Constitutional Law

In May 2026, the Supreme Court of India made significant observations regarding the protection of homebuyers in stalled real estate projects. The Court emphasised the need to find a pathway for completion of such projects while safeguarding the rights of allottees who have invested their savings. With thousands of housing projects stalled across the country, particularly in the National Capital Region and other metropolitan areas, the judicial intervention aims to balance the

The Supreme Court of India's administrative decision to cancel the Advocate-on-Record (AoR) examination for 2026 has drawn legal challenge from affected advocates. A petition was mentioned before a Bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi in May 2026, with Senior Advocate Dama Seshadri Naidu appearing for the petitioners. The AoR certification is a mandatory prerequisite for advocates seeking the right to file cases directly before the Suprem

In Lucknow Public School v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2026 SCC OnLine SC 723), the Supreme Court of India held that once a student is allotted to a school by state education authorities through the centralised admission process, the school is bound to admit the student and cannot refuse admission on any ground not recognised by law. The judgment reinforces the right to education guaranteed under Article 21A of the Constitution and the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Ed

On 4 May 2026, the Supreme Court of India declined to interfere with a National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) order that reinstated the original Committee of Creditors (CoC) in the insolvency proceedings of Think and Learn Private Limited (TLPL), the parent company of education technology platform Byju's. The Court dismissed the special leave petition filed by Byju Raveendran, the founder and former CEO of the company, who had challenged the reconstitution of the CoC

In Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India (2026 SCC OnLine SC 741), the Supreme Court of India addressed the limits of judicial power in relation to hate speech and communal disharmony. The Court held that the creation of criminal offences and the prescription of punishments are functions that lie exclusively within the legislative domain, and that the judiciary cannot create new offences or expand criminal liability through judicial directions. The judgment was delivered i

In Reliance Eminent Trading and Commercial Private Limited v. Delhi Development Authority (2026 INSC 436), the Supreme Court of India issued comprehensive guidelines on the exercise of power to pass summary judgment under Order XIII-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 in commercial suits. The Court held that judges must grasp the nettle and decide summary judgment applications when faced with neat points of law or construction, rather than routinely relegating matters to f

In State Bank of India and Others v. Doha Bank Q.P.S.C. (2026 INSC 423), decided on 28 April 2026, the Supreme Court of India held that liabilities arising from corporate guarantees squarely fall within the definition of financial debt under Section 5(8) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The judgment, delivered by Justices PS Narasimha and Alok Aradhe, set aside concurrent orders of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and the National Company Law Appellate Tri

In The Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu and Others v. S. Raja and Others (2026 INSC 407), decided on 22 April 2026, the Supreme Court of India delivered a significant judgment reinforcing the protection of third-party property rights against the misuse of status quo orders by government authorities. The case involved a protracted land dispute in Thazhambur, Chennai, where homebuyers who had purchased plots in good faith found their properties frozen by a government-obtaine

The Supreme Court of India has strengthened the rights of convicted persons under Article 21 of the Constitution by holding that prolonged delay in hearing an appeal against conviction can, in appropriate cases, justify the suspension of sentence and grant of bail pending appeal. The 2026 ruling addresses a systemic problem in the Indian criminal justice system: appeals against conviction often take years or even decades to be heard, during which the convicted person remains

The Supreme Court of India has reinforced the principle that criminal proceedings cannot be quashed merely because a civil court has ruled in favour of the accused on a related issue. In a 2026 judgment, the Court restored a criminal trial in a family property dispute where the accused had sought to terminate the prosecution on the ground that a civil court had already upheld the validity of the disputed documents. The ruling reaffirms the well-established legal position that

In Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprises Ltd. v. B. Gurappa Naidu (2026 INSC 434), the Supreme Court of India delivered a firm restatement of the boundaries of High Court supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution. The bench of Justices J.K. Maheshwari and Atul S. Chandurkar held that High Courts cannot use their supervisory powers to act as appellate courts, re-appreciate evidence, or substitute their own view for a plausible finding reached by a subo

In Nagreeka Indcon Products Ltd. v. Cargocare Logistics, the Supreme Court of India addressed a question that recurs frequently in commercial arbitration: does the word "can" in an arbitration clause create a binding obligation to arbitrate, or does it merely confer a permissive option? The Court held that "can" is not equivalent to "shall" and that a clause using permissive language does not constitute a mandatory arbitration agreement. This ruling has significant implicatio

In a recent order passed in April 2026, the Bombay High Court highlighted a severe systemic problem in the disposal of motor accident and railway compensation appeals. Justice Jitendra Jain, while dismissing an appeal filed by The Oriental Insurance Company Limited against a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) award of Rs 74,422, observed that the appeal had waited 15 years just to come up for admission. The Court directed that a copy of the order be sent to the Ministry of

On April 21, 2026, the Delhi High Court held YouTuber Gulshan Pahuja guilty of criminal contempt of court for publishing videos containing scandalous allegations against judicial officers. The proceedings were initiated suo motu after judicial officers flagged objectionable content on Pahuja's YouTube channel titled Fight 4 Judicial Reforms. The videos featured interviews with advocates, displayed banners naming specific judges alongside sensational captions, and made baseles

The Election Commission of India (ECI) derives its authority from Article 324 of the Constitution, which vests in it the superintendence, direction, and control of all elections to Parliament, state legislatures, and the offices of President and Vice President. This constitutional mandate gives the ECI sweeping powers that extend well beyond merely conducting polls. From deploying central armed police forces across state boundaries to enforcing the Model Code of Conduct, the

The Supreme Court of India has reiterated a critical principle affecting millions of government employees: appointments subject to 'until further orders' do not confer an automatic right to complete a full tenure. This landmark observation, made on April 28, 2026, clarifies the legal distinction between fixed-term appointments and conditional appointments, with profound implications for job security and employee rights. Understanding Fixed-Term vs. Conditional Appointments T

In January 2026, the Karnataka High Court lifted the blanket ban on bike taxis, holding that motorcycles used as transport vehicles cannot be denied permits on a categorical basis. The state has since appealed to the Supreme Court.

In a landmark order passed on April 25, 2026, the Madras High Court directed the Tamil Nadu Government to formulate a comprehensive rehabilitation scheme for transgender persons at the taluk level. The direction came in V. Sarathkumar v. The State, CrlOPMD No. 5185 of 2026, while hearing an anticipatory bail application connected to the circulation of a video showing the self-immolation of a transgender person near a police station in Srivilliputhur. The Court observed that t

A significant procedural judgment from the Supreme Court has refined how courts should approach applications to amend pleadings under Order VI Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code. The Court held that when a party seeks to amend its plaint or written statement to introduce a new plea or argument, the court deciding the amendment application cannot examine the merits or correctness of the proposed plea. Instead, courts must assess whether allowing the amendment would cause irre

The Supreme Court's decision in Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu v. S Raja (2026 INSC 407), delivered on April 22, 2026, addresses a critical intersection of property law: how courts should treat third-party rights acquired during the pendency of litigation when status quo orders are in place. This judgment clarifies when courts can and cannot disturb completed transactions, particularly when bona fide purchasers are involved. Understanding this ruling is essential for sta