Constitutional Law

On April 17, 2026, the Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill 2026 fell 54 votes short of passage in the Lok Sabha. The Bill received 298 affirmative votes but required 352 votes for a two-thirds majority. This defeat represents a significant political setback and raises important questions about political consensus on constitutional reform. Understanding why the Bill failed illuminates India's constitutional amendment process, federalism tensions, and parliamentary opposition f

In July 2025, the Supreme Court delivered a historic judgment affirming that tribal women and their legal heirs are entitled to equal shares in ancestral property, rejecting the argument that tribal customs could exclude women from inheritance. In Ram Charan v. Sukhram, justices Sanjay Karol and Joymalya Bagchi held that customary law permitting gender-based exclusion from property violates the Constitution's guarantee of equality. This judgment reshapes property succession r

On 30 April 2025, a five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court delivered a landmark judgment clarifying the scope of judicial power under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. In a 4:1 majority decision, the Court held that appellate courts have only limited power to modify arbitral awards, rejecting the broader view that courts could freely amend awards. This judgment fundamentally reshapes arbitration law in India and directly impacts parties who

In the landmark case of Harish Rana v Union of India and Others, decided on March 11, 2026, the Supreme Court significantly expanded patient autonomy in end-of-life medical decision-making. The judgment permits withdrawal of life support treatments in cases of persistent vegetative state and recognizes the right of individuals to control end-of-life medical decisions even when they cannot communicate their wishes. This ruling expands the legal scope of passive euthanasia in I

On April 17, 2026, the Supreme Court held that an arbitration clause employing the word 'can' does not constitute a binding arbitration agreement. The ruling clarifies a longstanding ambiguity in commercial contract interpretation: what language is necessary to create a mandatory obligation to arbitrate disputes? This judgment has direct implications for thousands of commercial contracts that use ambiguous or discretionary language in arbitration clauses and for dispute resol

In April 2026, the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Surya Kant, issued notices on a Public Interest Litigation seeking to extend India's fundamental right to free and compulsory education to children aged 3 to 6 years. Currently, Article 21A of the Constitution guarantees free and compulsory education only to children aged 6 to 14. This PIL challenges that age restriction and seeks constitutional recognition of pre-primary education as a foundational right. If successful,

The Supreme Court of India on April 16, 2026, issued a landmark Standard Operating Procedure addressing one of the criminal justice system's most persistent problems: delays in legal aid appeals. The SOP prescribes binding timelines for every stage of the legal aid appeal process, from judgment communication to record transmission to filing. It also mandates the creation of a unified digital platform for real-time monitoring of appeals. This represents a significant step towa

The Supreme Court has articulated comprehensive alimony principles in 2026 judgments establishing that monthly maintenance represents a more equitable approach than lump sum alimony in divorce proceedings. The Court exercises discretionary jurisdiction to replace one-time lump sum awards with periodic monthly maintenance ensuring long-term financial security. This framework balances the paying spouse's financial capacity with the recipient's actual ongoing needs. The approach

On 7 April 2026, India's Supreme Court delivered a landmark judgment establishing menstrual hygiene as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution. This ruling compels all schools across India to provide comprehensive menstrual hygiene facilities and support systems. The judgment represents a significant step in recognizing the constitutional dimensions of menstruating individuals' dignity and access to education without disruption. Constitutional Basis for Mens

In a landmark ruling affirmed multiple times, India's Supreme Court has recognized that the right to privacy and the right to reputation are both fundamental rights protected under Article 21 of the Constitution. However, these rights must be balanced against the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19. Understanding this balance is essential in an age of online speech, social media, and mass communication. Privacy as a Constitutional Right In

The Supreme Court of India has held that prolonged pre-trial incarceration under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) violates the right to speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Court established that bail can be granted in cases where the trial shows no realistic prospect of early commencement. This judgment significantly strengthens procedural protections for accused persons in money laundering cases, countering a pattern of indefinite detention.

In March 2026, the Supreme Court of India delivered landmark judgments in two cases, Pooja Pal (2026 INSC 281) and Yogendra Kumar Singh (2026 INSC 282), both establishing a critical precedent for women officers in the armed forces seeking permanent commission. The Court held that Annual Confidential Reports written under conditions of institutional exclusion cannot fairly determine suitability for Permanent Commission. This ruling affects thousands of serving women officers a

The Supreme Court of India, in a significant ruling delivered in March 2026, reaffirmed and clarified the constitutional and statutory standards governing the dismissal of government servants. The judgment addresses the scope of disciplinary authority, the procedural safeguards required under Article 311 of the Constitution, and the extent to which courts may interfere with departmental decisions. The ruling has important implications for central and state government employee

The Supreme Court of India issued a landmark ruling in early 2026 reinforcing the rights of persons with disabilities in public employment and appointments. The judgment interprets the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act 2016 in the context of government recruitment, examinations, and reasonable accommodation obligations. It addresses long-standing grievances about inadequate reservation implementation, discriminatory eligibility criteria, and the failure of public employ

The Supreme Court of India has progressively expanded the scope of Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, to encompass a widening range of rights essential to a dignified existence. The courts have begun to recognise that access to digital services, including internet connectivity and online government platforms, is not a mere convenience but a component of the right to life in a society where essential services and civic part