This article critiques the functioning of the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and the role of 'media trials' in high-profile cases. It highlights instances where the judiciary has called out the ED for exceeding its mandate and violating legal principles, such as conducting searches without credible information or a predicate offence. The article argues that the ED's sweeping powers under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), including the difficulty of obtaining bail, are increasingly being used as tools of political intimidation. It calls for urgent constitutional guardrails to prevent investigative authorities from becoming instruments of arbitrary state power.
- The PMLA requires a 'predicate offence' (scheduled offence) that generates proceeds of crime before money laundering charges can be applied.
- Section 50 of the PMLA allows the ED to summon individuals and record statements under oath, which can be used as evidence.
- The 'reverse burden of proof' under PMLA makes it exceptionally difficult for accused individuals to secure bail compared to regular criminal law.
Child trafficking remains a critical issue in India, with over 53,000 children rescued between 2024 and 2025. The Supreme Court, in the K. P. Kiran Kumar case, issued strict guidelines to prevent trafficking, linking it to the fundamental right to life under the Constitution. The article examines the legal framework, including the Palermo Protocol and Section 143 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023, which provides a broad definition of exploitation. Despite these laws, the conviction rate remains low at 4.8%. The author emphasizes the need for socio-economic interventions for marginalized communities and enhanced Union-State cooperation, as law and order are state subjects while trafficking is often a cross-border crime.
- The Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023, Section 143, defines trafficking to include recruitment, transportation, and receipt of persons for exploitation.
- Articles 23 and 24 of the Indian Constitution provide fundamental protections against human trafficking and hazardous child labor.
- The conviction rate for trafficking offenses in India was only 4.8% between 2018 and 2022, highlighting a major gap in law enforcement.
A two-judge Bench of the Supreme Court delivered a split verdict on the constitutional validity of Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption (PC) Act, 1988. This section mandates prior government sanction before initiating an inquiry or investigation against a public servant for decisions made in their official capacity. Justice B.V. Nagarathna struck down the section, arguing it violates Article 14 by creating a protected class and hindering the fight against corruption. Conversely, Justice K.V. Viswanathan upheld the provision, suggesting that an independent body like the Lokpal, rather than the government, should grant such sanctions to maintain neutrality. The case has been referred to a larger Bench to resolve the core disagreement.
- Section 17A of the PC Act requires prior approval from the government before investigating public servants for official acts.
- Justice Nagarathna argued that the provision creates an impermissible barrier to investigation and fosters a 'policy bias' within institutions.
- Justice Viswanathan suggested that the Lokpal could act as an independent authority to grant sanctions, balancing accountability with protection from frivolous litigation.
Nearly six years after the 2019 amendments to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the Union government is yet to constitute the Arbitration Council of India (ACI). The ACI was envisioned as a regulatory body to promote institutional arbitration and grade arbitral institutions. However, concerns regarding its independence persist, as the council would comprise members nominated by the executive. The draft Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Bill, 2024, seeks to address these issues by introducing structural reforms, redefining 'arbitral institutions,' and recalibrating the role of courts in granting interim relief to reduce judicial intervention and curb delays in the arbitration process.
- The ACI was proposed by the Justice B.N. Srikrishna Committee to make India a hub for international arbitration.
- Critics argue that government dominance in the ACI's composition could compromise its institutional impartiality.
- The 2024 draft Bill aims to limit court intervention by requiring arbitration to commence within 90 days of interim relief.
Telangana Assembly Speaker Gaddam Prasad Kumar has dismissed disqualification petitions against seven out of ten Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) legislators. These MLAs were accused by the BRS of switching allegiance to the ruling Congress party following the 2023 Assembly elections. The Speaker's decision comes after the Supreme Court issued a contempt notice to him in November 2025 for failing to comply with directives to decide on the disqualification pleas expeditiously. The BRS has criticized the move, alleging it makes a mockery of the Tenth Schedule and the constitutional principles intended to prevent political defection.
- The Tenth Schedule of the Indian Constitution (Anti-Defection Law) gives the Speaker the power to disqualify members for defection.
- The Supreme Court has previously emphasized that Speakers must decide on disqualification petitions within a reasonable timeframe.
- Disqualification can occur if a member voluntarily gives up party membership or votes against party directions.
The Supreme Court dismissed a petition by Justice Yashwant Varma challenging the Lok Sabha Speaker's decision to constitute an inquiry committee for his removal. The court emphasized that constitutional safeguards for judges should not paralyze the removal process. Justice Varma argued that since removal notices were submitted in both Houses on the same day, a joint committee was required under Section 3(2) of the Judges (Inquiry) Act. However, the Bench ruled that because the Rajya Sabha Deputy Chairman rejected the notice while the Lok Sabha Speaker admitted it, the Speaker acted within his legal autonomy to proceed independently.
- The Supreme Court clarified that the rejection of a removal motion in one House does not render the other House incompetent to proceed.
- Section 3(2) of the Judges (Inquiry) Act regarding joint committees applies only if notices are admitted in both Houses.
- The judiciary must balance the protection of judges with the effective functioning of constitutional removal mechanisms.
The Kuki-Zo Council (KZC) has reiterated its demand for a separate Union Territory with a legislature for the Kuki-Zo tribes in Manipur. In a memorandum to Union Home Minister Amit Shah, the council alleged that the state government was complicit in atrocities against their community during the ongoing ethnic conflict. The KZC also warned against the resettlement of Meitei internally displaced persons (IDPs) in 'buffer zones' separating the two communities, calling it a provocative attempt that could reignite violence. They seek urgent constitutional and political intervention by the Centre for lasting peace.
- The ethnic conflict in Manipur has resulted in over 250 deaths and the displacement of 40,000 people since May 2023.
- Buffer zones are narrow strips of land separating Meitei-dominated valleys from Kuki-Zo inhabited hills.
- The KZC claims that Kuki-Zo people have been unable to access the Imphal Valley for nearly three years, leading to hardships.
A two-judge bench of the Supreme Court delivered a split verdict on the constitutionality of Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. This section mandates prior government sanction before investigating a public servant for decisions made in their official capacity. Justice B.V. Nagarathna declared the provision unconstitutional, while Justice K.V. Viswanathan upheld it, arguing it protects honest officers from frivolous complaints and 'policy paralysis.' The case will now be referred to a larger three-judge bench for a final decision on balancing public probity with officer protection.
- Section 17A was introduced to provide a filter against malicious prosecution of public servants for official decisions.
- Justice Nagarathna argued that the provision is unconstitutional as it creates an arbitrary distinction between classes of public servants.
- Justice Viswanathan suggested that independent bodies like Lokpal should handle the grant of sanction to ensure impartiality.
The Kerala Assembly passed the Malayalam Language Bill, 2025, aiming to make Malayalam the official language for all administrative, judicial, and educational purposes in the state. The Bill proposes Malayalam as the first language in schools and its use in sectors from IT to the judiciary. However, the Karnataka government opposes the Bill, claiming it violates the rights of linguistic minorities, specifically Tamil and Kannada speakers in border districts like Kasaragod. Kerala maintains the Bill includes protections for these minorities, allowing correspondence in their mother tongues in notified areas and exempting certain students from examinations.
- The Bill mandates Malayalam as the first language in all government and aided schools up to Class 10.
- It seeks to replace the existing Official Languages Act of 1963 to advance the enrichment of the language.
- Karnataka argues the Bill is unconstitutional and violates the rights of Kannada-speaking linguistic minorities.
The Supreme Court questioned the Election Commission (EC) regarding the authority of Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) to strike individuals off electoral rolls based on citizenship inquiries. During a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise, nearly 6.5 crore names were deleted. The Court raised concerns whether an ERO's finding could trigger a central government investigation into an individual's right to remain in India. The EC argued that citizenship is a cornerstone of the electoral process and that excluded individuals have a right to appeal, maintaining that verifying citizenship is essential for maintaining valid electoral rolls.
- The Supreme Court is examining if EROs can effectively strip the 'colour of citizenship' before a final central government decision.
- Article 326 and the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960 are central to the EC's claim of authority for these deletions.
- Nearly 6.5 crore names were deleted in the second phase of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) process across several states.
A two-judge bench of the Supreme Court delivered a split verdict on the constitutionality of Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. This provision requires prior government approval before investigating public servants for official decisions. Justice B.V. Nagarathna declared the provision unconstitutional, viewing it as a barrier to transparency. Conversely, Justice K.V. Viswanathan argued it is necessary to protect honest officers from frivolous complaints and 'policy paralysis.' He suggested that an independent authority like the Lokpal should handle the grant of sanction. The case has been referred to a larger three-judge bench for final determination.
- Section 17A was introduced to prevent the harassment of public servants for bona fide official decisions.
- Justice Nagarathna argued that the provision violates the principle of equality before the law.
- Justice Viswanathan emphasized that the Lokpal has the authority to inquire into allegations even against the Prime Minister.
The Supreme Court is examining whether Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) can strike individuals off electoral rolls based on citizenship inquiries before a final decision by the Central government. The bench, including Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi, questioned if an ERO's finding could trigger investigations into an individual's right to remain in India. The Election Commission argues that Article 326, the Representation of the People Act, and the Registration of Electors Rules 1960 empower them to conduct such inquiries to ensure only citizens are on the rolls. The court is concerned about the potential for these findings to lead to deportation without due process.
- EROs are conducting inquisitorial enquiries into citizenship during Special Intensive Revisions (SIR).
- The Supreme Court is concerned that removing a voter's name based on citizenship doubts might strip them of rights before a final government decision.
- The Election Commission maintains that citizenship is a cornerstone of the electoral process and non-citizens are not entitled to vote.
The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025, introduced in the Lok Sabha, aims to transform India's higher education by replacing fragmented oversight with a coordinated, transparent system. Aligned with NEP 2020, the Bill proposes a 'light but tight' framework, granting autonomy to well-performing institutions while maintaining high standards. It creates an apex body with three separate councils for regulation, accreditation, and standards to reduce conflicts of interest. By repealing the UGC, AICTE, and NCTE Acts, the Bill seeks to unify the regulatory architecture, promote international credibility, and foster a culture of public accountability through technology-enabled disclosures.
- The Bill aims to replace the University Grants Commission (UGC), AICTE, and NCTE with a single regulatory framework.
- It establishes the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan as an apex body with distinct councils for regulation, accreditation, and standards.
- The 'light but tight' approach focuses on transparency and standards while minimizing procedural burdens on institutions.
There is a growing legal and social debate regarding the age of consent in India, currently set at 18 years under the POCSO Act (2012). Critics argue that the rigid age limit criminalizes consensual adolescent relationships, often weaponized by families to punish young couples. While the Law Commission (2023) advised against lowering the age to 16, it recommended 'guided judicial discretion' for sentencing in cases involving minors aged 16-18. Recent High Court and Supreme Court judgments have highlighted the need to distinguish between predatory abuse and 'young love' to protect adolescent autonomy.
- The POCSO Act applies strict liability, making a minor's consent legally irrelevant if they are under 18.
- The Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013, raised the age of consent from 16 to 18 to align with POCSO.
- The Law Commission's 283rd Report (2023) opposed lowering the age but suggested judicial discretion in sentencing.
The upcoming delimitation exercise, expected after the 2028 Census, poses a significant challenge to India's federal balance. Southern states, which successfully implemented population control and health reforms, fear a reduction in their Lok Sabha seat share compared to northern states with higher population growth. The 84th Constitutional Amendment (2001) froze seat numbers until 2026. Proposed solutions include increasing the total number of Lok Sabha seats to approximately 866 or adopting a 'Digressive Proportionality' principle, similar to the European Parliament, to ensure fair representation without penalizing states for demographic progress.
- Delimitation based strictly on population could reduce the relative political and fiscal power of southern states.
- The 84th Constitutional Amendment Act (2001) extended the freeze on Lok Sabha seats until the first census after 2026.
- The Finance Commission currently uses population size as a 15% weight for tax revenue redistribution.
Recent data reveals a significant milestone in 2025 where fast-track special courts cleared more child sexual offence cases than registered, achieving a 109% disposal rate. However, this surge in disposals has not led to higher conviction rates; instead, convictions fell from 35% in 2019 to 29% in 2023. The analysis suggests that rapid case processing might lead to weaker investigations and incomplete forensic reports. The article emphasizes that children in POCSO cases require comprehensive support systems, including trained professionals and sensitive legal procedures, rather than just speedy trials.
- Fast-track special courts achieved a record 109% disposal rate in 2025, clearing 87,754 cases.
- Despite faster disposals, the national average conviction rate dropped to 29% by 2023.
- The POCSO Act (2012) was designed to provide child-friendly procedures and time-bound trials.
The Supreme Court recently denied bail to activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in the 2020 Delhi riots conspiracy case, citing the stringent provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). The court established a 'hierarchy of roles,' distinguishing 'ideological drivers' from 'local-level facilitators.' Under Section 43D(5) of the UAPA, bail is significantly harder to obtain compared to ordinary criminal law, as the court must be satisfied that the accusations are prima facie true. The judgment also expanded the reading of 'terrorist acts' under Section 15 to include road blockades (chakka jams) intended to disrupt essential services or threaten national security.
- Section 43D(5) of the UAPA creates a high threshold for bail, departing from the general principle of 'bail, not jail' found in ordinary criminal law.
- The court distinguished between 'ideological drivers' who devised strategies and 'derivative' participants who provided logistical support for protests.
- Section 15 of the UAPA defines 'terrorist acts' broadly, including actions intended to threaten the unity, integrity, or security of India.
The Telangana Drug Control Administration (DCA) has issued a stop-use notice for Almont-Kid Syrup, a medication for children's allergy symptoms, after testing revealed contamination with toxic ethylene glycol (EG). The Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation (CDSCO) confirmed the presence of the toxin in a specific batch (AL-24002) manufactured by Tridus Remedies in Bihar. Ethylene glycol is a dangerous industrial solvent that can cause severe health issues or death if ingested. The DCA has directed all healthcare providers and retailers to freeze stocks and advised the public to immediately stop using the product to prevent further health risks.
- Almont-Kid Syrup was found contaminated with ethylene glycol, a toxic chemical often used in industrial applications like antifreeze.
- The contamination was identified by the Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation (CDSCO), East Zone, Kolkata.
- The affected batch (AL-24002) was manufactured by Tridus Remedies based in Vaishali, Bihar, with a manufacturing date of January 2025.
The Tamil Nadu government has implemented the Tamil Nadu Assured Pension Scheme (TAPS) effective January 1, 2026. This scheme targets state government employees who entered service on or after January 1, 2003, and were previously under the Contributory Pension Scheme (CPS). Under TAPS, retirees are guaranteed a pension equal to 50% of their last-drawn basic pay and dearness allowance. Employees contribute 10% of their basic pay, while the government covers the remaining funding. The scheme also includes provisions for family pensions (60% of the pensioner's amount) and gratuity up to ₹25 lakh based on service tenure.
- TAPS provides an assured pension of 50% of the last-drawn basic pay plus dearness allowance for eligible retirees.
- It is mandatory for employees entering service from January 1, 2026, while existing CPS employees have an option to switch at retirement.
- Employees contribute 10% of their basic pay to the pension fund, with the government bearing the additional fund requirements.
Attorney-General R. Venkataramani has stated that the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, 2023, does not 'dilute' the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005. While civil society groups argue that amendments to Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act create a total exemption for personal information, the A-G points to Section 8(2) of the RTI Act. This section mandates the disclosure of exempted information if the public interest outweighs the harm. The DPDP Act aims to provide a legal framework to balance privacy and transparency, as mandated by the Supreme Court's Puttaswamy judgment, ensuring accountability is maintained.
- Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act was amended by the DPDP Act to exempt 'personal information' from disclosure.
- Section 8(2) of the RTI Act remains a 'super-clause' that allows disclosure if public interest is paramount.
- The DPDP Act was notified in August 2023 with a 12-18 month implementation timeline for various provisions.
The Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) has announced that all candidates appearing for its examinations must undergo face authentication at venues. This initiative, following a successful pilot project in Gurugram and Gujarat, aims to strengthen the integrity of the examination process and prevent fraud, cheating, and impersonation. The AI-enabled technology reduces verification time to an average of 8-10 seconds per candidate. This move comes in the wake of the Puja Khedkar case, where a probationer allegedly used forged identity and disability certificates to obtain extra attempts beyond the prescribed limit, prompting stricter verification protocols.
- The new system uses AI-enabled facial recognition to match candidates with photographs submitted during registration.
- The initiative was developed with the assistance of the National e-Governance Division (NeGD) to streamline entry processes.
- Verification time is significantly reduced to an average of 8 to 10 seconds per candidate, adding an extra layer of security.
The Supreme Court is hearing a challenge by sitting Allahabad High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma regarding the "unilateral" establishment of an inquiry committee by the Lok Sabha Speaker. The case centers on whether a notice of motion for removal must be admitted by both the Rajya Sabha Chairman and the Lok Sabha Speaker simultaneously if given on the same day. The Court is examining Section 3(2) of the Judges (Inquiry) Act, which mandates joint action. The Solicitor-General argued that the ultimate test of removal lies with the Houses of Parliament, while the petitioner claims procedural prejudice.
- The case involves the interpretation of Article 32 of the Constitution and the Judges (Inquiry) Act.
- Under the Act, if motions are given in both Houses on the same day, the Chairman and Speaker must act jointly to form a committee.
- The petitioner argues that the rejection of the motion by the RS Chairman while the LS Speaker admitted it caused legal prejudice.
Over the last decade, the Supreme Court of India has shifted from reviewing administrative legality to issuing forward-looking regulatory directions in environmental matters. While intended to protect the environment, this "managerial role" has sometimes created uncertainty for regulated actors. Key instances include the 2022 mandate for Eco-sensitive Zones (ESZ) of at least one kilometer around protected areas, which was later modified due to practical difficulties. The Court's tendency to substitute for the regulator, rather than correcting the regulatory process, has led to a "push-pull" relationship with the executive, often resulting in policy U-turns.
- The Court has moved into a "continuing mandamus" role, issuing serial directions in cases like the Aravalli hills mining.
- Frequent modifications of orders can smother meaningful judicial review in other forums.
- Experts suggest the Court should focus on disciplining the state back into regulation rather than acting as an approving authority.
As the 16th Finance Commission (FC) begins its work, there is a growing debate on using Gross State Domestic Product (GSDP) as a primary indicator for central tax devolution. Currently, devolution relies heavily on population and income distance, which some high-performing states argue penalizes their efficiency. Proponents suggest GSDP is a reliable proxy for the actual accrual of central taxes at the state level, especially since GST is destination-based. Data shows a high correlation (0.91) between GSDP and GST collections, suggesting GSDP reflects a state's contribution to the national exchequer more accurately than current metrics.
- High-performing states like Karnataka, Maharashtra, and Tamil Nadu contribute disproportionately to central tax revenues but receive lower shares in devolution.
- The 15th FC's devolution formula showed a weak correlation (0.24) with actual tax collection shares.
- Using GSDP could balance the principles of rewarding contribution and ensuring equity.