_*National Green Tribunal at New Delhi has directed municipal corporations to ensure uninterrupted supply of clean and safe drinking water to residents, while issuing notice in an original application alleging contamination of municipal drinking water in several cities across the country.

for judgment click here

NGT has directed municipal corporations to ensure uninterrupted supply of clean and safe drinking water to residents Judgment

⚖️

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 

THE LAW LITERATES 

The legal community in Delhi is in a state of shock following the tragic news of the death of Aman Kumar Sharma, a 30-year-old judge. On Saturday, May 2, 2026, Sharma was found dead at his residence in Delhi, sending ripples of grief through the halls of justice.

While investigations are still in the early stages, preliminary reports suggest that authorities suspect the cause of death to be suicide.

The Details of the Incident

According to police statements, the incident came to light in the afternoon. When Sharma did not respond to calls or visitors, the discovery was made at his home.

• Status of Investigation: Police have arrived at the scene to conduct a forensic sweep.

• Official Statements: While no suicide note has been publicly confirmed yet, the “preliminary information” points toward self-harm.

• Next Steps: A post-mortem examination is expected to be conducted to provide a definitive cause of death.

A Career Cut Short

At just 30 years old, Aman Kumar Sharma was part of the younger generation of the Indian judiciary—a role that carries immense responsibility and, often, significant pressure. The loss of such a young legal mind is not just a personal tragedy for his family, but a loss for the judicial system itself.

The Weight Behind the Robes

This heartbreaking event has reignited conversations regarding the mental health and high-stress environments faced by judicial officers. Judges often deal with:

• Overwhelming case backlogs.

• High-stakes decision-making.

• Social isolation due to the nature of their neutral office.

all rights Reserves Vaibhav Tomar (Adv)

The Delhi High Court, in the case of Yogender Chandolia vs. Vishesh Ravi & Ors (EL.PET. 10/2020), has delivered a significant judgment regarding the scope of “corrupt practices” under the Representation of the People Act (RPA), 1951.  

The ruling clarifies whether a candidate’s false declaration about their own educational qualifications in an election affidavit (Form 26) can lead to disqualification.

Key Takeaways from the Judgment

1. Scope of Section 123(4) of the RPA

The Court examined whether misstating educational qualifications falls under Section 123(4), which defines a corrupt practice as the publication of a false statement of fact in relation to the personal character or conduct of any candidate.  

• The Ruling: The Court held that while educational qualifications are part of a candidate’s profile, a false statement about them does not automatically qualify as a “corrupt practice” unless it is shown to have a direct and substantial impact on the “personal character or conduct” in a way that unduly influences voters.

• Precedent: This aligns with the Supreme Court’s observation that voters in India generally do not cast their ballots based solely on a candidate’s educational degree.  

2. Difference Between “Non-Disclosure” and “Corrupt Practice”

The High Court distinguished between two legal avenues:

• Section 100(1)(d)(i): Improper acceptance of a nomination due to false information. This can make an election “void” if it materially affects the result.

• Section 123: Corrupt practices. Being found guilty here has harsher consequences, including a 6-year disqualification from contesting future elections.  

• The Court’s View: The Court was cautious not to expand the definition of “corrupt practice” to every inaccuracy in an affidavit, noting that such a “purposive interpretation” must stay within the strict boundaries of the statute.

3. Judicial Context

The matter was referred to a larger bench to decide specifically whether filing a false affidavit regarding one’s own education constitutes a corrupt practice. The Court noted:

• The Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 (Form 26) requires these disclosures.

• However, without an explicit amendment to Section 123 of the RPA by Parliament, the judiciary cannot easily categorize educational falsehoods as “corrupt practices” unless they are of a “substantial character.”

Beyond the Black Robes

For a long time, the image of a “Senior Leader” at the Bar was almost exclusively male. This news changes the visual landscape of power. When 2026 rolls around, seeing a woman in one of the top three SCBA offices will:

1. Normalize Female Authority: It moves women from the sidelines to the center of the courtroom’s administrative heart.

2. Encourage Boldness: It tells every woman practicing today that there is a seat at the table reserved specifically for their perspective.

3. Humanize the Legal Process: Representation often brings issues like childcare, harassment protocols, and flexible working hours to the forefront.

The Bottom Line:

This isn’t just about one election in 2026. It’s about ensuring that the future of Indian law looks like the society it serves.

History in the making. The SCBA 2026 elections will feature a woman as Vice President, a landmark move for gender parity in the legal world. #LegalNews #WomenInLaw #SCBA”

The gavel of leadership is getting a new perspective. 2026: The year women lead the SCBA. ⚖️✨ #Equality #SupremeCourt #IndianLaw”

Vaibhav Tomar (Adv)

All rights Reserved 

🏛️SUPREME COURT OF INDIA🏛️

SC Holds Debt Arising from Cash Transaction Exceeding ₹20,000 (Violating IT Act) Can Still be ‘Legally Enforceable’ for Cheque Dishonour Cases

Supreme Court recently set aside the Kerala High Court judgment in PC Hari v. Shine Varghese, which held that a debt created by a cash transaction above Rs.20,000 in violation of the Income Tax (IT) Act, 1961 cannot be considered as a “legally enforceable debt” under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act unless there is a valid explanation for the same.

For More read the Judgment click here 

shine-varghese-v-state-of-kerala-s138-ni-act-cash-debt-exceeding-rs20000-cheque-dishonor-The Law Literates

all rights Reserved (Vaibhav Tomar Adv)

🏛️DELHI HIGH COURT 🏛️

HARISH vs STATE CRLMC 1481/25 10/10/25

Section 483 read with Section 528 BNSS POCSO ACT , 2012 Sections 6 and 21 Section 376AB IPC Regular bail application – Allegations of sexual assault on a minor girl – No DNA match between the accused and the victim – CCTV evidence inconclusive and not placing the accused in the classroom – Victim failed to identify the accused during deposition Prosecution failed to establish strong prima facie grounds of involvement – Bail granted subject to stringent conditions to ensure trial integrity and safety of victim and witnesses.

Relevant Paras 

12. Thus, it emerges that the child has not identified the Applicant during

deposition, the CCTV does not place him in the classroom, and the FSL report discloses no DNA linkage. Without pre-judging credibility or the merits reserved for trial, these features at least create a prima facie doubt as to the Applicant’s involvement. A case for release on bail is therefore made out, subject to stringent conditions to safeguard the child and the integrity of the proceedings.

13. The nominal roll dated 24th June 2025 records that the Applicant has BAIL APPLN. 1481/2025 Page 8 of 10remained in custody for 1 year, 1 month and 23 days, and his jail conduct is noted to be satisfactory. The principal witnesses, including the child and her parents, have already been examined. The Applicant has no criminal antecedents and is a young man who supports his family. In these circumstances, with investigation concluded, charge sheet filed, and the key witnesses examined, continued incarceration risks straying into pre-trial punishment rather than serving the purposes of securing the proceedings. Liberty, once constrained, must be justified, not presumed.

14. In light of the foregoing discussion, the Applicant is directed to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond for a sum of INR 25,000/- with one surety of the like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty MM, on the following conditions:

To see the Judgment Click here

Harish vs State of NCT of Delhi Judgment Delhi High Court Bail order Pocso