Accused Entitled to List of Documents “Not Relied Upon” by the Prosecution

Posted inFair Disclosure under CrPCNo Comments
In Akhil Sabu v. State of Kerala [2024: KER: 49597], the High Court of Kerala observed that Rule 19(4) of the Kerala Criminal Rules of Practice, 1982, mandates that every accused must be supplied with the statements of witnesses recorded and a list of documents, as specified under Sections 173, 207, and 208 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (now Sections 193, 230, and 231 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023).

Widowed Daughter-in-law Deserves Maintenance from the Estate of the Deceased Father-in-Law

Posted inMatrimonial and Maintenance CasesNo Comments
In Kanchana Rai v. Geeta Sharma & Ors [2026 INSC 54], the Supreme Court examined whether a daughter-in-law who becomes a widow after the death of her father-in-law is considered a "dependant" under Section 21(vii) of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, and is thus entitled to maintenance from his estate under Section 22.

Cross-Examination Questions: Against a Plaintiff Contesting a Registered Will on the Ground of Testator’s Mental Incapacity Due to Illness

Posted inCross Exam. Questions, Will & Related MattersNo Comments
These sample questions are structured to: Challenge exaggeration of illness Establish mobility and mental capacity Highlight contradiction with registration of the will Suggest tutoring or bias. These questions are illustrative only and must be adapted to the specific facts, pleadings, and documentary record of each case. Counsel should obtain and review all medical records, the registration file, and the attesting witnesses' statements before framing questions for trial.

Supreme Court Raises Concerns Over Use of AI-Generated Fake Judgments in Judiciary

Posted inConstitutional lawNo Comments
The Supreme Court of India, while considering an SLP in Gummadi Usha Rani & Anr. v. Sure Mallikarjuna Rao & Anr, expressed serious displeasure over a trial court’s reliance on non-existent, allegedly Artificial Intelligence (AI)-generated case law. The Court added that such misconduct strikes at the very integrity of the adjudicatory process and cannot be brushed aside as a mere error of law.