Latest · Criminal Law
Written grounds of arrest have become a powerful ground for bail. A new ruling asks what the accused actually knew, and whether he was prejudiced, before a technical lapse can free him.
In recent years, the grounds of arrest have been one of the Supreme Court’s most reliable tripwires. Beginning with Pankaj Bansal and Prabir Purkayastha, the Court insisted that a person arrested must be told why, in writing, and that an arrest which skipped this step could not stand. A decision of 28 October 2026 asks a harder question: what is the rule for, and must every lapse in how the grounds were conveyed set the accused free? This commentary draws on a published report of the ruling, and readers should consult the judgment itself before relying on it.
When a capital closes its metro stations, switches off mobile internet and turns protesters back at its borders, the question is not whether order matters. It is whether the State has shown its work.
A trial court acquitted because no handwriting expert was examined. The Chhattisgarh High Court reversed, and in doing so restated how Section 306 is actually proved.
Criminal law was built around the State and the accused. India's courts and legislature have slowly made room for the victim, but the room is still smaller than the promise.
Generative AI has moved from conference-panel novelty to the document-review queue. But the firms that will benefit are not the ones buying the most tools — they are the ones that redesign how work, supervision and accountability fit together.
Commentary, analysis and essays on developments in law, governance and public policy, covering the constitutional, international, and technological questions of the present century.
Have a view on law, governance or policy?
We welcome commentary, case notes and short-form essays. Pitches and full drafts are both welcome.
Submission guidelines