A three-judge bench was on Tuesday set up in the Supreme Court to decide the fate of Yakub Memon, the lone death row convict in 1993 Mumbai blasts case, after a two-judge bench was divided on his plea seeking stay of his execution scheduled on July 30
The judges on the bench are CJI S A Bobde, Justices R Banumathi, Ashok Bhushan, L Nageswara Rao, M M Shantanagoudar, S A Nazeer, R Subhash Reddy, B R Gavai and Surya Kant.
The Supreme Court of India granted custody of a man suffering from cerebral palsy to his mother, a US national, after determining it was in his best interest due to his inability to make independent decisions. The court overruled a Madras High Court decision, finding the lower court's interaction with the son insufficient to assess his needs. The Supreme Court emphasized the son's limited cognitive capacity and the availability of specialized support in the US, where he had completed most of his schooling.
India's anti-corruption ombudsman, the Lokpal, has dismissed a complaint alleging corruption against former Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud, citing a lack of jurisdiction. The complaint, filed in October 2024, alleged abuse of office, corruption, and favoritism by Chandrachud while he was CJI. The Lokpal, in its order, concluded that sitting judges of the Supreme Court, including the CJI, are not subject to its jurisdiction under the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act. The Lokpal stated that the Supreme Court was established by the Constitution of India, not an Act of Parliament, making it outside the scope of its jurisdiction.
On the basis of her committee's report, the UCC in Uttarakhand established mandatory registration for marriages and live-in relationships, banned polygamy, and provided equal inheritance rights for women.
While acknowledging that they needed strong allies for a chance in the assembly polls, AIADMK cadres seemingly prefer actor-politician Vijay's Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam to the BJP, owing to the latter's 'communal agenda' and consequent hardline Hindutva image, explains N Sathiya Moorthy.
It is crucial to electoral democracy that the exercise of freedom to vote is not subject to undue influence, the Supreme Court said on Thursday while striking down as unconstitutional the electoral bonds scheme for political funding.
An institution of national importance must reflect the "national structure", the Centre told the Supreme Court on Tuesday while pointing out that around 70 to 80 per cent students studying at Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) are Muslims even without reservation.
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 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 of India has ruled that foreign nationals facing criminal charges cannot be allowed to leave the country. The court emphasized the need to ensure the presence of foreigners during criminal proceedings and outlined procedures for enforcing this restriction. The ruling clarifies legal provisions related to foreigners' movements in India, particularly during bail applications.
It said the law must be just and fair and should protect the human rights and dignity of all members of society.
The Supreme Court of India has ruled that Tamil Nadu Governor R.N. Ravi can no longer serve as chancellor of state-run universities, a decision welcomed by the ruling DMK party. The court's judgment stems from a long-standing dispute between the state government and the governor over the assent of 10 bills passed by the Tamil Nadu Assembly. The DMK alleges that the governor had obstructed the smooth functioning of universities by delaying appointments and other critical matters. The judgment paves the way for the Tamil Nadu government to appoint new chancellors for its universities, effectively removing the governor's influence in higher education.
A petition seeking a review of the October 17 verdict refusing to accord legal recognition to same-sex marriages was mentioned before the Supreme Court on Thursday for an open court hearing.
The apex court said 'we are not straightaway arriving at any conclusion' as there were 'very strong views' on both sides. It said it will also see if there was any error in previous judgements which dealt with the issue and decide whether it can be referred to a larger or a five-judge constitution bench.
A five-judge bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud considered the pleas in chambers and dismissed applications for listing of the review petition in open Court.
"The doctrinal error in the Krishna Iyer approach was, postulating a rigid economic theory, which advocates for greater State control over private resources, as the exclusive basis for constitutional governance," the CJI wrote in the 193-page judgment.
The Supreme Court on Thursday said constitutional courts cannot allow provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act to become instruments in the hands of the Enforcement Directorate to continue incarceration for a long time.
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 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.
A five-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court, by a 3:2 majority, on Tuesday upheld one of the adoption regulations prohibiting unmarried and queer couples from adopting children.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has directed the Punjab government not to take any coercive action against Congress leader Partap Singh Bajwa till April 22 in connection with an FIR lodged against him over his "50 bombs have reached Punjab" remarks. Bajwa, the leader of opposition in the Punjab Assembly, has been booked on charges, including misleading information that endangers the country's sovereignty and unity, after being quizzed over his "50 bombs have reached Punjab" claim. The court also issued a notice to the state of Punjab on Bajwa's plea seeking quashing of the FIR registered against him over his statement.
The Supreme Court raised concerns about a potential stalemate in Tamil Nadu due to the Governor's delay in assenting to bills passed by the state assembly. The court questioned the Governor's actions, noting that he should have communicated his concerns about the bills' constitutionality to the state government. The case focuses on the delicate balance of power between the state government and the Governor, highlighting the importance of open communication and transparency in the legislative process.
Terming as 'unfortunate' the January 29 stampede at Maha Kumbh where at least 30 people were killed, the Supreme Court on Monday refused to hear a public interest litigation (PIL) for guidelines over safety of devotees and asked the petitioner to move the Allahabad high court instead.
The Supreme Court has sought the assistance of the solicitor general of India in a plea that seeks job security for members of internal complaint committees (ICC) for sexual harassment at workplaces. The court recognized the importance of the plea and expressed concern over the lack of response from the Central government, despite issuing notice. The petitioners, Janaki Chaudhry and Olga Tellis, argue that ICC members in the private sector face a serious conflict of interest as they can be terminated without reason if a decision goes against the senior management. The petition highlights the vulnerability of ICC members to retaliation and the lack of protection they have compared to their counterparts in the public sector.
The Delhi High Court has ordered Jammu and Kashmir MP Abdul Rashid Sheikh, alias Engineer Rashid, to deposit Rs 4 lakh with the prison authorities as travel expenses for attending Parliament. The court allowed Rashid to attend the ongoing Parliament session "in-custody" till April 4, but the NIA had raised concerns about him being a flight risk. Rashid has been lodged in Delhi's Tihar Jail since 2019 after the NIA arrested him in a 2017 terror-funding case.
While closing the contempt proceedings, the bench observed that the matter ought to have come up for hearing earlier.
Chief Justice of India-designate Sanjiv Khanna on Friday lauded CJI D Y Chandrachud for his "monumental" contribution, saying he worked on a mission to improve the apex court and pursued his goal of making it "a sanctuary of inclusivity", which was accessible to all.
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 privileges enjoyed by MPs and MLAs are "tethered intrinsically" to the functioning of the legislature collectively, the Supreme Court said on Monday while holding that lawmakers taking bribe to vote or make a speech in the house are not immune from prosecution.
The Act prohibits conversion of any place of worship and provides for the maintenance of the religious character of any place of worship as it existed on August 15, 1947.
The Bombay High Court has imposed a cost of Rs 1 lakh on former cricket administrator Lalit Modi while dismissing his petition seeking an order to BCCI to pay penalty of Rs 10.65 crore imposed on him by ED for violating Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA).
The Supreme Court collegium has confirmed the transfer of Delhi High Court Justice Yashwant Varma to his parent Allahabad High Court. This decision comes after an inquiry was initiated against Justice Varma regarding the alleged discovery of a large amount of cash at his official residence. The transfer recommendation was made public in a resolution uploaded on the Supreme Court's website. The alleged cash discovery occurred following a fire at Varma's residence in Delhi on March 14, 2025. The apex court collegium, headed by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna, has also constituted a three-member inquiry committee to further investigate the matter.
Kerala high court on Thursday held that freedom of speech and expression available to the press and media could not trample on the right to dignity, reputation and privacy available to the citizen, especially when reporting about criminal investigations or cases pending before various courts.
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 Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar also indicated that it may not take up the pending scheduled petitions, heard earlier by a three-judge bench, during the day as it was sitting in a combination of two judges.
The Supreme Court of India has laid down guidelines for courts when ordering DNA tests to ascertain paternity. The court emphasized the need to balance the interests of all parties involved, including the child, parents, and other stakeholders. It also recognized the potential for infringement of privacy and the social stigma associated with illegitimate children. The court stressed that DNA tests should only be ordered when existing evidence is insufficient and when such tests are in the best interests of all parties involved.
The bench posed questions to senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, appearing for one of the petitioners Soayib Qureshi, who has challenged the Centre's August 5, 2019 decision to abrogate the provision.
A five-judge constitution bench headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud said there is "no manner of doubt" that the SBI is required to disclose complete details of the bonds.
