Founded by Managing Partner K.P. Sreejith, INDIALAW began as a small firm in Mumbai with a commitment to client service and corporate-focused legal solutions. From its modest beginnings, the firm has grown into a respected name by prioritizing excellence, integrity, and tailored legal strategies. INDIALAW’s team believes in adapting to each client’s unique needs, ensuring that solutions align with individual circumstances and business goals.
The firm combines its deep understanding of the local business landscape with experience across multiple jurisdictions, enabling clients to navigate complex legal environments effectively. INDIALAW emphasizes proactive service, anticipating client needs and potential challenges to provide timely, high-quality legal support. The firm values lasting client relationships and sees its role as a trusted advisor, dedicated to delivering business-friendly and principled legal counsel.
In Anwar Hussain v. State of Madhya Pradesh, the Supreme Court of India delivers a strong message on state accountability and protection of personal liberty under Article 21. The Court found that false criminal antecedents were wrongly attributed to the petitioner in a bail matter, rejecting the State’s “computer error” explanation and calling it a serious lapse affecting a citizen’s liberty.
within Law Department Performance, Compliance and International Law topic(s)
in India
In Anwar Hussain v. State of Madhya Pradesh, the Supreme Court of India delivers a strong message on state accountability and protection of personal liberty under Article 21. The Court found that false criminal antecedents were wrongly attributed to the petitioner in a bail matter, rejecting the State’s “computer error” explanation and calling it a serious lapse affecting a citizen’s liberty.
The Court not only granted bail but also took the rare step of impleading police officers personally, directing them to file affidavits and explain their conduct. This judgment reinforces that affidavits filed before constitutional courts must be accurate, verified, and truthful, and that individual officers can be held accountable for misleading the Court.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
