April 25, 2026

Supreme Court of India

Mandatory Prosecution for False Affidavits and Pleadings: Delhi High Court Enforces Supreme Court Directives . Walmark Holdings Limited v. Fortis Healthcare Limited (2026 DHC 515) Screenshot 2025-12-14 at 20.02.18

Mandatory Prosecution for False Affidavits and Pleadings: Delhi High Court Enforces Supreme Court Directives . Walmark Holdings Limited v. Fortis Healthcare Limited (2026 DHC 515)

Rashid Khan Pathan Posted on 3 months ago
The Three-Judge Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in James Kunjwal v. State of Uttarakhand, 2024 SCC...
Read More Read more about Mandatory Prosecution for False Affidavits and Pleadings: Delhi High Court Enforces Supreme Court Directives . Walmark Holdings Limited v. Fortis Healthcare Limited (2026 DHC 515)
बार कौन्सिलमधील अन्यायाविरोधात ॲड. रवी जाधव यांच्या लढ्याला इंडियन बार असोसिएशनचा ठाम पाठिंबा WhatsApp Image 2026-01-21 at 12.51.09

बार कौन्सिलमधील अन्यायाविरोधात ॲड. रवी जाधव यांच्या लढ्याला इंडियन बार असोसिएशनचा ठाम पाठिंबा

Rashid Khan Pathan Posted on 3 months ago
बार कौन्सिलकडून वकिलांच्या हक्कांचे संरक्षण करण्याचे कर्तव्य पार पाडले जात नसून, उलट बेकायदेशीर शिस्तभंग कारवाया, बोगस तक्रारी,...
Read More Read more about बार कौन्सिलमधील अन्यायाविरोधात ॲड. रवी जाधव यांच्या लढ्याला इंडियन बार असोसिएशनचा ठाम पाठिंबा
Indian Bar Association Backs Adv. Ravi Jadhav, Announces Nationwide Protests to Protect Advocates’ Rights and Bar Independence WhatsApp Image 2026-01-21 at 12.51.09

Indian Bar Association Backs Adv. Ravi Jadhav, Announces Nationwide Protests to Protect Advocates’ Rights and Bar Independence

Rashid Khan Pathan Posted on 3 months ago
Amid growing unrest over allegations that the Bar Council is failing to discharge its duty to protect...
Read More Read more about Indian Bar Association Backs Adv. Ravi Jadhav, Announces Nationwide Protests to Protect Advocates’ Rights and Bar Independence
झूठे मामलों पर सख़्त कार्रवाई: दोषी वादकारियों, वकीलों और लापरवाह पुलिस व न्यायिक अधिकारियों को कोई रियायत नहीं 2_03_59_58_supreme-court-_1_H@@IGHT_0_W@@IDTH_600

झूठे मामलों पर सख़्त कार्रवाई: दोषी वादकारियों, वकीलों और लापरवाह पुलिस व न्यायिक अधिकारियों को कोई रियायत नहीं

Rashid Khan Pathan Posted on 3 months ago
उच्च न्यायालय ने दिशा-निर्देश जारी किए — Umme Farva v. State of U.P. and Another (2026: AHC:...
Read More Read more about झूठे मामलों पर सख़्त कार्रवाई: दोषी वादकारियों, वकीलों और लापरवाह पुलिस व न्यायिक अधिकारियों को कोई रियायत नहीं
Crackdown on False Cases: No Leniency for Guilty Litigants, Lawyers, or Erring Police and Judicial Officials. High Court issued guidelines. [Umme Farva v. State of U.P. and Another (2026: AHC: 8949)] SUPREME-COURT-OF-INDIA

Crackdown on False Cases: No Leniency for Guilty Litigants, Lawyers, or Erring Police and Judicial Officials. High Court issued guidelines. [Umme Farva v. State of U.P. and Another (2026: AHC: 8949)]

Rashid Khan Pathan Posted on 3 months ago
No Bail for Such Dishonest Persons or Officers. Supreme Court [Naveen Singh v. State of U.P., (2021)...
Read More Read more about Crackdown on False Cases: No Leniency for Guilty Litigants, Lawyers, or Erring Police and Judicial Officials. High Court issued guidelines. [Umme Farva v. State of U.P. and Another (2026: AHC: 8949)]

You may have missed

image-750x-2023-10-28-10_01_43pm-653d376f8f3b2

सुप्रीम कोर्ट का बड़ा आदेश: बॉम्बे हाई कोर्ट को निलेश ओझा मामले में सभी मुद्दों पर फैसला करने का निर्देश

Rashid Khan Pathan Posted on 4 days ago
Screenshot 2025-12-28 at 11.52.13

सुप्रीम कोर्टचा मोठा आदेश: निलेश ओझा प्रकरणात सर्व मुद्द्यांवर निर्णय घेण्याचे बॉम्बे हायकोर्टाला निर्देश

Rashid Khan Pathan Posted on 4 days ago
Screenshot 2026-02-02 at 22.04.35

Supreme Court Orders Bombay High Court to Adjudicate All Issues in Adv. Nilesh Ojha Case, Negates Earlier HC View that certain issues should be decided by the Supreme Court.

Rashid Khan Pathan Posted on 4 days ago
WhatsApp Image 2026-03-08 at 13.20.38

[Shocking] A two-judge Bench headed by Justice B.V. Nagarathna dismissed a petition filed in accordance with the law laid down by the Constitution Bench in In Re: C.S. Karnan, (2017) 7 SCC 1, imposed costs on the petitioner, and made discourteous and intimidating remarks cautioning advocates who in fact had filed the petition as per law settled by the larger benches.

Rashid Khan Pathan Posted on 2 months ago