A 39-year-old Adivasi woman from West Bengal, Bhadu Mandi, was rescued from bonded labour conditions in Gurugram after working for over two years in a home in DLF Garden City. She was brought to Delhi for domestic work with an advance payment of ₹40,000. Her sister, Lakshmi Tudu, reported that Ms. Mandi was restricted by smart locking systems, worked over 16 hours daily, and suffered physical abuse. The case came to light in March, an FIR was registered on June 4, and a joint operation by Haryana and West Bengal police, district administration, and civil society members led to her rescue.
- A tribal woman from West Bengal was rescued from bonded labour in Gurugram.
- She was subjected to restricted movement, long working hours, and physical abuse for over two years.
- The rescue was a result of a joint operation involving police, district administration, and an NGO.
The Association of Victims of Uphaar Tragedy (AVUT) marked 29 years since the 1997 Uphaar cinema hall fire, expressing dismay that fire safety lessons remain unlearnt in Delhi. AVUT president Neelam Krishnamoorthy highlighted recurring fire incidents as evidence of overlooked safety violations and poorly scrutinised No Objection Certificates. The association called for stricter accountability for negligence causing deaths and advocated for a law governing safety violations, emphasizing that public safety suffers when compliance is bought and accountability evaded.
- AVUT observed 29 years since the Uphaar cinema tragedy, criticizing the lack of fire safety improvements.
- Recurring fire incidents in Delhi indicate persistent safety violations and inadequate scrutiny of NOCs.
- The association demands stricter accountability for negligence leading to deaths.
The Justice K.G. Balakrishnan (retd) Commission, tasked with examining the issue of Scheduled Caste (SC) status for Dalit converts, has completed its report after nearly four years and multiple extensions. The three-member Commission was constituted in October 2022 to study the demand for SC status for Dalit Muslims and Christians, the opposition to this demand, and the impact on existing SC communities. Currently, only Dalits of Hindu, Buddhist, and Sikh faiths are entitled to SC classification. The Union Social Justice Ministry has consistently argued against granting SC status to converts to Islam and Christianity.
- The Justice K.G. Balakrishnan Commission has completed its report on granting Scheduled Caste status to Dalit converts.
- The Commission was formed in October 2022 to examine the demand for SC status for Dalit Muslims and Christians.
- Currently, SC status is limited to Dalits of Hindu, Buddhist, and Sikh faiths.
The rejection of Congress leader Meenakshi Natarajan's nomination for the Rajya Sabha election from Madhya Pradesh has sparked questions about institutional integrity and procedural fairness. Her nomination was rejected by the Returning Officer (RO) for allegedly failing to disclose a pending criminal case, which was a private complaint, not a conventional police case, and not directly against her. Critics argue the RO's decision is arbitrary and a misinterpretation of Section 33A of the Representation of the People Act, which requires disclosure only for cases with potential punishment of two years or more where charges have been framed. This incident is seen as damaging democracy and election integrity.
- The nomination of Congress leader Meenakshi Natarajan for Rajya Sabha was rejected on grounds of non-disclosure of a pending criminal case.
- The criminal case was a private complaint, not a police FIR, and not directly against Ms. Natarajan.
- Critics argue the rejection is arbitrary and misinterprets Section 33A of the Representation of the People Act.
The Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Amendment (FCRA) Bill, 2026, introduced in Lok Sabha, is seen as a significant expansion of state control over NGOs, charitable trusts, and educational/religious institutions. Critics argue it goes beyond transparency to enable executive confiscation of assets, particularly through Section 16A, which allows "provisional vesting" of assets in a government-designated authority upon cancellation or cessation of FCRA registration, without prior judicial review. This threatens the survival of organizations, especially those serving vulnerable communities and minorities, and raises concerns about undermining constitutional rights like freedom of association and property rights.
- The FCRA Bill, 2026, significantly increases executive power over civil society organizations.
- Section 16A allows for the provisional vesting of an organization's assets in a government-designated authority if its FCRA registration is cancelled or ceases.
- The Bill is criticized for potentially leading to asset confiscation without judicial review and for impacting organizations serving vulnerable communities and minorities.
The Supreme Court utilized its extraordinary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to overturn a conviction under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. This decision was made in a case where the victim, who was a minor at the time of the incident, later married the accused as an adult. The court emphasized that Article 142 allows it to ensure "complete justice" when existing laws are insufficient, enabling the couple to live peacefully as spouses.
- The Supreme Court used Article 142 to quash a POCSO conviction.
- The decision was based on the fact that the victim and accused later married as adults.
- Article 142 grants the Supreme Court power to deliver "complete justice" where laws fall short.
The Supreme Court's May 27, 2026 judgment on the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls has sparked significant debate regarding the Election Commission of India's (ECI) powers and conduct. The Court upheld all ECI arguments, despite petitioners' concerns about the SIR's implementation in Bihar, just months before the 2025 Assembly election. Critics argue the SIR was conducted under a wrong provision of law (Section 21(3) instead of 21(2) of RP Act, 1950), leading to the deletion of millions of voters without proper redress. The judgment also grants the ECI broad authority to determine citizenship documents, a role typically belonging to the Home Ministry, raising questions about its constitutional mandate.
- The Supreme Court's judgment on the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar has raised questions about the ECI's powers and adherence to statutory provisions.
- Critics argue that the SIR was implemented under an incorrect legal provision, Section 21(3) of the RP Act, 1950, which is meant for special revision in a constituency, not an intensive revision across a whole state.
- The judgment's allowance for the ECI to determine citizenship documents for electoral roll purposes is seen as an overreach into the Home Ministry's domain.
The Supreme Court's acceptance of a Presidential Ordinance to increase the sanctioned strength of judges from 34 to 38, leading to the appointment of five new judges (three to newly created posts), raises significant questions about judicial independence and security of tenure. The article draws parallels to historical instances, like President Roosevelt's court-packing plan, which were rejected to preserve an independent judiciary. It highlights that an Ordinance's temporary nature and the possibility of its lapse or disapproval by Parliament could make the tenure of judges appointed under it precarious, potentially creating an obligation to the executive. The Supreme Court itself has previously ruled against governance by repromulgated ordinances, calling it a "fraud on the Constitution."
- The Supreme Court accepted a Presidential Ordinance to increase its sanctioned strength from 34 to 38 judges, leading to appointments to newly created posts.
- This move raises concerns about judicial independence and the security of tenure for judges appointed via a temporary Ordinance.
- Historically, attempts to alter court composition for political reasons, like Roosevelt's court-packing plan, have been resisted to protect judicial autonomy.
The Supreme Court recently delivered two significant rulings impacting India's real-money online gaming industry. It upheld the constitutional validity of State laws prohibiting real-money gaming platforms, asserting that betting and gambling are 'res extra commercium' and fall under State legislative competence (Entry 34, List II). The Court also affirmed the Centre's retrospective 28% GST levy on online gaming companies, clarifying that GST applies to the full value of stakes, irrespective of whether games are skill-based or chance-based. The rulings emphasize that once money is staked on an uncertain outcome, the distinction between skill and chance becomes irrelevant for GST purposes. These judgments have severe implications for the industry, with many companies facing insolvency and potential shifts in operations.
- The Supreme Court upheld State laws prohibiting real-money online gaming, classifying betting and gambling as 'res extra commercium'.
- The Court affirmed that State governments have legislative competence to regulate such activities under Entry 34 of List II.
- The Centre's retrospective 28% GST levy on online gaming was upheld, applicable to the full value of stakes.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi recently invoked 'national interest' regarding the closure of the Sterlite Copper plant in Thoothukudi, Tamil Nadu, suggesting a conspiracy behind its shutdown. The plant, closed for eight years after police firing on protesters in 2018 and environmental violations, had a capacity of 4 lakh tonnes of refined copper annually, meeting 40% of India's demand and contributing to exports. Its closure turned India into a net importer of copper, costing $3.5 billion in foreign exchange. Vedanta, the company, proposed a 'green copper' project with cleaner technology, but its application was rejected by the TNPCB. The Madras High Court has directed the State government to form an expert committee to study the new proposal, amidst ongoing legal and environmental debates.
- PM Modi highlighted the closure of the Sterlite Copper plant in Thoothukudi as a matter of national interest, implying a conspiracy.
- The plant's closure transformed India from a copper exporter to a net importer, impacting the economy.
- Vedanta proposed a 'green copper' project with advanced, cleaner technology, but its application was rejected by the TNPCB.
The Supreme Court recently upheld the use of DNA tests in a paternity dispute, navigating the complex question of balancing a child's right to know parentage with an individual's right to privacy. While previous judgments cautioned against routine DNA tests, this ruling emphasized the child's desire for closure. The court referenced the 2017 Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India case, which established privacy as a fundamental right. It also cited the 2014 Nandlal Wasudeo Badwaik v. Lata Nandlal Badwaik case, affirming that scientific advancements should prevail over conclusive legal proof when in conflict, as exemplified by the N.D. Tiwari paternity case.
- The Supreme Court ruled on balancing a child's right to know paternity against an individual's right to privacy.
- The court upheld the use of DNA tests in a specific paternity dispute, moving beyond previous cautions against routine testing.
- The ruling acknowledges the fundamental right to privacy established in the Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India case (2017).
The Supreme Court AI committee has proposed draft regulations prohibiting the use of artificial intelligence (AI) for determining judicial outcomes, sentencing, or profiling individuals. The rules mandate that AI systems must operate solely in an assistive capacity, under strict human judgment, and must not perpetuate biases based on various grounds like race or gender. While AI is permitted for administrative tasks such as case management and scheduling, its use for "risk scoring" or assessing witness credibility is barred. An "apex body" is proposed to oversee AI adoption in the judiciary, ensuring accessibility and preventing digital divides.
- The Supreme Court's draft regulations prohibit AI from making judicial decisions or profiling individuals.
- AI systems are to be used only as assistive tools, always under human oversight and judgment.
- The rules explicitly forbid AI from perpetuating biases based on protected characteristics.
This article analyzes "Operation Langda," a policing method in Uttar Pradesh involving shooting suspects in the leg to disable them, rather than kill. These "half-encounters" have become routine since 2017, characterized by targeted leg injury, standardized reporting, and official endorsement. While presented as a pragmatic crime-control model and legally defensible due to suspects surviving, it raises concerns about due process and the rule of law. The system is self-sustaining, driven by political endorsement, professional incentives like promotions, and uncritical media. Despite Supreme Court guidelines (People's Union for Civil Liberties v. State of Maharashtra, 2014) for independent inquiries, these are not systematically applied, making fundamental reform challenging without dismantling the interlocking incentives.
- "Operation Langda" is a routine policing practice in Uttar Pradesh involving shooting suspects in the leg to disable them.
- This "half-encounter" method is considered legally defensible as suspects survive, allowing for arrest.
- The practice is sustained by political endorsement, professional incentives, and uncritical media reporting.
The article explores the conflict between the 'right to be forgotten' (informational privacy) and open justice, particularly concerning digital court records. While the Supreme Court recognized the right to privacy in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (2017), a Delhi High Court order highlighted the persistence of digital information. The core issue isn't discoverability but incompleteness, as records often fail to reflect subsequent decisions like acquittal. The article argues that judicial records, as official state acts, must be wholly public, accurately updated to reflect all major actions, and presented with proper context by platforms. This approach protects fundamental rights, ensures digital accuracy, and addresses the root cause of the problem.
- The article addresses the tension between the 'right to be forgotten' and the principle of open justice regarding digital court records.
- The Supreme Court recognized the right to informational privacy in the Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (2017) case.
- The primary problem is the incompleteness of digital records, which often don't reflect subsequent judicial decisions like acquittals.
The Supreme Court welcomed five new judges, increasing its working strength to 37, leaving only one position vacant. These appointments follow the Centre's decision to raise the court's sanctioned strength from 33 to 37 judges (excluding the Chief Justice of India) through the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Ordinance, 2026. CJI Surya Kant administered the oath of office to the new appointees, who include former Chief Justices of various High Courts and a senior advocate. This move aims to address the workload and ensure timely justice delivery in the apex court.
- The Supreme Court's working strength has increased to 37 judges with the appointment of five new judges.
- This expansion follows the Centre's decision to raise the sanctioned strength from 33 to 37, excluding the Chief Justice of India.
- The increase was facilitated by the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Ordinance, 2026.
The Centre has approved the appointment of five new judges to the Supreme Court, increasing its working strength to 37, just shy of the revised sanctioned strength of 38. These appointments follow the Collegium's recommendation on May 27, 2026. The new judges include Chief Justices from various High Courts and a senior advocate. This development comes after the sanctioned strength of the Supreme Court was increased from 34 to 38 judges through the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Ordinance, 2026, earlier in May. Currently, Justice B.V. Nagarathna is the only woman judge in the Supreme Court.
- The Centre approved the appointment of five new Supreme Court judges, bringing the working strength to 37.
- The appointments were made under Article 124(2) of the Constitution, following the Collegium's recommendation.
- The sanctioned strength of the Supreme Court was recently increased from 34 to 38 judges via an Amendment Ordinance in May 2026.
The Supreme Court has established a close link between human trafficking and broader migration flows, describing trafficking as a severe form of exploitation arising from systemic inequalities that transform survival strategies into pathways of exploitation. Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan noted that while not all migration is trafficking, the latter rarely occurs without it. The court also addressed the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act (ITPA), highlighting its failure to accord rights and protections to voluntary adult sex workers, which leads to social stigma and isolation. It called for the government to recognize the rights of voluntary adult sex workers and re-examine the conflation of sex trafficking and sex work in legislative frameworks.
- The Supreme Court linked human trafficking to broader migration flows, stemming from systemic inequalities.
- Trafficking is seen as an extreme form of exploitation, often emerging from survival strategies.
- The Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act (ITPA) is criticized for failing to protect voluntary adult sex workers.
The article critiques the Supreme Court's increasing reliance on suo motu cognisance in individual criminal cases, likening it to a bureaucracy ringing its own chain. It argues that such interventions, often triggered by media reports, are "heroic" but fail to promote institutional shake-up in lower judiciary. The author points out that while the apex court takes cognisance, the actual work of conviction or investigation is done by trial courts. The trend of rising suo motu cases since 2020, contrasted with earlier periods, suggests a shift from a "rare" to a "recurring" instrument, raising questions about the effective use of scarce judicial attention, especially when dowry deaths and other serious crimes have low conviction rates.
- The Supreme Court's frequent use of suo motu cognisance in individual criminal cases is criticized as a form of judicial overreach.
- Such interventions, often media-driven, are seen as superficial rather than leading to systemic reforms in the lower judiciary.
- The article highlights that despite apex court cognisance, the investigative and conviction work primarily rests with trial courts.
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.