The Supreme Court of India has expressed concern over the erosion of the family institution, stating that people in India, while valuing the concept of 'vasudhaiva kutumbakam' (the world is one family), are failing to maintain unity even within their immediate families. This observation came in a case involving a dispute between a mother and her eldest son over property and family relations.
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) has allowed state-owned Canara Bank and Indian Bank to pursue proceedings against former IL&FS directors, who are not part of the new board, to declare them as wilful defaulter. However, the appellate tribunal said those directors who are part of the new board of Infrastructure Leasing & Financial Services (IL&FS) and its various subsidiaries after October 1, 2018, would remain protected.
The Supreme Court has directed a Maharashtra authority to respond to a man's plea for initiating contempt action against it after his properties were demolished for allegedly raising anti-India slogans during a cricket match. The petitioner, who hails from Sindhudurg district in the state, claims his house and shop were demolished on February 24 following an FIR against him, his wife, and his 14-year-old son for allegedly raising anti-India slogans during the India-Pakistan Champions Trophy match. The plea argues that the demolition violated the Supreme Court's November 13, 2024 verdict on demolition of properties, which barred demolition without a prior showcause notice and 15 days' time for the aggrieved party to respond. The petitioner seeks directions for initiating contempt proceedings against the chief officer and administrator of the Malvan Municipal Council.
In more than one way, it's a setback for the DMK and Chief Minister Stalin in political terms. The electoral fall-out, if any, will have to wait until the next summer, only when assembly elections are due in the state, explains N Sathiya Moorthy.
The Supreme Court of India harshly criticized a man for abandoning his wife and minor daughters, calling his actions "cruel" and questioning his humanity. The court demanded the man provide financial support to his family, including his daughters, before it would consider any favorable orders in his case. The man had previously been convicted of domestic abuse and fraudulently removing his wife's uterus. The court's strong stance highlights the ongoing issue of domestic violence and the need for legal protection for women and children in India.
The Supreme Court has expressed its dissatisfaction with the Delhi Police's handling of appeals against acquittals in the 1984 anti-Sikh riots cases. The court emphasized the need for serious and earnest prosecution, not just for the sake of it. This comes in the wake of a public interest litigation filed by a former Shiromani Gurudwara Prabhandak Committee member, seeking justice for the victims of the violence.
A Supreme Court bench, which was assigned a case by another bench of equal strength, has said orders pertaining to placing a case before benches can only be passed by the Chief Justice of India.
The Supreme Court of India will likely hear a batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 on April 15. The Act, which came into force on April 8, has been met with widespread criticism from various stakeholders, including politicians, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), and Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind. They argue that the law is discriminatory and violates the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution. The petitions allege that the amendments give the government more control over the administration of Waqf, effectively sidelining the Muslim minority from managing their own religious endowments.
The Bombay High Court has ruled that Pushpa Ganediwala, the former HC judge who had faced criticism for a series of controversial judgments in POCSO Act cases, is entitled to receive pension on par with a high court judge. Ganediwala was demoted as district sessions judge at the end of her additional judgeship in 2022 following an uproar over some judgments passed by her on the interpretation of what constitutes a sexual assault under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. She had filed a petition challenging a communication issued by the HC registrar declaring that she was not eligible for pension of a HC judge. The court quashed the communication and directed the registry to fix her pension with 6% interest from February 2022.
The Supreme Court of India has granted interim police protection to Discovery Communications India officials who have been receiving threats from followers of self-styled godman Asaram Bapu. The threats were triggered by the release of a documentary series titled "Cult of Fear: Asaram Bapu". The court has directed the Centre and several state governments to ensure the safety of the petitioners, including their offices.
The Supreme Court of India has dismissed a plea seeking directions to states to take immediate action against mob lynching and cow vigilantism, particularly against Muslims. The court stated that it was not feasible to "micro-manage" such incidents from Delhi and referred to its 2018 verdict, which issued guidelines to address mob violence and cow vigilantism. The court also noted that the new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) criminalizes mob lynching as a separate offence. The plea argued that there was "gross non-compliance" with the 2018 directions, but the court maintained that authorities were bound by its previous rulings.
The Supreme Court of India has issued pan-India guidelines on property demolition, emphasizing that no property should be demolished without a prior show cause notice and 15 days for the affected party to respond. The court strongly criticized 'bulldozer justice', stating that the Executive cannot demolish homes simply because individuals are accused of a crime. The verdict cites the importance of shelter as a fundamental right and highlights the unconstitutionality of demolishing houses based solely on accusations or convictions.
A bench comprising Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan said, "He (the governor) seems to have adopted his own procedure. He says, 'I withhold assent, but I will not ask you to reconsider the bill'. It does not make sense to keep withholding assent and not send it to the legislature, thereby frustrating the provision of Article 200."
The Supreme Court has said police cannot serve notices to accused persons through WhatsApp or other electronic modes under the Criminal Procedure Code or Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
The Supreme Court of India has ruled that individuals affiliated with political parties are not barred from contesting elections for bar bodies. The court dismissed a PIL seeking directions to prevent such candidates, arguing that a diverse range of ideologies is essential in a democracy and that there is no law prohibiting politically active individuals from participating in bar body elections.
The Supreme Court of India censured the Assam government for keeping persons declared foreigners in detention centers indefinitely and not deporting them. The court questioned the state's explanation for not sending nationality verification forms to the Ministry of External Affairs, stating that detainees should be deported immediately once identified as foreigners. The court directed the Assam government to initiate the deportation process of 63 declared foreign nationals whose nationality was known and file a status report in two weeks. The court also directed the Centre to provide details of those deported and how it plans to deal with detainees whose nationality is unknown.
"Are you waiting for some muhurat," the Supreme Court remarked on Tuesday as it came down heavily on the Assam government for keeping people declared as foreigners in detention centres indefinitely rather than deporting them.
The Supreme Court has granted bail to alleged middleman Christian Michel James in the purported Rs 3,600-crore AgustaWestland case. James had been in custody for six years while the investigation was ongoing. The alleged scam relates to the purchase of 12 VVIP helicopters from AgustaWestland. James, a British national, was extradited from Dubai in December 2018.
The Madras High Court has dismissed a petition seeking to prevent the Isha Foundation from conducting Mahasivarathri celebrations at its Coimbatore campus. The petitioner had alleged that the foundation lacked adequate sewage treatment facilities and caused noise pollution. However, the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board (TNPCB) informed the court that the foundation has adequate treatment facilities and complies with noise regulations. The court dismissed the petition, allowing the celebrations to proceed.
The Supreme Court of India has assured the creation of a robust mechanism to address the alarming number of suicides occurring in Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs) and Indian Institutes of Management (IIMs). The court was informed that 18 suicides had taken place in these institutions over the past 14 months. The court has also directed the University Grants Commission (UGC) to finalize draft regulations aimed at combating caste-based discrimination in educational institutions.
The litigant levelled allegations against the former CJI following which a bench comprising Justices Bela M Trivedi and Satish Chandra Sharma asked the security personnel to escort him out of the courtroom
The Mathura Shahi Masjid Eidgah Committee has approached the Supreme Court, requesting the court to prevent the central government from filing a response to a petition challenging the Places of Worship Act's constitutional validity. The committee accuses the BJP-led government of intentionally delaying its response. The court had previously issued a notice to the government in March 2021, but the government has yet to submit its reply despite numerous opportunities. The committee argues that the government's delay is intended to obstruct those opposing the challenge to the Places of Worship Act from filing their own responses. The petition also states that the pleas challenging the law's validity are scheduled for hearing on February 17, and closing the government's right to respond would serve justice. The Supreme Court previously issued a ruling in December 2022 that stopped courts from entertaining new lawsuits or issuing interim or final orders regarding the reclaiming of religious places, particularly mosques and dargahs. The ruling halted proceedings in 18 lawsuits filed by Hindu groups seeking surveys to confirm the original religious character of 10 mosques, including the Gyanvapi Masjid in Varanasi, the Shahi Idgah Masjid in Mathura, and the Shahi Jama Masjid in Sambhal. This decision was made in response to six petitions, including one filed by lawyer Ashwini Upadhyay, challenging various provisions of the Places of Worship Act. The 1991 law prohibits the conversion of places of worship and guarantees the preservation of their existing religious character as it stood on August 15, 1947. Notably, the dispute regarding the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid in Ayodhya was excluded from this law. There are also several cross-petitions advocating for a strict enforcement of the 1991 law to uphold communal harmony and maintain the current status of mosques that Hindu groups seek to reclaim, claiming they were temples before being destroyed by invaders.
The Indian government has defended the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 in the Supreme Court, arguing that there cannot be a blanket stay on the law as there is a presumption of its constitutionality. The Centre countered the pleas challenging the law's validity, asserting that the amendments were undertaken after a comprehensive study by a parliamentary panel. The government also highlighted the "reported misuse" of earlier provisions and the increase in waqf land, claiming that over 20 lakh hectares were added after 2013.
The Supreme Court criticized the Punjab government for making irresponsible statements regarding farmer leader Jagjit Singh Dallewal's indefinite fast and questioned the intentions of some farmer leaders. The court emphasized that it never directed Dallewal to break his fast but expressed concern for his health and urged medical aid. The bench expressed frustration over the government's attempts to create an impression that they were persuading Dallewal to end his fast, despite the court's directives to provide medical aid.
The Supreme Court of India has sought the Indian government's response to a petition filed by a Muslim woman seeking to be governed by the Indian succession law instead of Shariat. The woman, Safiya P.M., argues that she does not believe in Shariat and wants to be governed by secular law, including the Indian Succession Act of 1925. The court has asked the government to file a counter affidavit within four weeks.
The Bombay High Court has reserved its order on comedian Kunal Kamra's petition seeking the quashing of an FIR registered against him for allegedly making defamatory remarks against Maharashtra deputy Chief Minister Eknath Shinde. The court also granted Kamra interim protection from arrest.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court will decide whether Jain individuals can seek relief under the Hindu Marriage Act, including divorce by mutual consent. This decision stems from a family court's refusal to accept a divorce petition from a Jain software engineer, citing the community's minority status. The high court appointed an amicus curiae to assist in the case, and the next hearing is scheduled for March 18.
The Bombay High Court has upheld the suspension of a Dalit PhD student from the Tata Institute of Social Science (TISS) for allegedly participating in a politically motivated protest against the central government's policies. The court found that the student's participation in the protest, under the banner of TISS' student organization, brought disrepute to the institute.
The Supreme Court will hear a plea seeking an independent selection process for the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) on March 17. The PIL, filed by the Centre for Public Interest Litigation, argues that the current system of appointment solely by the executive and the prime minister violates the Constitution and undermines the CAG's independence. The petition calls for a transparent process involving the prime minister, Leader of the Opposition, and Chief Justice of India. The PIL contends that the CAG's role as a watchdog over government finances requires a fair and non-arbitrary appointment procedure.
The top court asked the state government to spell out details of its actions taken against the culprits and the encroachers.
© 2026 Rediff.com - Investor Information - Advertise with us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy - Sitemap - Feedback - About us - Terms of use - Grievances