LawLoveLegal

1. Introduction: A Defining Constitutional Moment The Supreme Court of India has fixed May 5, 2026 for the final hearing of petitions challenging the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (CAA) and the Citizenship (Amendment) Rules, 2024 . This hearing is expected to be one of the most consequential constitutional adjudications in recent decades, involving questions of citizenship, equality, secularism, immigration policy, and the limits of judicial review . 2. Procedural Background and Case Management A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M. Pancholi directed that the matters be listed seriatim for final hearing in the week commencing May 5, 2026 . Hearing Schedule Petitioners: May 5 and May 6 (first half) Respondents (Union of India): May 7 Rejoinder arguments: May 12 The Court noted that the petitions fall into two broad categories: Assam and Tripura cases Cases from the rest of India Nodal counsel have been directed to classify p...

Introduction A recent social media disclosure by an employee of the State Bank of India (SBI) has reignited public interest in government-linked banking careers. A woman working as a Probationary Officer (PO) in SBI revealed that her monthly in-hand salary stands at approximately ₹95,000 , excluding additional benefits. The disclosure, which quickly went viral, has been widely described as motivating, especially for aspirants preparing for competitive banking examinations. Beyond public curiosity, the episode also provides an opportunity to understand the statutory framework, service conditions, pay structure, and constitutional principles governing employment in public sector banks like SBI. Background of the Disclosure The salary revelation was made by Shweta Uppal , an SBI Probationary Officer who qualified the IBPS PO examination in 2022 and has been serving with SBI for over two and a half years . In a video shared on social media, Uppal stated that: Her in-hand salary is appr...

Background: The US Tariff Regime on Indian Goods The United States currently imposes a 50% tariff burden on certain Indian goods , structured as follows: 25% tariff imposed as a penalty for India’s purchase of Russian crude oil 25% tariff imposed under the US’s so-called “reciprocal measures” , citing Indian duties on American products However, a large category of Indian exports , particularly electronics and select industrial goods , remains exempt from these tariffs. The punitive tariff regime emerged in the context of the Ukraine conflict , with Washington attempting to deter third-country energy trade with Russia through economic pressure rather than UN-backed sanctions. US Treasury Secretary’s Statement: “A Path to Take Them Off” On Saturday, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent publicly indicated that there is a “path” to remove the 25% tariffs imposed on India for buying Russian oil. Bessent described the sanctions as a “success” , stating: “We put 25% tariffs on India for b...

Background of the Case The Supreme Court is currently examining a batch of petitions challenging the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) June 24 notification directing a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar. The petitions were filed in 2025 and raise serious constitutional and statutory questions concerning voter deletion, citizenship determination, and the scope of the Election Commission’s powers. The matter was heard by a bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi , which sought to ascertain the true intent behind the SIR exercise. Supreme Court’s Core Question: Citizenship or Electoral Hygiene? During the hearing, the Supreme Court posed a pointed question to the ECI: “When you started this exercise, was citizenship in your mind or are you second-guessing it as a reason to begin this exercise?” The Court noted that the SIR notification primarily cited migration, urbanisation, and the need to update electoral entries as...

I. Introduction The prolonged standoff between Tamil Nadu Governor R N Ravi and the DMK-led government under Chief Minister M K Stalin has once again come into sharp focus following the Governor’s walkout from the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly . What appears on the surface as a disagreement over speeches and protocol raises deeper constitutional questions about the role of Governors in India’s federal structure , the limits of their discretion , and the authority of elected state governments . II. Background of the Conflict The conflict between the Governor and the state government has not emerged overnight. It has evolved over several years, manifesting through disputes over: The Governor’s Assembly address Delay or refusal to grant assent to Bills Public comments by the Governor on governance issues Alleged interference by the Union government via Raj Bhavans The friction became visibly public when Governor Ravi walked out of the Assembly , refusing to read the full government-ap...

Background of the Case The Election Commission of India (ECI) has informed the Supreme Court that its authority to verify a person’s citizenship during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls is strictly confined to determining eligibility for voter registration and does not extend to deportation or termination of citizenship. The submissions were made before a Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant , along with Justice Joymalya Bagchi , while hearing a batch of petitions challenging the legality of the SIR exercise undertaken by the ECI. What Is the Special Intensive Revision (SIR)? The Special Intensive Revision is an electoral exercise conducted periodically by the ECI to: Remove names of deceased voters Delete entries of persons who have permanently migrated Correct duplicate or erroneous voter records The petitioners allege that the current SIR exercise is being used as a backdoor mechanism to determine citizenship , thereby leading to potential disen...

Background of the Case The Supreme Court of India has agreed to examine a significant question concerning the interpretation of India’s citizenship law: whether children born in India to foreign nationals can be granted citizenship through a liberal interpretation of statutory provisions , particularly where denial would result in statelessness. The issue arose from a petition filed by Rachita Francis Xavier , an 18-year-old woman born and raised in Andhra Pradesh , whose parents were United States citizens at the time of her birth but were Overseas Citizens of India (OCI) cardholders residing lawfully in India. A Bench comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice KV Viswanathan issued notice to the Union Government on January 8 , and the matter is listed for further hearing on January 30 . Factual Matrix Rachita Francis Xavier was born in 2006 in Andhra Pradesh. Her parents were originally Indian citizens but later acquired US citizenship —her father in 2001 and her mother in 2005...

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has issued a stern warning to the Sukhvinder Singh Sukhu-led state government for failing to release essential judicial funds, threatening to initiate contempt proceedings if ₹10 crore is not deposited with the High Court by November 13, 2025 . Judicial Reprimand Over Financial Neglect A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice G.S. Sandhawalia and Justice Ranjan Sharma took serious note of the non-release of funds since September 2025 , observing that the continued financial neglect is “disrupting the normal functioning of the courts” . The Bench directed the Finance Secretary to personally appear before the Court with a bank draft of ₹10 crore payable to the Registrar General of the High Court . The order explicitly warned that failure to comply would result in the issuance of a contempt notice . The court stated: “Let the Secretary (Finance) come present in this Court along with necessary draft of ₹10 crore, in favour of the Registrar Ge...

The Madras High Court has directed Air India Limited to compensate a passenger with ₹35,000 after he suffered vomiting sensations and stomach pain from consuming a meal that contained a strand of hair . The ruling reinforces the principle that airlines are liable for negligence in services provided to passengers, even when outsourced to third-party caterers. Background of the Case The case arose when a passenger onboard an Air India flight consumed food supplied by the airline, only to find a hair follicle in the meal. The passenger experienced immediate nausea, vomiting, and stomach pain, and subsequently lodged a complaint upon landing. The trial court had earlier directed Air India to pay ₹1 lakh in damages for negligence. Air India appealed against this decision, arguing that the food was prepared by an external caterer — Ambassador Pallava Hotel — and that the airline itself could not be held directly responsible. Court’s Observations and Findings Justice P. B. Ba...

The ongoing constitutional debate on the powers of governors and the President regarding pending state bills took a sharp turn as the Union government argued before the Supreme Court that states have no legal right to approach the top court under Article 32 to allege violation of their rights due to delayed or withheld assent. This submission came during the hearing of President Droupadi Murmu’s Article 143 reference in May, which seeks clarity on the April 8 Supreme Court ruling that prescribed timelines for the President and governors to act on pending bills. Key Arguments from the Union Government Appearing before a five-judge Constitution Bench led by Chief Justice of India Bhushan R Gavai , Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta asserted that: States Cannot Claim Fundamental Rights The Constitution confers fundamental rights on citizens and individuals, not governments. A state is “the State” as defined under Article 12 and is a repository of duties , not a hold...

The Supreme Court of India, in a significant ruling, has reiterated that the gravity of a crime alone is insufficient to impose the death penalty unless the judicial process leading to the sentencing is scrupulously fair, transparent, and in strict compliance with constitutional safeguards . This judgment, delivered in the case involving death row convict Vasant Sampat Dupare , is a reminder of India’s strong constitutional framework that upholds life, dignity, and justice , even for those convicted of heinous crimes. The Fragility of the Death Penalty System A bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol, and Sandeep Mehta emphasized the irreversible nature of capital punishment and the risk of wrongful convictions. The judgment pointed out that investigations in India often rely on confessions extracted under opacity, contested recoveries, and forensic material of doubtful rigor , which when coupled with an overburdened trial system, increases the risk of errors. “A Constituti...

Introduction The Supreme Court of India has raised a crucial constitutional question: Can the apex court remain powerless if the President or state governors indefinitely withhold assent to bills passed by duly elected legislatures? The matter came up while examining President Droupadi Murmu’s Article 143 reference filed in May 2025, seeking clarity on the judiciary’s role in enforcing timelines for assent to legislation. This debate strikes at the heart of India’s separation of powers and federal structure , questioning whether constitutional discretion vested in high offices should be judicially regulated when used to indefinitely stall governance. Background: The Tamil Nadu Bills Case This presidential reference stems from the Supreme Court’s April 8, 2025 judgment concerning Tamil Nadu Governor R.N. Ravi’s prolonged inaction over several state bills. The Court invoked Article 142 to deem 10 Tamil Nadu bills as assented to , holding that the governor’s delay was “ille...