This roundup of weekly legal developments in India covers the most significant Supreme Court and High Court rulings, including Bhojshala’s Religious Character Examined; ₹10 Overcharge on Beer Costs ₹25,000; Custody Disputes Guidelines; Safe Footpaths a Fundamental Right; Haryana Cooperative Society Recruitment; and Constructive Res Judicata.
It also highlights major legislative developments such as the Advisory for Indian Seafarers Amid Gulf Security Risks; SHe-Box 2.0 Enhances PoSH Act; Health Ministry Ends Over-the-Counter Sale of Cough Syrups; FEMA (Third Amendment) Rules, 2026, along with other updates from across India.
STORY OF THE WEEK
Section 69-A, IT Act empowers platform-wide blocking: Temporary Telegram Ban upheld as proportionate amid risk of fabricated leak claims in NEET-UG 2026
Delhi High Court affirmed an interim order dated 16 June 2026 (impugned order) passed by Union of India through Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY), under Section 69-A, Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act) directing the temporary blocking of the Telegram platform throughout India and required Telegram to disable its message-editing feature.
[Telegram FZ LLC v. Union of India, 2026 SCC OnLine Del 4750]
Read more HERE
SUPREME COURT HIGHLIGHTS
Arbitration | Arbitration clause cannot override consumer forum’s jurisdiction; Statutory remedy under Consumer Protection Act remains intact
Supreme Court held that the existence of an arbitration clause in an agreement does not oust the jurisdiction of consumer fora under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The Court reiterated that consumer remedies are statutory, additional, and independent of other remedies available under law. The Bench further held that once a consumer complaint has been admitted, it cannot be transferred to arbitration or any other forum by virtue of the proviso to Section 12(4), Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Clarifying the scope of the term “consumer”, the Court ruled that an allottee does not lose the right to seek compensation for delayed possession merely because possession of the flat has subsequently been delivered. Consequently, the Court set aside the orders of the consumer fora below and restored the complaint for adjudication on merits.
[T.K.A. Padmanabhan v. Abhiyan Coop. Group Housing Society Ltd., 2026 SCC OnLine SC 1160]
Read more HERE
Compassionate Appointment | Compassionate Appointment Cannot be Kept in Abeyance by Invoking Rule Applicable Only to Financial Assistance: Haryana Rule Upheld
Supreme Court examined the scope and interplay of Rule 23(1) and Rule 5(1)(f) and (g), particularly in the context of pending criminal proceedings arising out of the death of a government employee and the entitlement of dependents to compassionate benefits.
[Atul Chauhan v. State of Haryana, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 1108]
Read more HERE
Companies Act | “Irreversible Stage” Test and Transfer of Winding-Up Proceedings to NCLT Under S. 434 Companies Act Revisited: Notice issued
In an appeal arising out of Calcutta High Court’s judgment dated 11 May 2026, wherein the Company Court’s order transferring pending winding-up proceedings concerning Martina Bio Genics Pvt. Ltd. (in liquidation) from the High Court to the National Company Law Tribunal, Kolkata Bench (NCLT) was upheld, and notice was issued to the respondents.
[Shiva Shakti Security Services v. Official Liquidator, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 1159]
Read more HERE
Constructive Res Judicata | Constructive Res Judicata Cannot Bar Title Suit When Right Was Not Previously Under Threat
Supreme Court held that the appellant’s suit seeking declaration of title and possession could not be barred by constructive res judicata merely because such relief had not been claimed in earlier proceedings challenging specific sale deeds executed by a general power-of-attorney holder.
[Makardhwaj Ram v. Jagdish Rai, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 1112]
Read more HERE
Also Read: Probate Revocation Plea Time-Barred; Mutation Notice Is Constructive Notice: SC | SCC Times
Family Law | Multi-Expert Panels for Psychological Evaluation of Child Victims Barred in Custody Disputes, 20-Point Guidelines Issued
Supreme Court held that the High Court had failed to adequately consider the welfare, emotional security and psychological well-being of the minor child while modifying its earlier direction for appointment of an independent expert and constituting a 4-member panel of experts.
[Sheetal Vasant Thakur v. Chirag Arora, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 1110]
Read more HERE
Fundamental Right | 5-year-old’s tragic death leads to declaring the right to walk on safe footpaths a fundamental right
Supreme Court not only enhanced the compensation payable to the bereaved father but also addressed the larger constitutional issue of pedestrian rights in India. Observing that the “primary right of movement under Article 19(1)(d) is the Fundamental Right to Walk”, the Court declared that the right to walk on safe and well-demarcated footpaths is a fundamental right under Part III of the Constitution.
[Maniyar Iliyaz v. P. Ayyappan, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 1162]
Read more HERE
Motor Vehicle Accident Compensation | Falling of Tree Branch Not Accident “Arising Out of the Use of a Motor Vehicle”; To Do Complete Justice Compensation Enhanced to ₹ 25 lakhs Under Article 142
Supreme Court held that falling of a tree branch during heavy rain may constitute an unforeseen natural occurrence beyond the contemplation of authorities, however, it does not by itself, constitute an accident “arising out of the use of a motor vehicle” within the meaning of Sections 165 and 166 of the Act, specially when the vehicle plays no active or proximate role in causing the injury and its presence is merely incidental. Therefore, the Court held that, in such circumstances, fastening liability upon the appellant under the Act would be unfair.
[Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike v. K.K. Umesh Kumar, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 1111]
Read more HERE
Recruitment | Administrative Delays in Workshop Renewals Can’t Prejudice Eligible Candidates: Fresh TNPSC Motor Vehicle Inspector Recruitment Process Upheld
Supreme Court upheld the impugned directions, holding that these directions provided a level playing field to all the candidates so that they are placed at par with each other and a wider competition amongst eligible candidates.
[S. Senthil Kumaran Bose v. State of T.N., 2026 SCC OnLine SC 1135]
Read more HERE
Recruitment | Procedural irregularity in final appointment process cannot invalidate fair recruitment: Haryana Cooperative Society directed to reconsider employees’ appointments
Supreme Court held that on compliance with Rule 3, Service Rules, 2003 relating to the presence and concurrence of specified officials in the Board of Directors (BOD) meeting approving appointments constitutes a curable procedural irregularity and not a substantive illegality. Where the advertisement and selection process are otherwise fair, transparent, and free from infirmity, such a defect does not render the entire recruitment process void ab initio. Further, the Court directed the Haryana Cooperative Society to reconsider the appointments of the employees through a duly constituted BOD, in compliance with the applicable statutory rules.
[Gaurav Mehla v. State of Haryana, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 1107]
Read more HERE
HIGH COURTS HIGHLIGHTS
Advocates’ Health Insurance | State’s Undertaking on ₹6,000 Annual Premium for Advocates’ Health Insurance Binding; Non-Publication of Resolution in Official Gazette No Bar to Implementation
Jharkhand High Court noted that the State had undertaken to provide health insurance to registered advocates with annual premium allocations. In view of this undertaking, the Court accepted the affidavit as binding on the State and accordingly disposed of the petition without any order as to costs.
[Bidesh Kumar Dan v. Union of India, 2026 SCC OnLine Jhar 644]
Read more HERE
Arbitration | No stay on arbitral award means execution cannot be obstructed: HDIL promoter’s associate and guarantor directed to disclose assets on oath
Bombay High Court observed that in absence of stay on arbitral award, disclosure orders and continuation of injunction granted by Arbitral Tribunal are justified in execution proceedings. The Court directed Meena Kumar Rohra (borrower) and Rakesh Kumar Wadhawan (guarantor) to disclose their assets and encumbrances thereon on oath within 4 weeks. The Court further directed that the injunction restraining the borrower from disposing of her assets shall continue till further orders.
[Unity Small Finance Bank Ltd. v. Meena Kumar Rohra, Interim Application No. 2752 of 2026, decided on 17-6-2026]
Read more HERE
Arbitration | Binding Heads of Terms Gives Rise to Bona Fide Arbitral Claim; Issues of Specific Performance and Enforceability Left to Arbitral Tribunal
Delhi High Court held that the HoT prima facie constituted a binding commercial arrangement and disclosed a bona fide arbitral claim and that questions relating to the enforceability of the HoT and the petitioner’s entitlement to specific performance were matters to be determined by the Arbitral Tribunal.
[Conscient Infrastructure (P) Ltd. v. Mahesh Kapoor, 2026 SCC OnLine Del 4436]
Read more HERE
Arbitration | Technical Disputes Do Not Mandate a Technical Presiding Arbitrator; Tribunal May Seek Expert Assistance: Former Judge Nominated as Third Arbitrator
Kerala High Court held that the presiding arbitrator has no noteworthy superior role compared to other arbitrators except in matters of procedure. Accordingly, the Court directed the Kerala High Court Arbitration Centre to nominate a former Judge from its panel as the third arbitrator, clarifying that the technical aspects can be addressed by seeking expert assistance.
[Ambica Praveesh v. BMH Care Hospital Ltd., 2026 SCC OnLine Ker 5681]
Read more HERE
Also Read: Preity Zinta Personality Rights: Bombay HC Grants Leave for AI Deepfake Suit | SCC Times
Criminal Law | Can a Murder Conviction Be Based on Confessional Statements Under S. 164 CrPC Recorded in Presence of Police Officer?
Gauhati High Court observed that the alleged confessions of the appellants had been made in the presence of a police officer. Thus, the Court held that that the said confessions cannot be said to be voluntary and as such, cannot be relied as substantive admissible evidence. Thus, the Court set aside the appellants’ conviction directed the appellants to be released from judicial custody.
[Jiten Engti v. State of Assam, 2026 SCC OnLine Gau 3880]
Read more HERE
Child Marriage | “Parents Who Solemnise Child Marriages Cannot Escape Liability”: Husband Asked to Seek Recourse from Them, Wife’s Maintenance Enhanced Threefold
Madhya Pradesh High Court partially allowed the application, holding that she could not be denied a reasonable amount of maintenance and the amount of Rs 2000 per month could not be justified. Accordingly, the maintenance amount was enhanced from Rs 2000 to Rs 6000 per month from the date of application.
[R v. S, 2026 SCC OnLine MP 15133]
Read more HERE
CGST Act | Gauhati HC disagrees with Bombay HC on Section 122(1-A), CGST Act; Holds partners liable to penalty for GST-Evasive transactions, including pre-2021 period
Gauhati High Court held that liability under the provision is not confined to a “taxable person” but extends to any person who retained the benefit of transactions covered under Section 122(1) and at whose instance such transactions were conducted. Holding that Section 122(1-A) is complementary to Section 122(1) and merely identifies the person responsible for, and benefiting from, such violations, the Court ruled that the provision could be applied even in relation to transactions predating its enforcement on 1 January 2021.
[Mayank Bansal v. Union of India, 2026 SCC OnLine Gau 3796]
Read more HERE
Also Read: Bombay HC restrains auction of arrested vessel | SCC Times
Electricity Law | KERC order quashed on captive power verification; Strikes down dynamic “UQR” mechanism as contrary to Electricity Rules & SC precedent
Karnataka High Court held that impugned order introduced a dynamic “UQR” based on actual captive consumption contrary to the qualifying benchmark. Accordingly, the Court quashed the said order.
[Distributed Solar Power Association v. Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission, Writ Petition No.13316 of 2025 (GM-KEB), decided on 12-6-2026]
Read more HERE
Evidence Law | Can Witness Statements Recorded Before Summoning Be Used Against an Accused?
Allahabad High Court allowed the appeal, after observing that the trial court had relied on witness statements recorded before the accused was summoned to face trial. The Court held that such evidence could not be read against the accused, particularly when the witness, after his summoning, did not support the prosecution. Accordingly, the Court set aside the judgment and acquitted the accused of all the charges.
[Pramod Kumar Singh v. State of U.P., 2026 SCC OnLine All 10411]
Read more HERE
Also Read: Family Law | Can the 30-day notice period under the Special Marriage Act be waived?
Family Law | Custody Dispute Concerning Minor Child amid Complex Factual Disputes Require Adjudication by “Competent Family Court”, Not Summary Writ Proceeding
Delhi High Court declined to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution and held that the petitioner’s claim regarding custody and visitation should be adjudicated before the “competent family court” where a detailed inquiry into all disputed facts could be undertaken.
[Somya Goel v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2026 SCC OnLine Del 4629]
Read more HERE
Family Law | Marital Discord Cannot Penalise a Sister-in-Law Who Opened Her Home in Good Faith: Wife’s Shared Household Claim Rejected Over Sister-in-Law’s Property
Delhi High Court held that a wife who enters a property solely by virtue of her husband’s permissive occupation cannot claim a better right than the husband after his licence stands terminated. Observing that the appellant had no independent right, title or interest in the suit property and that no domestic relationship existed between her and the plaintiff-owner, the Court held that the property could not be treated as a shared household vis-à-vis the plaintiff. Finding no merit in the allegations of collusion between the plaintiff and her brother, and no substantial question of law arising for consideration, the Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the decree directing the appellant to vacate the premises.
[X v. Y, 2026 SCC OnLine Del 4611]
Read more HERE
Land Acquisition | Landowners Entitled to Compensation Even for Land Acquired for Service Road
Bombay High Court held that the petitioners were entitled to compensation for the land acquired for the service road in a National Highway widening project and directed the authorities to pay the compensation amount within 2 months, holding the denial of compensation to be arbitrary.
[Youvraj v. NHAI, 2026 SCC OnLine Bom 3802]
Read more HERE
MP Cough Syrup Deaths Case | Bail Denied to Paediatric Doctor Who Prescribed Banned Fixed-Dose Compound to Children Below 4 Despite Government Circular
Madhya Pradesh High Court dismissed the application, holding that the accused prescribed the fixed-dose compound to the children below the age of 4 years, which was banned by the Circular issued by the Government on 18 December 2023 (the Circular), due to which many innocent children died.
[S.S. Thakur v. State of M.P., 2026 SCC OnLine MP 14540]
Read more HERE
Medical Law | Rejecting Reimbursement Solely Due to Non-Empanelment, Places Procedure Above Human Survival: Medical Reimbursement Claims Called for Reconsideration
Punjab & Haryana High Court held that medical reimbursement policies, being instruments of social welfare and an extension of the right to health under Article 21 must be interpreted in a humane and purposive manner and not in a way that defeats genuine claims on technical grounds. Noting that the State was revisiting the policy framework, the Court directed the Competent Committee to reconsider each petitioner’s claim independently and pass a reasoned decision within 4 weeks, with any amount found payable carrying interest at 6 per cent per annum.
[Swati Yadav v. State of Haryana, 2026 SCC OnLine P&H 13335]
Read more HERE
NDPS Act | Court Reduces NDPS Conviction from Commercial to Intermediate Quantity Due to Lack of Proof of Joint Possession
Gauhati High Court held that, although the prosecution had proved that the appellants were in conscious possession of the ganja recovered from their respective bag/sack, it had failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that they had jointly possessed or transported the total quantity of 21.1 kg recovered under the 2 seizure lists. The Court held that, if the seized articles were considered separately as per the 2 seizure lists, they could not be said to be of commercial quantity. Accordingly, the conviction under Section 20(b)(ii)(C), Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) was altered to Section 20(b)(ii)(B), and the sentence was modified accordingly.
[Bipin Kumar v. State of Assam, 2026 SCC OnLine Gau 3774]
Read more HERE
NI Act | Imprisonment in Default of Fine is Coercive, Not Punitive: Release of Convict in Section 138 NI Act Case Ordered
Karnataka High Court held that imprisonment in default of payment of fine is intended to operate as a coercive mechanism for recovery and not as a disproportionately punitive measure. Thus, the Court moderated the aggregate default sentence to the period already undergone and directed his release.
[Dinesh Malpani v. State of Karnataka, 2026 SCC OnLine Kar 4401]
Read more HERE
POCSO | Madrassa Teacher’s Conviction Upheld for Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault on a Nine-Year-Old Boy
Kerala High Court upheld the conviction and sentence imposed on the accused for offences punishable under Section 377, Penal Code, Section 5(f) and (m) read with Section 6, Section 9(m) and (o) read with Section 10, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act), and Section 75, Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (JJ Act).
[Rasheed v. State of Kerala, 2026 SCC OnLine Ker 5660]
Read more HERE
Protected Monuments | Bhojshala’s Religious Character Examined As On 15 August 1947 To Be A Temple Of Goddess Vagdevi (Saraswati); Held It A “Protected Monument”
Madhya Pradesh High Court declared the “disputed area” of Bhojshala complex to be a “protected monument” under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 and the disputed site was held to be Bhojshala Temple of Goddess Vagdevi (Saraswati) and centre of Sanskrit learning, associated with Raja Bhoj of Paramar dynasty. The Court quashed the impugned order passed by Archaeological Survey of India in 2003, restricting right of Hindus to worship within Bhojshala Temple and permitting namaz by Muslim community.
[Hindu Front for Justice v. Union of India, 2026 SCC OnLine MP 11410]
Read more HERE
TRIBUNALS
DCDRC | ₹10 overcharge on beer bottle costs KSBC ₹25,000: Held That Charging Beyond Printed MRP Amounts to Unfair Trade Practice
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (DCDRC), Pathanamthitta held that charging a price higher than the MRP printed on a packaged commodity constitutes an unfair trade practice and deficiency in service under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
[Akash A.T. v. Kerala State Beverage Corpn., CC No. 96 of 2025, decided on 3-6-2026]
Read more HERE
Also Read: NCLT Kolkata: Ownership dispute over CIRP property to be decided by Civil Court | SCC Times
ITAT | Investigation Wing Report Alone Insufficient to Sustain Section 147 Proceedings; Reassessment Beyond Four Years quashed; Deleted ₹5 Lakh Section 68 Addition
ITAT, Mumbai upheld the deletion of an addition made under Section 68, Income-tax Act, 1961 and the consequential disallowance of interest/TDS. The Tribunal held that where an assessment completed under Section 143(3) is reopened beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment year (AY), the assessing officer must establish failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment. In the absence of such a finding, the reassessment proceedings initiated under Sections 147 and 148 were held to be without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed.
[CIT v. Sneha Marketing, 2026 SCC OnLine ITAT 9003]
Read more HERE
RERA | Forensic Audit of Project Accounts Permissible During CIRP; Held Section 14 IBC No Bar to Regulatory Inquiry
Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority directed a limited forensic audit of the project notwithstanding the pendency of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) proceedings before the NCLT. The Authority held that a forensic audit undertaken under the RERA Act, 2016, for examining utilisation of allottees’ funds, project-level compliances and regulatory disclosures, is investigative and fact-finding in nature and does not amount to a coercive proceeding prohibited by the moratorium under Section 14, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). Noting substantial inconsistencies in the promoter’s financial disclosures, including discrepancies in project receipts, expenditure, loan amounts and physical progress, the Authority held that an independent examination of the project accounts was necessary to ascertain the true financial position of the project and safeguard the interests of allottees.
[Suo Moto v. GRJ Distributors and Developers (P) Ltd., F.3(151)RJ/RERA/C/2017, decided on 8-6-2026]
Read more HERE
Also Read: NHRC Takes Suo Motu Cognizance of Minor Kept in Adult Jail in U.P. | SCC Times
OTHER DEVELOPMENTS OF THIS WEEK
LEGISLATION UPDATES
Immigration and Foreigners (Amendment) Order, 2026: Key Changes in OCI Status, Permit Rules, and Protected Areas
On 18 June 2026, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) notified the Immigration and Foreigners (Amendment) Order, 2026. The amendment introduces definitional clarity, relaxes certain permit conditions, and significantly revises the list of protected areas. These changes have important implications for foreign nationals, OCI cardholders, and the tourism sector.
Read more HERE
Also Read: Ministry of Power Sets ISTS Project Timelines | SCC Times
Towards Safer Workplaces: SHe-Box 2.0 Enhances PoSH Act Implementation
On 17 June 2026, the Ministry of Women and Child Development announced the launch of SHe-Box 2.0, marking a significant step towards creating a safe, inclusive, and empowered environment for women across the country.
Read more HERE
Health Ministry Ends Over-the-Counter Sale of Cough Syrups; Prescription Now Mandatory
On 15 June 2026, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare notified the Drugs (Fifth Amendment) Rules, 2026, removing cough syrups from the list of exemptions that earlier allowed their sale without a prescription.
Read more HERE
India Issues Advisory for Indian Seafarers as Gulf Security Risks Escalate
On 13 June 2026, the Directorate General of Shipping (DGS) issued a security advisory directing Indian seafarers to maintain the highest vigilance amid escalating security risks in the Gulf region, particularly in the Strait of Hormuz and the Gulf of Oman.
Read more HERE
Timeline Relief for Merchant Bankers: SEBI Defers Key SBU and Financial Norm Deadlines
On 11 June 2026, the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) issued a circular granting additional time to Merchant Bankers (MBs) for complying with key regulatory requirements introduced under the SEBI (Merchant Bankers) (Amendment) Regulations, 2025.
Read more HERE
FEMA Third Amendment Rules, 2026 Reshape Investor Definition, Tighten Investment Limits and Strengthen Approval Framework
On 12 June 2026, the Ministry of Finance notified the Foreign Exchange Management (Non-debt Instruments) (Third Amendment) Rules, 2026, aiming to simplify regulatory language, broaden the category of eligible investors, and strengthen oversight in sensitive investment areas, particularly those involving countries sharing land borders with India.
Read more HERE
OP. ED.
-
When a Common Name Becomes Dangerous: Nandhini Deluxe, Nandini Agarbatti and the Myth of Generic Immunity by Sidhartha Das
-
Self-Induced Frustration Across Interdependent Construction Contracts: A Need for Doctrinal Expansion under Section 56 By Pawan Upadhyay
-
Executive Authority over Tariffs, Major Questions Doctrine and India’s Constitutional Alternative by Twinkle Hussain and Syed Shiraz Fazal
EXPERT’S CORNER
-
From Form to Substance: Reinterpreting Electronic Evidence under Section 138-C, Customs Act, 1962 by Rachit Jain, Harshdeep Khurana and Dhanur Gupta
-
Judicial Review of Arbitral Awards: The Supreme Court’s Tryst with Article 142 and Arbitral Finality by Vasanth Rajasekaran and Harshvardhan Korada
Also Read:
-
Top Legal Developments This Week [8-13 June, 2026] | SCC Times
-
Know Thy Judge | Supreme Court of India: Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva | SCC Times
-
Karnataka Notifies AAG Appointments for Supreme Court | SCC Times
-
Building Lawyers of the Future: LegalTechTalk 2026 | SCC Times
-
Who Is Liable When AI Acts? Victoria Albrecht at LegalTechTalk 2026 | SCC Times
-
How law firms are built from the ground up: Insights from LegalTechTalk 2026 | SCC Times
-
AI Strategy in Legal Practice: Christel Aguila at LegalTechTalk 2026 | SCC Times
-
Sarah Walton guides law firms seeking to embrace AI at LegalTechTalk 2026 | SCC Times
-
Law Firm Survival in the AI Era: LegalTechTalk 2026 Panel | SCC Times
-
From Information to Intelligence: How Law Firms Embed Judgment in AI | SCC Times
-
Legal Tech Talk 2026: How to Become a Tech-Powered General Counsel | SCC Times
-
How AI is rewiring the in-house legal function: Key takeaways from LegalTechTalk 2026 | SCC Times
-
NASA’s Lessons for Law Firms: John Saiz Keynotes LegalTechTalk 2026 | SCC Times
-
CJI Surya Kant speaks at Indian High Commission at London on mediation | SCC Times
-
‘Two Nations, One Legal Future’: India-UK Dispute Resolution Panel at GCAI Conference | SCC Times
