Supreme Court #fyp #yt #shorts #law #court #trend #civilcourts #reelsinstagram #youtubeshorts

The Supreme Court has reiterated that although courts ordinarily do not entertain writ petitions challenging a show cause notice (SCN), this principle is not absolute, and interference at the notice stage is permissible in exceptional circumstances.The Court observed that judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution can be invoked where the show cause notice is vitiated A bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta of the Supreme Court of India, in the case of J. Sri Nisha v. The Special Director, Adjudicating Authority, Directorate of Enforcement & Anr. (2026), reiterated that the general rule discouraging writ challenges to show cause notices (SCNs) is a rule of prudence — not an inviolable bar — and that High Courts retain jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution to intervene at the SCN stage in exceptional circumstances. The petitioner challenged a show cause notice issued in adjudication proceedings under the Foreign Exchange Management Act before the High Court. The High Court declined to entertain the writ petition on the ground that challenges to show cause notices are ordinarily not maintainable at the notice stage, as the authority issuing the SCN must first be allowed to complete its adjudicatory process. Aggrieved by the High Court's refusal to exercise writ jurisdiction, the petitioner approached the Supreme Court, raising the question of whether and in what circumstances a writ petition against a show cause notice would be maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution.

Видео Supreme Court #fyp #yt #shorts #law #court #trend #civilcourts #reelsinstagram #youtubeshorts канала वकील साहब