The Supreme Court of India questioned whether former JNU student Sharjeel Imam can be prosecuted in multiple states for sedition based on a single speech. The court is considering a plea to club multiple FIRs filed against Imam in Uttar Pradesh, Assam, Manipur, and Arunachal Pradesh for his alleged inflammatory remarks during protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA). The court is concerned about the potential for double jeopardy and has indicated that it may transfer the cases to Delhi.
The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday questioned the issue of using "spyware against terrorists" and stated that any report touching upon the country's "security and sovereignty" won't be made public. The court indicated it might address individual concerns regarding privacy breaches, but the report of the technical committee would not be a document for public discussion. The court will examine the extent to which the report can be shared publicly. The court's statement came during a hearing on a petition related to the alleged use of Pegasus spyware for surveillance. The court also emphasized that "having spyware is not wrong, against whom you are using is the question" and that the security of the nation cannot be compromised. The hearing has been adjourned to July 30.
The Supreme Court of India has dismissed the bail plea of former IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt, who was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment in a 1990 custodial death case. The court ruled that there was no merit in his plea for bail or suspension of sentence. Bhatt, along with co-accused Pravinsinh Zala, was found guilty of murder, voluntarily causing hurt, and criminal intimidation by the Gujarat High Court in 2024. The case stems from the death of Prabhudas Vaishnani, who was detained by Bhatt following a communal riot in Jamjodhpur in 1990. Vaishnani's brother alleged that Bhatt and other police officers tortured him in custody, leading to his death.
The Supreme Court of India strongly condemned the terrorist attack in Pahalgam, Kashmir, that killed at least 26 people, mostly tourists. The court observed a moment of silence in tribute to the victims and expressed condolences to their families. The attack was described as an affront to the values of humanity and the sanctity of life. The Supreme Court Bar Association and other legal bodies also condemned the attack and expressed solidarity with the victims and their families.
The top court said 86-year-old Asaram was suffering from various age-related health conditions besides a heart ailment.
The Supreme Court of India has released an inquiry report into the alleged discovery of a large amount of cash at the residence of Delhi High Court judge Yashwant Varma. The report, which includes photos and videos, was uploaded on the court's website. Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna has formed an in-house committee to investigate the matter and has asked the Delhi High Court Chief Justice to not assign any judicial work to Justice Varma. Justice Varma has denied the allegations, claiming they are part of a conspiracy to frame him. The inquiry report, submitted by the Delhi High Court Chief Justice, has been made public and calls for a deeper probe into the incident. The incident has raised concerns about judicial accountability and has prompted the Congress party to call for strong measures to uphold public trust in the judiciary.
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Wednesday searched locations in Karnataka, including educational institutions linked to state Home Minister G Parameshwara, as part of a probe into alleged gold smuggling-linked money laundering case against Kannada actor Ranya Rao and others. The ED sources said an educational trust is suspected to have "diverted" funds and made a payment of Rs 40 lakh towards the credit card bill of Rao, allegedly on the instructions of an influential individual. The sources claimed the trust is linked to Parameshwara and the "influential" individual is a politically exposed person. The searches found there were no supporting vouchers or documentation to "substantiate" this payment (for credit card bill payment), they said.
The top court also referred to the distinctions achieved by women officers, and put out an example of Col Qureshi's achievements.
The Supreme Court referred to a larger bench the legal issues stemming from a plea of BJP leader B S Yediyurappa, including the question whether a prior sanction to prosecute is needed under the Prevention of Corruption Act after a magisterial court order of inquiry. The questions revolve around the interplay between the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act and the Code of Criminal Procedure on the issue of prior sanction to prosecute a public servant.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh was acting on a batch of pleas against the blanket ban on blood donations by such persons from the LGBTQIA+ community.
Leaders of several INDIA bloc parties met the Election Commission over the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls in Bihar and raised concerns over its timing, alleging that over two crore voters of the state may be disenfranchised by this mammoth exercise being done just ahead of assembly elections.
A three-judge panel appointed by the Supreme Court of India has submitted its inquiry report to the Chief Justice of India on the cash discovery allegations against Allahabad High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma. The panel, comprising Justice Sheel Nagu, Justice G S Sandhawalia, and Justice Anu Sivaraman, finalized its report on May 3. The report was submitted to the CJI on May 4 for further actions. The controversy was raised following a news report about the cash discovery row after a fire at Justice Varma's residence in Delhi on March 14. The report reportedly contains the findings of the panel into the alleged cash discovery row. Justice Varma has denounced any insinuation and said no cash was ever placed in the storeroom either by him or any of his family members.
The BJP lawmaker sparked a row when he said, "(the) Supreme Court is taking the country towards anarchy" and that "Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna is responsible for the civil wars taking place in the country".
The Supreme Court of India has reprimanded a Karnataka High Court judge for passing an inconsistent verdict, highlighting the crucial importance of consistent judicial outcomes for maintaining public trust. The court emphasized that inconsistent decisions from different benches undermine faith in the judiciary and can lead to "forum shopping" and other unethical practices.
The Supreme Court of India has asked DMK leader V Senthil Balaji to choose between his ministerial post in Tamil Nadu and his freedom. The court expressed concern over Balaji's reinstatement as a minister despite being granted bail in a money laundering case related to the "cash-for-job" scam. The court fears that Balaji's presence as a minister could influence witnesses in the case. The court has given Balaji until April 28 to make a decision.
The Congress party has accused the BJP of engaging in "damage control" after the party distanced itself from comments made by two of its MPs, Nishikant Dubey and Dinesh Sharma, criticizing the Supreme Court. Congress general secretary Jairam Ramesh stated that the BJP's clarification was merely an attempt to mitigate the damage caused by the MPs' remarks and that the party's actions were hypocritical, given the silence of the BJP president on similar comments made by other party members.
The BJP on Saturday disassociated itself from the criticism of the Supreme Court by its MPs Nishikant Dubey and Dinesh Sharma. Party president J P Nadda rejected the comments as their personal views and affirmed the ruling party's respect for the judiciary as an inseparable part of democracy. Nadda said he has directed both the leaders and other members of the party to not make such comments.
Fourth-term Bharatiya Janata Party MP Nishikant Dubey, one of the more vocal party members in the Lok Sabha, launched a broadside against the Supreme Court on Saturday, saying Parliament and state assemblies should be closed down if the apex court has to make the laws.
A Governor does not possess any discretion in exercise of functions under Article 200 of the Constitution in respect to any bill presented to them and must mandatorily abide by the advice tendered by the council of ministers, the Supreme Court has held.
'The Election Commission is conducting the National Register of Citizens in Bihar through the backdoor.'
The Supreme Court of India has reserved its verdict on a plea by BJP leader and former Karnataka Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa challenging an order reviving a corruption case against him. The case involves allegations of corruption and criminal conspiracy related to the allocation of industrial land. The court has framed several key legal questions, primarily focusing on the interplay between various provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act and the Criminal Procedure Code regarding prior sanction to prosecute a public servant. The court has asked Yediyurappa's counsel to file written submissions within two weeks.
The Supreme Court has extended the services of terminated teachers in West Bengal who were found untainted by the CBI, providing relief to the state. The court did not, however, extend the services of grade 'C' and 'D' employees of state-run and aided schools. The court directed the state government to start the recruitment process by May 31 and conclude it by December 31.
The Supreme Court of India has announced its intention to establish an effective mechanism to address caste-based discrimination in educational institutions throughout the country. The court directed the University Grants Commission (UGC) to draft regulations to prevent such discrimination and to provide data on institutions that have implemented equal opportunity cells as mandated by the 2012 UGC equity regulations. The court's decision stems from a public interest litigation filed in 2019 highlighting the prevalence of caste-based discrimination in higher education institutions and its tragic consequences, including the suicides of students like Rohith Vemula and Payal Tadvi.
Amidst ongoing tensions with the ruling DMK government, Tamil Nadu Governor R N Ravi has invited Vice President Jagdeep Dhankar to inaugurate a meeting of state university Vice Chancellors in the Nilgiris district, sparking criticism from political parties, particularly the Left, who have urged a boycott. The meeting comes in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling in favor of the Tamil Nadu government regarding the appointment of Vice Chancellors, which has stripped the Governor of his previous authority as Chancellor. The Governor, however, maintains his right to convene the meeting, highlighting the ongoing power struggle between the Governor and the state government. The meeting is scheduled for April 25 and 26.
The Supreme Court of India will hear a batch of pleas seeking a probe into the alleged unauthorised use of Pegasus spyware for the surveillance of journalists and others next week. The court had previously ordered a technical panel to investigate the matter but received no reports. Senior advocate Shyam Divan, appearing for some petitioners, urged the court to pass directions as the reports were not shared. The court has now listed the matter for hearing on April 29.
The Supreme Court of India has agreed to hear on May 6 the pleas of the Kerala government against the governor over the delay in approving bills passed by the state assembly. The court will consider whether the issues raised in the Kerala petition are covered by a recent judgment on a similar plea by Tamil Nadu, which set timelines for governors and the President on granting assent to bills.
The Nagpur municipal chief has offered an unconditional apology to the Bombay High Court for the demolition of houses belonging to accused in a riots case, citing ignorance of Supreme Court guidelines on such actions. The civic officials were unaware of the Supreme Court's order, which mandates procedural safeguards before demolishing properties linked to riots accused, the commissioner stated in an affidavit. The court has granted the Maharashtra government two weeks to respond to the matter.
The Supreme Court of India has sought responses from the Centre and others on a petition challenging the blocking of the YouTube channel '4PM'. The petitioner, Sanjay Sharma, the Editor of the channel, alleges that the blocking order, issued by an intermediary based on an undisclosed direction from the Centre, violates his right to free speech and the public's right to information. The plea argues that the blocking was based on vague grounds of 'national security' and 'public order' without any opportunity to be heard. The court has issued notices to the Centre and others seeking their responses on the petition.
"The prejudice against Urdu stems from the misconception that Urdu is alien to India. This opinion, we are afraid, is incorrect as Urdu, like Marathi and Hindi, is an Indo-Aryan language. It is a language which was born in this land," the judges said.
The Supreme Court of India has advised a petitioner, who claims to have suffered disability due to the side effects of the first dose of a Covid-19 vaccine, to file a suit for damages instead of pursuing his plea before the court. The court suggested that filing a suit could provide quicker relief than waiting for a potentially lengthy decision on the petition.
The Supreme Court of India has dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking to make dowry harassment and maintenance provisions "gender neutral." The court stated that it cannot legislate law and it is the responsibility of Parliament to look into such matters. The PIL, filed by an NGO, argued that these provisions are often misused to harass husbands and their families. The court, however, emphasized that every case must be judged on its own merits, and that the provisions are intended to protect women and children. The court also noted that the allegation of misuse was vague and that such claims should be examined on a case-by-case basis.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday took exception to the Allahabad high court's recent remarks in a rape case as reportedly saying the complainant "herself invited trouble", and wondered why it made such observations while deciding a bail plea.
The Supreme Court of India has directed changes in digital know your customer (KYC) guidelines for persons with disability and acid attack survivors, citing the right to digital access as an intrinsic component of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution. The court found that existing KYC procedures, which require visual tasks such as head movements and facial positioning, pose significant challenges for these groups, preventing them from accessing essential services like bank accounts and welfare schemes. The court emphasized the importance of bridging the digital divide and ensuring universal accessibility to digital services for all citizens.
Two petitions have been filed in the Supreme Court seeking a court-monitored probe into the violence in West Bengal over the newly-enacted Waqf (Amendment) Act. The petitions call for a special investigation team or a judicial enquiry commission to investigate the incidents, which have resulted in deaths and displacement. The Calcutta High Court has already ordered the deployment of central forces in the violence-hit Murshidabad district.
The Supreme Court of India has reprimanded the central government for failing to implement a cashless treatment scheme for road accident victims. The court expressed its concern over the delay in formulating the scheme, which is designed to provide immediate medical care to accident victims within the crucial "golden hour." The court highlighted that despite a statutory provision requiring the scheme's implementation, the government has not taken any action, prompting the court to intervene. The court also criticized the General Insurance Council (GIC) for raising objections to the scheme and delaying its implementation. The court has now directed the government to notify the scheme within a week and has scheduled a hearing on the matter for May 13.
Several petitions were filed in the apex court challenging the Act, contending that it was discriminatory towards the Muslim community and violated their fundamental rights.
Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar on Thursday questioned the judiciary setting a timeline for the President to take decisions and act as a "super Parliament", saying the Supreme Court cannot fire a "nuclear missile" at democratic forces.
The Supreme Court of India has agreed to examine whether Muslims can be governed by secular Indian succession law for ancestral properties instead of Shariat without renouncing their faith. The court will consider three petitions on the matter, including one filed by Naushad K K, a resident of Kerala, who wants to be governed by the succession law without leaving Islam. The court has issued notices to the Centre and the Kerala government to file their responses.
Her claims of being detained overnight at the police station without food or sleep and being asked to drink toilet water by police personnel have sparked widespread outrage.
The Bombay High Court expressed concerns about allowing a 36-year-old divorced woman to undergo surrogacy, questioning if it could lead to commercialization of the practice. The court also emphasized the rights of the child born through surrogacy, not just the woman seeking it. The court adjourned the case indefinitely, suggesting the petitioner approach the Supreme Court, which is already dealing with related matters.
© 2026 Rediff.com - Investor Information - Advertise with us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy - Sitemap - Feedback - About us - Terms of use - Grievances