The Supreme Court quashed a criminal medical-negligence prosecution against an anaesthetist, holding that an expert panel without a peer specialist is a fundamental defect, and that a nurse's failure to find the epidural space is at most civil deficiency — not the gross negligence and mens rea that Section 304-A IPC demands.
Valkya Editorial··7 min
High CourtHigh Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh
A single judge of the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court took suo motu cognizance of criminal contempt against the law firm Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas for allegedly misquoting an earlier judgment in a pre-litigation legal notice. A Division Bench closed the proceedings, holding that a bona fide — even erroneous — reading of a judgment is not contempt absent wilful distortion. A digest of the facts, the ratio, and what it means for advocates.
In February 2026, the Supreme Court held that the surviving partner in a mutual suicide pact is liable for abetment under section 306 read with section 107 IPC, closing a 23-year matter.