Sometimes, In The Quest For Justice We End Up Doing Injustice.

  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Publications
  4. /
  5. Case Snippets
  6. /
  7. Sometimes, In The...

In High Court Bar Association, Allahabad v. State of U.P. & Ors., 2024 INSC 150, a Constitution Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court while overruling its own three-judge bench decision, unanimously held that automatic vacation of stay orders after a lapse of six months is against the basic tenets of justice, provides undue benefit to the respondents therein and that such orders can be vacated only after application of judicial mind by the concerned Court. The bench also observed that Article 142 which grants them extraordinary powers to do complete justice cannot be used to nullify the benefits derived from stay orders, ignore the substantive right of the parties to be heard before the passage of an adverse order and that such blanket direction of automatic vacation of stay amounts to making a dent to the jurisdiction of Hon’ble High Courts which consequentially amounts to making a dent to basic structure as well. Hon’ble Justice Pankaj Mithal in his separate concurring decision went on to opine that “sometimes, in the quest for justice we end up doing injustice” and the impugned three-judge bench decision in Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Private Limited & Anr. v. Central Bureau of Investigation is an example of the same.

Tags:

Let us help you!

If you need any help, please feel free to contact us. We will get back to you within one business day. Alternatively, if you're in a hurry, you can call us now

+91 9052538538
info@karavadi.in

Recent Case Snippets

Rights In Rem Are Not Arbitrable – Supreme Court

In Booz Allen & Hamilton Inc. v. SBI Home Finance Ltd. (2011), the Supreme Court of India ruled that disputes involving the enforcement of mortgage rights are non-arbitrable because they pertain to rights in rem—public rights affecting immovable property—rather than rights in personam, which are private and suitable for arbitration. Although Booz Allen sought to... Read more » Read more »

Supreme Court Upholds Fundamental Right to Be Informed of Arrest Grounds

In Vihaan Kumar v. State of Haryana (2025), the Supreme Court held informing grounds of arrest to relative of accused is not sufficient and that Article 22(1) mandates that every arrested person must be informed about the grounds of arrest in a way they understand. The court declared the Appellant’s arrest was illegal due to... Read more » Read more »

Shilpa Mittal Vs. State of Nct of Delhi Air – 2020 sc-405

The court while ascertaining the scope of Sec 2(33) of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 held that the Act does not deal with offences which are ‘heinous’ in nature.  It observes that even if a child commits a heinous offence, he cannot be automatically tried as an adult. Before, trying a child as an adult,... Read more » Read more »

Disclaimer

The Rules and Regulations set forth by the Bar Council of India under Advocates Act, 1961 prohibit Advocates or Law Firms from advertising or soliciting work through public domain communications. This website is intended solely to provide information. Karavadi & Associates (“K&A”) does not aim to advertise or solicit clients through this platform. K & A disclaim any responsibility for decisions made by readers/visitors based solely on the content of this website.

By clicking 'AGREE,' readers/visitors agree and acknowledge that the information provided herein (a) does not constitute advertising or solicitation, and (b) is intended solely for their understanding of K & A services. By continuing to use this site, you consent to the use of cookies on your device as outlined in our Cookie Policy.