• All
  • Current Affairs
  • Interview Guidance
  • Job Updates
  • Judiciary Exam Tips
  • Landmark Judgements
  • Law school
  • Legal Concepts
  • Legal Updates
  • Muslim Law
  • Trademark Law

Landmark Judgements

SC Child Trafficking Guidelines 2025
Landmark Judgements

SC Child Trafficking Guidelines 2025: No Bail & Hospital May Lose License

By / / 13 minutes of reading

In the 2025 case Pinki v. State of Uttar Pradesh, the Supreme Court issued the SC Child Trafficking Guidelines 2025, canceling bail for 13 accused and mandating hospital license suspension for newborn trafficking. This ruling aims to curb child trafficking effectively. This blog explains the SC Child Trafficking Guidelines 2025 for Judiciary, APO, and JLO aspirants preparing for 2025 exams.

SC Child Trafficking Guidelines 2025: No Bail & Hospital May Lose License Read More »

Patanjali Misleading Ads
Landmark Judgements

SC Slams Patanjali! Contempt Notice Over Patanjali Misleading Ads

By / / 11 minutes of reading

In a 2024 ruling in Indian Medical Association v. Patanjali Ayurved, the Supreme Court issued a contempt notice in the Patanjali Misleading Ads Contempt case, slamming Patanjali for false medical claims under the Drugs and Magic Remedies Act, 1954. This verdict protects consumer rights. This blog explains the Patanjali Misleading Ads Contempt ruling for Judiciary, APO, and JLO aspirants preparing for 2025 exams.

SC Slams Patanjali! Contempt Notice Over Patanjali Misleading Ads Read More »

Forgery Before Court
Landmark Judgements

Forgery Before Court? Supreme Court Clears Key Doubts

By / / 11 minutes of reading

In the case Ariaswamy v. State of Tamil Nadu, the Supreme Court clarified that Forgery Before Court Section 195 CrPC does not apply to pre-court forgery, allowing prosecution without court permission. This ruling ensures justice for forged documents. This blog explains the Forgery Before Court Section 195 CrPC verdict for Judiciary, APO, and JLO aspirants preparing for 2025 exams.

Forgery Before Court? Supreme Court Clears Key Doubts Read More »

Wife can join husband's defamation suit
Blog, Landmark Judgements

Wife Can Join Husband’s Defamation Suit : Supreme Court

By / / 9 minutes of reading

The Supreme Court said Wife Can Join Husband’s Defamation Suit in the 2025 case Spunklane Media v. Nivedita Singh. The Court ruled that a wife can be part of her husband’s defamation case. They share a family reputation. This blog explains the Wife Can Join Husband’s Defamation Suit ruling. It is simple for Judiciary, APO, and JLO aspirants preparing for 2025 exams.

Wife Can Join Husband’s Defamation Suit : Supreme Court Read More »

Aadhaar Not Mandatory for Bank Operations
Landmark Judgements

Aadhaar Not Mandatory for Bank Operations: Supreme Court

By / / 12 minutes of reading

In a significant ruling, the Aadhaar Not Mandatory for Bank Operations stance was reinforced by the Supreme Court in the 2025 case MC Mehta v. Union of India. The Court questioned the Delhi Government for denying subsistence allowances to workers due to non-Aadhaar-linked accounts, asking, “Which law says bank accounts can’t be operated without Aadhaar?” This blog explores the Aadhaar Not Mandatory for Bank Operations ruling, its background, and implications for Judiciary, APO, and JLO aspirants preparing for 2025 exams.

Aadhaar Not Mandatory for Bank Operations: Supreme Court Read More »

Supreme Court on Lengthy Pleadings & AI
Landmark Judgements

Supreme Court on Lengthy Pleadings & AI in Civil Suits

By / / 13 minutes of reading

Explore the Supreme Court on Lengthy Pleadings & AI in the 2025 case Annaya Kocha Shetty v. Laxmibai Narayan Satose, where the Court criticized bulky pleadings and AI-generated statements. Learn how Order 6 Rule 16 CPC empowers courts to strike out unnecessary pleadings. This blog delves into the Supreme Court on Lengthy Pleadings & AI ruling, its implications, and Order 6 Rule 16 CPC for Judiciary, APO, and JLO aspirants preparing for 2025 exams.

Supreme Court on Lengthy Pleadings & AI in Civil Suits Read More »

Doon School Trademark Relief
Legal Updates, Landmark Judgements

Doon School Trademark Relief 2025: Dehradun Court’s Interim Order

By / / 10 minutes of reading

In a significant ruling, the Doon School Trademark Relief 2025 was granted by a commercial court in Dehradun, restraining Doon School, Srinagar from using the trademark ‘The Doon School’. The interim order protects the 94-year-old institution’s reputation. The Doon School Trademark Relief 2025 highlights the importance of trademark protection in education. This blog explores the Doon School Trademark Relief 2025, its background, and implications for Judiciary, APO, and JLO aspirants preparing for 2025 exams.

Doon School Trademark Relief 2025: Dehradun Court’s Interim Order Read More »

Tamil Nadu Governor Action Illegal
Landmark Judgements

Tamil Nadu Governor Action Illegal 2025: Article 200 Explained

By / / 13 minutes of reading

In a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court in State of Tamil Nadu v. The Governor of Tamil Nadu and Anr declared the Tamil Nadu Governor Action Illegal 2025 by reserving 10 re-enacted bills for the President as illegal and erroneous. The court set aside all subsequent actions. It clarified Article 200 and set timelines for gubernatorial decisions. The Tamil Nadu Governor Action Illegal 2025 ruling stresses that Governors must not create roadblocks. This blog explores the Tamil Nadu Governor Action Illegal 2025 judgment, Article 200, and its significance for Judiciary, APO, and JLO aspirants preparing for 2025 exams.

Tamil Nadu Governor Action Illegal 2025: Article 200 Explained Read More »

Supreme Court RJS Ruling 2025
Job Updates, Landmark Judgements

Supreme Court RJS Ruling 2025: No Relief for Late Caste Certificates

By / / 10 minutes of reading

In a significant decision, the Supreme Court RJS Ruling 2025 in Sakshi Arha v. The Rajasthan High Court and Ors. dismissed appeals by five candidates for the Rajasthan Civil Judge post. The court upheld the Rajasthan High Court’s decision to deny appointments due to late submission of caste certificates. The Supreme Court RJS Ruling 2025 emphasizes strict adherence to cut-off dates. This blog explores the Supreme Court RJS Ruling 2025, its background, and implications for Judiciary, APO, and JLO aspirants preparing for 2025 exams.

Supreme Court RJS Ruling 2025: No Relief for Late Caste Certificates Read More »

Prompt Medical Care is a Fundamental Right
Landmark Judgements

Prompt Medical Care Is a Fundamental Right

By / / 14 minutes of reading

In the case of House Owners Welfare Association (Regd.) v. State of Haryana and others (2025 P&H HC), the Punjab and Haryana High Court ruled that prompt medical care is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution, refusing to quash a layout plan incorporating a clinic in Sector 17, Panchkula, despite claims of increased traffic. Justices Sureshwar Thakur and Vikas Suri emphasized the importance of accessible healthcare for the elderly and disabled, balancing it against the right to trade under Article 19(1)(g). This blog explores the ruling, its legal implications, and its significance for Judiciary, APO, and JLO aspirants preparing for 2025 exams.

Prompt Medical Care Is a Fundamental Right Read More »

Landmark Judgements

Munnesh v. State of UP (2025 SC): New Supreme Court Guidelines on Bail and Anticipatory Bail

By / / 13 minutes of reading

In Munnesh v. State of UP (2025 SC), the Supreme Court issued new guidelines on bail and anticipatory bail, mandating petitioners to disclose their criminal antecedents in the petition synopsis. Justices Dipankar Datta and Manmohan warned that false disclosures could lead to petition dismissal, addressing the issue of non-disclosure that often misleads courts. This blog explores the Supreme Court guidelines on bail, their implications, and their relevance for Judiciary, APO, and JLO aspirants preparing for 2025 exams.

Munnesh v. State of UP (2025 SC): New Supreme Court Guidelines on Bail and Anticipatory Bail Read More »

Landmark Judgements, Job Updates

Supreme Court Guidelines on Setting Aside Selection Process: State of West Bengal v. Baishakhi Bhattacharyya (2025 SC)

By / / 16 minutes of reading

In State of West Bengal v. Baishakhi Bhattacharyya (2025 SC), the Supreme Court laid down 4 key principles for setting aside an entire selection process due to irregularities, upholding the cancellation of 25,000 teaching and non-teaching appointments by the West Bengal SSC in 2016. Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Sanjay Kumar emphasized systemic fraud, evidence standards, and the priority of process purity over candidate inconvenience. This blog explores the Supreme Court guidelines on setting aside selection process, their implications, and their relevance for Judiciary, APO, and JLO aspirants preparing for 2025 exams.

Supreme Court Guidelines on Setting Aside Selection Process: State of West Bengal v. Baishakhi Bhattacharyya (2025 SC) Read More »

Best Judiciary & Law Exams Online Courses
Youtube Facebook-f Whatsapp Instagram

Quick Links

About Us

Testimonials

Contact Us

Terms & Conditions

Courses

Judiciary Exam Courses

APO Exam Courses

Interview Guidance

Test Series

Help

Contact Us

Terms & Conditions

Privacy policy

Copyright © 2025 Doon Law Mentor

Shopping Basket
Scroll to Top