The multi-crore Great Nicobar Island project, involving a power plant, transshipment port, and airport, faces scrutiny over its impact on 13,000 hectares of pristine forests. The article discusses the 'rights of nature' legal framework, where non-human entities like rivers and forests are granted legal personhood. It references the 2013 Niyamgiri Hills judgment, which upheld the gram sabha's power to protect tribal culture and environment. The Uttarakhand High Court's 2017 ruling granting legal personhood to the Ganga and Yamuna rivers is cited as a precedent for recognizing nature's rights in India, potentially offering a new legal path for environmental protection.
- The Great Nicobar project affects a global biodiversity hotspot and critical climate regulator.
- The 'rights of nature' or 'earth jurisprudence' approach grants legal standing to ecosystems, allowing them to be subjects of rights.
- The Supreme Court's Niyamgiri judgment (2013) emphasized the role of the Tribal Council and the Forest Rights Act in forest diversion cases.
The Supreme Court of India, led by CJI B.R. Gavai, indicated it might revisit its earlier order imposing a ban on firecrackers in the Delhi-National Capital Region (NCR). The court is considering allowing the use of 'green' fireworks certified by NEERI and PESO for the upcoming Deepavali festival. This follows a proposal from the Centre to lift the blanket ban and allow licensed traders to sell eco-friendly variants. The court will review the 2018 Arjun Gopal v. Union of India judgment, which previously prohibited online sales and restricted manufacturing to green crackers with reduced emissions.
- The Supreme Court is examining the possibility of allowing green crackers with reduced emissions and noise levels.
- The Centre has proposed specific time slots (8 PM to 10 PM) for bursting crackers during festivals.
- The 2018 Arjun Gopal judgment had declined a complete firecracker ban but restricted sales to licensed traders.
The Supreme Court has ruled that the age limits introduced by the Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021, cannot be applied retrospectively to couples who had already initiated the surrogacy process before the law's enactment. The Act stipulates that an intending woman must be aged 23-50 and the man 26-55. The Court held that applying these limits to couples with previously frozen embryos violates their reproductive autonomy. The ruling emphasizes that the law should not unfairly disqualify those who have already undergone medical procedures based on the legal framework existing at the time of initiation.
- The Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021, came into force on January 25, 2022.
- Reproductive choice is recognized as a fundamental right that cannot be restricted retrospectively.
- The exemption applies to cases where embryos were created and frozen before the commencement of the Act.
A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court, led by CJI B.R. Gavai, has ruled that judicial officers who had at least seven years of practice as advocates before joining the subordinate judiciary are eligible for appointment as District Judges. Interpreting Article 233 of the Constitution, the court held that a lawyer does not lose their status as a practitioner simply by joining judicial service. This decision aims to bring young talent into the higher district judiciary. The court also mandated a minimum age of 35 years for both advocates and judicial officers applying for these positions.
- Article 233(2) of the Constitution governs the eligibility for appointment as District Judges.
- The ruling clarifies that combined experience as an advocate and a judicial officer counts toward the seven-year requirement.
- A minimum age limit of 35 years is established to ensure maturity in the upper echelons of the district judiciary.
The Kerala government has introduced the Wild Life Protection (Kerala Amendment) Bill 2025, seeking to devolve powers from the Union to the State regarding wildlife management. The Bill aims to allow the State to declare Schedule II animals, such as wild boars, as 'vermin' to address severe human-wildlife conflict. It also empowers the Chief Wildlife Warden to order the killing or capture of animals that have injured humans. However, critics argue this move challenges federal structures as Wildlife is on the Concurrent List, and any state law repugnant to the Central Act requires Presidential assent.
- Wildlife is a subject under the Concurrent List of the Indian Constitution.
- Section 62 of the Central Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972 currently reserves the power to declare 'vermin' for the Union government.
- The amendment seeks to address a 'lived crisis' of human-wildlife conflict in Kerala's agricultural and forest buffer zones.
The Delhi High Court recently issued summons in a case where a spouse sought damages from a third party for interfering in their marriage, reviving the concept of 'alienation of affection' (AoA). While the Supreme Court decriminalized adultery in the Joseph Shine case, it noted that adultery could still be a civil wrong and grounds for divorce. The High Court's move explores whether a civil tort claim can be maintained against a 'paramour' for causing marital breakdown. This raises complex questions about personal autonomy versus marital rights and the jurisdiction of civil courts in matrimonial disputes.
- Alienation of Affection (AoA) is a common law tort allowing a spouse to sue a third party for interfering with the marriage.
- The Supreme Court's Joseph Shine (2018) judgment struck down Section 497 of the IPC, decriminalizing adultery.
- The Delhi High Court is testing whether civil remedies for marital disruption exist outside the specific provisions of personal laws.
While India recognizes passive euthanasia through Supreme Court judgments, implementation remains difficult due to procedural hurdles like advance directives and medical board clearances. Former judge K. Kannan argues that India's approach reflects ethical conservatism, distinguishing between allowing death and causing it. To improve the system, he suggests a national digital portal for advance directives linked to Aadhaar, empowering hospital ethics committees to authorize withdrawal of life support, and integrating end-of-life care training into medical education. The goal is to ensure dignity in dying without moving toward active euthanasia, which remains illegal in India.
- Passive euthanasia involves withdrawing life-sustaining treatment, whereas active euthanasia involves a deliberate act to end life.
- The Supreme Court has upheld the right to die with dignity as part of Article 21 but maintains a distinction between omission and commission.
- Proposed reforms include digitalizing advance directives and decentralizing the oversight mechanism to hospital-based ethics committees.
With over 4.57 crore pending cases in India, Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is being prioritized to provide faster, cost-effective justice. ADR processes like arbitration, conciliation, and mediation are recognized under Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Lok Adalats, governed by the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, play a vital role in settling compoundable offenses and civil disputes. The article highlights the need for pre-litigation mediation and the establishment of an Indian Arbitration Council. Strengthening ADR is crucial to address the high vacancy rates in courts and the massive backlog of cases across various states.
- ADR mechanisms aim to reduce the burden on the judiciary, where High Courts and district courts face vacancy rates of 33% and 21% respectively.
- Article 39A of the Constitution mandates the state to provide free legal aid and ensure equal justice for all.
- Lok Adalats offer a platform where decisions are final and binding, with no provision for appeal, ensuring the finality of disputes.
Tamil Nadu has sought a Supreme Court review of a judgment requiring all in-service teachers (Classes 1-8) to clear the Teachers' Eligibility Test (TET) within two years or face disqualification. The state argues that 'compulsorily retiring' nearly 4 lakh non-TET qualified teachers would lead to a collapse of the education system and violate Article 21A (Right to Education). The controversy centers on Section 23 of the RTE Act, 2009. While the court aims to ensure quality education, the state seeks a balance that protects the livelihoods of long-serving teachers appointed before the RTE Act's implementation.
- Section 23 of the RTE Act mandates minimum qualifications for teachers as laid down by the NCTE.
- A 2014 SC judgment (Pramati case) exempted minority institutions from the RTE Act, but recent rulings suggest bringing them back under its ambit.
- Tamil Nadu argues that the TET requirement should not apply retrospectively to teachers appointed before the 2010 notification.
The Supreme Court is set to hear a petition challenging the Telangana government's order to enhance the Backward Class (OBC) quota in municipalities and panchayats to 42%. This increase brings the aggregate reservation in local bodies to 67%, exceeding the 50% ceiling established by the Supreme Court in the 1992 Mandal Commission case. The petitioner argues that this violates judicial precedents. Similar legal challenges are pending against reservation hikes in Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh. The Telangana government justifies the move by stating that OBCs are grossly underrepresented despite forming over half the population, while the bill awaits formal assent.
- The Telangana government increased the OBC quota in local bodies from 14% to 42% via a September 26 order.
- The total reservation (SC 15%, ST 10%, OBC 42%) now stands at 67%, breaching the 50% legal limit.
- The 50% ceiling rule was established by a nine-judge Bench in the landmark Indra Sawhney (Mandal Commission) case of 1992.
The Union government has released ₹538.39 crore to Tamil Nadu under the Right to Education (RTE) Entitlements component of Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA). This follows a Special Leave Petition filed by the State in the Supreme Court after the Madras High Court suggested delinking RTE reimbursements from SSA. The funds include the Centre's share for 2024-25 and the first installment for 2025-26. Under the RTE Act, 25% of seats in entry-level classes in private schools are reserved for marginalized sections. The delay in funds had stalled the admission process in the state.
- The RTE Act mandates 25% reservation for marginalized sections in private schools at entry-level classes.
- Funding for RTE is integrated into the Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) scheme, leading to center-state disputes.
- The Supreme Court intervened to ensure the release of central funds to the state to prevent educational disruption.
The latest National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) report for 2023 highlights several critical social and legal issues. Illegal migration cases under the Foreigners Act were highest in West Bengal and Tripura. Farmer suicides remain a major concern, with Maharashtra and Karnataka accounting for over 60% of cases, often attributed to government policies and import duties. Additionally, crimes against children rose by 9.2%, with kidnapping and POCSO cases being the most prevalent. The report also noted a significant 30.4% increase in environmental offences, primarily related to tobacco products and noise pollution regulations.
- West Bengal recorded the highest number of cases (1,050) under the Foreigners Act and Passport Act in 2023.
- Maharashtra (38.5%) and Karnataka (22.5%) reported the highest percentages of farmer suicides in India.
- Crimes against children reached a rate of 39.9 per 1,00,000, with Madhya Pradesh topping the list of total cases.
The Karnataka High Court dismissed a petition by X (formerly Twitter) challenging the Union government’s Sahyog portal, which automates the issuance of content takedown orders. X argued that the portal bypassed the procedural safeguards of Section 69A of the IT Act. However, the Court ruled that the portal is merely an administrative tool to facilitate compliance with Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act, which requires intermediaries to remove unlawful content upon receiving 'actual knowledge' from the government. The ruling emphasizes that social media platforms cannot be 'anarchic zones' and must comply with national laws aimed at protecting sovereignty and public order.
- The Sahyog portal is operated by the Indian Cybercrime Coordination Centre (I4C) under the Ministry of Home Affairs.
- Section 69A of the IT Act allows the Centre to block online material on specific grounds like national security.
- Section 79(3)(b) requires intermediaries to remove content once they have 'actual knowledge' of its illegality.
Online gaming companies have approached the Supreme Court, stating that their businesses have 'shut down' due to the implementation of the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025. The new law bans real money games, related banking services, and advertisements. The companies are seeking an urgent hearing and interim relief, arguing that the law violates the right to equality, freedom of expression, and the established legal distinction between games of skill and games of chance. The Centre maintains that the law is necessary to curb the 'rapid mushrooming' of online money games that pose risks to individuals and families.
- The Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025, effectively bans real money online gaming in India.
- Gaming firms argue the law is unconstitutional and fails to distinguish between skill-based gaming and gambling.
- The Supreme Court has transferred various petitions from High Courts to itself to ensure a uniform authoritative pronouncement.
A group of environmentalists, scientists, and former Union Ministers, including Murli Manohar Joshi and Karan Singh, have petitioned the Supreme Court to review its 2021 judgment. The 2021 ruling permitted the widening of roads for the Char Dham project beyond the 5.5-meter limit recommended by an expert committee. Petitioners argue that cutting hill slopes for 10-meter wide roads has caused massive landslides, sinking zones, and ecological damage in the fragile Himalayan region. They seek a return to the 5.5-meter intermediate road width to prevent further disasters, citing recent torrential rains and road blockages as evidence of the project's detrimental impact.
- Petitioners seek a recall of the 2021 SC judgment that allowed 10-meter wide roads for strategic border access.
- The original expert committee had recommended a 5.5-meter width to minimize ecological disturbance in the Himalayas.
- The project involves widening roads leading to the shrines of Yamunotri, Gangotri, Kedarnath, and Badrinath.
The Union Home Ministry has revoked the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA) registration of the Students Educational and Cultural Movement of Ladakh (SECMOL), founded by activist Sonam Wangchuk. The Ministry cited multiple rule breaches, including the improper deposit of funds and accepting foreign donations for studies involving 'national sovereignty,' which is prohibited under FCRA rules. Wangchuk has termed the charges 'baseless,' explaining that some funds were proceeds from the sale of an old bus. Additionally, the CBI is inquiring into another of Wangchuk's organizations, the Himalayan Institute of Alternatives Ladakh (HIAL), for similar suspected violations.
- SECMOL's FCRA license was cancelled following a showcase notice issued in August.
- The Ministry claims foreign funds were used for activities related to 'national sovereignty,' violating FCRA guidelines.
- The CBI is investigating HIAL, which reportedly does not have FCRA clearance.
Recent Delhi High Court rulings have brought 'personality rights' into focus, protecting celebrities from unauthorized commercial use of their name, voice, and likeness, especially through AI-generated content. While not explicitly codified in a single statute, these rights are derived from the Right to Privacy (Article 21), the Copyright Act 1957, and the Trade Marks Act 1999. Courts use 'passing off' actions to prevent misappropriation of goodwill. However, concerns exist regarding the potential conflict with free speech (Article 19(1)(a)) and the need for a comprehensive legislative framework to replace the current piecemeal judicial approach to ensure consistent enforcement.
- Personality rights protect an individual's unique traits (voice, image, signature) from unauthorized commercial exploitation.
- These rights are grounded in the Right to Privacy under Article 21 and provisions of the Copyright Act, 1957.
- Section 38A and 38B of the Copyright Act grant performers certain exclusive rights and moral rights over their performances.
The article discusses the Supreme Court's 2016 judgment in the Subramanian Swamy case, which upheld criminal defamation by arguing reputation is part of the right to life. However, recent judicial observations suggest the law is frequently misused as a tool for political retribution and intimidation. Unlike physical harm, reputational injury can be addressed through civil damages or retractions. The article argues that criminal defamation fosters opportunistic litigation and self-censorship, particularly among journalists. It notes that many countries, including the U.K., have abolished criminal defamation, suggesting India should follow suit to protect free expression and democratic debate.
- Criminal defamation allows for imprisonment for speech, which is often disproportionate to the actual harm caused to a reputation.
- The law is frequently used by political actors to silence criticism and harass rivals through lengthy and onerous litigation processes.
- Civil proceedings offer a more balanced approach by providing monetary damages without the threat of jail time for contested interpretations.
The Supreme Court of India recently dismissed a petition that sought to communalize a state-sponsored cultural event, the Mysuru Dasara festival. The court reaffirmed that secularism is a fundamental principle and part of the 'basic structure' of the Constitution. It clarified that the state cannot discriminate based on religion when organizing public events. The ruling emphasized that the constitutional right to practice religion (Articles 25 and 26) does not allow individuals to restrict others from participating in public festivities. This judgment reinforces India's pluralistic society and the Preamble's commitment to equality and secularism.
- Secularism is a core component of the Basic Structure doctrine of the Indian Constitution.
- State-sponsored events are public and cannot exclude individuals based on their religious identity.
- Articles 25 and 26 guarantee freedom of religion but do not support communal exclusion in public gatherings.
Justice M.M. Sundresh of the Supreme Court recently remarked that the time has come to decriminalize defamation. He expressed concern over the increasing use of criminal defamation laws by private individuals and political parties to settle personal scores. While the court upheld the constitutional validity of criminal defamation in the 2016 Subramanian Swamy case, recent benches have been more critical, often staying summons and advising against being 'too touchy.' The debate centers on whether defamation between private parties serves any public interest or if it merely stifles free speech guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a).
- Justice M.M. Sundresh suggested that defamation by private individuals should not be treated as a crime.
- The Supreme Court had previously upheld criminal defamation as a 'reasonable restriction' on free speech in 2016.
- Recent judicial observations suggest that courts should not be forums for settling political scores through defamation cases.
The Supreme Court is hearing a petition regarding the discretionary powers of Governors to withhold or delay assent to bills passed by State legislatures. Under Article 200 of the Constitution, a Governor has four options when presented with a bill, but the text does not specify a timeline. This has led to 'pocket vetoes' in several Opposition-ruled states. Legal experts and previous commissions, like the Sarkaria and Punchhi Commissions, have recommended fixed timelines (e.g., six months) for decisions. The Court's upcoming judgment in May 2025 is expected to clarify whether judicial review can be applied to such delays.
- Article 200 outlines the Governor's options: give assent, withhold assent, return for reconsideration, or reserve for the President.
- Article 163(1) states the Governor must generally act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers.
- The Sarkaria Commission (1987) and Punchhi Commission (2010) suggested timelines to prevent political misuse of the Governor's office.
The Supreme Court dismissed a petition challenging the selection of Muslim writer Banu Mushtaq to inaugurate the Mysuru Dasara festival. The Court emphasized that the Preamble enshrines secularism, liberty of thought, and equality as cardinal ideals. It reiterated that the State of Karnataka is secular and maintains no religion of its own. The bench noted that while the inaugural pooja is a religious activity, the "ribbon-cutting" is a secular state event. The judgment referenced landmark cases to affirm that secularism is a basic feature of the Constitution, preventing the State from discriminating between religions.
- The Supreme Court ruled that the State cannot distinguish between religions for public events like the Mysuru Dasara.
- Secularism was reaffirmed as a 'basic feature' of the Indian Constitution, as established in the Kesavananda Bharati and S.R. Bommai cases.
- The Court distinguished between secular state activities (like inauguration) and specific religious rituals performed before a deity.
Qatar's chief negotiator has met with the President of the International Criminal Court (ICC) to explore legal avenues following an Israeli strike in Doha that killed five Hamas members and a Qatari official. As an observer state at the ICC, Qatar cannot directly refer cases but is seeking accountability for what it terms a violation of international humanitarian law and its sovereignty. This development occurs amidst ongoing ICC investigations into war crimes in Gaza, including arrest warrants sought for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Hamas leaders. The incident has strained regional security and complicated ceasefire negotiations.
- Qatar is an observer state at the ICC and is seeking legal recourse for an Israeli military strike on its territory.
- The ICC is currently investigating alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by both Israeli and Hamas leadership.
- The strike in Doha targeted top Hamas officials who have been hosted in Qatar with U.S. blessing since 2012.
The Indian government has taken a significant step toward making the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) functional by notifying the timelines for filing appeals. Taxpayers can now file appeals against orders communicated before April 1, 2026, until June 30, 2026. Additionally, the scope of cases for the Principal Bench has been expanded. This move is expected to resolve the massive backlog of GST-related litigation that has been pending for years due to the absence of a dedicated appellate body. Experts believe this structured framework will bring predictability and timely access to justice for businesses facing indirect tax disputes.
- The GSTAT is the second independent forum for dispute resolution under the GST law.
- The 56th GST Council meeting decided to make the GSTAT operational for accepting appeals by late 2024.
- The Principal Bench of the GSTAT will handle specific categories of cases, now with an expanded scope.