Summary: Part I examines OFAC’s Advisory and the fundamental shift it signals in sanctions compliance — moving from a mechanical application of 50% ownership rule towards a substance-over-form analysis. It covers the expanded interpretation of “property interest”, the red flags identified by OFAC, and the resulting compliance implications for businesses operating across sectors.
Continue Reading How OFAC’s Latest Guidance Changes the Sanctions Compliance Landscape – Part I
Summary: A persistent misconception in legal discourse is that findings or determinations of a civil court are binding on a criminal court, despite no such rule being codified in the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, or its successor statute, the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023. This belief often leads to the argument that a civil judgment should conclusively govern subsequent criminal proceedings. However, this position does not reflect the true legal framework. The Hon’ble Supreme Court’s decision in Prem Raj v. Poonamma Menon & Anr., tracing the evolution of law on this point, provides much-needed clarity, reaffirming the distinct nature, standards of proof, and purposes of civil and criminal proceedings, and explaining the limited evidentiary value, rather than absolute binding effect, of civil court findings in criminal trials.
Continue Reading Findings of a Civil Court binding on Criminal Court? SC clears the air
Summary: The Supreme Court in its landmark ruling in Nagaraj V. Mylandla v. PI Opportunities Fund-I has charted out a clearer path for PE/ VC exits. It has held that a promoter responsible for providing exits to its investor cannot relitigate issues in an Indian court already decided by the seat court. By doing so, the court has formally embraced the doctrine of transnational issue estoppel.
Continue Reading Finality in PE/ VC Exits Across Borders: SC Endorses Transnational Issue Estoppel
Summary: As per settled legal jurisprudence, there are limited grounds available for a participating entity to raise challenges to a tender process and/ or its terms after participation. Barring such limited grounds, any challenge in respect of a tender must be raised before participation in the tender process. This blog focusses on the Supreme Court’s decision in National Highways Authority of India v. Gwalior-Jhansi Expressway Limited (2018) 8 SCC 243, which, in a specific factual matrix, held that an entity which did not participate in the tender process, did not have the locus to challenge the tender and thereby claim a substantive right arising therefrom. However, in subsequent High Court decisions, the aforesaid rationale has been applied in an overbroad manner, dehors its underlying factual matrix, effectively treating it as a general rule that non-participating entities lack locus to raise challenges in respect of tenders.
Continue Reading Locus to Challenge Tender Conditions after Participation in Tender Process
Summary: Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) fraud has emerged as a significant and growing area of corporate misconduct in India, triggering a wave of internal investigations across organisations. This article examines India’s mandatory CSR framework, the patterns of fraud that have surfaced since its enactment and the consequent rise of corporate internal investigations as an essential governance tool.
Continue Reading From Compliance to Crime: Investigating CSR Misuse and Corporate Accountability in India
Summary: In India, personality rights, protecting an individual’s control over the commercial use of their identity, have primarily evolved through judicial pronouncements. However, the rise of artificial intelligence, including deepfakes and voice cloning, has significantly intensified the threat of identity misappropriation, prompting Indian courts to expand the scope of these rights. In recent times, the Delhi and Bombay High Courts have granted injunctions restraining AI-driven misuse of celebrities’ names, images and likenesses. Yet, despite this judicial recognition, the existing statutory framework remains fragmented, and comprehensive legislative intervention has now become essential to ensure consistent and effective protection of personality rights in the AI age.
Continue Reading Personality Rights in India in the Age of AI
Summary: China’s recent invocation of its Blocking Rules against U.S. sanctions marks a significant moment in the evolving landscape of global sanctions law. As nations increasingly push back against the extraterritorial reach of unilateral sanctions, the question arises: What does this mean for India? This article examines China’s move, its implications for the global sanctions regime, and what a potential Indian blocking statute could look like in practice.
Continue Reading Beyond Strategic Autonomy: Is a Blocking Statue the Need of the Hour in the Age of Extraterritorial Sanctions
Summary: Bail is the rule, jail is the exception, is an axiom. A tight rope between individual liberty and public interest, bail jurisprudence in India has evolved to err on the side of liberty. However, heinous offences are a slight exception to this rule and bail is often denied in such matters, considering the nature of the offence and larger societal interest. The Hon’ble Supreme Court’s judgment in Rakesh Mittal v Ajay Pal Gupta and Anr., marks an interesting development in this exception to ordinary bail jurisprudence. Applying precedents dealing with bail in heinous offence matters, the Court held that the same principles would also apply to grave pecuniary offences, especially when committed by habitual offenders. Accordingly, overturning an order of bail granted by the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court on the ground of parity with other accused, the Court also considered factors such as criminal antecedents of the accused, including a long history of fraud, absconding, and misuse of bail in other matters. Whether this is a unique exception or signals a change in jurisprudence remains to be seen.
Continue Reading Liberty Ends Where Fraud Begins: Supreme Court Signals Recalibration of Standards for Bail for Habitual Economic Offenders
Summary: In a landmark 2026 ruling, the Supreme Court of India has decisively reshaped the contours of post‑award interim relief under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Departing from the long‑held view that such protection lies only with the winning party, the Court held that even an unsuccessful party may seek interim measures after an arbitral award, provided the case is rare, compelling, and demands judicial restraint. By rejecting the “fruits of the award” doctrine and reaffirming the plain statutory language of “any party,” the judgment restores Section 9 to its full amplitude while carefully safeguarding arbitral finality. This decision marks a pivotal shift in Indian arbitration law, balancing textual fidelity with commercial and procedural realism.
Continue Reading After the Gavel Falls: Can the Losing Party Still Seek Interim Relief under Section 9?
Summary: This blog examines two recent decisions, Rajiv Gaddh v. Subodh Prakash (Supreme Court) (2026 INSC 302) and Nalin Vallabhbhai Patel v. Atharva Realtors (Bombay High Court)(2026:BHC-OS:7780), which reinforce a practical message for businesses: If a party lets an arbitration lapse through its own inaction (or withdraws a Section 11 request without liberty), courts are unlikely to allow a “reset” by filing a fresh Section 11 application for the same disputes under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Continue Reading Abandonment of Claims in Arbitration