Constitution Archives - Supreme Court of India Judgements

August 1, 2026 5:43 pm

Constitution of India, 1950 — Articles 21, 32, 14, 142 — Prisoners, rights of — Elderly and terminally ill convicts — Continued incarceration despite advanced age (above 70 years) or terminal illness — Held, imprisonment does not suspend constitutional guarantees of dignity and humane treatment — Right to life under Art. 21 continues in custody and extends to protection from cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment — NALSA’s nationwide Special Campaign identifying 5,393 vulnerable prisoners, including 11 terminally ill and 84 above 70 years across 17 States and 1 Union Territory, disclosed systemic gap between executive policy and ground-level implementation — Continued detention causing avoidable suffering held constitutionally impermissible — Supreme Court, invoking Arts. 32 and 142, directed States/UTs to formulate uniform compassionate-release policy.

Jul 19, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 713 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NATIONAL LEGAL SERVICES AUTHORITY Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ( Before : Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, JJ. ) Writ…

Constitution

Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 — Section 47 — Non-discrimination in government employment — Employee acquiring disability during service — Mandatory obligation on employer to shift employee to alternate post with same pay and service benefits, or, failing that, to accommodate on supernumerary post till superannuation — Respondent, a CRPF Constable (Driver), rendered blind/partially blind in 1996 and medically invalidated from service in 1998 without consideration of alternate posting — Held, S. 47 casts a positive and mandatory obligation on employer to protect disabled employee and not await a request for accommodation — Order of medical invalidation dated 11-3-1998 held ultra vires S. 47 and Arts. 14 and 21 of the Constitution — Single Judge’s direction reinstating respondent, upheld by Division Bench, affirmed in principle, though relief modified in view of respondent’s superannuation — Kunal Singh v. Union of India, (2003) 4 SCC 524; Bhagwan Dass v. Punjab State Electricity Board, (2008) 1 SCC 579; Ravinder Kumar Dhariwal v. Union of India, (2023) 2 SCC 209, relied on.

Jul 15, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 689 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs. BALI RAM NO. 850808321 ( Before : Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih, JJ. )…

Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 — Writ jurisdiction — Maintainability — Inclusion of advocate’s name in IBA “Caution List” — High Court dismissing writ petition on ground that Indian Banks’ Association (IBA) is not “State” under Art. 12 — Held, focus of maintainability has shifted from formal character of respondent body to nature of function performed and effect of impugned action on legally protected rights — Caution List operates as sector-wide adverse accreditation mechanism with public law element, having direct bearing on advocate’s right to practise profession under Art. 19(1)(g) — Writ petition against IBA held maintainable notwithstanding IBA not being “State” — Kishor S. Bhat v. Indian Banks’ Association, 2018 SCC OnLine Bom 2857, distinguished — Andi Mukta Sadguru Shree Muktajee Vandas Swami Suvarna Jayanti Mahotsav Smarak Trust v. V.R. Rudani, (1989) 2 SCC 691; Zee Telefilms Ltd. v. Union of India, (2005) 4 SCC 649; S. Shobha v. Muthoot Finance Ltd., 2025 SCC OnLine SC 177, relied on.

Jul 9, 2026 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH AJAY VIJH Vs. INDIAN BANKS ASSOCIATION AND OTHERS ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok Aradhe, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No. ….of 2026…

Constitution

Remission — Premature release of life convicts — Applicable policy — Conflict between Haryana’s 2002 Policy (dated 12.4.2002) and 2008 Policy (dated 13.8.2008) — Source of power — Held, the 2002 Policy, being in substance and effect referable to Article 161 of the Constitution of India (papers to be routed to the Governor for orders), is constitutional in origin, notwithstanding that it does not expressly recite the source of power — The 2008 Policy, by contrast, expressly invokes Sections 432 and 433 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and makes the Chief Minister the deciding authority, and is thus statutory in character — A policy traceable to a statute cannot override or supersede the exercise of the constitutional power under Article 161, that power being distinct, independent and uninfluenced by any statutory power — The purported “supersession” of the 2002 Policy by the 2008 Policy is accordingly untenable in law qua convicts governed by the 2002 Policy — Appellant held entitled to the benefit of the more liberal 2002 Policy.

Jul 2, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 667 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PARVEEN KUMAR @ PARVEEN CHAUHAN Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, JJ.…

Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 19(1)(d), Article 21 — Fundamental Right to Walk — The right to walk is a fundamental right integral to the right to movement under Article 19(1)(d), read with other provisions of Article 19 and Article 21 — This fundamental right includes the right to demarcated footpaths, which must take precedence over the movement of motorised vehicles

Jun 23, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 647 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MANIYAR ILIYAZ @ SHAIK RIYAZ AND ANOTHER Vs. P. AYYAPPAN AND OTHERS ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Atul S.…

Constitution Election Laws

Constitution of India, 1950 — Arts. 32 and 329(b) — Representation of the People Act, 1951 — S. 100 — Writ petition challenging order of Returning Officer rejecting nomination paper for Rajya Sabha election — Maintainability — Held, not maintainable — Bar contained in Art. 329(b) is absolute and excludes jurisdiction of this Court under Art. 32 (and of the High Court under Art. 226) in respect of all matters connected with conduct of an election, including the scrutiny and rejection of nomination papers — Only remedy available to a candidate aggrieved by rejection of his/her nomination is to file an election petition after conclusion of the election, in the manner provided under the Representation of the People Act, 1951 — Plea of petitioner that she did not seek to obstruct the election but only its fair and transparent completion does not take the case outside the bar of Art. 329(b) — Writ petition accordingly dismissed.

Jun 16, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 643 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MEENAKSHI NATARAJAN Vs. ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER ( Before : Prashant Kumar Mishra and Atul S. Chandurkar, JJ. )…

Constitution Service

Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226(1) — Territorial jurisdiction — Writ petition by CAPF personnel — Delhi High Court — Jurisdiction based on situs of respondent’s office —The Delhi High Court has territorial jurisdiction under Art. 226(1) of the Constitution to entertain a writ petition preferred by any enrolled member of the Border Security Force or any Central Armed Police Force (CAPF) who is aggrieved by an administrative order of termination of service, by reason of the situs of the offices of the Union of India and the Director General of the concerned CAPF in New Delhi — and this jurisdictional competence subsists notwithstanding that the impugned order of termination was issued from a place outside the territorial limits of the Delhi High Court and that no part of the cause of action arose within such limits — The Union of India and the Director General, BSF are necessary parties to such a writ petition by virtue of Ss. 4 and 5 of the BSF Act and the requirement under R. 22(4) of the BSF Rules that every order of dismissal/removal be reported to the Director General; there is, moreover, a presumption that official acts have been regularly performed.

Jun 12, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 630 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BAKSISH AHMAD Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER ( Before : Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 14, 15(1), 16, 39(a) & 39(c) — Uttar Pradesh Essential Commodities (Regulation of Sale and Distribution Control) Order, 2016 (2016 Order) — Clause 2(p) — Government Order (G.O.) No — 6 of 2019 — Paragraph IV(10) — Exclusion of married daughter from definition of ‘family’ for compassionate appointment as fair price shop dealer — Held, exclusion is based on gender stereotypes and lacks rational nexus with the object of the scheme, violating Articles 14 and 15(1) of the Constitution — Marital status cannot be the sole criterion for dependency — Dependency is a question of fact.

Jun 4, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 617 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KULSUM NISHA Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok Aradhe, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

Constitution

Allotment of Land — Irregularity — Public Interest Litigation — Demolition vs. Regularisation — The court must balance the wrong committed with the current reality and socio-economic consequences — Demolition of a fully operational commercial complex, involving significant investment, employment, and tax revenue, may not serve public interest if financial restitution is possible.

Jun 2, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 551 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH K. RAHEJA CORP. PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok Aradhe,…

Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950 — List II, Entry 34 — “Betting and gambling” — Whether confined to games of chance — The expression “betting and gambling” in Entry 34 cannot be split to mean that the staking angle alone constitutes “betting” and the chance element alone constitutes “gambling” — Both betting and gambling involve the aspect of staking money on an uncertain outcome — Merely because the risk element is commonly perceived as “taking a chance”, it cannot mean the expression covers only games of chance — The expression is a set composite expression and cannot be rewritten by Courts to read as “betting on gambling” — Such a judicial rewriting would constitute a clear constitutional aberration — State of Bombay v. R.M.D. Chamarbaugwala, AIR 1957 SC 699 (RMDC-I) and R.M.D. Chamarbaugwala v. Union of India, AIR 1957 SC 628 (RMDC-II), explained and distinguished.

May 31, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 594 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND OTHERS Vs. JUNGLEE GAMES INDIA PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS ( Before : J.B. Pardiwala and R.…

You missed

Will & Succession

Hindu female’s property devolves equally on husband and daughter separately; gift of undivided coparcenary share needs no co-owner’s consent. A. Hindu Succession Act, 1956 — Section 15(1)(a) — Devolution of Female Intestate’s Property — Properties of a Hindu female dying intestate devolve, in the absence of sons/daughters’ issue predeceasing her, upon her husband and daughter in equal shares under Section 15(1)(a); such undivided share in the husband’s hands does not partake the character of coparcenary property.

Jul 30, 2026 sclaw

Service

Armed Forces — Air Force Order No. 33/2017 — Prior Permission for Civil Post — Mandatory Nature — Requirement of seeking prior permission before applying for a civil post, and subsequent grant of NOC, held mandatory and not merely procedural/directory, since AFO 33/2017 has necessary nexus with regulating premature discharge of Airmen and its object of maintaining operational preparedness of the Air Force.

Jul 30, 2026 sclaw

Consumer

Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Deficiency of Service — Maintenance Contractor’s Liability — Elevator Malfunction — Comprehensive maintenance contractor, being both manufacturer and repair contractor with exclusive technical knowledge of safety interlocks and brake mechanisms, held principally deficient in service for failing to act on its own identified remedy (voltage stabiliser) despite repeated notice of persistent malfunction over several months preceding fatal accident.

Jul 30, 2026 sclaw

Service

Public Service Commission consultation before extending officiating appointment is directory not mandatory; ad-hoc service counts towards seniority computation. A. Uttaranchal Civil Services (Executive Branch) Rules, 2005 — Rule 24(4) — Uttaranchal Public Service Commission (Limitations of Functions) Regulations, 2003 — Regulation 5(a) — Nature of Requirement — Requirement of consulting Commission before continuation of officiating appointment beyond one year held directory, not mandatory, applying the classic test of statutory construction; non-compliance does not invalidate the appointment where treating it as void would cause serious inconvenience to persons with no control over the defaulting authority.

Jul 30, 2026 sclaw

Category: Constitution

You missed