Despite a modest increase in capacity, Indian prisons remain severely overcrowded, with the occupancy rate at 112.7% in 2024, a decade-low but still high. This issue is primarily driven by the disproportionately high share of undertrials, who constituted about 73% of the total inmate population in 2024. States like Delhi (194% occupancy) and Jammu & Kashmir (148%) show extreme overcrowding. A Parliamentary Committee report highlighted that overcrowding strains resources, compromises living standards, and limits access to facilities. Additionally, high staff vacancies, with almost half of sanctioned posts vacant in some states, further exacerbate the problem.
- Indian prisons are significantly overcrowded, with an occupancy rate of 112.7% in 2024.
- Undertrials account for approximately 73% of the total inmate population, contributing significantly to overcrowding.
- States like Delhi (194%) and Jammu & Kashmir (148%) exhibit severe overcrowding.
Brinda Karat critiques the Janjati Suraksha Manch (JSM) and Vanvasi Kalyan Ashram, RSS progeny, for their majoritarian agenda targeting Adivasi identity and faith. The JSM demands delisting Adivasi communities converted to Christianity from ST status, citing the Presidential Order of 1950 for Scheduled Castes. Karat argues this ignores the foundational distinction that Adivasi identity is not religion-based, as upheld by the Patna High Court in 1963. She highlights JSM's coercive tactics, such as forced exhumations and exclusion from community festivals, to prove Adivasis abandon their culture upon conversion. She also criticizes the cooption campaign asserting Adivasis as part of the "sanatan parivar" and Home Minister Amit Shah's endorsement of this agenda, while ignoring urgent issues like Forest Rights Act sabotage and corporate takeovers.
- Janjati Suraksha Manch (JSM) and Vanvasi Kalyan Ashram advocate delisting Christian Adivasis from Scheduled Tribe (ST) status.
- This demand is based on the Presidential Order of 1950 for Scheduled Castes, which links identity to religion.
- Adivasi identity is fundamentally not religion-based, as established by the Patna High Court in 1963.
The Supreme Court has issued notices to the Union Government, CBSE, and NCERT regarding the implementation of a three-language formula for Class 9 students from July 1, 2026. While declining an immediate stay, the Court acknowledged concerns about "hardship and inconvenience." The CBSE's mandate requires two of the three languages to be native Indian languages, with foreign languages only as a third or optional fourth subject. Critics argue this is a political decision, lacks parliamentary backing, and violates NEP 2020's promise of flexibility and no language imposition. Concerns include added pressure on students, teacher shortages, and textbook unavailability.
- Supreme Court issued notices to the Union Government, CBSE, and NCERT on the three-language formula for Class 9 students.
- The CBSE mandate requires two of the three languages to be native Indian languages.
- The policy is challenged on constitutional grounds, citing personal choice and lack of parliamentary legislation.
The article argues that public international law is increasingly seen as "optional" by powerful states, leading to a fraying of the rules-based order. It highlights numerous violations of foundational principles, including the UN Charter's prohibition on the use of force, sovereignty, and territorial integrity, citing Russia's invasion of Ukraine and the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran. Violations of UNCLOS, international humanitarian law, human rights treaties, and arms-control regimes are also discussed. The author contends that the impunity with which powerful states act signals that "might is right," leading to a vacuum where power determines legality and threatening global peace and stability.
- International law is increasingly disregarded by powerful states, undermining the rules-based global order.
- Violations of the UN Charter's prohibition on the use of force and principles of sovereignty are becoming common.
- Examples include Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran, and China's actions in the South China Sea.
The Supreme Court expressed deep concern over the NEET-UG paper leak case, highlighting the trauma inflicted on students and their families due to wasted years of hard work. The court criticized the National Testing Agency (NTA) for its "ad-hocism" and lack of "institutional memory and framework," questioning why it repeats mistakes unlike the UPSC. The Union government informed the court that the Prime Minister is personally monitoring the situation. The NTA stated that the cancellation of NEET-UG 2026 and the transfer of investigation to the CBI reflect the seriousness of the issue, affecting around 23 lakh candidates.
- The Supreme Court highlighted the severe emotional trauma experienced by NEET-UG aspirants and their families due to the paper leak.
- The court criticized the National Testing Agency (NTA) for its "ad-hocism" and lack of "institutional memory and framework," leading to repeated mistakes.
- The Union government assured the court that the Prime Minister is personally monitoring the situation.
The Supreme Court's May 21 clarification allows trials and proceedings under Section 124A (sedition) to resume for accused persons who consent to it, partially reviving the paused colonial-era provision. This decision, made in an unconnected case (Kamran vs State of Madhya Pradesh), raises concerns about constitutional questions, particularly regarding the provision's constitutionality which is still pending before the SC in the Vombatkere petitions. Critics argue it creates disparity, forcing some accused into trials under an undecided law while others remain in limbo, and undermines the fundamental right to equality before the law. The article highlights the historical context of sedition and its potential chilling effect on free speech.
- The Supreme Court's May 21 clarification allows sedition proceedings under Section 124A to resume for accused persons who willingly consent to face trial.
- This decision partially revives a colonial-era provision whose constitutionality is still under challenge in pending petitions (Vombatkere vs Union of India).
- The clarification creates a disparity, as consenting accused face trial under an undecided law, while others can remain in indefinite limbo.
The article debates whether increasing the Supreme Court's sanctioned strength from 34 to 38 judges will resolve its pendency crisis. Prashant Reddy T. and Swapnil Tripathi discuss the implications, with Reddy questioning the ordinance route for the increase and Tripathi highlighting how the large number of Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) contributes significantly to the backlog. Both agree that the Court's appellate jurisdiction has overshadowed its constitutional role. Concerns are raised that more judges could lead to greater doctrinal inconsistency, especially with two-judge benches, and that the government's inconsistent litigation policy exacerbates the problem. They emphasize the need for robust mechanisms to filter frivolous litigation, stricter time allocation, and improved gender representation.
- The recent increase in the Supreme Court's sanctioned strength to 38 judges aims to address pendency, but its effectiveness is debated.
- The high volume of Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) and the Court's reluctance to establish clear guidelines for their exercise are major contributors to the backlog.
- Concerns exist that increasing judge strength could lead to greater doctrinal inconsistency, particularly with two-judge Division Benches, and more conflicting rulings.
The article discusses the inconsistencies and ineffectiveness of India's cow protection laws, highlighting incidents of cow carcasses and the varying legal frameworks across states. Despite stringent laws in many states, cattle census data reveal a decline in cow population while buffalo populations have grown, suggesting these laws fail to achieve their objective. The authors argue that cow protection, while a central Hindutva issue, has historical political backing from parties like Congress. The article also points out that these laws economically disadvantage farmers by preventing them from culling unproductive cattle, leading to financial losses and potentially illegal sales at lower prices. It questions the constitutional validity and practical implications of such laws, citing privacy concerns and the need for a more objective assessment.
- Despite stringent cow protection laws in many Indian states, cattle census data indicate a decline in cow population and a rise in buffalo population, questioning the laws' efficacy.
- The article highlights the economic burden on farmers due to cow protection laws, as they are unable to sell unproductive cattle, leading to financial losses.
- Historically, cow protection has been a significant political issue, supported by various parties beyond just Hindutva groups.
The Supreme Court has upheld the constitutional validity of bringing organised online gaming activities with money stakes, including fantasy sports, under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime. A Bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan ruled that even if online gaming involves skill, the substantial money involved and uncertainty of outcome constitute betting and gambling for GST purposes. The court rejected arguments comparing online games of skill with horse-racing, noting that horse-racing is heavily regulated. It emphasized the State's duty to maintain public health, citing growing addiction and financial losses from online betting.
- The Supreme Court affirmed the constitutional validity of applying GST to organised online gaming activities with money stakes.
- The court classified such activities as betting and gambling for GST purposes, regardless of skill involvement.
- It rejected comparisons between online games of skill and highly regulated horse-racing.
The Supreme Court Collegium, led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, has recommended the appointment of four High Court Chief Justices and one woman senior advocate, V. Mohana, as judges to the apex court. This move, if approved, would mark the first appointment of a woman judge to the Supreme Court after a gap of over five years, with the last being in August 2021. The recommendations aim to increase the total strength of judges to 38 and reflect a focus on regional and gender representation, addressing career inequalities for women officers.
- The Supreme Court Collegium has recommended five new appointments to the apex court.
- The recommendations include four High Court Chief Justices and one woman senior advocate, V. Mohana.
- This appointment would fill vacancies and increase the total strength of Supreme Court judges.
The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, stating it breathes life into the Election Commission's mandate under Article 324 to conduct and supervise elections. The court found "cogent justifications" for the SIR, citing the long period since the last revision, large-scale additions/deletions, rapid urbanization, and migration, which could lead to repeated or defective entries. It clarified that SIR does not supplant existing laws like the Representation of the People Act but rather complements them. The court also directed that individuals whose names were wrongly deleted could challenge the EC's decision in court.
- The Supreme Court affirmed the constitutional validity of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
- SIR is deemed essential for maintaining accurate electoral rolls due to demographic changes over time.
- The court emphasized that SIR is an exercise of the Election Commission's constitutional power under Article 324.
India aims to be a global AI leader but faces significant challenges from AI-generated misinformation and identity manipulation. Advanced generative AI models can produce highly sophisticated, indistinguishable fake images, videos, and documents, posing risks of cybercrime, theft, and digital deceit. This content, easily spread on social media, makes it difficult for users to verify information, impacting academics, journalism, and institutional credibility. The article stresses the urgent need for a robust legal framework that balances innovation with accountability, safeguarding the digital ecosystem. It also highlights the importance of digital and AI literacy for the public to critically evaluate content.
- Advanced AI models can generate highly realistic fake content, leading to widespread misinformation and identity manipulation.
- This poses significant risks to cyber security, academic integrity, journalism, and public trust.
- India needs a robust legal framework to regulate AI, ensuring accountability while fostering innovation.
The article discusses the Supreme Court's inherent power under Article 142 of the Constitution to deliver 'complete justice,' especially when existing laws are inadequate. This power acts as a 'constitutional safety valve,' allowing the Court to go beyond strict procedural constraints to prevent injustice. While critics argue it can lead to judicial overreach, encroaching on executive or legislative domains, the author defends its necessity for addressing evolving social realities and ensuring substantive justice. The article clarifies that High Courts, though capable of delivering justice, do not possess powers equivalent to the Supreme Court's under Article 142, which is crucial for applying due process in rapidly changing societal contexts.
- The Supreme Court possesses inherent power under Article 142 for delivering 'complete justice' when laws are insufficient.
- Article 142 acts as a 'constitutional safety valve,' enabling the Court to transcend procedural limitations to prevent injustice.
- The exercise of Article 142 often faces criticism for potential judicial overreach, but it is defended as essential for evolving social realities.
The Supreme Court has agreed to examine a challenge to the constitutional validity of the definition of 'wetlands' in the Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Rules, 2017. Petitioners argue that Rule 2(g) arbitrarily excludes most human-made, artificial, and historically developed wetlands from environmental protection, thereby diluting accountability and violating India's obligations under the Ramsar Convention, 1971. The exclusion of waterbodies constructed for drinking water, irrigation, aquaculture, and other allied purposes is seen as removing a substantial majority of wetlands from protective frameworks. This dilution is alleged to violate the principle of non-regression and departs from functional characteristics-based identification of wetlands.
- The Supreme Court will examine the constitutional validity of the 'wetlands' definition in the 2017 Wetlands Rules.
- Petitioners argue that the rules arbitrarily exclude many human-made wetlands from environmental protection.
- The challenged definition is seen as inconsistent with India's obligations under the Ramsar Convention, 1971.
The Supreme Court has directed Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, and Rajasthan to consider granting prosecution immunity to forest guards combating illegal sand mining in the Chambal region. This immunity, akin to that for armed forces, would protect them from prosecution for bona fide actions taken in the line of duty. The directive, issued under Article 142 of the Constitution, aims to ensure 'complete justice' and environmental safeguards, following brutal murders of forest guards by miners. The court also ordered immediate steps to augment field-level enforcement, fill vacancies within a year, and establish carpet surveillance with CCTV cameras and live streaming to protect the ecologically sensitive Chambal gharial sanctuary.
- The Supreme Court has directed three states to consider granting prosecution immunity to forest guards in the Chambal region.
- The immunity is intended to protect guards from prosecution for bona fide actions against illegal sand miners.
- The directive was issued under Article 142 of the Constitution to ensure 'complete justice' and environmental safeguards.
The defection of seven Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MPs in the Rajya Sabha, invoking the 'merger' exception under the 10th Schedule to join the BJP, has raised significant constitutional questions. The article analyzes whether a merger can be effected solely by two-thirds of a legislature party or if it requires a decision from the original political party. It argues that the 10th Schedule's Paragraph 4 implies the merger of the political party itself, not just a numerical alignment within the legislature. This interpretation is crucial for preserving the integrity of the party system and the institution of opposition in parliamentary democracy, highlighting the need for judicial clarity from the Supreme Court.
- The defection of AAP MPs in Rajya Sabha under the 'merger' exception raises constitutional questions.
- The core issue is the interpretation of Paragraph 4 of the 10th Schedule regarding political party merger versus legislature party alignment.
- The article argues for the primacy of the political party's decision in a merger to maintain democratic accountability.
The Supreme Court has directed an expert committee, to be constituted for defining the Aravalli hills and ranges, to ensure larger public participation through consultations with domain experts and stakeholders. A Bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant emphasized that the committee's mandate would extend beyond mere definition to drawing a roadmap for permissible activities, including the crucial aspect of regulated mining in this ecologically sensitive mountain system. The court's decision underscores the importance of inclusive decision-making and sustainable management for one of the world's oldest mountain ranges.
- The Supreme Court has called for greater public participation in the expert committee tasked with defining the Aravalli hills and ranges.
- The committee's role will include developing a roadmap for permissible activities, such as regulated mining, in the Aravalli region.
- The Aravalli range is recognized as one of the oldest and ecologically sensitive mountain systems globally.
The Assam government has tabled 'The Uniform Civil Code, Assam, 2026 Bill' in the State Assembly, aiming to establish a common law for all residents on matters of marriage, divorce, succession, and live-in relationships. Key provisions include a ban on bigamy and polygamy with imprisonment, standardised legal ages for marriage (21 for grooms, 18 for brides), mandatory registration of all marriages and divorces, uniform grounds for divorce, and gender-equal inheritance. The Bill also mandates registration of live-in relationships within a month, with penalties for non-compliance, and explicitly excludes Scheduled Tribes from its purview. Opposition parties have criticized the lack of consultation.
- The Assam UCC Bill aims to establish a common law for marriage, divorce, succession, and live-in relationships for all residents, excluding Scheduled Tribes.
- It proposes a ban on bigamy and polygamy, punishable by imprisonment, and standardizes legal ages for marriage.
- Mandatory registration of all marriages, divorces, and live-in relationships is a key provision, with penalties for non-registration.
The Supreme Court's May 21, 2026, clarification, allowing lower courts to decide on sedition cases, has unlatched Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code, a provision previously frozen by the court in May 2022. This revival triggers concerns because both the Supreme Court and the Union government had acknowledged the law as "not in tune with the current social milieu" and a "colonial baggage." While the recent order aims to protect the right to a speedy trial for accused persons, it raises questions about lower courts pronouncing guilt when the constitutionality of Section 124A itself is still under challenge in the top court.
- The Supreme Court's May 21, 2026, order revived proceedings under Section 124A (sedition) of the IPC.
- This order reverses the May 11, 2022, decision that had frozen all sedition proceedings due to rampant misuse.
- Both the Supreme Court and the Union government had previously recognized Section 124A as a colonial and outdated law.
Infertility affects 10-15% of adults in India, yet it remains a neglected public health issue with minimal government policies or services. The sector is heavily privatized, making advanced treatments like IVF prohibitively expensive for many, with costs ranging from ₹1 lakh to ₹2.5 lakh per cycle, often requiring multiple cycles. Limited insurance coverage forces individuals to fund treatments out-of-pocket, leading to significant financial and emotional strain. Experts argue that reproductive autonomy, enshrined under Article 21, should encompass infertility care, not just contraception and abortion, highlighting a critical disconnect between constitutional promises and healthcare realities.
- Infertility impacts 10-15% of Indian adults but is largely ignored as a public health issue.
- The fertility treatment sector is dominated by private players, with high costs and negligible public health services.
- IVF treatments are expensive, ranging from ₹1 lakh to ₹2.5 lakh per cycle, often requiring multiple attempts.
The Trump administration announced a significant policy change requiring non-immigrants seeking Green Cards to apply from their home countries, reversing a decades-long practice. Previously, individuals with legal status in the U.S., including those married to citizens or on work/student visas, could complete the entire permanent residency process domestically. The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) framed this as a return to the 'original intent of the law' and closing a 'loophole,' aiming to reduce the number of people gaining permanent residency. The effective date and impact on ongoing applications remain unclear.
- The U.S. government has mandated that Green Card seekers must now apply from their home countries.
- This policy reverses a long-standing practice that allowed non-immigrants to complete the process while in the U.S.
- The change affects various categories, including individuals married to U.S. citizens and those on work or student visas.
Recent conflicts highlight a shift towards cyber operations alongside conventional military action, raising questions about legal accountability. While international law principles like the prohibition on the use of force (UN Charter Article 2(4)) and state responsibility apply to cyberspace, establishing the threshold for an internationally wrongful act is difficult. Key challenges include attribution, as cyber operations are secretive and routed through multiple networks, making legal proof difficult. The lack of appropriate forums, states' avoidance of litigation to prevent escalation, and complex evidence further hinder accountability, leading to a growing mismatch between frequent cyber incidents and rare legal consequences. India needs to actively shape cyber norms given its reliance on digital infrastructure.
- Cyber operations are increasingly integrated with conventional military action, posing challenges for international legal frameworks.
- Establishing the threshold for what constitutes an internationally wrongful act in cyberspace is a major difficulty.
- Attribution of cyber attacks to specific states is complex due to their secretive nature and routing through multiple jurisdictions.
The Supreme Court referred the question of whether prolonged incarceration and trial delays can override stringent bail curbs under anti-terror laws like UAPA to a larger Bench. This decision aims to ensure "parity, consistency and institutional fidelity" in applying precedents. The court also granted six months of interim bail to two accused in the 2020 Delhi riots case. The reference addresses a "perceived conflict" between a May 18 judgment, which held that prolonged incarceration can "melt down" bail embargoes, and an earlier January ruling. The court emphasized the need to balance societal interests with accused rights.
- The Supreme Court referred the question of UAPA bail curbs and prolonged incarceration to a larger Bench.
- The reference aims to resolve a conflict between recent judgments regarding the application of Section 43D(5) of UAPA.
- The court granted interim bail to two accused, Abdul Khalid Saifi and Tasleem Ahmad, in the 2020 Delhi riots case.
The Supreme Court declined to interfere with the environmental clearances granted to the Adani Group's coal block project in Madhya Pradesh's Singrauli district, primarily due to the petitioner's delay in challenging the approvals. Environmental activist Ajay Dubey had challenged an NGT order that dismissed his plea against the May 2025 environmental clearance for Mahan Energen Ltd. (an Adani Power subsidiary) on limitation grounds. The Bench, comprising Justices P.S. Narasimha and Alok Aradhe, questioned the delay, noting that challenges to statutory authority orders must typically be filed within 30 days, with a 60-day extension for sufficient cause. While the petitioner argued grave environmental concerns, the SC suggested pursuing other legal remedies.
- The Supreme Court refused to intervene in the environmental clearances for an Adani coal project in Singrauli, Madhya Pradesh.
- The primary reason for the SC's decision was the petitioner's significant delay in challenging the approvals.
- Challenges to statutory authority orders under the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, typically have a 30-day limitation period.