https://sclaw.in/2026/04/05/criminal-procedure-code-1973-crpc-section-1971-requirement-of-sanction-for-prosecution-of-public-servants-protection-under-section-1971-applies-only-to-public-serv/ 2026-04-05T15:04:23Z Supreme Court of India Judgements en Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 197(1) — Requirement of sanction for prosecution of public servants — Protection under Section 197(1) applies only to public servants who are not removable from office except by or with the sanction of the government — Subordinate police officers not falling under this category are not entitled to the benefit of this protection, even if the alleged offence was committed while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of official duty. 2026-04-05T15:04:23Z Blog https://sclaw.in/2026/04/05/service-law-dismissal-from-service-disciplinary-proceedings-violation-of-natural-justice-requirement-of-oral-enquiry-employers-burden-of-proof/ 2026-04-05T15:02:41Z Supreme Court of India Judgements en Service Law — Dismissal from Service — Disciplinary Proceedings — Violation of Natural Justice — Requirement of Oral Enquiry — Employer's Burden of Proof — The Apex Court held that unless the charged employee clearly admits guilt, a disciplinary enquiry must be held — The employer must first present evidence and witnesses, allowing the employee to cross-examine — Only then should the employee be given an opportunity to present their defense — The Court emphasized that relying solely on documents without examining witnesses or making them available for cross-examination when charges are denied, vitiates the enquiry. 2026-04-05T15:02:41Z Blog https://sclaw.in/2026/04/05/civil-procedure-code-1908-cpc-order-9-rule-13-setting-aside-an-ex-parte-decree-a-minor-who-was-not-properly-represented-in-succession-proceedings-despite-being-a-lega/ 2026-04-05T14:58:07Z Supreme Court of India Judgements en Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 9 Rule 13 — Setting aside an ex parte decree — A minor who was not properly represented in succession proceedings, despite being a legal heir and known to respondents, can file an application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC after attaining majority to challenge the ex parte proceedings. 2026-04-05T14:58:07Z Blog https://sclaw.in/2026/04/03/companies-act-2013-section-185-loan-to-directors-violation-of-section-185-loan-from-company-to-director-for-securing-bail-without-special-resolution/ 2026-04-03T13:47:54Z Supreme Court of India Judgements en Companies Act, 2013 — Section 185 — Loan to directors — Violation of Section 185 — Loan from company to director for securing bail without special resolution — Deposit of Rs. 50 Crores for bail sourced from company funds without proper approval — Held to be not sustainable in law. 2026-04-03T13:45:23Z Blog https://sclaw.in/2026/04/03/contract-law-termination-and-blacklisting-principles-of-judicial-review-courts-must-apply-distinct-standards-of-legality-rationality-and-proportionality-when-reviewing/ 2026-04-03T13:42:51Z Supreme Court of India Judgements en Contract Law — Termination and Blacklisting — Principles of Judicial Review — Courts must apply distinct standards of legality, rationality, and proportionality when reviewing administrative actions related to contract termination and blacklisting, considering the differing gravity of these measures and their consequences. 2026-04-03T13:42:51Z Blog https://sclaw.in/2026/04/03/service-law-disciplinary-proceedings-punishment-judicial-review-the-courts-power-to-review-punishment-is-limited-and-generally-does-not-allow-substitution-of/ 2026-04-03T13:39:23Z Supreme Court of India Judgements en Service Law — Disciplinary proceedings — Punishment — Judicial review — The court's power to review punishment is limited and generally does not allow substitution of its own judgment for that of the disciplinary authority unless the punishment is illogical, suffers from procedural impropriety, or shocks the conscience of the court 2026-04-03T13:39:23Z Blog https://sclaw.in/2026/04/03/waqf-act-1995-section-3i-and-section-322g-jurisdiction-of-civil-court-versus-waqf-board-distinction-between-sajjadanashin-and-mutawalli-sajjadanashin-is/ 2026-04-03T13:34:04Z Supreme Court of India Judgements en Waqf Act, 1995 — Section 3(i) and Section 32(2)(g) — Jurisdiction of Civil Court versus Waqf Board — Distinction between Sajjadanashin and Mutawalli — Sajjadanashin is a spiritual head with religious duties, while Mutawalli is a secular manager of Waqf property — Waqf Board has jurisdiction over appointment and removal of Mutawallis but not Sajjadanashins — Civil Court retains jurisdiction over disputes concerning the office of Sajjadanashin — High Court wrongly held Civil Court lacked jurisdiction. 2026-04-03T13:34:04Z Blog