LawLoveLegal

1. Introduction: A Defining Constitutional Moment The Supreme Court of India has fixed May 5, 2026 for the final hearing of petitions challenging the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (CAA) and the Citizenship (Amendment) Rules, 2024 . This hearing is expected to be one of the most consequential constitutional adjudications in recent decades, involving questions of citizenship, equality, secularism, immigration policy, and the limits of judicial review . 2. Procedural Background and Case Management A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M. Pancholi directed that the matters be listed seriatim for final hearing in the week commencing May 5, 2026 . Hearing Schedule Petitioners: May 5 and May 6 (first half) Respondents (Union of India): May 7 Rejoinder arguments: May 12 The Court noted that the petitions fall into two broad categories: Assam and Tripura cases Cases from the rest of India Nodal counsel have been directed to classify p...

1. Background of the Dispute: Mundra Grazing Land Allotment The Supreme Court of India has set aside a Gujarat government order reclaiming 108 hectares of grazing land allotted to Adani Ports and Special Economic Zone Ltd (APSEZ) in Mundra, Gujarat. The dispute traces back to 2005 , when the Gujarat Revenue Department and the Collector allotted approximately 231 acres of grazing land in Navinal village, Kutch district , to private entities associated with the Mundra Port project. In 2011 , a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed before the Gujarat High Court challenging the land allotment, alleging improper diversion of grazing land and environmental concerns such as dredging, filling of creeks, and destruction of mangroves. 2. Supreme Court Judgment: Violation of Natural Justice A bench comprising Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice Atul Chandurkar held that the Gujarat government’s July 4, 2024 order resuming 108 hectares of land was passed without granting Adani Ports an op...

Introduction: A Constitutional Reassessment of Labour Law The Supreme Court of India is set to revisit one of the most consequential questions in Indian labour jurisprudence: What constitutes an “industry”? A nine-judge Constitution Bench , scheduled to hear the matter on March 17 and 18 , will reconsider the expansive interpretation laid down in the landmark Bangalore Water Supply case (1978) . Chief Justice of India Surya Kant described the reference as the first matter referred to a nine-judge bench in the Court’s history , highlighting its constitutional and institutional significance. The outcome will have far-reaching implications for labour rights, public administration, educational institutions, charities, and government departments . Background of the Reference: State of Uttar Pradesh v. Jai Bir Singh Origin of the Reference The lead case State of Uttar Pradesh v. Jai Bir Singh seeks reconsideration of the definition of “industry” under labour laws. In 2017 , a seven-judge b...

Introduction The Supreme Court of India has directed the Union Government to place before it, within four weeks, a comprehensive and uniform proposal on the functioning of tribunals across the country. The Court emphasised that tribunals, as specialised quasi-judicial bodies, cannot be allowed to become dysfunctional or defunct due to administrative or legislative lapses. This directive follows a series of constitutional challenges and judicial interventions concerning the tribunal system and its independence.

Introduction The Supreme Court of India has expressed grave concern over large-scale cyber frauds, describing the siphoning of more than ₹54,000 crore through digital fraud as nothing short of “robbery or dacoity.” In a significant intervention, the Court has directed the Union Government and regulatory authorities to frame a comprehensive Standard Operating Procedure (SoP) to tackle cyber-enabled financial crimes, particularly the emerging menace of ‘digital arrest’ frauds.

Introduction A high-speed crash involving a luxury Lamborghini allegedly driven by Shivam Mishra, son of tobacco businessman K.K. Mishra, has left at least six people injured in Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh. The incident, which occurred around 3:15 PM near Rev-3 Mall in the Gwaltoli area, has triggered public outrage and raised serious legal questions relating to criminal liability, road safety laws, and the treatment of high-profile accused persons in India’s criminal justice system.

Introduction A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed before the Supreme Court of India challenging provisions of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 that permit sitting or retired judicial officers to hold leadership positions within the prosecution framework. The petition raises significant constitutional concerns relating to separation of powers, judicial independence, and prosecutorial autonomy. The case has implications for India’s criminal justice architecture and the balance among the three organs of the State.

Introduction: Bail in a High-Profile Legal Impersonation Case In a significant order reinforcing the principle of personal liberty and speedy trial, the Supreme Court of India granted bail to Poonam Charandas Khanna , a Mumbai resident accused of impersonating a Supreme Court advocate and cheating a builder of ₹51 lakh. A Bench comprising Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan granted bail primarily on the ground of prolonged incarceration without substantial progress in trial , despite serious allegations of fraud and impersonation. This case raises critical legal questions about bail jurisprudence, impersonation of legal professionals, cheating offences, and constitutional safeguards of liberty . Facts of the Case: Alleged Impersonation and Financial Fraud Alleged Modus Operandi The complainant, a builder facing multiple litigations, was introduced to Khanna through his nephew. Khanna allegedly misrepresented herself as a practising Supreme Court lawyer and presented a visi...

Background of the Case Actor Rajpal Yadav surrendered at Tihar Jail, Delhi , after the Delhi High Court refused to grant him any further relief in long-pending cheque bounce cases. The surrender took place on Thursday at around 4 PM , in compliance with the court’s direction. The cases stem from a complaint filed by M/s Murali Projects Pvt Ltd against Rajpal Yadav and his wife, alleging repeated dishonour of cheques and failure to repay outstanding dues. A magisterial court convicted the actor in 2018 , sentencing him to six months’ imprisonment . This conviction was affirmed by a sessions court in 2019 . Despite multiple opportunities, the High Court noted that Yadav had repeatedly breached undertakings given to the court to settle the dues. Delhi High Court’s Refusal to Extend Surrender Deadline On February 2, the Delhi High Court had directed Rajpal Yadav to surrender by 4 PM , after observing prolonged non-compliance. The actor’s counsel sought one more week , claiming that ₹50 ...

Introduction In a significant intervention touching the core of press freedom, open justice, and the limits of privacy , the Supreme Court of India has cautioned that judicial directions mandating the removal of news reports and online articles could have serious and troubling implications for democracy . The observation came while staying a Delhi High Court order that permitted invocation of the “right to be forgotten” to compel the takedown of digital news content relating to concluded criminal proceedings. The ruling signals judicial unease with courts assuming the role of editors and rewriting historical records in the digital age. Background of the Case The matter arose from a petition filed by IE Online Media Services Private Limited , challenging a December 18, 2025 order of the Delhi High Court . The High Court had upheld an interim injunction directing the removal of online news reports that linked banker Nitin Bhatnagar to criminal allegations, despite his subsequent disch...

Introduction: A Liberty-Centric Recalibration of Criminal Procedure In a significant reaffirmation of personal liberty, the Supreme Court has held that no person accused of an offence punishable with imprisonment up to seven years should be arrested unless such arrest is absolutely warranted . Emphasising that issuance of notice to cooperate with investigation is the norm , the Court ruled that arrest must remain a rare and carefully justified exception . This judgment assumes heightened importance as it offers one of the first authoritative interpretations of arrest-related provisions under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 , which replaced the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) with effect from 1 July 2024 . Background of the Case and Reference Before the Court The ruling was delivered by a bench comprising Justice MM Sundresh and Justice N Kotiswar Singh , while answering a reference concerning the scope and mandatory nature of Section 35 of the BNSS . The cor...

Introduction The Supreme Court of India has once again drawn a firm line between genuine cases of sexual exploitation and criminal proceedings arising out of failed consensual relationships , warning that indiscriminate invocation of rape charges poses a “profound concern” for both justice delivery and the credibility of criminal law. In a significant judgment delivered by a bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan , the Court quashed criminal proceedings against a Chhattisgarh-based advocate accused of rape on the alleged false promise of marriage, holding that criminal law cannot be weaponised to settle personal scores after a relationship turns sour . Factual Background of the Case Allegations by the Complainant The complainant, a 33-year-old advocate , alleged that: She entered into a physical relationship with the accused advocate from September 2022 The relationship continued till January 2025 The accused allegedly promised to marry her She became pregnant during...

Background of the Controversy Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif has formally confirmed the Pakistani government’s decision to boycott the T20 World Cup 2026 Group A match against India , scheduled for February 15 in Colombo , while allowing the national team to participate in the remainder of the tournament. The decision was publicly announced on February 1 , following Bangladesh’s removal from the competition after its refusal to travel to India citing security concerns. Pakistan justified its stance as a show of solidarity with Bangladesh , arguing that international sport should remain free from political discrimination. Events Leading to Bangladesh’s Exclusion Bangladesh’s exit from the tournament became the catalyst for the diplomatic and sporting standoff. Security Concerns Raised by Bangladesh The Bangladesh Cricket Board (BCB) cited repeated security threats linked to travel to India. The issue intensified after Kolkata Knight Riders (KKR) released Bangladesh pacer Must...

In a moment that will be remembered in India’s constitutional history, West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee became the first sitting CM to personally argue her own case before the Supreme Court —turning a routine election-law dispute into a defining battle over democracy, federalism, and voter disenfranchisement . Appearing before a bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant , Banerjee urged the Court to “protect democracy” and “protect people’s lives”, as the Court examined the legality and fairness of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls being carried out by the Election Commission of India (ECI) ahead of the 2026 West Bengal Assembly elections. Why This Hearing Was Unprecedented While politicians routinely challenge constitutional authorities through lawyers, a sitting chief minister personally addressing the Supreme Court is virtually unheard of . Banerjee, a trained advocate, made a 15-minute oral intervention—granted by the Court itself—asserting th...

Introduction: A Defining Moment for Digital Privacy in India The Supreme Court of India has delivered one of its strongest judicial rebukes yet to a global technology platform, warning WhatsApp and its parent company Meta Platforms that the exploitation of personal data of even a single Indian citizen will not be tolerated . In sharp language, the Court described WhatsApp’s data-sharing practices as a “ decent way of committing theft of personal information ” and cautioned that the platform was “ making a mockery of the constitutionalism of this country ”. The remarks came during the hearing of a batch of appeals concerning WhatsApp’s controversial 2021 Privacy Policy , which significantly expanded data sharing with Meta entities. Background of the Case: WhatsApp’s 2021 Privacy Policy The Triggering Event In January 2021, WhatsApp introduced a revised privacy policy requiring users to consent to expanded data sharing with Meta companies as a condition for continued use of the platform....

Mamata Banerjee’s Supreme Court Challenge to Electoral Roll Revision Explained West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee is set to create constitutional history by potentially becoming the first sitting Chief Minister to personally argue her own case before the Supreme Court of India . Her petition challenges the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in West Bengal ahead of the 2026 Assembly elections , escalating an already intense institutional confrontation. At the heart of the dispute lies a fundamental constitutional question: Can electoral roll verification, in the name of purity of elections, risk mass disenfranchisement of genuine voters? Background: What Is the Special Intensive Revision (SIR)? The Special Intensive Revision (SIR) is an extraordinary electoral exercise undertaken by the ECI to comprehensively verify voter rolls, particularly focusing on: • Duplicate entries • Bogus voters • Ineligible inclusions • Discrepa...