The Supreme Court of India has sought the government's response on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that challenges the appointment process of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG), arguing it's unconstitutional. The PIL, filed by the Centre for Public Interest Litigation, claims the current process, solely through executive appointment by the Prime Minister, undermines the CAG's independence and violates constitutional principles. The court, while acknowledging the importance of institutional trust, questioned the extent to which it should intervene in the appointment process and whether this would constitute rewriting constitutional provisions. The PIL suggests the CAG's appointment should be similar to other independent bodies, with a selection committee comprising the Prime Minister, Leader of the Opposition, and Chief Justice of India. The case has implications for the independence and transparency of India's audit system.
A division bench asked the respondents to file their replies to the petition filed by the Centre by Febraury 13. \n\n
In a significant development, the Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the Election Commission of India to provide details of cases in which it had either removed or reduced the period of disqualification from electoral rolls of leaders post their conviction in criminal cases.
Some of his directives had the Supreme Court judges disclose their assets whereas the row over the discovery of cash from a sitting judge's official residence paved way for inquiry.
Former Board of Control for Cricket in India president Narayanswami Srinivasan cannot represent the Board at the International Cricket Council's meeting next week as he has been held guilty of conflict of interest, the Supreme Court said.
'Presumption of innocence must guide all formal actions, but transparency must not be mistaken for pre-judgment.' 'The cruel irony, however, is that Justice Varma is a fine judge who enjoys a reputation for writing well-reasoned judgments.'
Several leaders of the BJP and its allies are of the view that the NDA this time is unlikely to follow the instincts that made it pick Dhankhar and will be more conventional in its search for his successor.
The Supreme Court on Monday said the pleas challenging the Waqf (Amendment) Act's constitutional validity will now be taken up by a bench headed by Chief Justice of India-designate Justice B R Gavai on May 15 as the incumbent CJI will be demitting office on May 13.
Sharad Pawar claimed that two individuals had met him in New Delhi before the 2024 Maharashtra assembly polls and 'guaranteed' the Opposition's victory in 160 of 288 constituencies.
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.
Political parties should not be brought under the ambit of the Right to Information Act by terming them 'public authorities', as this would not only hamper their smooth working but help political rivals to file pleas with malicious intention to seek information, the government told the Supreme Court on Monday.
As soon as one of the pleas came up for hearing on Friday, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, objected and said there can't be an "endless" filing of pleas challenging the Act.
'The Election Commission's involvement in the avoidable SIR controversy has carried a message down to the last voter -- who just does not like it,' observes N Sathiya Moorthy.
The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to consider listing for urgent hearing the petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025.
Four-time Odisha MP Pinaki Misra's wedding to firebrand TMC MP Mahua Moitra in a quiet, intimate ceremony that chose privacy and tradition over fanfare, was a reflection of his personal style.
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.
Questioning BJP's stand on reservation, he said whatever the ruling party may say it cannot go against the views of the RSS.
The Rajya Sabha secretariat has verified the signatures of 44 of the 55 MPs who had signed a notice to bring a motion for the removal of Allahabad high court Judge Shekhar Yadav over his 'hate speech' even as Kapil Sibal and nine others were yet to verify their signatures.
The Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025 was passed in the Lok Sabha early Thursday, with 288 members supporting it and 232 against it.
'Militants are taking over the administration. Fundamentalists have been released from jail.'
The Supreme Court of India expressed its disapproval of "scurrilous and unfounded allegations" made against judges in a petition challenging the conferment of senior designations to lawyers. The court found the plea's averments, which insinuated that judges favor their relatives in bestowing senior advocate titles, to be unacceptable. The bench offered the petitioners four weeks to amend the petition, warning that it may take further action if the offensive allegations are not removed.
The Indian government defended the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 in the Supreme Court, arguing that waqf, while an Islamic concept, is not an essential part of Islam. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta stated that waqf is essentially charity, which is recognized across religions, and cannot be considered a fundamental tenet of any faith. He also argued that the amended law addresses secular aspects of waqf and activities unrelated to Islam, and that "waqf by user" does not grant ownership of public land. Mehta highlighted the extensive consultations involved in the bill's creation, including feedback from various stakeholders. The hearing will continue on Thursday.
Tamil Nadu Chief Minister and DMK president M K Stalin announced that his party will file a case in the Supreme Court against the Waqf Bill passed in the Lok Sabha. The opposition AIADMK expressed solidarity with the DMK's stance, while the BJP members staged a walkout from the Assembly in protest. The CM argued that the amendment was passed at the behest of a few allies despite opposition from majority parties and that it is an attack on the Constitution and religious harmony. The DMK claims the bill threatens the autonomy of the Waqf Board and the Muslim minority population.
The Supreme Court on Friday refused to entertain a fresh plea challenging constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025.
The project was announced in September 2019 and Prime Minister Narendra Modi laid the foundation stone of the new Parliament building on December 10, 2020.
The apex court said it was only safeguarding the interest of innocents from being arrested.
A plea in the Supreme Court of India seeks a direction to Delhi Police to lodge an FIR over the alleged discovery of semi-burnt stash of cash from the official residence of Delhi High Court judge Yashwant Varma. The plea challenges a 1991 judgement that prohibits criminal proceedings against judges without prior consent from the Chief Justice of India, arguing it violates the principle of equality before the law. It also seeks to declare the collegium's 3-member committee investigating the incident as having no jurisdiction and calls for action against corruption within the judiciary.
'So, they have taken away the word Waqf from the Bill.' 'It will now be known as the UMEED Act.'
The Delhi government is embroiled in multiple litigations with the Lieutenant Governor in the Supreme Court including its plea challenging the Centre's law establishing pre-eminence of the LG over the elected dispensation in controlling services in the national capital.
A five-judge bench of the Supreme Court will consider review pleas challenging the October 2023 verdict that declined legal sanction to same-sex marriage. The review pleas will be heard in chambers on January 9, with Justice P S Narasimha being the only member of the original bench that delivered the verdict.
With the Supreme Court quashing the ban on dance bars in Maharashtra, bar-owners and dancers look forward to business starting once again, reports Neeta Kolhatkar. However, some issues need to be sorted out
The Board of Control for Cricket in India filed a petition in the Supreme Court on Tuesday, seeking review of its July 18 verdict in which it had accepted most recommendations of the R M Lodha panel on reforms in the cricketing body, saying the bench, headed by Chief Justice T S Thakur, had "a prejudiced approach" against it and he should recuse from hearing the matter.
While India today is vastly different from the India of 1975, the need for vigilance against authoritarianism remains the same, asserts Utkarsh Mishra.
Aam Aadmi Party MPs boycotted President Droupadi Murmu's address to the joint sitting of the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha on Thursday to protest against the arrest of party convenor Arvind Kejriwal.
The Supreme Court of India expressed concern about the "criminalization of politics" and questioned how convicted individuals can return to Parliament. The court sought the assistance of the attorney general on this issue, highlighting the apparent conflict of interest and the need for clarity on the Representation of People Act's provisions. The court also raised concerns about the slow pace of trials against lawmakers, with a significant number of cases pending. The issue has been referred to a larger bench for consideration.
As an IAS officer in Kerala, Gyanesh Kumar -- who the Congress described as Amit Shah's 'right hand man' -- had a good working equation with the state's Congress and Left leaders.
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 of India has repeatedly criticized the Enforcement Directorate (ED) for exceeding its authority and misusing its powers. The latest rebuke came on Thursday, when the court accused the agency of 'crossing all limits' in a money laundering probe against a Tamil Nadu state-run liquor retailer. This follows a string of similar observations by the Supreme Court and high courts across India, raising concerns about the ED's investigative practices and the potential for misuse of its powers.
The Delhi High Court has reserved its order on a plea by jailed MP Rashid Engineer, facing trial in a terror funding case, seeking custody parole to attend the ongoing Parliament session. Engineer, a Baramulla MP, was opposed by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) who argued that he has no vested right to attend Parliament and there were security concerns. The court said though there might not be a vested right to attend the session, it could exercise its discretion. The NIA also argued that Rashid misused the telephone facility in Tihar jail and that allowing him to attend the session would be a security risk.
The Supreme Court of India has ruled that the secular nature of the state does not prevent it from interfering with religious practices and attitudes when they impede development and the right to equality in the larger public interest. The court dismissed pleas challenging the 1976 amendment to the Constitution, which added the terms "socialist", "secular", and "integrity" to the Preamble, stating that Parliament's amending power extends to the Preamble as well.
© 2026 Rediff.com - Investor Information - Advertise with us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy - Sitemap - Feedback - About us - Terms of use - Grievances