Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
While noting that the reported amounts defrauded had decreased substantially, the Court regarded this trend as certainly encouraging but expressly cautioned that “continued monitoring remains indispensable”.
Supreme Court clarified that “criminal antecedents” in its NEET 2026 protest order refers only to “grave and heinous offences” and held that NCT of Delhi and other States are at liberty to decide closure or withdrawal of FIRs in accordance with law.
Supreme Court held that the existing judicial framework, including e-filing, virtual hearings and urgent listing mechanisms, adequately ensures round-the-clock access to constitutional remedies in cases involving imminent threats to life, liberty and other fundamental rights.
The Court directed that all CCTV footage, drone footage, body-worn camera recordings, videography, wireless communication records, and PCR lodge collections related to the students’ protest be preserved.
The Court directed that directions issued in Rohit Anand Das v. State of Odisha, 2025 SCC OnLine Ori 4535, regarding modification of the APAAR consent form should operate on a pan-India basis.
“Once the parties with their eyes open without any protest whatsoever and with free will accept certain terms of a contract they cannot afterwards be permitted to go back on the same merely because at a later point of time the stipulation proves to be onerous.”
On 27 May 2026, the Supreme Court Collegium recommended Justice V. Mohana’s (who was then a Senior Advocate) direct elevation from the Bar as Judge of Supreme Court. She took the oath of office on 2 June 2026.
The PIL highlighted the widespread absence of properly equipped Ladies’ Bar Rooms and essential amenities in High Courts, District Courts, Taluka Courts, Tribunals, Revenue Courts, and Commissions across the country.