Author: Anvita Dwivedi

In a telling observation that reflects the growing anxiety within the judicial system over cyber fraud, Surya Kant recently expressed shock that even well-educated individuals are falling victim to so-called “digital arrest” scams. The remark, made during proceedings relating to a suo motu case on cyber fraud, signals not merely a passing concern but a deeper institutional recognition that traditional assumptions about awareness and vulnerability are no longer valid in the digital age. The Chief Justice’s remarks were accompanied by a striking anecdote: a woman known to him in an official capacity lost her entire post-retirement savings after falling prey…

In a significant reaffirmation of labour jurisprudence, the Supreme Court of India has held that short or artificial breaks in service cannot be used to deny ad-hoc employees the benefit of continuity for the purposes of regularisation. The ruling strengthens the constitutional protection available to long-serving employees who are often subjected to intermittent and strategically imposed breaks by employers to defeat their claims to permanency. The Court’s reasoning is rooted in a well-established legal principle: continuity of service must be assessed in substance, not in form. Where employees have worked over long durations performing regular duties, minor or artificial interruptions…

In a sharp assertion of judicial discipline, the Supreme Court of India has dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking a declaration that Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose and the Indian National Army (INA) were solely responsible for India’s independence. The Court not only rejected the plea but also issued a stern warning to the petitioner against repeatedly filing identical petitions, signalling growing judicial intolerance toward what it termed misuse of the PIL jurisdiction. The matter was heard by a Bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, which expressed strong disapproval of the petitioner’s conduct. Notably, the same petitioner…

The rejection of the Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill, 2026 must be understood not merely as a parliamentary outcome, but as a defining constitutional moment that has once again postponed women’s entry into India’s highest decision-making forum. While the public discourse has been dominated by the politics of delimitation, the real and immediate consequence lies elsewhere women’s representation in Parliament continues to remain deferred, despite decades of legislative acknowledgement and constitutional commitment. As previously analysed, the collapse of the Bill has directly halted a pathway that could have operationalised one-third reservation in a time-bound manner. At the centre of this debate…

The Bombay High Court has recently sought a response from the Union Government on a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking inclusion of Subacute Sclerosing Panencephalitis (SSPE) under the National Policy for Rare Diseases (NPRD), 2021. This development marks an important moment in the evolving interface between public health policy and constitutional rights, particularly the right to life and health under Article 21. By calling for the Centre’s stand, the Court has signalled its willingness to examine whether policy exclusions in the domain of rare diseases can withstand constitutional scrutiny. The PIL, filed by a parent who lost his minor son…

The Supreme Court of India has recently delivered a significant ruling clarifying the legal threshold required for a valid arbitration agreement. In holding that a contractual clause stating disputes “can be settled by arbitration” does not create a binding obligation to arbitrate, the Court has reaffirmed that arbitration is fundamentally rooted in clear and unequivocal consent between parties. This judgment once again underscores that arbitration cannot be inferred from ambiguous or permissive language. The case arose in Nagreeeka Indcon Products Pvt. Ltd. v. Cargocare Logistics (India) Pvt. Ltd., where the dispute centered around Clause 25 of a Bill of Lading.…

In a politically and constitutionally charged development, the Lok Sabha has rejected the Constitution (One Hundred and Thirty-First Amendment) Bill, 2026 an ambitious legislative proposal aimed at restructuring India’s electoral architecture through delimitation and expansion of parliamentary representation. The failure of the Bill, which did not secure the mandatory two-thirds majority, has not only stalled immediate reforms but also opened a deeper constitutional debate on representation, federal balance, and the future of electoral democracy in India. The Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill sought to substantially increase the strength of the Lok Sabha from 543 seats to 850, alongside enabling a fresh…

In a significant intervention reflecting the judiciary’s growing engagement with technological shifts in legal practice, Surya Kant has advised newly designated Advocates-on-Record (AoRs) of the Supreme Court to personally draft pleadings and refrain from outsourcing this core professional responsibility to artificial intelligence tools. The remarks, delivered during an interaction with newly inducted AoRs, underscore an emerging judicial concern: that while technology may assist, it cannot substitute the intellectual rigour and accountability inherent in legal drafting. Addressing the new AoRs, CJI Surya Kant emphasised that drafting is not a mechanical exercise but a deeply intellectual process requiring legal reasoning, contextual understanding,…

In a development of considerable constitutional significance, the Supreme Court of India has referred a batch of petitions challenging the validity of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, along with its Rules, to a three-judge Bench. The move signals that the Court views the issue not as an isolated statutory challenge but as one with far-reaching implications for similar legislative frameworks governing organised crime across India. The reference emerged in proceedings arising from a plea filed by Samajwadi Party leader Irfan Solanki, where a Bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul…

In a significant constitutional articulation, former Chief Justice of India B. R. Gavai has reaffirmed that the Indian Constitution does not merely promise equality in form, but mandates the dismantling of entrenched structures that perpetuate inequality. Delivered at the Ambedkar Memorial Lecture at NALSAR University of Law, his address foregrounds a deeper, transformative understanding of constitutionalism one that aligns law with social realities rather than abstract guarantees. Justice Gavai’s central thesis rests on the distinction between formal equality and substantive equality. While the former ensures equal treatment in law, the latter demands corrective mechanisms to address historical and systemic disadvantages.…