Author: Anvita Dwivedi
The Supreme Court of India has sought the personal presence of a senior Delhi Police officer to explain allegations that women journalists were assaulted, manhandled and detained while covering protests in the national capital, bringing the relationship between police powers, press freedom and the constitutional protection of women journalists into sharp judicial focus. Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, while hearing a mentioning concerning a petition filed by the Network of Women in Media, India (NWMI), indicated that the police administration would be required to respond to the allegations before the Court. The Bench made it clear that an explanation…
In a significant observation on the criminal justice system’s response to narcotics offences, the Supreme Court of India has emphasised that persons found at the receiving end of the drug supply chain may themselves be victims of a larger network, and that law enforcement must concentrate on curbing the availability of narcotic substances and dismantling the structures responsible for their distribution rather than merely punishing users. The Bench of Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K. Vinod Chandran made these observations while allowing an appeal filed by Sanjana Bhaskaran and quashing the prosecution against her under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic…
The Supreme Court on October 13, 2026, declined to entertain a writ petition filed directly under Article 32 of the Constitution by Waiz Khan, who alleged that personnel of the Uttar Pradesh Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) entered his residence without wearing proper uniforms or displaying identification, despite there being no criminal proceedings pending against him. A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana held that the petitioner had not first approached the Allahabad High Court and granted him liberty to pursue the available remedy before that Court. The petition was accordingly dismissed at…
The Supreme Court on October 13, 2026, adjourned to October 15 the batch of petitions arising from the protests in Delhi against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, after Justice V. Mohana was reported to be unwell. The matters were listed before a Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Mohana. With the parties expressing no objection to the adjournment, the Court deferred the hearing and extended the time for the Union and the other authorities to submit their compliance report in relation to…
The Supreme Court on October 13, 2026, stayed further proceedings before the trial court in the criminal defamation case against Congress leader and Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi over his remarks describing Prime Minister Narendra Modi as “Choron Ke Sardar” and “Commander-in-Thief”. A Bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh issued notice, returnable in four weeks, on Gandhi’s challenge to the Bombay High Court’s September 8 order refusing to quash the criminal defamation proceedings. The Bench ordered that further proceedings before the trial court would remain stayed in the meantime. Senior Advocate…
The Supreme Court on October 12, 2026, declined to stay a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) First Information Report registered in connection with corruption allegations against Rajbir Singh Ghuman, Officer on Special Duty (OSD) to Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann, while directing that no coercive steps be taken in the matter during the pendency of the proceedings. A Bench comprising Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice Prasanna B. Varale issued notice on the petition filed by the State of Punjab challenging the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s direction to the CBI to register a criminal case and investigate the allegations. The…
Rajya Sabha Member A.A. Rahim, National President of the Democratic Youth Federation of India (DYFI), has approached the Supreme Court seeking an independent investigation into the alleged illegal detention and custodial assault of DYFI office-bearers, Central Committee members and activists during a protest against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar at Connaught Place, New Delhi, on October 11, 2026. The petition, instituted under Article 32 of the Constitution, alleges that demonstrators were taken away in police vehicles with curtained windows, shifted into compartmentalised vehicles and subjected to physical violence while in custody. It further alleges that they were detained for more…
The Supreme Court has acquitted a man convicted of aggravated penetrative sexual assault under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act), holding that the prosecution had failed to establish his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Setting aside the concurrent judgments of the trial court and the Meghalaya High Court, a Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta found that the prosecution’s case suffered from serious deficiencies concerning the identification of the accused, the unexplained delay in lodging the First Information Report, material omissions in the earliest account of the incident and the…
The Delhi High Court on October 12, 2026, questioned the Delhi Police over allegations that civil rights activist Mohammad Wasiq Nadeem Khan was prevented from leaving his residence-cum-office for several hours to stop him from attending a proposed demonstration at Jantar Mantar. While the Bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Nitin Wasudeo Sambre and Justice Sanjay Sharma expressed concern over the legal authority for the police presence at Khan’s premises, the controversy also raises a question that deserves equally careful examination: what happens when the police deny permission for a demonstration on public-order grounds, but receive information that a prospective participant…
The Supreme Court on October 12, 2026, questioned the connection between religious practice and the bursting of firecrackers while hearing proceedings concerning air pollution in Delhi-NCR ahead of the festive season. A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana was considering whether, and subject to what conditions, firecrackers should be permitted in the National Capital Region amid persistent concerns over deteriorating air quality and the health consequences of pollution. During the hearing, Justice Bagchi questioned the assumption that bursting crackers necessarily constitutes a religious practice, asking, “What does religion have to do…