For the Supreme Court of India & High Court of Kerala
Research notes,
cited to the paragraph.
Thirty minutes instead of three days. Every citation paragraph-checked. Built for advocates who can't afford a wrong cite.
Free to sign up. Your first research note is on us.
One platform. Four ways in.
Ask anything
Statute lookups, status checks, doctrinal questions. Streamed answers, free.
Try a question →📚Full research notes
Paragraph-anchored, citation-verified, with distinguishing analysis on demand.
See a sample →📰Recent judgments
Daily SC + Kerala HC summaries. Why-it-matters and practice-area tagged.
Browse the feed →🎧Audio briefs
Four to six minute two-host podcasts. Listen on the commute.
Start listening →The answer first.
Citations always.
- Section lookups— “What does S.319 CrPC actually allow?”
- Status checks — “Is Sahara v. SEBI still good law?”
- Doctrinal— “When can a writ lie against a private body?”
Is Sahara India v. SEBI still good law on the SEBI's jurisdiction over CIS schemes by unlisted companies?
Good law— Sahara India Real Estate Corp. Ltd. v. SEBI, (2013) 1 SCC 1, remains the leading authority on the reach of SEBI's jurisdiction over collective investment schemes by unlisted companies that effect a public issue.
The principle has been followed in Roofit Industries v. SEBI (2018) and reaffirmed by the three-judge bench in Pancard Clubs v. SEBI (2022).
Bottom line: still good law. No subsequent ruling has departed from the Sahara framework on this point.
Three things that matter, done right.
Paragraph-anchored
Every cited case comes with the exact paragraph numbers, role (ratio / obiter / order), and verbatim text. No hallucinated citations — every claim is traceable to a tool result.
Current legal status
Each authority arrives with its current standing — good law, doubted, overruled, partial-overruled — computed from the citation graph, validated by bench strength.
Distinguishing on demand
Flag the cases the other side will cite. The system surfaces them, then drafts distinguishing analysis grounded in your client's specific facts.
Pillai v. Menon — a 3-page note with 6 authorities, 5 argument steps, 6 statutes invoked, and a risk register that addresses every adverse precedent counsel flagged.
The court's last week, distilled.
Every fresh SC and Kerala HC judgment, summarised the morning it drops. Skim the holdings, jump to the full analysis when one touches your practice.
- Supreme Court4 May2026 INSC 442
Attavar v. State of Maharashtra
Advocates defending accused persons where an FIR has been registered pursuant to a High Court writ direction — without the complainant first exhausting BNSS remedies before the SP or Magistrate — can cite this judgment to quash both the writ order and the FIR; conversely, complainants must ensure they traverse the full statutory ladder under Sections 173(4) and 175(3) BNSS before approaching the High Court under Article 226.
criminalconstitutionalwrit - Supreme Court4 May2026 INSC 444
RPSC v. Lavanshu Sankhla & Ors.
Recruiters and candidates in public service selections must note that where a service rule's proviso permitting "final-year appearing" candidates has been deleted, no amount of subsequent acquisition of qualification can cure ineligibility at the application stage — advocates advising PSC candidates or challenging eligibility cut-offs should scrutinise the current text of the applicable service rules before relying on any candidate-friendly interpretation of the advertisement.
servicewrit - Supreme Court16 Apr2026 INSC 372
S. Valliammai & Others v. S. Ramanathan & Another
Defendants who routinely invoke Order VII Rule 11(d) to reject plaints on the ground of Order II Rule 2 bar will now fail at the threshold — courts must dismiss such applications and proceed to trial; plaintiffs facing such applications should cite this judgment to resist premature rejection and insist that the Order II Rule 2 plea be tested only after evidence is recorded.
civilproperty
Pop your headphones in.
Two-host conversational briefs on every fresh judgment. Four to six minutes each. Pick up where you left off — even on tomorrow's commute.
RPSC v. Lavanshu Sankhla & Ors.
Where a service rule's proviso permitting final-year-appearing candidates has been deleted, subsequent acquisition of qualification cannot cure ineligibility at the application stage.
Start where you are.
Sign up for the full toolkit, or skim a few judgments first. Either way, no card required.