Author: Anvita Dwivedi

The Supreme Court recently expressed serious concern over the extraordinarily low conviction rate in cases registered under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA), observing that while the national conviction rate in such prosecutions is reportedly around six percent, the figure in Jammu and Kashmir remains below one percent. The Court’s remarks have once again brought into sharp focus the continuing constitutional debate surrounding anti-terror legislation, prolonged incarceration without trial, and the tension between national security imperatives and protection of civil liberties. The observations reportedly came during proceedings involving prolonged detention under the UAPA, where the Court examined the broader…

Chief Justice of India Surya Kant recently captured the dramatic transformation of India’s judicial system through a simple but striking observation. Recalling the culture of traditional court practice, the CJI remarked that litigants once entered lawyers’ chambers asking, “File kahan hai?” a question symbolic of a justice system dominated by bulky paper records, physical movement of files, and endless procedural delays. Today, he noted, the same litigants increasingly ask, “Link bhej dijiye,” reflecting the rapid transition of Indian courts toward digitisation, e-filing, virtual access, and paperless functioning. The remark, though conversational in tone, carries deep institutional significance. It reflects not…

In a major institutional development aimed at addressing mounting judicial backlog and increasing constitutional workload, President Droupadi Murmu has promulgated the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Ordinance, 2026, increasing the sanctioned strength of the Supreme Court from 33 judges to 37 judges, excluding the Chief Justice of India. With the Chief Justice included, the effective strength of the Court now rises to 38 judges. The ordinance marks the latest chapter in the gradual expansion of India’s apex judiciary since the Constitution came into force in 1950. The Union Government justified the move by citing the alarming rise in pendency…

In a significant judgment reaffirming the reformative foundations of criminal jurisprudence, the Supreme Court has ruled that the gravity or heinousness of an offence alone cannot become the sole ground for denying remission to a convict who has undergone prolonged incarceration and demonstrated satisfactory conduct in prison. The Court ordered the release of a convict in the widely discussed Madhumita Shukla murder case after he spent more than twenty-two years behind bars, holding that executive authorities cannot mechanically reject remission merely because the crime generated public outrage or involved exceptional brutality. The ruling is legally important because it revisits the…

In an important judgment concerning landlord-tenant relationships and co-ownership rights, the Supreme Court has ruled that a co-owner of a property can legally initiate eviction proceedings under the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act even without demonstrating exclusive ownership over the premises. The ruling reinforces the legal principle that a co-owner, by virtue of having an undivided interest in the property and entitlement to receive rent, falls within the definition of a “landlord” under rent control legislation. The judgment came in a dispute where eviction proceedings had been initiated by one of the co-owners of a tenanted…

The Supreme Court recently issued a sharp caution to the Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray (UBT) faction of the Shiv Sena over public remarks allegedly attributing delay in adjudication of the party symbol and disqualification dispute to the judiciary. The observations came during ongoing proceedings connected to the prolonged constitutional and political battle arising from the split within the Shiv Sena following the 2022 Maharashtra political crisis. The Court’s remarks have once again brought into focus the increasingly delicate relationship between judicial institutions, political rhetoric, and public confidence in constitutional adjudication. A Bench of the Supreme Court reportedly expressed strong disapproval of…

In a deeply concerning observation that has sent ripples through India’s legal fraternity, the Supreme Court recently expressed serious anxiety over the growing presence of allegedly fraudulent lawyers practising across courts in the country. During the hearing of a matter concerning verification of law degrees and enrolment practices, Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai and Justice Surya Kant remarked that “thousands of fraudulent lawyers” may currently be practising within the Indian judicial system, while sharply questioning the effectiveness of regulatory oversight exercised by the Bar Council of India (BCI). The Bench further indicated that an independent investigative mechanism, potentially involving…

In a judgment likely to shape the future discourse on contested religious sites in India, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has ruled that the Bhojshala complex in Dhar is fundamentally a temple dedicated to Goddess Saraswati, while also observing that members of the Muslim community may seek alternative land for construction of a mosque. The verdict has immediately assumed national significance because it touches upon deeply sensitive questions involving history, archaeology, faith, constitutional secularism, and competing civilizational claims. The decision was delivered after prolonged hearings concerning the Bhojshala Kamal Maula complex, a site that has remained at the centre of…

In a politically and constitutionally consequential move, the Karnataka government has formally withdrawn the controversial 2022 order that had effectively prohibited the wearing of hijab and other overt religious symbols in government educational institutions. The decision marks a dramatic reversal of one of the most polarising educational and constitutional controversies in recent Indian legal history and revives larger national debates concerning secularism, religious identity, institutional discipline, and individual liberty within public spaces. The Karnataka government reportedly informed the Supreme Court that it had withdrawn the February 5, 2022 Government Order issued by the previous Bharatiya Janata Party administration. The earlier…

The Calcutta High Court on Thursday witnessed one of the most politically charged hearings in recent years as multiple Public Interest Litigations concerning alleged post-poll violence in West Bengal came up before the Court, with former Chief Minister and Trinamool Congress supremo Mamata Banerjee personally appearing and addressing the Bench. The proceedings transformed the courtroom into a constitutional theatre where questions of political violence, policing, democratic legitimacy, and federal governance converged with extraordinary intensity. Appearing before the Bench headed by Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam, Banerjee reportedly alleged widespread violence, intimidation, and police inaction following the recently concluded West Bengal Assembly…