Saturday, June 6

Featured

The Supreme Court clarified key principles on oral gifts (Hiba) under Mohammedan law in *Dharmrao Sharanappa Shabadi v. Syeda Arifa Parveen* (October 7, 2025). It ruled that oral gifts cannot be “surprise instruments” and must meet three simultaneous conditions: donor’s declaration, donee’s acceptance, and delivery of possession. Without evidence like mutation or acts of ownership, the gift claim fails. The Court set aside the Karnataka High Court ruling and held the 2013 suit time-barred, stressing strict proof and possession as decisive for validating Hiba claims.

The Supreme Court ruled on 6 October 2025 that tender conditions requiring prior supply experience **within a specific state** are unconstitutional. In *Vinishma Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Chhattisgarh*, the Court struck down the rule for violating **Article 14** (equality) and **Article 19(1)(g)** (freedom of trade), stressing that public procurement must ensure fair competition and a “level playing field.” Geographical restrictions lacking rational justification were deemed arbitrary. The decision reinforces that tender rules must serve legitimate objectives, not create artificial barriers favoring local suppliers over qualified national bidders.

The Supreme Court held in *Executive Trading Co. v. Grow Well Mercantile* that defendants in summary suits under Order XXXVII CPC must obtain the court’s permission (“leave to defend”) before filing any defence. The ruling preserves the fast-track nature of summary proceedings, requiring defendants to apply within set timelines and support their plea with an affidavit showing a substantial defence. Courts may grant leave with conditions, but cannot permit routine replies without leave. The decision enforces strict procedural compliance to protect quick recovery of liquidated commercial claims.

Albania’s appointment of “Diella,” an AI, as a government minister raises serious constitutional questions. Critics say ministers must be human—able to take oaths, answer parliament, and bear legal responsibility—so an AI creates an “accountability gap.” Supporters argue AI could curb corruption and boost efficiency. The move may clash with EU rules on human oversight. Experts say such a fundamental change likely requires constitutional amendment, not executive reinterpretation, and urge safeguards like meaningful human control, transparency, audits, and clear legal liability.

The Bombay High Court granted interim relief to Asha Bhosle against AI platforms and online sellers for cloning her voice and misusing her image without consent. The Court held this violated her personality and publicity rights and her moral rights under Section 38B of the Copyright Act. Defendants were restrained from using her identity and ordered to remove infringing content. Relying on constitutional privacy rights, moral rights, and passing off principles, the Court protected her control over her persona, reflecting a growing legal response to AI-based misuse of celebrity identities.

Madras High Court formed a Special Investigation Team led by IG Asra Garg to probe the Karur stampede at actor-politician Vijay’s TVK rally on Sept 27 that killed 41 people. The court faulted TVK’s leadership for poor planning and lack of remorse, ordered Karur police to hand over records, and dismissed CBI probe petitions. Tamil Nadu will not allow highway rallies until SOPs are set; essential facilities and crowd-management measures must be provided. Multiple FIRs have been filed and compensation was announced for victims’ families.