Supreme Court Weekly Round-up: July 21, 2024 To July 27, 2024

Supreme Court Orders Rs 50 Lakh Compensation To J&K Police Officer Who Suffered Custodial Torture, Directs CBI Probe

Case Details: Khursheed Ahmad Chohan V. Union Of Territory Of Jammu And Kashmir And Ors.

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 732

Reinforcing constitutional safeguards against custodial violence, the Supreme Court (July 21) ordered a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into the alleged custodial torture of a police constable at the Joint Interrogation Centre (“JIC”) in Kupwara, Jammu and Kashmir.

The Court directed immediate arrest of the police officers of the J&K police who were responsible for the abuse and ordered the Union Territory of J&K to pay a compensation of Rs. 50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakhs) to the appellant-victim Khursheed Ahmed Chauhan as restitution for the gross violation of his fundamental rights.

"Considering the gravity and magnitude of the custodial torture established through medical records and the institutional apathy that followed, we are of the considered opinion that this is a fit case for awarding compensation to the victim of the violence," the Court said.

"where the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India are violated by State machinery, appropriate monetary compensation may be an effective remedy", the Court said, referencing DK Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997) 1SCC 416 and Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa (1993) 2 SCC 746.

'Savior Turned Devil': Supreme Court Cancels Bail Of Woman In-Charge Of Bihar Shelter Home Accused Of Trafficking Inmates

Case Details: X V. State Of Bihar And Anr., SLP(Crl) No. 4335/2024

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 733

The Supreme Court cancelled the bail granted to woman in-charge of a Bihar shelter home, accused of trafficking the shelter home residents and facilitating immoral activities.

"we are of the firm opinion that the present case is an exceptional one, wherein the grant of bail by the High Court to respondent No.2-accused by a cryptic order dated 18th January, 2024 has resulted into travesty of justice. Grant of bail to the person accused of such grave offences without assigning reasons shakes the conscience of the Court and would have an adverse impact on the society", a bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta observed.

Registered Will Carries Presumption Of Genuineness; Burden Of Proof On Party Disputing Its Validity : Supreme Court

Case Details: Metpalli Lasum Bai (Since Dead) And Others V. Metapalli Muthaih(D) By Lrs.

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 734

The Supreme Court reiterated that a registered 'Will' carries a presumption of due execution and genuineness, and the burden of proof lies heavily on the party challenging the Will.

Holding so, the bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta set aside the Andhra Pradesh High Court's decision judgment that had reduced the Appellant/Lasum Bai's share in the contested land, and upheld her absolute ownership based on a registered Will and an oral family arrangement.

The Court held that the High Court erred in its reasoning, emphasizing that a registered Will carries a strong presumption of genuineness and this presumption stood reinforced in the present case, as the respondent, having admitted that the Will bore his father's signature, did not dispute its authenticity especially when the Will benefitted not only the appellant but also the respondent himself and his sister.

No Arrest In 498A FIRs For 2 Months; Refer Cases To Family Welfare Committees : Supreme Court Endorses Allahabad HC Guidelines

Case Details: Shivangi Bansal v. Sahib Bansal

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 735

The Supreme Court endorsed the safeguards laid down by the Allahabad High Court regarding the establishment of the Family Welfare Committee (“FWC”) to prevent the misuse of Section 498A IPC(cruelty offence) in matrimonial disputes.

The Court directed that the guidelines framed by the High Court will remain in effect and should be implemented by the authorities.

Also from the judgment - Supreme Court Orders IPS Wife & Her Parents To Issue Public Apology To Husband & In-Laws For False Criminal Cases

'Fraud Unravels Everything': Supreme Court Recalls Its Own Order Obtained By Fraud Back In 2022

Case Details: Vishnu Vardhan @ Vishnu Pradhan v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 736

In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court held that any judgment or order obtained by fraud is a nullity and can be challenged even in collateral proceedings, without necessarily being assailed in appeal, revision, or writ proceedings.

A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant, Dipankar Datta, and Ujjal Bhuyan applied this principle to set aside its own 2022 judgment delivered in Reddy Veerana v. State of U.P., (2022) , observing that the decision had been fraudulently obtained and was therefore void.

The Court held that if a High Court's decision, later upheld by the Supreme Court, was obtained by fraud, the aggrieved party may challenge it by filing an appeal against the High Court's order before the Supreme Court, rather than seeking a review of the Supreme Court's judgment.

The Court held that the doctrine of merger (where the lower court's decision merges with the Superior court's order) would not apply to the situation where the impugned judgment/order was obtained by fraud.

S.482 CrPC | Second Quashing Petition On Grounds Available Earlier Not Maintainable : Supreme Court

Case Details: M.C. Ravikumar v. D.S. Velmurugan & Ors.

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 737

Observing that the principle of constructive res judicata applies to quashing petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Supreme Court yesterday (July 23) ruled that a second quashing petition cannot be filed on grounds available but not argued in the earlier petition.

The Court reiterated that the second petition would be maintainable only when it is shown that a change arose in circumstances warranting the filing of a subsequent quashing petition.

Foreign Entity Doing Business Through Temporary Premises In India Liable To Tax : Supreme Court Rejects Hyatt International's Appeal

Case Details: Hyatt International Southwest Asia Ltd. v. Additional Director of Income Tax

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 738

The Supreme Court ruled that the existence of a Permanent Establishment (PE) is sufficient to attract tax liability for a foreign entity in India, even in the absence of exclusive possession of a fixed place of business. The Court clarified that temporary or shared use of premises, when combined with administrative or operational control, is adequate to establish a PE, thereby triggering income tax liability in India.

Holding so, the bench comprising Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan dismissed Hyatt International's appeal against the Delhi High Court's order, which had held the company liable to pay income tax in India on income earned through its Strategic Oversight Services Agreements (SOSA) with Asian Hotels Ltd. for 20 years, the operator of Hyatt's hotel business in India.

S.129 CGST Act | Assessee Doesn't Waive Right To Challenge Levy By Mere Payment Of Penalty To Release Goods : Supreme Court

Case Details: M/s. ASP Traders v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 739

The Supreme Court observed that by mere payment of penalty for the release of the goods detained under Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, the assessee cannot be held to have waived the right to file a statutory appeal.

The Court ruled that mere payment of penalty for the release of goods detained during transit under the GST regime does not conclude proceedings unless a formal, reasoned order is passed under Section 129(3) of the CGST Act.

In NEET Aspirant's Death Case, Supreme Court Issues Guidelines To Protect Mental Health Of Students In Colleges & Coaching Centres

Case Details: Sukdeb Saha v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 740

Addressing the issue of students' suicides in India, the Supreme Court issued comprehensive guidelines to protect the mental health of students in schools, colleges, and coaching centres.

The bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta issued fifteen binding directions, while deciding a case a 17-year-old NEET aspirant who died under suspicious circumstances after falling from her hostel terrace in Visakhapatnam.

While issuing the set of guidelines for ensuring psychological well-being of students, the Supreme Court ruled that the right to mental health is an integral part of the fundamental right to life and dignity (Article 21).

The bench held that mental well-being is inseparable from the right to life, while criticizing the coaching centres and educational institutions for fostering a toxic rank and result culture.

Supreme Court Rejects Plea For Delimitation In AP & Telangana To Increase Assembly Seats, Says Comparison With J&K Baseless

Case Details: K. Purushottam Reddy v. Union of India and Ors., W.P.(C) No. 488/2022

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 741

The Supreme Court dismissed a plea seeking directions for the Union to set in motion the delimitation process for increasing the number of assembly seats in the States of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh delivered the judgment, after having reserved orders on April 30 in the writ petition filed by Professor (Dr.) K. Purushottam Reddy.

S. 156(3) CrPC| Magistrate's Order For FIR Not Vitiated Merely Because Complainant Didn't Avail Remedy Under S.154(3) : Supreme Court

Case Details: Anurag Bhatnagar & Anr. v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 742

The Supreme Court refused to quash the magistrate's order directing a police investigation under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C., despite the complainant not availing alternative remedies under Section 154(3).

The Court said that a magistrate's order directing a police investigation can be irregular but cannot be termed illegal if the complaint discloses a cognizable offence and the magistrate applied his mind before ordering the investigation; therefore, the order cannot be faulted.

“To sum up, the Magistrate ought not to ordinarily entertain an application under Section 156(3) CrPC directly unless the informant has availed and exhausted his remedies provided under Section 154(3) CrPC, but as the Magistrate is otherwise competent under Section 156(3) CrPC to direct the registration of an FIR if the allegations in the application/complaint discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, we are of the opinion that the order so passed by the Magistrate would not be without jurisdiction and would not stand vitiated on this count”, the Court observed.

Complaint Can Be Amended At Post-Cognizance Stage If No Prejudice Is Caused To Accused : Supreme Court

Case Details: Bansal Milk Chilling Centre v. Rana Milk Food Private Ltd. & Anr.

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 743

The Supreme Court ruled that an amendment to a complaint can be made at the post-cognizance stage, provided that no 'prejudice' is caused to the accused and the complainant's cross-examination is awaited.

The bench comprising Justices BV Nagarathna and KV Viswanathan allowed the complainant's request to amend the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, noting that no cross-examination had been concluded and the correction changing “Desi Ghee (milk products)” to “milk” was a typographical error appearing in both the legal notice and the complaint, which did not prejudice the accused.

'Retrospective Application Of Enhanced Punishment Violates Art 20(1)' : Supreme Court Modifies Sentence In POCSO Act Case

Case Details: Satauram Mandavi v. State of Chhattisgarh & Anr. | SLP (Crl) No. 13834 of 2024

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 744

The Supreme Court set aside the sentence of life imprisonment till the remainder of natural life imposed by the Trial Court retrospectively in a case under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act where the convict was held guilty of raping a 5-year-old minor.

While upholding the conviction, the Court modified the sentence only to life imprisonment as per S.6 POCSO before it was amended in 2019.

S. 18 Limitation Act| Acknowledgment Of Partial Debt Doesn't Extend Limitation For Entire Claim : Supreme Court

Case Details: M/S. Airen And Associates v. M/S. Sanmar Engineering Services Limited

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 745

The Supreme Court observed that the acknowledgment of partial debt would not extend the limitation period for the entire debt under Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

The bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kumar and SC Sharma upheld the Chhattisgarh High Court's decision, which denied the benefit of Section 18 (extension of limitation on acknowledgement of debt) to the Appellant, upon noting that only part of the debt due to the Appellant was acknowledged by the debtor.

Orders

'Why ED Being Used For Political Battles?' : Supreme Court Rejects Plea Against Karnataka CM's Wife In MUDA Case

Case Details: Directorate Of Enforcement v. Parvathi | SLP(Crl) No. 9384/2025

The Supreme Court on July 21 asked the Enforcement Directorate why it was being used for "political battles", while refusing to entertain the ED's appeal against the Karnataka High Court quashing the summons against Karnataka CM Siddaramiah's wife BM Parvati and State Minister Byrathi Suresh in connection with alleged illegal allotment of sites by the Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA).

'Fight Your Battles Before Electorate' : Supreme Court Rejects Karnataka Govt's Plea For FIR Against BJP MP Tejasvi Surya

Case Details: State Of Karnataka Vs. L.S. Tejasvi Surya| Diary No. - 26570/2025

The Supreme Court refused to entertain a challenge to the quashing of a criminal case filed against Karnataka BJP MP Tejasvi Surya for allegedly spreading fake news about a farmer's suicide.

The bench of CJI BR Gavai and Justice K Vinodchandran was hearing the State Government's challenge to the order of the Karnataka High Court which quashed a case registered against BJP Member of Parliament Tejasvi Surya for allegedly spreading 'fake news' regarding the suicide of a farmer in Haveri district.

Byju's Insolvency : Supreme Court Dismisses BCCI, Riju Ravindran Appeals Against NCLT Mandating CoC Nod To Withdraw CIRP

Case Details: Board Of Control For Cricket In India Vs Pankaj Srivastava |C.A. No. 6959-6960/2025

The Supreme Court dismissed civil appeals filed by the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) and Riju Ravindran challenging the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) judgment holding that the application for withdrawal of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) of Think and Learn Pvt Ltd (the company running Byju's) needed approval from 90 percent of the Committee of Creditors.

TN Idol Theft Cases: Ex-IPS Officer Pon Manickavel Undertakes Not To Give Media Interviews; Supreme Court Restrains CBI Also

Case Details: Central Bureau Of Investigation V. A.G. Ponn Manickavel, SLP(Crl) No. 7200/2025

Retired IPS officer Pon Manickavel, who is accused of falsely implicating police officials in Tamil Nadu's Idol Theft cases, undertook before the Supreme Court that he would not give any interviews to the media about the subject case(s).

At his request, the Court restrained CBI officials/Investigating Officer as well from making any statement against Manickavel in the meantime.

A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta was dealing with CBI's plea seeking surrender of Manickavel's passport and restrain on his giving any interviews to the media.

Supreme Court Stays Arrest Of Actor Shreyas Talpade In Cheating Cases

Case Details: Shreyas Talpade v. State Of Haryana

The Supreme Court granted interim protection to actor Shreyas Talpade from arrest in cases registered in various states in connection with alleged financial crime committed by a cooperative society accused of defrauding investors.

A bench of Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice K.V. Viswanathan issued notice to respondents to file their response/counter affidavit and directed that in the meantime no coercive steps shall be taken against him. The matter has been listed on August 29 for further consideration.

'Misuse Of Political Power' : Supreme Court Asks How Samajwadi Party Got Municipal Building For Pilibhit Office At Cheap Rate

Case Details: Samajwadi Party V. State Of U.P. And Anr., SLP(C) No. 18269/2025

The Supreme Court refused to entertain Samajwadi Party's plea challenging its eviction from Pilibhit district office, asking the party to approach the Civil Court, where it has already filed a civil suit, seeking ad-interim injunction.

During the hearing, the Court made certain oral remarks, disapproving of the manner in which the Party got the office in the municipal plot at a throwaway price, and opined that it was an allotment based on misuse of political power when the Party was in power.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi however clarified in its order that no observation on the merits of the matter has been made, leaving open the civil remedies.

The Supreme Court on Monday (July 21) refused to entertain Samajwadi Party's plea challenging its eviction from Pilibhit district office, asking the party to approach the Civil Court, where it has already filed a civil suit, seeking ad-interim injunction.

During the hearing, the Court made certain oral remarks, disapproving of the manner in which the Party got the office in the municipal plot at a throwaway price, and opined that it was an allotment based on misuse of political power when the Party was in power.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi however clarified in its order that no observation on the merits of the matter has been made, leaving open the civil remedies.

Isha Foundation v Nakkheeran Publications : Supreme Court Asks Parties To Work Out Remedies In Delhi High Court

Case Details: Nakkheeran Publications V. Google Llc, T.P.(C) No. 1403/2025

The Supreme Court asked Sadhguru's Isha Foundation to agitate before the Delhi High Court its plea seeking to injunct Tamil media outlet Nakkheeran Publications from publishing 'defamatory' content against the Foundation.

The Court also allowed Nakkheeran to raise its contentions in an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC (for rejection of the plaint filed by Isha Foundation). The High Court was requested to take up the applications filed by the parties at the earliest.

With these observations, the Supreme Court disposed of the transfer petition filed by Nakkheeran, as well as the interlocutory application filed by the Foundation in the transfer petition.

Supreme Court Stays Bombay HC Order Restraining Probe Into Alleged Misappropriation Of ₹1243 Crore At Mumbai's Lilavati Trust

Case Details: Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust v. State of Maharashtra

The Supreme Court stayed an ex-parte interim order of the Bombay High Court that had restrained investigation into alleged cheating and misappropriation of funds to the tune of Rs. 1243 Crores at the Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust, which runs Mumbai's Lilavati Hospital.

A bench of Justice PS Narasimha and Justice AS Chandurkar issued notice to in a special leave petition filed by the Trust against the Bombay High Court's 4 July 2025 stay order.

'CBI Has Guts To Not Appear Before Us?' : Supreme Court Questions CBI's Absence In Plea For Probe Against Indiabulls Housing Finance

Case Details: Citizens Whistle Blower Forum Vs Union Of India | SLP(C) No. 2993/2025 Diary No. 50365 / 2024

The Supreme Court made strong critical oral remarks against the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for not entering appearance in a case concerning allegations of serious illegalities, including round-tripping of funds, violations of provisions of the Companies Act, and siphoning of funds committed by the promoters of Indiabulls House Finance Limited (renamed as Sammaan Capital ltd) and its subsidiaries and their promoters.

The Special Leave Petition is filed against the February 2, 2024, order passed by Delhi High Court rejecting the writ petition filed by Citizens Whistle Blower Forum seeking time-bound and in-depth investigation by a Special Investigation Team into the allegations.

Keeping the matter to be heard on July 30, the Court ordered: "This Court by an order dated 13 May 1995 issued notice to the Central Bureau of Investigation and as per the notice report, the said agency has been duly served. Suprisingly, no one has entered appearance. SV Raju, learned Additional Solicitor General for India, seeks time and is granted one week time to have instructions..."

'A Cow Is A Cow' : Supreme Court Rejects Plea To Use Only Indigenous Cow Milk For Worship At Tirumala Temple

Case Details: Yuga Thulasi Foundation v. Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams (TTD)

The Supreme Court refused to entertain a writ petition seeking a direction to the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams (TTD) that the milk used for the worship of Lord Venkatesh at the Venkateswara Temple, Tirumala should be sourced only from indigenous cows.

After a bench of Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice N. Kotiswar Singh expressed disinclination to hear the matter, the counsel appearing for the petitioner withdrew the petition.

Supreme Court Dismisses Plea To Reject Ex-TN CM O Panneerselvam's Election Petition Against MP Navas Kani's Win In 2024 LS Polls

Case Details: Navaskani K V. O. Panneerselvam And Ors. | SLP(C) No. 18726/2025

The Supreme Court dismissed a special leave petition filed by MP K Navas Kani, of the Indian Union Muslim League, challenging the Madras High Court's order dismissing his pleat to reject the petition filed by former Chief Minister O. Panneerselvam challenging MP Kani's victory in the June 2024 Lok Sabha polls on grounds of suppression of facts.

By an order dated April 21, the Madras High Court dismissed an application filed by MP Kani under Order VII Rule 11 CPC against the election petition filed by the former CM against Kani's victory from Ramanathapuram Lok Sabha constituency.

Supreme Court Refuses To Entertain Plea For Action Against Alleged Hate Speech Towards Christians In Andhra Pradesh

Case Details: Ashok Babu Chegudi @ Joshua Daniel And Ors. V. The State Of Andhra Pradesh And Ors., Diary No. 17352-2025

The Supreme Court refused to entertain a plea seeking action against Shivashakthi Foundation members, and others, for allegedly spreading hate towards the Christian community and instigating people towards desecration of the Holy Bible.

The Court asked the petitioners to approach the jurisdictional magistrate. In case of inaction, they may approach the High Court for orders in exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction, the Court added.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi was dealing with the petitioners' grievance against certain objectionable remarks made by a group of persons last year during an event of the Shivashakthi Foundation in Andhra Pradesh.

Supreme Court Rejects Plea Against Political Parties Using Tricolour Flags With Election Symbols

Case Details: Sanjay Bhimashankar Thobde V. Union Of India And Ors. | Diary No. 56966-2024

The Supreme Court refused to entertain a Public Interest Litigation against political parties using flags with the tricolour along with party symbols.

The bench of CJI BR Gavai, Justice K Vinod Chandran and Justice NV Anjaria was hearing a PIL filed by a petitioner in person against using the tricolour of the National Flag as part of their political campaign, replacing the Ashoka Chakra with their symbols.

Kanwar Yatra : Supreme Court Refuses To Examine Legality Of QR Code Directives, Says Hotels Need Only Display Licences As Per Law

Case Details: Apoorvanand Jha And Anr. V. Union Of India W.P.(Crl.) No. 328/2024

Considering the end of the Kanwar Yatra pilgrimage of this year, the Supreme Court on refused to go into the legality of the directives issued by the Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand authorities to the eateries along the Kanwar Yatra route to display QR codes which would enable the pilgrims to know the details of the owners.

A bench of Justice MM Sundresh and Justice NK Singh disposed of the interlocutory applications filed challenging the mandate issued by the authorities. The bench also clarified that the sellers need only display their licenses and registration certificates as required by the law.

'One Shouldn't Hold On To Govt Accommodation Endlessly' : Supreme Court

Case Details: Avanish Kumar Singh Vs. The State Of Bihar | SLP(C) No. 016257 - / 2025

The Supreme Court expressed displeasure over the withholding of Government accommodation by former Bihar MLA Avinash Kumar Singh.

The bench of CJI BR Gavai, Justice K Vinod Chandran and Justice NV Anjaria was hearing a challenge to the Patna High Court order, which upheld a government order against the former Bihar MLA for paying 20 Lakhs of house rent for the government residence, which he overstayed. The bench refused to entertain the plea and allowed the petitioner to withdraw the petition.

During the hearing, CJI expressed displeasure over the conduct of the petitioner : "One should not hold on to Government accommodation endlessly."

Supreme Court Allows Ex-Chhattisgarh CM Bhupesh Baghel To Contest Maintainability Of Petition Challenging His Election

Case Details: Bhupesh Baghel V. Vijay Baghel And Ors., SLP(C) No. 17768/2025

The Supreme Court refused to entertain ex-Chhattisgarh Chief Minister Bhupesh Baghel's plea against an election petition filed by his nephew Vijay Baghel alleging violation of silence period norms during the state's 2023 Assembly elections.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi dismissed the petition as withdrawn, while giving liberty to Bhupesh Baghel to approach the High Court-cum-Election Tribunal "to raise issue of maintainability as a preliminary issue".

Need To Regulate Transfers & Postings In NCLT, There's A Deep Problem : Supreme Court Tells Union

Case Details: Madras Bar Association V. Union Of India And Anr., W.P.(C) No. 1018/2021

The Supreme Court asked the Union government to look into the manner of posting of Judicial/Technical members for the National Company Law Tribunal benches across the country.

"There's an application filed by High Court Bar Association, Indore...it's disturbing...it says no full time judicial/technical member is posted in the NCLT Indore bench...[we] don't want to make it part of judicial order today. Something needs to be done to regulate transfers and postings in NCLT, there's a very deep problem", the Court orally told Attorney General R Venkataramani, while calling for a comprehensive plan to streamline postings in NCLT.

The Court was hearing a batch of matters where it earlier asked Union of India to collate and furnish data on the status of appointments and selection process of judicial/technical/accounting/administrative members of Tribunals across the country. One of the petitions is a public interest litigation initiated by the Madras Bar Association.

Supreme Court Rejects Plea To Transfer Petition Challenging Waqf Act 1995 From Delhi HC

Case Details: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay V. Union Of India And Ors. | T.P.(C) No. 1652/2025

While refusing to transfer a writ petition challenging the Waqf Act 1995 pending before Delhi High Court, the Supreme Court (July 22) expressed concerns over the trend of filing petitions for getting sheer newspaper publicity.

The bench of CJI BR Gavai and Justices K Vinod Chandran and NV Anjaria was hearing a transfer petition seeking the transfer of the writ petition challenging the Waqf Act, 1995 from the Delhi High Court to the Supreme Court.

Hasdeo Forest | 'Where Exactly Are Trees Being Planted?' Supreme Court Questions Coal Block Allottees And Chhattisgarh Govt

Case Details: Dinesh Kumar Soni V. Union Of India And Ors., W.P.(C) No. 371/2019

During the hearing of pleas challenging coal mining in the Hasdeo Aranya forest area, the Supreme Court questioned the coal block allottees and the state government about where trees are being planted as part of compensatory measures.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi was dealing with 2 public interest litigations – one, filed by Sudiep Shrivastava (Chhattisgarh-based advocate and activist), seeking a direction to the Union of India to cancel all non-forest use and mining permissions granted for PEKB (Parsa East and Kente Basan) and Parsa Coal Block, Chhattisgarh, and second, filed by Dinesh Kumar Soni, which raises similar issues and relates to the Coalgate case, where a three Judge bench headed by Chief Justice RM Lodha declared coal allocation between 1993-2009 illegal.

Ultimately, the matter was adjourned to enable the parties to file convenience compilations and replies. After urgency was shown by Bhushan, saying that tree-felling will likely resume once monsoon season is over, the bench listed the matter on August 19.

Builder-Bank Nexus In NCR: Supreme Court Allows CBI To Register 22 Cases; Asks Gurugram Judge To Enquire Into Coercive Orders Against Homebuyers

Case Details: Himanshu Singh and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors., SLP(C) No. 7649/2023

Considering's Central Bureau of Investigation's interim report on a "builder-bank nexus" in the national capital region, the Supreme Court yesterday allowed the agency to register 22 regular cases for further investigation.

Taking note of "problems" with Gurugram Courts, the top Court directed District and Sessions Judge, Gurugram to conduct a fact-finding enquiry into passing of coercive orders against homebuyers despite a stay order restraining any such action. The Sessions Judge was asked to file a report within 10 days. “This is a serious matter”, commented Justice Surya Kant.

Supreme Court Rejects Kal Airways & Kalanithi Maran's Appeals In A Dispute Against SpiceJet

Case Details: Kalanithi Maran v. Spicejet Limited and Anr. | SLP(C) No. 17306/2025

The Supreme Court upheld the Delhi High Court's order, which rejected the plea of Kal Airways and former promoter of Spicejet, Kalanithi Maran, to seek damages of Rs. 1323 crores from Spicejet.

A bench comprising Justice PS Narasimha and Justice AS Chandurkar passed the order in a special leave petition challenging the Delhi High Court's order dated May 23, wherein the division bench dismissed their plea on grounds of delay.

Dharmasthala Burial Case: Supreme Court Refuses To Entertain Plea Against Media Gag Order, Asks Party To Approach High Court

Case Details: Third Eye YouTube Channel v. Sri Harshendra Kumar D & Ors.

The Supreme Court refused to entertain a challenge to an ex-parte gag order restraining media from publishing any "defamatory content" against the family running the Sri Manjunathaswamy temple, Dharmasthala (Karnataka) and also the temple in relation to the "Dharmasthala Burial" case

The counsel for the petitioner Third Eye YouTube channel mentioned the matter before the bench led by CJI BR Gavai.

The bench of CJI BR Gavai and Justices K Vinod Chandran and Joymalya Bagchi refused to consider the matter directly at the Apex Court. The CJI asked the counsel to first approach the High Court as "we cannot discourage the High Courts".

BCI's Power To Inspect Law Colleges: Supreme Court Seeks 'Independent, Transparent' Mechanism For Periodical Inspection

Case Details: Nathibai Damodar Thackersey Womens University Law School v. State of Maharashtra and Ors., SLP(C) No. 17029/2025

The Supreme Court called on the Bar Council of India to suggest an independent mechanism for annual/ periodical inspection of law colleges/ universities.

While issuing notice on a petition challenging Bombay HC judgment which upheld a notice of inspection issued by BCI to petitioner-Nathibai Damodar Thackersey Women's University Law School, a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi said,

“Meanwhile, the Bar Council of India shall suggest an independent, impartial and transparent mechanism for annual/periodical inspection of the Law Colleges/Law Universities.”

7/11 Mumbai Blasts :Supreme Court Stays Bombay HC's Acquittal Judgment; But Says Accused Not Required To Go Back To Prison

Case Details: State of Maharashtra v. Mohd Faisal Ataur Rahman Shaikh and Ors. | SLP(Crl) No. 10780-10791/2025

The Supreme Court issued notice in the criminal appeals filed by the State of Maharashtra challenging the Bombay High Court's judgment which acquitted all 12 accused in the 7/11 Mumbai train blasts case of 2006.

The bench observed in the order :

"We have been informed that all the respondents have been released and there is no question of bringing them back to the prison. However, taking note of the submission made by the SG on the question of law, we are inclined to hold that the impugned judgment shall not be treated as a precedent. To that extent, there is a stay of the impugned judgment."

'288 Gangster Case Trials Pending In NCT': Supreme Court Asks Union & Delhi Govt To Introduce Fast-Track Courts

Case Details: Mahesh Khatri @ Bholi V. State NCT of Delhi, SLP(Crl) No. 1422/2025

Highlighting the need for expeditious trials in gangster-related cases, the Supreme Court called on the Union of India and Delhi government to consider establishment of fast-track courts which can deal with such cases on a day-to-day basis.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi made the suggestion to Additional Solicitor General SD Sanjay, after it was informed that there are 288 trials pending in the national capital courts pertaining to gangster-related cases, out of which charges have been framed in 108 cases and there is a gap of 3-4 years between framing of charges and commencement of prosecution evidence.

The Court reflected that if the proposed decision is taken by the governments, all pending trials can be brought to an end.

'Castigating Lawyers Over Small Mistake May Affect Their Career': Supreme Court On Action Against AoR & Advocate For Filing Misconduct

Case Details: N. Eswaranathan v. State Represented By The Deputy Superintendent Of Police | Diary No. 55057-2024

The Supreme Court held that lawyers should not be castigated for small mistakes as that may affect their career detrimentally.

The bench of CJI BR Gavai and Justices K Vinod Chandran and Joymalya Bagchi was hearing the issue arising from a split verdict by another bench of the Supreme Court.

"We are also of a considered view that for a small mistake, lawyers shouldn't be castigated, it may have serious ramifications affecting their career."

A bench of Justices Bela M Trivedi and Satish Chandra Sharma had agreed that the Advocates failed to discharge their duties and did not uphold the honour and dignity of the institution (Supreme Court). However, the judges disagreed on the further course of action to be taken.

Supreme Court Allows Kerala Govt To Withdraw Petitions Challenging Governor's Inaction On Bills; Rejects Centre's Objection

Case Details: State of Kerala and Anr. v. Hon'ble Governor for State of Kerala and Ors.

The Supreme Court allowed the State of Kerala to withdraw the two petitions filed by it n 2023 against the Kerala Governor over the delay in granting assent to the bills passed by the legislative assembly.

A bench comprising Justice PS Narasimha and Justice AS Chandurkar passed the order rejecting the objections raised by the Centre to the State's bid to withdraw the matters.

'Udaipur Files' Row : Supreme Court Asks Delhi HC To Decide On Monday Pleas To Stay Movie's Release

Case Details: Mohammed Javed v. Union of India and Ors., W.P.(C) No. 647/2025

The Supreme Court asked the parties objecting to the release of the controversial movie "Udaipur Files : Kanhaiya Lal Tailor Murder" to approach the Delhi High Court to challenge the Centre's revisional order which approved the movie's exhibition with 6 edits.

The Supreme Court clarified in its order that it has not expressed anything on the merits of the matter and all contentions are open to be raised before the High Court, which shall decide in accordance with law.

NEET UG 2025: Supreme Court Dismisses Pleas Seeking Reexamination For Candidates Who Faced Power Outage At Centres

Case Details: Navya Nayak v. National Testing Agency | SLP(C) No. 19807/2025

The Supreme Court dismissed two petitions filed by NEET-UG 2025 candidates, who suffered a power outage in centres in Madhya Pradesh, seeking a re-examination.

The Court refused to interfere with the Madhya Pradesh High Court Division Bench's judgment which refused the plea for re-test. The Court opined that the High Court has examined the issue from all possible aspects, including the report of an independent Expert Committee.

However, the bench comprising Justice PS Narasimha and Justice AS Chandurkar directed that those students who are eligible for counselling should be allowed to register for the same and participate in the ongoing process.

1984 Anti-Sikh Riots : Supreme Court Criticises Allahabad HC For Staying Trial Of 3 Cases, Directs To Expedite Hearing

Case Details: Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee (Petitioner No. 01) and Anr. v. Union of India and Anr., W.P. (Crl.) No. 45/2017

The Supreme Court expressed dismay over Allahabad High Court staying trial proceedings in 3 out of 11 cases pertaining to the 1984 Anti-Sikh Riots, where proceedings commenced pursuant to re-investigation and filing of chargesheets by a Special Investigation Team.

While calling on the UP Advocate General to deploy "best of the state law officers" to pursue the cases, the Court requested the High Court to take up the matters out of turn and expeditiously.

'Courts Are There To Convict Or Acquit; YouTube Cannot Substitute Courts' : SC While Hearing Crime Reporter's Plea

Case Details: Nandakumar T.P. v. State of Kerala & Anr.

The Supreme Court on Friday observed that YouTube presentations cannot replace the judicial process and criticised a Kerala based journalist for his video allegedly targeting a prominent woman politician. The journalist has claimed that the video was meant to encourage public discussion and fight corruption.

A bench of Justice Nagarathna and Justice KV Viswanathan was hearing the anticipatory bail plea of Nandakumar TP, who is facing prosecution over a video uploaded on his YouTube channel “Crime Online”.

At the end of the hearing, the counsel for the State of Kerala sought time to take instructions and file a counter affidavit, if necessary. The Court adjourned the matter by three weeks and extended the interim protection from arrest granted earlier.

Supreme Court Stays PMLA Trial In Case Where Chargesheet In Predicate Offence Not Filed For 7 Yrs

Case Details: S. Srividhya and Ors. v. Assistant Director and Anr., SLP (Crl) No. 10113-10115/2025

The Supreme Court stayed trial against 4 accused in a case under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act where chargesheet had not been filed in the predicate offense since 7 years.

A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta passed the order after hearing Senior Advocate PB Suresh (on behalf of the petitioners), who argued that the petitioners were not named in the predicate offense and questioned how trial could proceed in the PMLA case when chargesheet had not been filed in the predicate offense.

Staying the trial qua the petitioners, the bench issued notice to the Enforcement Directorate and Indian Bank.

Other Developments

'Fight Your Political Battles Elsewhere' : Supreme Court On Plea For Contempt Action Against WB CM Mamata Banerjee

Case Details: Aatmadeep (A Public Charitable Trust) Vs. Mamata Banerjee

The Supreme Court while hearing a plea seeking criminal contempt against West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, cautioned against politicising matters before the Court.

The bench of CJI BR Gavai and Justices K Vinod Chandran, NV Anjaria was hearing a petition which sought the initiation of criminal contempt against West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee over her remarks on the Apex Court's ruling in the teachers' recruitment scam case.

The bench ultimately agreed to list the matter after 4 weeks.

Supreme Court Issues Notice On PIL To Display Names & Contact Details Of Owners At Entrances Of All Shops

Case Details: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay V. Union Of India And Ors., W.P.(C) No. 667/2025

The Supreme Court issued notice to the respondents on a public interest litigation seeking mandatory disclosure of shop owner/seller details as part of consumer's 'right to know' about products they purchase.

The Union Government, all State Governments, and the Law Commission of India are respondents in the case.

A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta passed the order, after hearing Advocate Eklavya Dwivedi on behalf of petitioner-Advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay.

'How Can ED Summon Lawyers For Privileged Communications With Clients?There Should Be Guidelines' : Supreme Court

Case Details: In Re : Summoning Advocates Who Give Legal Opinion or Represent Parties During Investigation of Cases and Related Issues | SMW(Cal) 2/2025

The Supreme Court stressed the need to have guidelines to address the issue of the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and other investigating agencies summoning lawyers over the legal advice given to clients in criminal cases.

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India BR Gavai, Justice K Vinod Chandran and Justice NV Anjaria was hearing the Suo Motu case titled "In Re : Summoning Advocates Who Give Legal Opinion or Represent Parties During Investigation of Cases and Related Issues".

Russian Woman Fled Through Nepal With Indian Child, Says Centre; 'Unacceptable', Remarks Supreme Court

Case Details: Viktoriia Basu V. The State Of West Bengal And Ors., W.P.(Crl.) No. 129/2023

In the case where a Russian woman has seemingly gone missing with her child during pendency of a custody battle with her Indian husband, the Supreme Court was informed by the Centre that the woman appears to have left the country and gone to Russia.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi was apprised by Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati that based on the woman's IP address, it has been found that she was in Bihar on July 8 and thereafter in Nepal. Subsequently, she went to UAE and took a flight from there to Russia, where she reached on July 16.

Calling on the authorities to file an updated status report, the Court re-listed the matter after 1 week.

'You Cannot Say Media Narratives Influence Our Judgments' : Supreme Court To Solicitor General

Case Details: In Re : Summoning Advocates Who Give Legal Opinion or Represent Parties During Investigation of Cases and Related Issues | SMW(Cal) 2/2025

The Supreme Court stated that its judgments and actions are not influenced by any "media narrative." The Court's statement came in response to a submission made by the Solicitor General that there was a media narrative being made against the Enforcement Directorate.

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India BR Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran was hearing the Suo Motu case taken to address the issue of investigating agencies like the ED summoning advocates over the legal opinion given by them to their clients.

When the hearing started, CJI Gavai said that he was shocked after reading the reports in LiveLaw and Bar & Bench about the ED's summons to Senior Advocates.

Dharmasthala Burial Case : YouTube Channel Approaches Supreme Court Challenging Order To Delete 'Defamatory' Content Against Temple Family

Case Details: Third Eye YouTube Channel v. Sri Harshendra Kumar D & Ors.

A special leave petition has been filed before the Supreme Court challenging the Bengaluru Court ex-parte interim order which restrained various media houses and YouTube channels from publishing any "defamatory content" against the family running the Sri Manjunathaswamy temple, Dharmasthala(Karnataka) and also the temple in relation to the "Dharmasthala Burial" case

To recap, the case arises out of registration of an FIR based on the complaint of a sanitation worker, who claimed that he was instructed to bury the bodies of women and children between 1995 and 2014 in Dharmasthala village.

'Election Commission Has Power To Verify Citizenship' : ECI Tells Supreme Court In Bihar SIR Matter

Case Details: Association for Democratic Reforms and Ors. v. Election Commission of India

The Election Commission of India (ECI) has defended its authority to seek proof of citizenship during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar, in a counter-affidavit filed before the Supreme Court in the batch of petitions challenging the SIR process.

Responding to the petitioner's argument that the ECI was overstepping its jurisdiction by calling upon individuals to prove citizenship, the Commission submitted that it is statutorily bound to ensure that only citizens of India are registered as voters.

It asserted that this obligation flows from Article 326 of the Constitution and Sections 16 and 19 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950.

Supreme Court Issues Notice To Union & All States On President's Reference On Timelines For Bills' Assent

Case Details: In Re : Assent, Withholding Or Reservation Of Bills By The Governor And The President Of India | SPL.REF. No. 1/2025

The Supreme Court issued notice to the Union Government and all the State Governments on the Presidential Reference made by President Droupadi Murmu concerning the powers of the Governor and the President under Article 200 and 201 of the Constitution, respectively, concerning power to assent on Bills.

A Constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice of India BR Gavai and comprising Justice Surya Kant, Justice Vikram Nath, Justice PS Narasimha and Justice AS Chandurkar posted the matter for next Tuesday for the appearances of the respondents. CJI BR Gavai said that the Court was proposing to hear the matter in August.

'Aadhaar, Voter ID & Ration Cards Not Reliable Documents' : ECI Tells Supreme Court In Bihar Electoral Roll Revision Matter

Case Details: Association for Democratic Reforms and Ors. v. Election Commission of India

In the counter affidavit filed before the Supreme Court, the Election Commission of India (ECI) has stated that the Electoral Photo Identity Card (EPIC) cannot be accepted as a document for inclusion in the electoral roll during the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) in Bihar, since the process is a fresh revision of the electoral rolls.

The Commission said that the SIR is a de novo revision process under Rule 21(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, and that EPICs are based on entries in the existing electoral roll, which is itself under revision.

On Aadhaar, the ECI reiterated that it is not recognised as a valid document for inclusion in the electoral roll because it does not establish citizenship, and is merely proof of identity. It cited both statutory provisions and case law to support this position.

The Commission addressed the exclusion of ration cards from the list of acceptable documents during the Bihar SIR by pointing to the prevalence of fraudulent cards. It relied on a press release dated March 7, 2025 from the central government stating that it has removed 5 Crore fake ration cards.

'Ashamed To Hear Frequent Cases Of Sexual Violence Against Women' : Supreme Court

Case Details: Supreme Court Women Lawyers Association v. Union of India and Ors. | W.P.(Crl.) No. 526/2024

The Supreme Court on July 21 orally remarked that it feels "ashamed" to hear frequent cases of assault on women, including the recent incidents where women have been burnt alive. The Court was hearing a writ petition seeking a strict time-bound implementation of the laws protecting and safeguarding women from sexual offences.

The writ petition, filed by the Supreme Court Women Lawyers Association, seeks the issuance of 'Pan-India Safety Guidelines, Reforms and Measures for Protection of Women'. It also asks for a change in the laws by allowing all sexual offenders to mandatorily undergo chemical castration immediately upon arrest and then be subjected to an immediate polygraph or lie detector test.

Hasdeo Forest | 'Where Exactly Are Trees Being Planted?' Supreme Court Questions Coal Block Allottees And Chhattisgarh Govt

Case Details: Dinesh Kumar Soni v. Union of India and Ors., W.P.(C) No. 371/2019

During the hearing of pleas challenging coal mining in the Hasdeo Aranya forest area, the Supreme Court questioned the coal block allottees and the state government about where trees are being planted as part of compensatory measures.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi was dealing with 2 public interest litigations – one, filed by Sudiep Shrivastava (Chhattisgarh-based advocate and activist), seeking a direction to the Union of India to cancel all non-forest use and mining permissions granted for PEKB (Parsa East and Kente Basan) and Parsa Coal Block, Chhattisgarh, and second, filed by Dinesh Kumar Soni, which raises similar issues and relates to the Coalgate case, where a three Judge bench headed by Chief Justice RM Lodha declared coal allocation between 1993-2009 illegal.

Ultimately, the matter was adjourned to enable the parties to file convenience compilations and replies. After urgency was shown by Bhushan, saying that tree-felling will likely resume once monsoon season is over, the bench listed the matter on August 19.

GST Can't Be Based On Bet Value, Casinos Argue In Supreme Court

Case Details: Directorate General of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence Hqs v. Gameskraft Technologies Private Limited | SLP(C) No. 19366-19369/2023

The Supreme Court continued to hear arguments in a batch of petitions raising the question of law as to whether online gaming platforms could be classified as gambling and therefore, be charged 28% Goods and Services Tax (GST). The Court is also considering the issue whether the GST can be charged on casinos and the platforms on the entire bet amount.

A bench comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan is hearing a challenge against a 2023 Karnataka High Court order, which ruled in favour of online gaming platform, Gameskraft, against the GST demand notice. It held that an online gaming platform can't be charged with GST applicable on gambling/betting. Against this, the GST Department approached the Supreme Court.

'I Advocate Sustainable Development, But Forests Can't Be Cleared Overnight By Bulldozers': CJI BR Gavai In Kancha Gachibowli Case

Case Details: In Re Kancha Gachibowli Forest, State of Telangana | SMW(C) No. 3/2025

Chief Justice of India BR Gavai while hearing the suo motu case of deforestation in the Kancha Gachibowli forest area in Telangana, expressed that employing bulldozers to clear a forest overnight cannot be justified as sustainable development.

The CJI verbally remarked that while he supported the cause of sustainable development, the overnight bulldozing incident at Kancha Gachibowli area could not be condoned.

Senior Advocate K Parameshwar, appearing as the amicus in the matter, informed that certain private intervenors wanted to file a response to the State's affidavit on the issue.

The bench then agreed to re-list the matter for August 13.

Plea In Supreme Court Seeks Removal Of Vijay Shah From Ministerial Post Over Col Sofia Qureshi Remarks

Case Details: Dr. Jaya Thakur v. State of MP and Ors.

Congress Leader Dr Jaya Thakur has filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court seeking removal of BJP Minister Kunwar Vijay Shah from the ministerial position over his remarks on Colonel Sofia Qureshi during 'Operation Sindoor'.

Supreme Court Seeks Response Of Centre, States On Plea To Curb Heatwave Deaths, Protect Workers In Unorganised Sectors

Case Details: Adil Sharfuddin v. Union of India | W.P.(C) No. 000653 / 2025

The Supreme Court sought a response from the Union and State Governments in a plea seeking comprehensive measures to protect workers in unorganised sectors from heat wave effects and prevent deaths due to the rising temperature.

The bench of CJI BR Gavai and Justices K Vinod Chandran and Joymalya Bagchi agreed to consider the matter and issued notice on the petition.

Supreme Court Reserves Verdict On TN Health Minister's Plea In Land Grab Case, To Decide If Sanction Needed To Prosecute For Offence In Past Office

Case Details: Ma. Subramanian v. State of Tamil Nadu | SLP(Crl) No. 007659/2025

The Supreme Court reserved judgment in a plea moved by Tamil Nadu Health Minister Ma. Subramanian and his wife, challenging the Madras High Court's order refusing to quash the chargesheet against them in an illegal government land grabbing case in Guindy, Chennai.

The Court dealt with an interesting issue of law as to whether a sanction to prosecute Subramanian, who is now a State Minister, would be required for an offence allegedly committed while holding the post of Chennia Mayor but, cognizance for which was taken filed after he had vacated the office.

West Bengal Govt Approaches Supreme Court Challenging Calcutta HC Staying New OBC List Notification

The State of West Bengal has approached the Supreme Court challenging the Calcutta High Court's order staying the new list of Other Backward Classes (OBCs). While staying the new list, the High Court prima facie observed that State was attempting to reintroduce to the same OBC classes which were earlier struck down.

Pursuing Judges' Appointment Issue With Govt On Administrative Side : CJI BR Gavai

Case Details: Advocates Association Bengaluru v. Barun Mitra & Anr. | Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 867 of 2021

Chief Justice of India, BR Gavai said that the Supreme Court was pursuing on its administrative side the issue of pending judicial appointments with the Union Government.

CJI made this statement when Senior Advocate Arvind Datar and Advocate Prashant Bhushan jointly mentioned the petitions seeking directions to the Union Government to act on Collegium recommendations in a time-bound manner.

Agreeing to list the matter after two weeks, the CJI stated that there is an ongoing effort to resolve the pendency of appointments on the administrative side.

Supreme Court To Hear Plea To Allow BS-VI Compliant End-of-Life Vehicles To Ply In Delhi-NCR

The Supreme Court agreed to hear an application seeking to allow vehicles meeting the BS VI emission standards to operate in the National Capital Region regardless of their end-of-life period (10 years for diesel vehicles and 15 years for petrol vehicles).

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India BR Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran agreed to list the matter, after a counsel mentioned the application for urgent listing.

'Muslim Community Demonised' : Jamiat Files Petition In Supreme Court Against Centre Approving 'Udaipur Files' Movie With 6 Cuts

Jamiat Ulema-I-Hind President Maulana Arshad Madani has filed a writ petition before the Supreme Court challenging Centre's order clearing release of the movie 'Udaipur Files' subject to 6 changes.

Madani has also filed objections to Centre's order in the batch of pleas arising out of Delhi High Court's order, which stayed release of the film till Centre's order on the objectors' revision petitions.

In his objections, Madani claims that the movie producer-Amit Jani is a self-styled activist and founder of the Uttar Pradesh Navnirman Sena who has historically indulged in communally colored propaganda.

Supreme Court Issues Notice To Assam Chief Secretary In Contempt Petition Over Demolitions In Goalpara District

Case Details: Nur Nabi and Ors. v. Ravi Kota and Ors. Diary No. – 37759/2025

The Supreme Court agreed to hear a contempt petition against the Chief Secretary of Assam Government and Goalpara district authorities for alleged illegal eviction and demolition of structures in violation of the Court's guidelines in In Re: Directions in the matter of Demolition of Structures

The bench of CJI BR Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran issued notice in the Civil Contempt Petition seeking action against Assam Government for alleged illegal demolition of houses, schools and shops in a village in Goalpara District.

The contempt petition has been filed by residents of Hasila Beel Village, Goalpara, in Assam against the alleged illegal demolitions of houses, shops and structures within the area.

'Very Bad' : Supreme Court On Exclusion Of Blind Persons From Uttarakhand Judicial Service Exam; Seeks PSC's Response

Case Details: Sravya Sindhuri v. Uttarakhand Public Service Commission

The Supreme Court issued notice to the Uttarakhand Public Service Commission on a writ petition filed by a blind candidate seeking to appear for the Uttarakhand Judicial Service Exams. She has challenged the exclusion of persons with blindness and locomotor disability, and also persons who are not domiciled in Uttarakhand, from being eligible for the Persons with Benchmark Disabilities (PwBD) quota in the Uttarakhand Judicial Exams.

Supreme Court Issues Notice To IMA On Union's Plea Against HC Judgment Quashing Provision To Levy GST On Supplies By Clubs To Members

Case Details: Union of India v. Indian Medical Association | SLP(C) No. 18349-18350/2025

The Supreme Court issued notice on the Union Government's petition challenging the recent Kerala High Court judgment striking down the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 ("CSGT Act"), which allowed the levy of GST on supply by clubs and associations to their members.

However, the Court ordered that there shall not be any recovery steps against the Indian Medical Association, the respondent in the matter.

A bench comprising Justice PS Narasimha and Justice AS Chandurkar passed the order.

'Very Serious & Sensitive Issue' : Supreme Court Asks Union To Urgently Consider Rehabilitation Measures For Homeless, Mentally Ill Persons

Case Details: Gaurav Kumar Bansal v. Union of India and Ors., W.P.(C) No. 198/2025

While dealing with a public interest litigation seeking rehabilitation measures for homeless, mentally ill persons, the Supreme Court orally observed that the issue raised is "very serious and sensitive".

A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta probed the Union of India about steps taken and on the asking of Additional Solicitor General Brijender Chahar, adjourned the matter for 8 weeks.

Age Of Consent Should Remain 18; Judicial Discretion May Be Exercised In Adolescent Relationship Cases : Centre Tells Supreme Court

Case Details: Nipun Saxena v. Union of India

In written submissions filed before the Supreme Court in a PIL regarding improving response of Indian criminal justice system to sexual offences, the Union of India has opposed any move to reduce the statutory age of consent under Indian law from 18 years.

The Centre also opposed Amicus Curiae Senior Advocate Indira Jaising's suggestion for the Court to read in an exception excluding sexual activity between consenting adolescents between the age of 16 and 18 from the scope of the POCSO Act and relevant laws, in order to decriminalise voluntary adolescent relationships.

Delhi Govt Seeks Review Of Supreme Court Order Banning 10 Yr Old Diesel & 15 Yr Old Petrol Vehicles In NCR

The Government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi has filed a review petition in the Supreme Court seeking to review a 2018 order passed by the Court, banning 10-year-old diesel and 15-year-old petrol vehicles in the National Capital Region.

The plea states that such a ban on vehicles would not be necessary as, after 2018, stricter standards of monitoring of emissions and increased coverage of pollution testing have been made applicable. It has also asked in its plea for directing the Union Central Government and the Commission for Air Quality Management to conduct a comprehensive scientific study, evaluating the actual environmental benefits of the age-based ban.

According to the review plea, there should be a ban based on emissions, rather than the vehicle's age.

Bihar SIR | BLOs Mass-Uploading Enumeration Forms Without Voters' Knowledge Or Consent : ADR Tells Supreme Court

Case Details: Association for Democratic Reforms and Ors. v. Election Commission of India | W.P.(C) No. 640/2025

The Association for Democratic Reforms ("ADR") has filed a rejoinder in the batch of petitions challenging the Election Commission of India ("ECI") order of Special Intensive Revision ("SIR") in Bihar. As per the rejoinder, ADR claims that the enumeration forms of voters, which are used to update the electoral rolls, are being mass-uploaded by the Electoral Registration Officers ("EROs") without the consent of the voters.

'Gross Misconduct' : Supreme Court Upholds Advocate's Suspension For Claiming Fees Based On MACT Compensation

Case Details: X V. Bar Council Of India And Ors.

The Supreme Court refused to show leniency in the case of an advocate whose license was suspended for 3 years over issuance of a fee notice of Rs.2.3 lakhs to a client who got motor accident compensation claim of Rs. 5 lakhs.

The Court underlined the risk of poor people, seeking motor accident compensation claims, getting exploited by advocates' 'giroh' and opined that the petitioner's conduct of demanding fees depending on the MACT outcome amounted to 'gross misconduct'.