharma
v. Union of India, January 2023
The Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Union Government
to demonetise the 500 and 1000 banknotes in 2016. The judgment
was delivered by a majority of 4:1, with Justice Nagrathna dis-
agreeing with the majority. She observed that the demonetisation
was not carried out lawfully. Since the decision had already been
acted upon, Justice Nagarathna clarified that it would have a pro-
spective effect. She acknowledged that the move to demonetise
was well-intended but that the process was found to be unlawful
on "a purely legalistic analysis".

Demonetisation has been done five

times in India, the first in 1946 and the
most recent in 2023. In 1946, banknotes
of ₹ 500, ₹ 1000 and ₹ 10000 were
demonetised.
 PG. 4

CAN ADDITIONAL
RESTRICTIONS BE IMPOSED ON
PUBLIC OFFICIALS' FREEDOM OF
SPEECH AND EXPRESSION?
Kaushal Kishore v. State of
Uttar Pradesh, January 2023
The Supreme Court examined whether there should be more lim-
itations on public officials' freedom of speech and expression. The
Court decided that the reasonable restrictions mentioned in Arti-
cle 19(2) of the Constitution are sufficient and no further restric-
tions are needed. The Court also discussed the idea of collective
responsibility and Constitutional tort, as politicians and Ministers
may not only express their personal views but also represent the
views of their Government. Justice Nagarathna provided her sep-
arate opinion on freedom of speech and hate speech, agreeing
with the majority but presenting her perspective.

The words "sovereignty and integrity of

India" in Article 19(2) of the Constitution,
dealing with restrictions on Freedom of
Speech and Expression, were added
through the 16th Amendment Act in 1963.
 PG. 5

WHY WAS THE LANDMARK

CASE ON PASSIVE EUTHANASIA
AGAIN BEFORE THE SC?
Common Cause v. Union of
tIndia, January 2023
The SC modified the directions on advance medical directives, or
living wills issued in the Common Cause v. Union of India, 2018.
The 2018 judgment recognised the right to die with dignity as a
part of the right to live with dignity under Article 21 of the Consti-
tution. It upheld the legal validity of passive euthanasia. The mod-
ification order was passed by a Constitution Bench considering an
application by the Indian Council for Critical Care Medicine, which
claimed the directives made the process lengthy and complex.
The SC, through the revised guidelines, has significantly reduced
the lengthy process.

There are 8 Countries which allow Active

Euthanasia (with certain conditions).
When a Doctor or Medical Officer stops
the treatment necessary for the survival
of the patient, it is called passive euthana-
sia. Whereas when such a medical profes-
sional administers a medicine to trigger
death, it's active euthanasia.
 PG. 6

WHAT DID THE SC HOLD FOR

THE RELEASE OF PRISONERS
AFTER GETTING BAIL?
In Re Policy Strategy for Grant
of Bail, January 2023
In a positive move for under-trial prisoners, the Supreme Court
has given various instructions for those prisoners who have been
in custody due to non-fulfilment of specific conditions for bail de-
spite being eligible for it. The directions include, among other
things, informing the prisoner about the grant of bail on the same
day or the next day. If the prisoner is not released within seven
days, then the Jail Superintendent must inform the District Legal
Services Authority to assist the prisoner.

In the landmark case of Hussainara

Khatoon v. State of Bihar, it was held
that speedy trial is an essential part of
the right to life and personal liberty
under Article 21 of the Constitution.
 PG. 7

CAN THE BAR COUNCIL OF

INDIA CONDUCT THE ALL INDIA
BAR EXAMINATION (AIBE)?
Bar Council of India v. Bonnie FOI
Law College, February 2023
A five-judge bench of the Supreme Court upheld the power of the
Bar Council of India (BCI) to conduct the All India Bar Examina-
tions (AIBE). This exam is mandatory for law graduates who wish
to practice in Indian courts, as it tests their basic understanding of
the law. The bench observed that neither the Advocates Act, 1961,
nor any other legal or educational body prohibits the BCI from
conducting AIBE. Moreover, the Court gave directions to the BCI
on matters such as timely exam conduct, eligibility, number of at-
tempts allowed to pass, etc.

More than 1 lakh 70 thousand

people appeared for the All India Bar
Examination conducted in February
2023. This figure was double the
number of people who appeared in
the one previous to Feb exam.
 PG. 8

WHO APPOINTS THE CHIEF

ELECTION COMMISSIONER & THE
ELECTION COMMISSIONERS?
Anoop Baranwal v. Union of
India, March 2023
Through this landmark case, a five-judge bench of the SC set up a
committee to appoint the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and
other Election Commissioners (ECs). According to Article 324 of
the Constitution, the President of India appoints CEC and ECs
unless the Parliament makes a law. Since the Parliament did not
make a law on it, the SC constituted a Committee comprising the
Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition and the Chief Justice
of India. The bench clarified that this Committee would function
till the Parliament makes a law on it.

In the Monsoon Session, the Parlia-

ment introduced the CEC and Other
ECs (Appointment, Conditions of Ser-
vice And Term of Office) Bill, 2023,
changing the Committee was passed
in the Winter Session. The Act replaces
the CJI with a Cabinet Minister in the
appointment-making process.
 PG. 9

DOES BEING A MEMBER OF

AN UNLAWFUL ORGANISATION
ATTRACT THE PROVISIONS
OF UAPA?
Arup Bhuyan v. State of Assam, March 2023

A 3-judge Bench of SC, in a significant verdict, overruled its

judgments in Arup Bhuyan v. State of Assam, Indra Das v. State
of Assam and State of Kerala v. Raneef in which it was held that
mere membership of a banned association is insufficient to con-
stitute an offence under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act
1967 unless there is a violent act involved. The bench upheld Sec-
tion 10(a)(i) of the UAPA, which states that mere membership of
an association, which has been declared unlawful, is an offence.

According to the recent NCRB data,

more than a thousand cases were reg-
istered under the Unlawful Activities
(Prevention) Act in the year 2022, and
currently, more than 3500 cases are at
the trial stage.
 PG. 10

CAN THE WAITING PERIOD FOR

DIVORCE UNDER THE HINDU
MARRIAGE ACT, 1955, BE WAIVED
OFF BY THE SC USING ART. 142?
Shilpa Shailesh v. Varun Sreenivasan, April 2023

Using its power under Article 142 of the Constitution, the SC held
that it has the power to grant a divorce based on an irretrievable
breakdown of marriage, which is not a ground for divorce under
the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA), to do complete justice. The
Court also held that if it is satisfied that the marriage is irretriev-
ably broken, it can waive the waiting period of 6-18 months pro-
vided under Section 13-B of the HMA. Further, the Apex Court set
out certain conditions to be met before granting divorce for an
irretrievable marriage breakdown.

The Supreme Court has used its power

under Article 142 in many significant
cases like the Bhopal Tragedy Case,
and the Babri Masjid Demolition Case,
to name a few.
 PG. 11

DOES USING SEALED-COVER

DOCUMENTS AS EVIDENCE
VIOLATE THE PRINCIPLES
OF NATURAL JUSTICE?
Madhyamam Broadcasting Limited
v. Union of India, April 2023
While dealing with the broadcasting rights of a channel, the Su-
preme Court allowed the plea made by Madhyamam Broadcast-
ing against the ban imposed by the Union. The court ruled that
the State cannot claim national security reasons to seek exemp-
tion from its duty to act reasonably. The court has the power to
examine if such a claim is legitimate. The court also observed
that the sealed cover procedure has two injuries. Firstly, the doc-
uments are not available to the affected party. Secondly, the op-
posite party relies on the documents, and the court arrives at a
finding depending on the material. The court further observed
that this procedure violates the principles of natural justice.

There are two legal maxims associated

with the principles of natural justice.
'Nemo judex in causa sua' means no
one should be a judge in his cause, and
‘Audi alreram partem' means no one
should be convicted unheard.
 PG. 12

SHOULD AYURVEDIC AND

ALLOPATHY DOCTORS GET
EQUAL PAY FOR THEIR WORK?
State of Gujarat v. Dr PA Bhatt, April 2023
The Supreme Court has ruled that equal pay for allopathy and
ayurvedic doctors cannot be granted as their work is not of equal
value. The Court also noted that discrimination based on educa-
tional qualifications does not violate Article 14 of the Constitution.
Previously, a lower court ruled that Ayurvedic doctors should re-
ceive the same benefits as MBBS doctors, as the Tikku Pay Com-
mission recommended. Still, the two-judge bench of the SC set
aside the order and clarified that this decision does not mean one
field of medicine is superior to the other.

According to the World Bank, as of

2022, 95 Countries do not guarantee
equal pay for equal work.
 PG. 13

DOES THE SPORT OF JALLIKATTU

VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTION AND
THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO
ANIMALS ACT OF 1960?
Animal Welfare Board v. Union of India, May 2023

The Supreme Court bench of 5 Judges decided that Jallikkattu,

Kambala, and Bullock-cart racing sports do not go against the
Constitution of India and the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals
Act, 1960. The Court upheld the amendments made by the States
of Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Maharashtra to allow these sports.
It recognised that many changes had been made to reduce
animal suffering. The Court also discussed doctrines of pith and
substance and colourable legislation in light of the law-making
powers of the Legislatures.

Similar sports like Jallikkattu are also

practised worldwide in countries like
Portugal, France and Mexico, all of
which are some versions of
bullfighting.
 PG. 14

WHO SHOULD HAVE BEEN THE

CM OF MAHARASHTRA: MR
UDDHAV THACKREY OR MR
EKNATH SHINDE?
Subhash Desai v. Governor of Maharashtra, May 2023

In a political party, two factions were split, and the leader of one
faction, and the then Chief Minister of Maharashtra, resigned from
his position just before he was called for a Floor Test. Meanwhile,
the leader of the other faction became the new Chief Minister.
Both factions approached the Supreme Court with their respective
issues, and a bench of five judges dealt with them. The Court ruled
that the power to decide on the disqualification of MLAs lies solely
with the Speaker. Further, through this judgment, a previous deci-
sion on anti-defection law, Nabam Rebia v. Deputy Speaker, 2016,
was referred to a larger bench of 7 Judges for reconsideration.

Since 2014, the maximum number

of MLAs lost by a party through
defection has been by Congress, and
the maximum number of gains have
been by BJP.
 PG. 15

WHO CONTROLS NCT DELHI'S

ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES?
Government of NCT Delhi
v. Union of India, May 2023

In a significant verdict of 2023, a five-judge bench of the SC ruled

that the power over administrative services of Delhi, including the
appointment, transfers, and other related matters of civil servants,
lies with the Government of NCT Delhi (GNCTD) and not with the
Lt. Governor. The bench further observed that despite Delhi being a
Union Territory, it possesses a unique status, and all powers,
except for land, police, and public order, should be with GNCTD.
the Central Government passed the GNCTD (Amendment) Bill,
2023, which grants the Lt. Governor the power to make the final
decision in case of any dispute related to matters of services.

NCT Delhi got its "special status" after

a recommendation by the Balkrishnan
Committee, which stated that being
the Capital of the Country, it should
belong to the whole nation.
 PG. 16

CAN PROCEEDINGS AGAINST AN

AUDITOR, UNDER SECTION 140 (5)
OF THE COMPANIES ACT 2013,
END IF THE AUDITOR RESIGNS?
Union of India v. Deloitte Haskins, May 2023

Upholding the Constitutional validity of Section 140(5) of the

Companies Act 2013, the SC observed that proceedings under the
Section will continue even if the concerned Auditor has resigned.
Section 140 (5) states that if the Tribunal is satisfied that an Auditor
has acted fraudulently, it can direct the Company to change its
Auditors. The Court further observed that an Auditor cannot
avoid the consequences of proceedings under the Companies
Act by resigning.

If an Auditor is found guilty of fraud

under the Companies Act 2013, such a
person cannot become an auditor of
any company for 5 years.
 PG. 17

WHAT DIRECTIONS DID THE SC GIVE

CONCERNING THE PREVENTION OF
SEXUAL HARASSMENT AT THE
WORKPLACE?
Aureliano Fernandes v. State of Goa, May 2023
In this case, the Supreme Court issued several directions to
ensure the proper implementation of the Prevention of Sexual
Harassment at Workplace Act 2013 (PoSH Act). The recommenda-
tions included time-bound exercises to check if all concerned au-
thorities have established Internal Committees. The Court also di-
rected that all organisations make information regarding PoSH
available on their websites and ensure that Committee Members
know how to conduct an inquiry upon receiving a complaint of
sexual harassment at the workplace.

The Bar Council of India took suo-moto

cognisance of the gun-firing incident
in Tis Hazari Court and suspended the
license of the advocate caught on
camera.
 PG. 18

WILL COAL INDIA LIMITED

COME UNDER THE COMPETITION
COMMISSION OF INDIA AS A PSU?
Coal India Limited v. Competition
Commission of India, June 2023
In a significant case, the Supreme Court ruled that Coal India Ltd.
would be subject to the Competition Act, 2002, even though it's a
Public Sector Undertaking. A three-judge bench returned the
matter to the Competition Commission of India to decide the
issue on its merits. The petitions were filed by Coal India, arguing
that its operations were covered under the Coal Mines Nationali-
sation Act and thus outside the purview of the Competition Act,
2002. The Competition Commission of India had imposed a fine of
more than 1700 crore on Coal India for unfair practices on the Fuel
Supply Agreement.

In April 2011, CIL was conferred the

Maharatna status by the Union Gov-
ernment of India and ranked as one of
India's most valuable companies by
market value.
 PG. 19

WHAT DID THE SC HOLD

CONCERNING THE APPOINTMENT
OF "SUPPORT PERSONS" UNDER
THE POCSO ACT?
Bachpan Bachao Andolan v.
Union of India, August 2023
The Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Rules provides
for a 'Support Person' responsible for being there with the child
through the whole legal process and providing them with all the
necessary assistance. The Court issued several directions relating
to the appointment and role of the Support Persons. The direc-
tions cover the selection, appointment, rules and guidelines,
Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), training, and other em-
ployment terms relating to the Support Persons.

More than 63000 cases were regis-

tered under the POCSO Act in 2022,
which is 10000 more than the previous
year, 2021. These figures show the high
percentage of sexual offences against
children.
 PG. 20

CAN AN EMPLOYEE CLAIM

MATERNITY BENEFITS EVEN IF
THEIR CONTRACTUAL PERIOD
OF EMPLOYMENT IS OVER?
Dr. Kavita Yadav v. Secy, Ministry of Health
and Family Welfare, August 2023
The SC, in this case, was dealing with the issue of whether ma-
ternity benefits can be given to a contractual employee even if
the period of benefit goes beyond the contractual period. The
Court held that per the Maternity Benefits Act 1961 provisions,
an employee is entitled to the benefits even beyond their term
of employment. The same cannot be denied because the con-
tractual period was over. The 3-judge bench of the SC observed
that even the dismissal of a person does not disentitle them
from the benefits. In this case, the appellant had applied for the
maternity benefit, and she received the benefits for only 11 days,
stating that her contractual period was over.

New mothers are entitled to 26

weeks of paid leave according to
the Maternity Benefits Act 1961.
 PG. 21

WHAT DIRECTIONS DID THE SC

ISSUE ON SAFETY MEASURES
FOR THE COURTS AFTER A
GUN-FIRING INCIDENT?
Pradyum Bisht v. Union of India, August 2023
Recently, there was an incident of gun-firing at the Tis Hazari
Court in Delhi, prompting the Supreme Court to issue several
safety directives. The court noticed that this was not an isolated
incident and emphasised that the safety of all individuals in-
volved in the judicial process is paramount and cannot be com-
promised. The two-judge bench issued several directions, in-
cluding establishing a security unit in every court, properly in-
stalling CCTV cameras, and constantly monitoring entry and exit
gates. The Court also noted that medical facilities and other
such services should be available in emergencies.

The Bar Council of India took

suo-moto cognisance of the gun-fir-
ing incident in Tis Hazari Court and
suspended the license of the advo-
cate caught on camera.
 PG. 22

WILL SECTION 6A OF THE DELHI

SPECIAL POLICE ESTABLISHMENT
ACT (DSPE) HAVE A RETROSPECTIVE
EFFECT?
CBI v. RR Kishore, September 2023
In Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India, 2014, the SC held Sec-
tion 6A of the DSPE Act to be unconstitutional. In 2023, the SC
held that the above mentioned decision would have a retrospec-
tive effect, meaning that it would be unconstitutional from the
day it was added to the Act. Section 6A mandated the CBI to get
prior approval from the Union Government in corruption cases
against an officer of Joint Secretary rank or above.

Currently, CBI has three investigation

divisions: Anti-corruption, Economic
Offences, and Special Crimes.
 PG. 23

DO CHILDREN BORN OUT OF

INVALID MARRIAGES HAVE A
RIGHT TO THEIR PARENT'S SHARE OF
JOINT HINDU FAMILY PROPERTY?
Revanasiddappa v. Mallikarjun, September 2023

According to the judgment delivered by a 3-judge Bench of the

Supreme Court, children born out of marriages that are either
void or voidable have the right to inherit a share of their parent's
property. However, it is essential to note that they are not entitled
to inherit any of the properties of other coparceners of the Joint
Hindu Family, except for their parents. Furthermore, it was clari-
fied that this ruling applies only to Joint Hindu Family properties
under the Mitakshara Law.

The Mitakshara law for inheritance

governs almost all the States of India,
while the Dayabhag law for inheritance
is followed by people of and around
West Bengal, Assam and Orissa.

PG. 24
 PG. 24

DO SAME-SEX COUPLES HAVE

THE RIGHT TO MARRY?
Supriyo v. Union of India, October 2023
This case was one of the most widely discussed judgments of
the year. It dealt with the right to marriage and mainly focused
on the rights of individuals belonging to the LGBTQIA+ commu-
nity to get married. The case also addressed the exclusion of the
same in Acts like the Special Marriage Act. A 5-judge Bench of
the Supreme Court unanimously held that there is no funda-
mental right to marry. However, it also held that transgender
persons in heterosexual relationships can marry under the exist-
ing laws. On the issue of the right to civil union and the right to
adopt by same-sex couples, the Court, with a 3:2 majority, held
that the legislature is the correct authority to decide whether
same-sex couples should have the right to a civil union or the
right to adopt. CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice Kaul gave the
two dissenting opinions and observed that persons belonging to
the LGBTQIA+ Community have the right to civil union.

Same-sex marriages are legal in 36

Countries of the World, whereas ho-
mosexuality is a crime in 64 countries.
 PG. 25

WHY DID THE SC ISSUE NEW

GUIDELINES AGAINST
MANUAL SCAVENGING?
Dr. Balram Singh v. Union of India, October 2023
A 2-judge bench of the Supreme Court issued several directions
to completely eradicate manual scavenging by ensuring proper
implementation of the Prohibition of Employment as Manual
Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013. The Court or-
dered the Union Government to develop policies and issue
guidelines to all statutory bodies to ensure the elimination of
manual scavenging. The directions also included provisions for
rehabilitating manual scavengers and providing compensation
in the event of death or disability resulting from this practice.

Manual Scavenging has been

banned since 1993, but even in the
last five years, almost 340 people
have died from manual scavenging
in India.
 PG. 26

WHAT DID THE SC DECIDE ON

THE SPECIAL STATUS OF JAMMU
AND KASHMIR?
In Re: Abrogation of Article 370, December 2023
On 11 December 2023, a five-judge bench of the SC upheld the
removal of the special status of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K). The
court unanimously held that it was a temporary provision.
Through Article 370 of the Constitution, J&K enjoyed a special
status, and the Parliament had limited power to legislate. Article
370 (3) stated that the special status of J&K can be amended or
removed by the President after the recommendation of the
Constituent Assembly of the State. In 2019, through two Presi-
dential Orders, the special status of J&K was removed, which
was challenged in this case. The Bench, however, did not rule
on the validity of the reorganisation of J&K into two Union Terri-
tories, Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh. The decision was based
on the Union's assurance that Jammu and Kashmir would soon
regain the status of a State.

Jammu and Kashmir have had their

separate flag since 1952, but after
the abrogation of Article 370, only
the national flag is hoisted in J&K.
 PG. 27

WHAT IS THE VALIDITY OF AN

UNSTAMPED ARBITRATION
AGREEMENT?
In Re Interplay Between Arbitration Agreements
Under The Arbitration And Conciliation Act 1996 And
The Indian Stamp Act 1899, December 2023
The recent ruling by the Supreme Court states that arbitration
clauses will still be enforceable even if the agreement is un-
stamped or improperly stamped. This decision overturns the
previous orders of the five-judge bench in M/s. NN Global Mer-
cantile Pvt. Ltd. v. M/s. Indo Unique Flame Ltd. And Ors, 2023,
where it was held that unstamped arbitration agreements are
not enforceable. In the present case, a seven-judge bench ob-
served that an agreement cannot be void or unenforceable due
to insufficient stamping. However, such an agreement may be
deemed inadmissible as evidence.

The United Nations Commission on

International Trade Law (UNCITRAL)
Model Law is designed to help the
States reform their arbitration laws.
The same has been mentioned in
the Preamble of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act of 1996.