Author: Anvita Dwivedi

In a development that once again foregrounds the uneasy relationship between preventive detention laws and constitutional liberty, the Supreme Court has declined to entertain a plea challenging the third detention order issued against Tamil YouTuber and journalist Savukku Shankar under the Tamil Nadu Goondas Act, directing the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional High Court instead. The order, delivered by a Bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma, may appear procedurally routine. Yet, in substance, it raises deeper questions about the limits of Article 32 jurisdiction, the repeated invocation of preventive detention, and the evolving judicial approach to liberty…

In a significant intervention at the intersection of criminal procedure, federal jurisdiction, and personal liberty, the Supreme Court has stayed the Telangana High Court’s order granting transit anticipatory bail to Congress leader Pawan Khera in connection with an FIR registered by Assam Police. The ruling, while interim in nature, raises deeper questions about the scope of transit anticipatory bail, the doctrine of territorial jurisdiction, and the increasing judicial concern over forum shopping in criminal proceedings. The Telangana High Court had granted Khera one-week transit anticipatory bail, enabling him to approach the competent court in Assam. The relief was premised on…

The retirement of Allahabad High Court judge Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav, while an impeachment motion against him remained pending in Parliament, has brought into sharp focus a fundamental institutional paradox within India’s constitutional framework the absence of an effective and time-bound mechanism for judicial accountability. While the event formally marks the end of a judicial tenure, its implications extend far beyond an individual judge. It raises a deeper and more uncomfortable question: can a constitutional system that provides for removal of judges fail to operationalise it in practice? Justice Yadav demitted office on April 15, 2026, even as impeachment proceedings…

In a significant intervention at the intersection of criminal procedure, federal jurisdiction, and personal liberty, the Supreme Court has stayed the Telangana High Court’s order granting transit anticipatory bail to Congress leader Pawan Khera in connection with an FIR registered by Assam Police. The ruling, while interiIm in nature, raises deeper questions about the scope of transit anticipatory bail, the doctrine of territorial jurisdiction, and the increasing judicial concern over forum shopping in criminal proceedings. The Telangana High Court had granted Khera one-week transit anticipatory bail, enabling him to approach the competent court in Assam. The relief was premised on…

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Act, 2026 is being positioned as a decisive reform to address the persistent delays and inefficiencies that have slowed India’s insolvency framework. Nearly a decade after the Code’s enactment, the need for reform is undeniable. However, the latest amendments do far more than streamline procedure they signal a deeper shift in the philosophy of insolvency law, moving it steadily from a revival-oriented framework to a creditor-driven enforcement mechanism. At the heart of the reform lies a crucial structural change: the near-mandatory admission of insolvency proceedings upon proof of debt and default. This significantly curtails…

The Union Government’s proposal to amend the Constitution to expand the Lok Sabha from 543 to 850 seats, while also permitting delimitation prior to the post-2026 Census, marks one of the most significant structural interventions in India’s representative democracy in recent decades. Though presented as an administrative and reform-oriented step, the proposal carries far-reaching implications for federal balance, electoral equity, and the future architecture of parliamentary representation. At its core, the proposed amendment seeks to fundamentally alter the framework governing delimitation. Under the existing constitutional scheme, particularly Article 82, delimitation is to be undertaken only after the first Census conducted…

In a significant ruling with both legal and political ramifications, the Supreme Court of India has permitted RJD supremo Lalu Prasad Yadav to raise the issue of sanction under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 during trial in the controversial “land-for-railway jobs” case. While granting this limited relief, the Court refused to quash the FIR and chargesheets, thereby allowing the prosecution to proceed marking a calibrated judicial approach balancing procedural safeguards with accountability in corruption cases. A Bench of Justices M.M. Sundresh and N. Kotiswar Singh disposed of Yadav’s plea seeking quashing of proceedings, holding that the…

In a thought-provoking address that has sparked introspection within India’s legal fraternity, Justice Sanjay Karol highlighted a growing disconnect between aspirations of law students and the realities of India’s justice system. Speaking at an event at the National Law Institute University (NLIU), Bhopal, the judge observed that many students today aspire to emulate the polished, corporate-style lawyers seen in popular series like Suits, rather than engaging with the grounded realities of Indian legal practice. Justice Karol candidly remarked that legal education in premier institutions is increasingly seen as a pathway to high-paying corporate careers, often inspired by global portrayals of…

In a significant development engaging the intersection of personal liberty, procedural fairness, and bail jurisprudence, the Supreme Court of India has agreed to hear a plea filed by activist Teesta Setalvad seeking release of her passport, which was surrendered as a condition of bail. The matter, now listed before a three-judge Bench, raises an important constitutional question whether prolonged restrictions on travel can be justified once an accused is enlarged on bail and cooperating with the investigation. Teesta Setalvad was granted interim bail by the Supreme Court in September 2022 in a case alleging fabrication of evidence and conspiracy in…

In a development that may have far-reaching implications for India’s agricultural policy and constitutional jurisprudence, the Supreme Court of India has issued notice to the Union Government on a plea seeking fixation of Minimum Support Price (MSP) based on the actual cost of cultivation (C2). The case brings into sharp focus a long-standing agrarian concern whether farmers are being assured remunerative returns that genuinely reflect their input costs, and whether the State’s pricing framework meets constitutional standards of fairness and economic justice. The Public Interest Litigation, filed under Article 32 of the Constitution, contends that the current MSP mechanism is…