Supreme Court's Verdict on Circumstantial Evidence In the intricate tapestry of evidence law, where shadows of doubt can unravel convictions, the Supreme Court of India recently delivered a landmark ruling that reaffirms the sanctity of procedural rigor. On October 6, 2025, in Nazim and Ors. v. The State of Uttarakhand (Criminal Appeal No. 715 of 2018), a bench comprising Justices M.M. Sundresh and S.C. Sharma acquitted three appellants in a grisly child murder case, spotlighting the frailties of circumstantial evidence , the "last seen" theory, the absence of Test Identification Parades (TIP), and the pivotal role of scientific evidence . This decision, authored by Justice S.C. Sharma, serves as a clarion call for courts to tread cautiously, ensuring that suspicion never masquerades as proof. As India grapples with evolving forensic capabilities and witness vulnerabilities, this judgment underscores the enduring principles governing convictions built on inference rat...

The recent Supreme Court proceedings on Delhi’s stray dog issue highlight a delicate balance between humanity towards animals and the constitutional duty to protect human life and safety. Context of the Supreme Court case The Supreme Court is hearing a suo motu matter titled “In Re: ‘City Hounded By Strays, Kids Pay Price’” (SMW(C) No. 5/2025), triggered by disturbing reports of dog bites and rabies in Delhi, especially affecting children. The Court has already recorded that recurring incidents of dog bites in schools, hospitals, railway stations and sports complexes indicate serious administrative lapses and systemic failure in securing citizens’ right to safety under Article 21. The LiveLaw report and court exchange During the latest hearing, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal challenged the rules framed by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) as “very very inhuman”, arguing they run contrary to the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act.[1] The bench (Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sand...

Delhi’s startup and professional community today is living through two equally disturbing truths: founders Vaibhav Chawla who feel forced to shut down functioning businesses once the criminal process is turned against them, and ordinary citizens who watch their life’s savings flow to sophisticated fraudsters while the police machinery moves at a glacial pace, if at all.  Both experiences point to one central failure—a policing culture that can be hyper‑active where there is pressure and influence, yet strangely comatose when a victim seeks nothing but protection under law. When process becomes the punishment In one set of cases, entrepreneurs narrate how a dispute that should have remained commercial is rapidly escalated into a criminal battle, with the system appearing to run on a presumption of guilt and a readiness to use coercive tools at the complainant’s bidding. The message they receive is brutal : it is not enough to build a healthy business; one must also survive a process...