The Supreme Court expressed its disapproval of an analogy used by the Centre in support of the inclusion of non-Muslims in Waqf boards, stating that such logic would disqualify a bench of Hindu judges from hearing matters related to Waqf. The CJI questioned the Centre's stance on the provisions of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, which allows non-Muslim members in the Central Waqf Council and state waqf boards. The Solicitor General defended the provisions, emphasizing that the non-Muslim inclusion is limited and does not impact the Muslim composition of these bodies. However, the CJI asserted that judges shed their religious affiliations while serving on the bench and maintained their secularity in their judicial capacity.
A lawyer for Elon Musk's X told the Karnataka high court on Tuesday that if every "Tom, Dick and Harry" government official is authorised to send content takedown notices then it would amount to misuse of official powers, remarks that drew strong condemnation from the Centre as well as the judge.
The Supreme Court is reviewing objections to the movie 'Udaipur Files - Kanhaiya Lal Tailor Murder,' with the Centre suggesting six cuts. The court has extended a stay on the film's release until further orders.
The SC has sought a response from the Centre on a plea seeking the restoration of statehood to Jammu and Kashmir.
With the rise of digital classrooms, students are often asked to create videos, prepare slideshows or use online research to complete assignments. 'We are glad that children are not spending hours copying notes in the name of homework but even now parents end up doing or supporting a major portion of the homework.'
A two-judge bench of the top court had on August 11 directed authorities in Delhi-National Capital Region (NCR) to start picking up stray dogs from all localities "at the earliest" and relocate the animals to dog shelters.
The Supreme Court has stayed the Bombay High Court verdict acquitting all 12 accused in the 2006 Mumbai train bomb blasts case, issuing notices and seeking responses from the accused.
The Supreme Court has restrained lower courts from releasing the accused in a digital arrest fraud case where a 72-year-old lawyer was duped of Rs 3.29 crore. The court expressed concern over the growing cybercrime and the targeting of elderly citizens.
Outgoing Supreme Court Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia bids farewell, expressing his deep connection to the legal community and the country.
The Supreme Court expressed serious concern over the Enforcement Directorate summoning advocates for offering legal advice or representing clients during investigations, calling for guidelines on the matter.
The Centre has opposed the imposition of fixed timelines on governors and the President for decisions on bills passed by state legislatures, arguing that such constraints were intentionally omitted by the Constitution's framers.
Podcaster Ranveer Allahbadia has filed an undertaking in the Supreme Court stating he will maintain decency in his shows. The undertaking was filed after the court allowed him to resume his podcast "The Ranveer Show" on March 3, subject to maintaining "morality and decency." Allahbadia, popularly known as BeerBiceps, was booked for his comments on parents and sex on comic Samay Raina's YouTube show "India's Got Latent." The Supreme Court previously called his comments "vulgar" and said he had a "dirty mind" which put society to shame.
The Centre has told the Supreme Court that imposing fixed timelines on governors and the president to act on bills passed by a state Assembly would amount to one organ of the government assuming powers not vested in it by the Constitution and lead to a "constitutional disorder".
The Supreme Court has upheld the deletion of the 'waqf by user' provision in the amended waqf law, stating it is not arbitrary and addresses potential misuse.
The Supreme Court has questioned the practice of Governors withholding assent to bills indefinitely, stating that it renders the constitutional provision of 'as soon as possible' meaningless.
A bench comprising Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih asked senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for those challenging the validity of the law, and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, to file their written notes by Monday.
BJP-ruled states argued in the Supreme Court that governors and the President have autonomy in assenting to bills passed by state assemblies, asserting that courts cannot mandate assent.
The Indian government defended its decision to revoke the security clearance of Turkey-based Celebi without warning, citing an "unprecedented" threat to aviation security. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued that giving a hearing or reasons before taking action would "defeat the purpose" in matters of national security. The decision came after Turkey backed Pakistan and condemned India's airstrikes on terror camps in the neighboring country. Celebi, which operates at nine Indian airports, has challenged the government's move in court.
The Supreme Court has directed the Delhi government and civic bodies to address the 'extremely grim' stray dog menace by picking up strays and housing them in shelters for sterilization and immunization. The court also warned against obstructing authorities and ordered the creation of a helpline for reporting dog bite cases.
On Thursday, MMRDA strongly defended its decision to disqualify L&T from the two infrastructure projects in Mumbai, citing "substantial grounds" for the rejection of its technical bids.
The Delhi High Court has set aside a Central Information Commission (CIC) order that directed the disclosure of information related to Prime Minister Narendra Modi's bachelor's degree.
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 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.
The Supreme Court on Friday directed authorities not to deport to Pakistan six members of a family, who allegedly overstayed their visa, till their citizenship claim is verified.
In a significant development, the Supreme Court on Thursday recalled its controversial May 2 verdict that had ordered liquidation of Bhushan Power & Steel Limited (BPSL) while setting aside a resolution plan of JSW Steel Limited for the ailing firm. A bench comprising Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma observed that the May 2 judgment, authored by Justice Bela M Trivedi, since retired, did not "correctly consider the legal position as has been laid down in the catena of judgments".
The Supreme Court addressed the issue of probe agencies summoning lawyers for providing legal advice to clients under investigation, emphasising that lawyers should not be summoned merely for offering legal advice but can be if they are assisting in the crime. The court is considering guidelines to prevent investigative overreach and protect lawyer-client privilege.
The Supreme Court of India has reserved its interim orders on three key issues related to the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, including the power to denotify waqf properties, the composition of waqf boards, and the provision regarding government land. The court heard arguments from both the petitioners, who challenged the validity of the amended law, and the Centre, which defended the Act as a secular concept. The petitioners sought interim orders to prevent the implementation of certain provisions while the court considers the legal challenges.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh also questioned the authenticity of materials placed before it by petitioner Mohd Ismail and others and refused to stay any further deportation of Rohingyas saying similar relief was denied by the court.
"Liberty is granted to newly-added respondents (states) to file a response within 15 days from the date of service, and rejoinder if any be filed after 15 days. The interim order to continue and will equally apply to the cases mentioned in the amended writ petition. We direct no further cases be registered without the permission of this court," the bench's order said.
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 Centre on Wednesday told the Supreme Court that nobody can claim right over government land and it is legally empowered to reclaim properties which are declared waqf by using the waqf by user principle.
The Delhi high court on Wednesday asked the Railways to examine the fixing of maximum passengers and sale of platform tickets -- issues raised in a public interest litigation (PIL) over the recent stampede at the New Delhi Railway Station.
The Centre on Thursday assured the Supreme Court that it will neither denotify Waqf properties, including "Waqf by user", nor make any appointments to the central Waqf council and boards till May 5.
The Supreme Court of India will examine the jurisdiction of the Lokpal, India's anti-corruption ombudsman, in entertaining complaints against sitting high court judges. The court is considering a suo motu proceeding initiated over the Lokpal's January 27 order on the issue. The case involves two complaints filed against a sitting additional judge of a high court, alleging that he influenced a judge of the subordinate judiciary and a judge of the same high court set to deal with a suit filed against the complainant by a private company.
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 has announced it will decide in April whether to reconsider its 2022 verdict upholding the Enforcement Directorate's powers to arrest and attach property under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The court is hearing a batch of pleas seeking a review of the July 2022 verdict, which upheld the ED's powers of arrest and attachment of property involved in money laundering, search and seizure under the PMLA. The verdict came on a batch of over 200 petitions filed by individuals and other entities questioning various provisions of the PMLA.
The Supreme Court of India began hearing a batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. The bench, led by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna, asked both sides to address whether the court should entertain the petitions or relegate them to the high court. The hearing is underway with senior advocate Kapil Sibal arguing for the petitioners. The act, which was passed by Parliament following heated debates, has been challenged by various parties including AIMIM leader Asaduddin Owaisi, All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), and Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind.
University of Delhi on Monday said the purpose of Right to information (RTI) was not to satiate a third party's curiosity as it challenged the central information commission's order over disclosure of information on Prime Minister Narendra Modi's degree.
The CJI called Justice Gavai his "biggest support" while expressing confidence in the latter's leadership and commitment to constitutional values.
Delhi University (DU) has informed the Delhi High Court that it is willing to show its records on Prime Minister Narendra Modi's degree to the court, but not disclose it to "strangers" under the Right to Information (RTI) Act. The university's solicitor general, Tushar Mehta, argued that the "right to privacy" superseded the "right to know" in this case, and that allowing disclosure would expose the university to RTI applications for information about lakhs of its students. The court has reserved its verdict on the matter.
© 2026 Rediff.com - Investor Information - Advertise with us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy - Sitemap - Feedback - About us - Terms of use - Grievances