In Tarsem Lal v. Directorate of Enforcement, Criminal Appeal No. 2608 of 2024 (2024 INSC 434), the Supreme Court of India delivered a significant ruling clarifying the procedural position under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) in relation to custody, arrest powers and the applicability of the stringent bail conditions under Section 45. […]
The landmark judgment in Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India (2023INSC866) by the Supreme Court India firmly establishes that the communication of grounds of arrest to an arrested person is not merely a procedural formality but a substantive constitutional and statutory safeguard that must be meaningfully discharged. The Court held that henceforth, written grounds of […]
In Sachin Dev Duggal v. Directorate of Enforcement (2025:DHC:11624), the Delhi High Court set aside non-bailable warrants (NBWs) issued against UK-based businessman Sachin Dev Duggal in proceedings initiated by the Directorate of Enforcement under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). In the case, the ED had issued summons to the petitioner under Section […]
To ensure compliance with the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules, 2026 by the February 20, 2026 deadline, digital platforms could utilise the following checklist. I. Content Moderation & Takedown Timelines Platforms must establish 24/7 rapid response teams to meet drastically shortened legal windows. 3-Hour Takedown: Remove or disable access […]
The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules, 2026 (“2026 Amendment Rules”) mark a significant regulatory shift in India’s digital governance framework. Notified on 10 February 2026 and effective from 20 February 2026, these amendments primarily address the regulation of synthetically generated information (SGI)—commonly referred to as AI-generated or deepfake content. […]
In Moin Akhtar Qureshi v. Central Bureau of Investigation (2025:DHC:11909), the Delhi High Court has clarified that a direction to furnish a voice sample for the purposes of criminal investigation does not amount to testimonial compulsion under Article 20(3) of the Constitution of India, nor does it violate the fundamental right to privacy. The Court […]
