Tag: Supreme Court

Women detained after being declared foreigners argue that tribunals disregarded substantial evidence and relied on minor inconsistencies to reject their citizenship claims

From citizenship and reservation to encounter accountability, privacy, environmental protection and minority rights, the Court's most contentious judgments of 2025 reveal an increasing preference for institutional deference and procedural compliance over substantive constitutional justice

By declining contempt proceedings, denying guidelines, and acquitting the accused without inquiry, the Court in Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay undoes what it spent years building

The Supreme Court’s May 27, 2026 verdict upholding the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) settles the legal question of constitutional authority but leaves many an unresolved concern on absence of due process and independent functioning by the ECI, the arbitrary abuse of process and access: questions of unreasonable and unchecked mass deletions etc.

The SC has upheld the ECI’s power to conduct SIR expressly stating that the contested process does not violate either election law nor rules; Court however directs that cases of voter exclusion should be provided routes and methods of adjudication

Union tells Court those sent to Bangladesh will be brought back and their citizenship claims examined in India; clarifies decision is confined to the exceptional facts of the case

Court says K.A. Najeeb cannot be reduced either to a “mathematical formula” mandating bail solely due to delay or to a hollow constitutional safeguard overridden entirely by Section 43D(5) of the UAPA

Part II turns its attention to Western India: Mumbai, the rest of Maharashtra, and the long shadow of the Western Ghats where from sound coastal-zone jurisprudence, the High Court has been asked to, and has, permitted successive ‘infrastructure’ projects that have touched coasts, mangroves and the urban forest.

Granting bail to a J&K man jailed for nearly six years in a narco-terror case, the Supreme Court cited abysmally low UAPA conviction rates, and warned that prolonged incarceration under anti-terror laws cannot override Article 21 protections

Acting on suo-moto proceedings triggered by media reports, the Court condemns “degrading” bail conditions imposed on Dalit and Adivasi accused, warns against judicial overreach, and reinforces that liberty cannot be conditioned on humiliation or caste-based labour