LawLoveLegal

The Supreme Court of India has commenced the final hearing in the bail petitions filed by student activists Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, and Gulfisha Fatima , who are accused in the larger conspiracy case related to the 2020 Northeast Delhi riots . A bench comprising Justices Aravind Kumar and NV Anjaria began proceedings on Friday, hearing detailed arguments presented by senior advocates Kapil Sibal , Abhishek Manu Singhvi , and Siddharth Dave , representing the accused. The matter is scheduled for further hearing on November 3 . Background: The Delhi Riots and the Larger Conspiracy Case The Delhi riots of February 2020 erupted amid nationwide protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens (NRC) . The violence resulted in 53 deaths and over 700 injuries , primarily in the northeast region of Delhi . The prosecution alleges that the riots were not spontaneous but part of a pre-planned conspiracy to incite communal unrest and dest...

Introduction: The Case for Judicial Parity The Supreme Court of India has initiated hearings on one of the most significant reform issues concerning the district judiciary —the disparity in promotions between judges recruited as Civil Judges and those appointed as Direct District Judges . A five-judge Constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Bhushan R. Gavai , along with Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, K. Vinod Chandran, and Joymalya Bagchi , is examining this anomaly, which has long been a structural imbalance in the judicial hierarchy. The issue arises from the fact that civil judges , despite decades of service, often do not reach the higher positions such as Principal District Judge (PDJ) or High Court Judge , whereas direct recruits progress faster in rank and remuneration. The Problem: Inequality in Judicial Promotions The Court highlighted the lack of equal opportunity within the judicial system, particularly in the career progression of judicial ...

1. Background of the Case The Supreme Court of India, led by Chief Justice Bhushan R. Gavai, has severely criticised the Maharashtra Government for its poor record in carrying out compensatory afforestation in the Aarey region. The issue came up during the hearing of an application filed by the Mumbai Metro Rail Corporation Limited (MMRCL) seeking permission to cut trees for the Goregaon–Mulund Link Road (GMLR) project, a tunnel connecting Filmcity in Goregaon with Khindipada in Mulund. An inspection report presented by Anitta Patil , Director of Sanjay Gandhi National Park (SGNP) , revealed that out of 20,460 saplings planted as compensatory afforestation, only 50% survived . Most surviving trees were poorly maintained, with stunted growth, low height, and little ecological recovery due to lack of maintenance, poor soil conditions, water scarcity, and grazing . 2. Supreme Court’s Observations The bench comprising CJI Bhushan R. Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran expres...

Introduction: A Novel Step Toward Linguistic Precision in Justice In a landmark administrative reform, the Supreme Court of India has launched an unprecedented initiative to address one of the judiciary’s long-standing challenges — the poor quality of English translations of judicial records originally written in Indian languages . Recognising the direct impact of inaccurate translations on the dispensation of justice, the apex court has decided to engage practising lawyers as translators . This move seeks to combine legal acumen with linguistic accuracy , ensuring that translations of pleadings, judgments, and other documents preserve the “true meaning and spirit” of the original records. Background: The Problem of Inaccurate Judicial Translations The problem of inaccurate translations has persisted for decades in the Indian judicial system. Many trial court records, particularly from lower courts in states where proceedings are conducted in regional languages, reach the Supreme...

Introduction: The Apex Court Steps In The Supreme Court of India has raised a critical question — can online gaming and betting platforms be completely banned in India? This came after a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by the Centre for Accountability and Systemic Change (CASC) alleged that several betting websites and gambling platforms continue to operate under the garb of “e-sports” or “social gaming.” The bench, comprising Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K.V. Viswanathan , directed the Union Government to assist the court in determining the legality and practicality of a nationwide ban on online gaming. Background of the Case The PIL , filed by advocate Vishal Arun Mishra on behalf of CASC, calls for a complete prohibition of online betting and gambling. It further seeks clarity on the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025 , which was enacted to regulate the online gaming ecosystem. The court asked CASC to share its entire case file with V.C....

Introduction: Supreme Court Highlights Crisis in Execution of Decrees In a significant observation highlighting one of the most persistent issues in India’s justice delivery system, the Supreme Court of India has expressed deep concern over the massive pendency of execution petitions across the country. The apex court lamented that over 8.82 lakh execution petitions remain pending in district courts nationwide — a figure that renders judicial decrees “meaningless” and amounts to a “travesty of justice.” An execution petition is a plea filed by a decree-holder seeking enforcement of a judgment — such as recovery of money, transfer of property, or ensuring compliance with a court order. Despite judgments being delivered, the prolonged enforcement process often denies effective relief to the litigant. Background: Pendency and Supreme Court Monitoring The bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Pankaj Mithal made these remarks while monitoring compliance with its March 6, 2025 dire...

The Supreme Court of India has delivered a landmark judgment settling a long-standing ambiguity in property law concerning minors’ rights over property sales executed by their guardians without prior court approval. The decision, pronounced by a bench comprising Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice PB Varale , establishes that minors, upon attaining majority, are not required to move the court to cancel such transactions — repudiation through their actions or conduct is sufficient under the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 . Case Background: The Dispute Over Two Plots in Karnataka The judgment arose from an appeal filed by KS Shivappa , who purchased two adjoining plots in Davanagere, Karnataka, from two brothers after they attained majority. These plots were originally purchased in 1971 by their father and natural guardian, Rudrappa , in the names of his minor sons. Soon after, Rudrappa sold both plots without obtaining the mandatory court permission required under Section 8(...

Supreme Court Restores Murder Conviction After 27 Years In a significant ruling reaffirming the importance of accountability in serious criminal offences, the Supreme Court of India has cautioned against adopting a “pedantic” or excessively rigid interpretation of the burden of proof principle in criminal jurisprudence. The apex court stressed that overemphasis on procedural rigidity could allow offenders in grave crimes to escape justice, thereby making “society the casualty.” The judgment came in a case involving the murder of a daughter-in-law, Pushpa , in Madhya Pradesh 27 years ago. The bench, comprising Justices Sanjay Kumar and Alok Aradhe , restored the conviction of the accused, Janved Singh , reversing the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s 2010 acquittal . Case Background: Dowry Death Disguised as Electrocution Pushpa, who was married to Mahesh Singh, was found dead in her home in December 1997 . Her father-in-law, Janved, reported to police that she had died of electrocuti...

The ongoing debate over Jammu & Kashmir’s restoration of statehood has taken a significant turn as Chief Minister Omar Abdullah announced that he is exploring the possibility of becoming a party to the petitions pending before the Supreme Court . The top court is currently hearing multiple pleas seeking the reinstatement of Jammu and Kashmir’s statehood, which was revoked on August 5, 2019 , following the abrogation of Article 370 and the bifurcation of the state into two Union Territories (J&K and Ladakh) . Supreme Court Proceedings on Statehood Restoration On October 10, 2025 , the Supreme Court of India granted the Centre four weeks to file its response in the ongoing hearings related to the restoration of Jammu and Kashmir’s statehood. The petitions argue that the prolonged Union Territory status undermines federalism , representative democracy , and constitutional autonomy once guaranteed under Article 370 and Article 35A of the Constitution. Chief Minister Oma...

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has approached the Supreme Court of India , challenging the Bombay High Court’s order that declared the arrest of former Vasai Virar City Municipal Corporation (VVCMC) chief Anilkumar Pawar as illegal and ordered his immediate release. The ED, through a Special Leave Petition (SLP) , has also sought a stay on the High Court’s order pending final adjudication. The plea is expected to be heard on Friday before the Supreme Court bench. High Court’s Findings: Arrest Declared Illegal and Arbitrary In a strongly worded order, the Bombay High Court bench comprising Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam Ankhad criticised the ED’s actions, terming the arrest “arbitrary, illegal and unsupported by evidence.” The court observed that the arrest violated Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002 , as well as Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India , which guarantee equality before law, freedom of mov...

The Supreme Court of India has reignited the debate around capital punishment methods, questioning whether the colonial-era practice of death by hanging should continue to be India’s sole means of execution. On October 9, 2025 , a bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta suggested that the Union Government should consider giving death row convicts the option to choose between hanging and lethal injection , observing that “methods of execution across the world have undergone significant change” since India codified hanging into law. The Case and the Challenge The issue arises from a petition filed by advocate Rishi Malhotra , challenging the constitutional validity of Section 354(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , which mandated that a person sentenced to death “shall be hanged by the neck till he is dead.” This provision has now been replaced by Section 393(5) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 , but the method of hangin...