The Supreme Court, in the Syed Iftikhar Andrabi vs National Investigation Agency case, reaffirmed the principle that bail should be the rule, even in UAPA cases. The ruling emphasized that the right to personal liberty and a speedy trial cannot be subservient to Section 43-D(5) of the UAPA, which makes bail difficult. This judgment disapproved earlier two-judge Bench rulings (Gurwinder Singh and Gulfisha Fatima) that diluted the principle set by a three-judge Bench in K.A. Najeeb (2021), which held that UAPA's rigours "melt down" if trial conclusion is unlikely within a reasonable time and substantial incarceration has occurred.
- The Supreme Court granted bail in the Andrabi case, emphasizing personal liberty and speedy trial.
- The ruling clarifies that Section 43-D(5) of the UAPA cannot indefinitely deny bail if trial is delayed.
- It reinforces the K.A. Najeeb (2021) judgment, which stated that UAPA's stringent bail conditions can be relaxed under certain circumstances.
The Supreme Court is set to review the legal principle of allowing shared use of disputed religious sites, following its 2024 order to examine the 'true character' of the Bhojshala complex in Madhya Pradesh. This comes in the context of the Ram Janmabhoomi mobilisation and the Archaeological Survey of India's 2003 survey. The court's 2020 Ayodhya judgment, which allowed shared use of the disputed site, is a key precedent. The article discusses the challenges of applying the "preponderance of probability" and "faith and belief" principles in such cases, and the need for the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958, to be enforced strictly, especially concerning Gyanvapi, Shahi Idgah, and the Bijamandal complex.
- The Supreme Court will examine the legal framework for allowing shared use of disputed religious sites, building on the Ayodhya judgment.
- The court's 2024 order to determine the 'true character' of the Bhojshala complex in Madhya Pradesh is a significant development.
- The Ayodhya judgment (2020) allowed shared use, applying principles of "preponderance of probability" and "faith and belief."
The Overseas Citizenship of India (OCI) status of foreigners of Indian origin who voted in recent Tamil Nadu elections is under scrutiny. Official sources indicate that the number of such individuals has increased to over 30. Authorities are analyzing arrival and departure details of these individuals, with some arrested in Chennai and Madurai. Their OCI registration could be cancelled if obtained through fraud or false declaration. The foreigners were booked under charges of cheating and violation of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, with false declarations in OCI forms attracting action under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
- The OCI status of foreign nationals of Indian origin who voted in recent Tamil Nadu elections is being investigated.
- Authorities are scrutinizing the declarations made in OCI application forms and during Special Intensive Revision.
- Fraudulent acquisition of OCI cards or false declarations could lead to cancellation of registration.
The Supreme Court refused to modify its 2025 order directing states and Union Territories to remove stray dogs from high-footfall public institutions. It clarified that such dogs cannot be "re-released" even after vaccination and sterilization. A Bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta, and N.V. Anjaria also permitted legally permissible measures, including euthanasia, for "rabid, incurably ill or demonstrably dangerous or aggressive dogs." The court emphasized the need for a balance between human safety and animal welfare, directing states to establish at least one Animal Birth Control (ABC) centre in every district and ensure proper infrastructure and trained personnel.
- The Supreme Court upheld its 2025 order for the removal of stray dogs from public institutions, clarifying they cannot be re-released post-vaccination/sterilization.
- Euthanasia is now permitted for stray dogs that are rabid, incurably ill, or demonstrably dangerous/aggressive.
- The court stressed the importance of balancing the right to live with dignity for humans and the welfare of animals.
Delhi Police has urged the Supreme Court to refer the issue of UAPA bail restrictions to a larger bench, citing two conflicting judgments. This comes after the Supreme Court's May 18 ruling granting interim bail in a narco-terror case, which voiced "serious reservations" about a January 5 judgment denying bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam. The police argue that the presumption of innocence takes a backseat under UAPA's statutory bail bar, and the issue requires consideration by a larger bench to reconcile the conflicting interpretations of Section 43D(5) of the UAPA, especially concerning prolonged incarceration and delay in trial.
- Delhi Police has requested the Supreme Court to constitute a larger bench to review the statutory bail restrictions under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
- The request follows conflicting judgments regarding the interpretation of UAPA's Section 43D(5) concerning bail, particularly in cases of prolonged incarceration.
- The Supreme Court's May 18 ruling, granting interim bail in a narco-terror case, expressed reservations about a January 5 judgment that denied bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam.
India's scientific ambitions are hindered by the marginalization of women researchers, who face a convergence of professional and domestic responsibilities. While age relaxation provisions exist, they need closer scrutiny. The article argues that the legal framework, including Articles 15(3), 16, and 51A(e) of the Constitution, mandates affirmative measures to ensure women researchers are not structurally penalized. It highlights legislative gaps in maternity benefits for researchers on fellowships and the lack of paternity leave. Data shows women's underrepresentation in academia and lower success rates in grants, emphasizing the need for gender-neutral caregiving support alongside women-specific provisions to address structural disadvantages.
- Women researchers in India face significant challenges due to combined professional and domestic responsibilities, leading to marginalization.
- Indian constitutional provisions (Articles 15(3), 16, 51A(e)) provide a legal basis for affirmative measures to support women in research.
- Legislative gaps exist in maternity benefits for researchers on fellowships and the absence of comprehensive paternity leave.
The Supreme Court expressed "serious reservations" about its January judgment refusing bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in the Delhi riots conspiracy case, particularly regarding the precluding of their right to seek bail for a year. The court's self-reproach, made while granting bail in a narco-terrorism case, emphasized that an accused cannot be indefinitely incarcerated merely because the state satisfies the low bar to refuse bail under UAPA. Justice Ujjal Bhuyan highlighted that "bail is the rule and jail is the exception" is a constitutional principle flowing from fundamental rights, speedy trial, and freedom from arbitrary arrests. He stressed that Section 43-D(5) of UAPA, which sets a low bar for bail denial, must be "muted" by constitutional courts and remains subordinate to Article 21, protecting personal liberty.
- The Supreme Court expressed serious reservations about its previous judgment denying bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in the Delhi riots conspiracy case.
- The court criticized the indefinite incarceration of accused individuals, especially when a timely trial is not possible, and highlighted the need for constitutional courts to "mute" draconian bail provisions.
- Justice Ujjal Bhuyan reiterated that "bail is the rule and jail is the exception" is a fundamental constitutional principle derived from fundamental rights.
The article argues that genuine competition is essential for a healthy democracy, likening 'one-horse races' to a lack of true democratic spirit. It highlights that the absence of rivals undermines the concept of 'rule by the people' and the fairness of the system. The author criticizes Section 53(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, which allows for 'unopposed' winners, diminishing the value of a mandate. The example of West Bengal Assembly elections is cited, where accusations of favouritism and issues with electoral rolls (SIR) tainted the outcome, raising questions about the Election Commission of India's neutrality and the integrity of the electoral process.
- Genuine electoral competition is fundamental for a vibrant democracy, allowing citizens to choose alternatives and ensuring fairness.
- The provision for 'unopposed' winners under Section 53(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, undermines the spirit of democratic contestation.
- Lack of competition and perceived partiality of electoral referees can diminish public confidence in election outcomes and the legitimacy of mandates.
President Droupadi Murmu has promulgated an ordinance increasing the Supreme Court's judge strength from 33 to 37 (excluding the Chief Justice of India) to address the growing backlog of over 93,000 cases. This move, which comes after a six-year hiatus since the last amendment in 2019, amends Section 2 of the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act, 1956. The ordinance will be presented to Parliament and will cease to operate if not approved within six weeks of reassembly or if disapproved. The Constitution originally envisaged a Supreme Court with a CJI and 'not more than seven judges' until Parliament prescribed a larger number.
- An ordinance has been promulgated to increase the Supreme Court's judge strength from 33 to 37, excluding the Chief Justice of India.
- The primary objective of this increase is to address the significant backlog of over 93,000 cases currently plaguing the Supreme Court.
- The ordinance amends Section 2 of the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act, 1956, and was promulgated by the President under Article 123 of the Constitution.
The United Doctors Front has moved the Supreme Court, seeking to transition the National Testing Agency (NTA) from a registered society to a statutory body established by an Act of Parliament. This demand aims to ensure constitutional and parliamentary accountability, following "recurring, systemic, and catastrophic failures" by the NTA, particularly in conducting the NEET-UG exam. The petition argues that NTA's current status as an autonomous society under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, creates an "accountability vacuum," shielding it from direct CAG audits and mandatory Parliamentary probes. A statutory shift would ensure direct oversight, financial transparency, and a robust grievance redressal mechanism.
- The United Doctors Front has petitioned the Supreme Court to convert the NTA into a statutory body.
- The move aims to ensure parliamentary and constitutional accountability for the NTA.
- The petition highlights "systemic failures" of the NTA, specifically regarding the NEET-UG exam.
Hindu groups performed worship at the Bhojshala complex in Dhar, Madhya Pradesh, a day after the High Court declared it a Hindu temple dedicated to Goddess Saraswati. The Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) acknowledged the verdict, granting Hindu communities "unrestricted access" for worship and learning. Meanwhile, Muslim bodies, including the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) and Kamal Maula Mosque Committee, rejected the High Court's decision, terming it "one-sided." They announced plans to challenge the verdict in the Supreme Court, emphasizing the importance of the Places of Worship Act, 1991, in preventing the reopening of historical religious disputes.
- Hindu groups conducted puja at the Bhojshala complex following a High Court verdict declaring it a Hindu temple.
- The ASI has granted unrestricted access to the Hindu community for worship and learning at the site.
- Muslim organizations, including AIMPLB, have rejected the High Court's decision and plan to appeal to the Supreme Court.
India has rejected an award issued by the Court of Arbitration (CoA) at The Hague concerning maximum pondage at Indian hydroelectric projects on the Indus river system, reiterating that it does not recognize the tribunal as legitimately constituted. The External Affairs Ministry stated that any decision by the "illegally constituted CoA" is "null and void." India's decision to hold the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance remains in force. The CoA, constituted in January 2023 at Pakistan's request, challenged India's Kishenganga and Ratle hydroelectric projects. India refused to participate, arguing technical questions fall under a Neutral Expert.
- India has rejected the Court of Arbitration's (CoA) award regarding the Indus Waters Treaty, citing the tribunal's illegitimate constitution.
- The award pertained to maximum pondage at Indian hydroelectric projects on the Indus river system.
- India maintains its stance that any decision by this CoA is "null and void" and its decision to hold the IWT in abeyance remains.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled that the disputed Bhojshala complex and Kamal Maula Mosque in Dhar district is a temple dedicated to Goddess Vagdevi (Saraswati), allowing the Hindu community to worship there while dismissing Muslim community claims. The court quashed a 2003 ASI order that permitted Muslims to offer Friday prayers at the site. The ruling, a 242-page order by Justices Vinay Kumar Shukla and Alok Awasthi, rejected the Muslim side's argument that a 1935 proclamation declared the site a mosque. The court directed the Union government to retrieve an idol of Goddess Saraswati from the London Museum and re-establish it in the monument, emphasizing scientific survey findings.
- The Madhya Pradesh High Court declared the Bhojshala complex in Dhar district a temple dedicated to Goddess Vagdevi (Saraswati).
- The court quashed a 2003 ASI order that had allowed the Muslim community to offer Friday prayers at the site.
- The ruling dismissed petitions from Muslim and Jain communities, suggesting Muslims seek alternate land for a mosque.
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has launched an AI-based helpbot named "Abhay" to authenticate CBI notices and protect citizens from digital arrest scams. This system is designed to counter the growing menace of fraudsters who use fake notices to trap victims, initiating sham legal processes and keeping them under surveillance under the guise of "digital arrest," a concept with no legal basis in Indian law. Citizens can access "Abhay" through the CBI's official website at any time to verify the legitimacy of any CBI notice they receive, thereby enhancing public safety and preventing fraud.
- The CBI has launched an AI-based helpbot, "Abhay," to authenticate CBI notices and protect citizens from digital arrest scams.
- "Abhay" aims to combat fraudsters who use fake notices to deceive victims into compliance with sham legal processes.
- Digital arrest scams involve keeping victims under surveillance under the false pretense of a "digital arrest," which has no legal standing in India.
The article discusses the Election Commission of India (ECI) and the need for electoral reforms, particularly concerning transparency and accountability. Following recent State elections, questions have been raised about the ECI's functioning, including the delay in releasing voter turnout data and the discrepancy between initial and final figures. The Supreme Court's call for a return to ballot papers and the subsequent rejection by the ECI highlight ongoing debates. The article emphasizes the need for a robust electoral system, free from political influence, to maintain public trust and ensure democratic integrity, suggesting reforms like a collegium for ECI appointments and addressing issues with EVMs.
- The Election Commission of India (ECI) is under scrutiny for its transparency and operational efficiency, especially regarding voter turnout data.
- Concerns include delays in releasing final voter turnout figures and discrepancies between preliminary and final data.
- The Supreme Court's suggestion for returning to ballot papers, though rejected by the ECI, underscores the debate on electoral integrity.
The Federation of Indian Medical Association (FAIMA) has petitioned the Supreme Court, alleging "recurring, systemic, and catastrophic" failures by the National Testing Agency (NTA) in conducting the NEET-UG exam. FAIMA claims NTA ignored recommendations from the Radhakrishnan Committee and previous SC directions following a 2024 paper leak. The petition highlights NTA's reliance on unverified private service providers, leading to lapses like unauthorized access to strongrooms and insecure transportation of sensitive materials. FAIMA urges the SC to invoke Article 142 for a modern, foolproof, and transparent system, arguing that mere cancellation of the exam is insufficient.
- FAIMA has accused the National Testing Agency (NTA) of repeated systemic failures in conducting the NEET-UG exam.
- The petition alleges that NTA disregarded recommendations from the Radhakrishnan Committee and Supreme Court directions after a 2024 paper leak.
- NTA's reliance on unverified private service providers for logistics and security is cited as a major cause of examination lapses.
The Supreme Court questioned the Union government's dominant role in appointing Chief Election Commissioners (CECs) and Election Commissioners (ECs), emphasizing that free and fair elections depend on a truly independent Election Commission. The court highlighted the absence of a neutral person on the Prime Minister-chaired selection committee and the impracticality of a Cabinet Minister defying the PM. Petitioners challenged the 2023 Act, which replaced the Chief Justice of India with a Cabinet Minister on the selection panel, arguing it undermined the independence established by the Anoop Baranwal judgment. The Attorney-General argued against judicial overreach, stating the court cannot dictate laws to Parliament.
- The Supreme Court underscored that free and fair elections necessitate a truly independent Election Commission.
- The court expressed concern over the composition of the selection committee, noting the absence of a neutral member and the influence of the Prime Minister.
- Petitioners challenged the 2023 Act for replacing the Chief Justice of India with a Cabinet Minister on the selection panel, arguing it compromises EC independence.
Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant launched 'One Case, One Data' (OCOD) and 'Su-Sahayak', an AI-powered chatbot, to digitize the judiciary. OCOD aims to create a unified digital trail for disputes across courts, improving data accuracy and easing procedural bottlenecks. Su-Sahayak assists users with case status and judgments on the Supreme Court website. While these tools promise improved access to justice, concerns exist regarding the digital divide, potential for misuse, interoperability, data integrity, and the risk of AI bias against marginalized communities, emphasizing the need for careful implementation to prevent abuse.
- CJI Surya Kant launched 'One Case, One Data' (OCOD) and 'Su-Sahayak' to digitize the Indian judiciary.
- OCOD aims to create a unified digital data platform for all court cases, linking records and litigant actions.
- 'Su-Sahayak' is an AI-powered chatbot designed to help users navigate the Supreme Court website for case information.
Chief Justice of India Surya Kant announced the launch of two major digital initiatives by the Supreme Court: "One Case One Data" and 'Su Sahay' chatbot. The "One Case One Data" initiative aims to integrate judicial administration across all levels, from taluk courts to the top court, into a unified and comprehensive digital database. This mechanism is designed to create a more interconnected system for judicial data. Additionally, 'Su Sahay', an artificial intelligence (AI)-powered assistance chatbot, has been launched. Integrated with the Supreme Court website, it aims to provide litigants with easier access to justice and court-related services, modernizing and streamlining the judicial system in India.
- The Supreme Court has launched "One Case One Data" to create a unified digital database for judicial administration across all court levels.
- This initiative aims to integrate judicial data from taluk courts to the Supreme Court, enhancing interconnectivity within the system.
- An AI-powered assistance chatbot named 'Su Sahay' has also been launched, integrated with the Supreme Court website.
The Supreme Court has referred to the Union government the question of whether schools imparting religious instruction should be classified under constitutional provisions for charitable or religious establishments, rather than as 'secular or professional' educational institutions. A petition by advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay sought a declaration that institutions promoting any religion fall under Article 26(a) (freedom of religion rights) and not Article 19(1)(g) (right to profession) or Article 30(1) (minority educational institutions). The petition argues that religious instruction schools should be subject to public order, health, and morality restrictions, raising concerns about potential brainwashing of children in unregistered institutions, emphasizing national security and child safety.
- The Supreme Court has asked the government to consider classifying schools imparting religious instruction under 'freedom of religion' rights.
- The petition seeks to categorize these schools under Article 26(a) rather than Article 19(1)(g) or Article 30(1).
- The petitioner argues that religious instruction schools should be subject to restrictions based on public order, health, and morality.
Despite the 2016 demonetisation, fake Indian currency notes (FICN) continue to be a significant problem, with their prevalence increasing in certain denominations like ₹500 and ₹2000. Data from the RBI and NCRB indicate that while overall detection initially decreased, it has risen again, particularly in the banking system. The article highlights the ongoing efforts of law enforcement agencies and the challenges in combating the circulation of counterfeit notes, with Maharashtra consistently reporting the highest seizures, underscoring the persistent threat to the economy.
- Fake Indian Currency Notes (FICN) continue to circulate despite the 2016 demonetisation, posing an ongoing challenge.
- Detection of counterfeit ₹500 and ₹2000 notes has increased significantly in recent years.
- The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) collect and report data on FICN seizures.
This explainer details the constitutional provisions and conventions governing the Governor's role in government formation, particularly in hung assemblies. It discusses the discretionary powers, the recommendations of various commissions (Sarkaria, Venkatachaliah, Punchhi), and concerns regarding the conduct of Governors. The article emphasizes the need to uphold constitutional propriety and democratic norms, especially regarding the invitation of the single largest party or pre-poll alliances and the floor test for proving majority, which is considered the ultimate test for a government's confidence.
- Article 164(1) states the Chief Minister is appointed by the Governor, and other ministers are appointed on the CM's advice.
- The Governor's discretionary powers are limited, primarily for identifying the person most likely to command the House's confidence.
- Commissions like Sarkaria, Venkatachaliah, and Punchhi recommend prioritizing pre-poll alliances and then the single largest party for government formation.
The article discusses the Governor's critical role when no single party secures a clear majority in state elections, leading to a hung assembly. The Governor, as the constitutional head, invites the largest party or pre-poll alliance to form the government, but discretion is involved. Precedents and Supreme Court judgments emphasize that the Governor must act judiciously, ensuring stability and adhering to constitutional propriety. Key issues include the timing of inviting parties, the floor test, and the formation of post-poll alliances. The Sarkaria Commission and the Punchhi Commission have provided recommendations to guide the Governor's actions in such scenarios, stressing the need for transparency and fairness.
- In a hung assembly, the Governor's role is crucial in inviting parties to form a government.
- The Governor's discretion must be exercised judiciously, guided by constitutional provisions and precedents.
- The largest single party or pre-poll alliance is usually invited first, but post-poll alliances can also be considered.
The Calcutta High Court has overruled the Union government's preliminary objections to petitions challenging the ₹92,000-crore Great Nicobar Island project. The petitions allege violations of the Forest Rights Act (FRA) in obtaining consent for the project. The court dismissed the Centre's argument that petitioner Meena Gupta lacked locus standi, affirming her sufficient interest in espousing the cause of the vulnerable tribal community. Issues raised include the validity of Gram Sabha resolutions, the constitution of a sub-divisional committee, and notifications reducing buffer zones for Campbell Bay and Galathea Bay National Parks. The Centre had argued the project's national importance should shield it from Public Interest Litigations.
- The Calcutta High Court dismissed the Union government's objections to petitions challenging the Great Nicobar Island project.
- The petitions allege violations of the Forest Rights Act (FRA) in the process of obtaining consent for the mega-infrastructure project.
- The court affirmed the petitioner's locus standi, recognizing her interest in advocating for the vulnerable tribal community.