{"id":377208,"date":"2026-03-02T18:30:48","date_gmt":"2026-03-02T13:00:48","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=377208"},"modified":"2026-03-03T12:04:51","modified_gmt":"2026-03-03T06:34:51","slug":"weekly-legal-developments-india-23-feb-to-1-march-2026","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/03\/02\/weekly-legal-developments-india-23-feb-to-1-march-2026\/","title":{"rendered":"Top Legal Developments [23 Feb \u2014 1 March, 2026] | Key SC & HC Rulings; Kerala\u2019s renaming; Committee in Justice Yashwant Varma Case; and more"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

This roundup of weekly legal developments India covers the most significant Supreme Court and High Court rulings, including ‘Ghooskhor Pandat’ case, West Bengal SIR, taxability of ‘Sharbat Rooh Afza’, etc. It also highlights major legislative developments such as the notices to six E-Commerce platforms over sale of restricted devices, notices to six E-Commerce platforms over sale of restricted devices, Kerala’s name change and other important legal and policy updates from across India.<\/p>\n

SUPREME COURT HIGHLIGHTS OF THE WEEK<\/h2>\n

CRIMINAL LAW| Can jail term be reduced by enhancing compensation?<\/p>\n

In Parameshwari v. State of T.N.<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 209<\/a><\/span>, the Supreme Court deprecated the practice of reducing substantive sentences in serious offences while enhancing fine and compensation and held that revisional powers cannot be exercised to dilute custodial sentences in grave crimes merely by increasing compensation to the victim. Read sentence reduction case HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

FREE SPEECH| Not a license to vilify communities; Fraternity concerns flagged in ‘Ghooskhor Pandat’ case<\/p>\n

In Atul Mishra v. Union of India<\/span>1<\/sup><\/a>, the Supreme Court considered a plea seeking restraint on the release of a film titled “Ghooskhor Pandat”, alleging offensive stereotyping of an identifiable community and recorded the respondents’ undertaking to withdraw and not use the impugned title. It was held that free speech cannot extend to vilifying or denigrating any community, observing that targeting groups based on religion, caste, language or region is constitutionally impermissible and contrary to the principle of fraternity. Read Ghooskhor Pandat case HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

SPECIAL INTENSIVE REVISION| Deployment of Judges permitted from Jharkhand & Odisha; WB Civil Judges to assist in claims adjudication<\/p>\n

While monitoring the SIR process in West Bengal in Mostari Banu v. Election Commission of India<\/span>2<\/sup><\/a>, the Supreme Court issued directions to expedite adjudication of pending claims under the “logical discrepancy\/unmapped category”. Read on WB SIR case HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

TELECOM LAW| Reserve price payable from date of 2G judgment; Liability clarified<\/p>\n

In Union of India v. Sistema Shyam Teleservices Ltd.<\/span> 2026 SCC OnLine SC 277<\/a><\/span>, the Supreme Court held that a telecom operator is liable to pay the reserve price for continued operations from 2 February 2012, that is, the date of the Court’s decision in the 2G spectrum case. Read on Reserve Price case HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

TAX LAW| ‘Sharbat Rooh Afza’ taxable at 4 per cent as fruit drink under UPVAT Act<\/p>\n

In Hamdard (Wakf) Laboratories v. Commissioner, Commercial Tax<\/span>3<\/sup><\/a>, the Supreme Court held that “Sharbat Rooh Afza” is classifiable as a fruit drink\/processed fruit product under Entry 103 of Part A, Schedule II of the UPVAT Act and taxable at the concessional rate of 4 per cent, and not at 12.5 per cent under the residuary entry. Read on Rooh Afza case HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

MAJOR HIGH COURT RULINGS THIS WEEK<\/h2>\n

COMMERCIAL LAW| “Actual Use” of property key to establish commercial dispute<\/p>\n

In Mohsin Samdani v. Sajjad Hussain Damami<\/span> 2026 SCC OnLine Raj 1376<\/a><\/span> the Rajasthan High Court held that the “actual use” of property for trade or commerce is essential to classify a dispute as commercial. The Court dismissed an appeal against the trial court’s order returning the plaint for filing before the Commercial Court, observing that no jurisdictional error occurred in refusing to entertain a suit for specific performance. Read commercial dispute case HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

CRIMINAL LAW| Married man’s sexual relations under false promise of marriage constitutes deceit<\/p>\n

In Vipin Kumar v. State of U.P.<\/span>4<\/sup><\/a>, the Allahabad High Court held that a married man who engaged in sexual relations with a victim under a false promise of marriage committed deceit from the very beginning. The Court observed that knowing he was married, the accused induced the victim into the relationship, and allegations of voluntary hurt, intentional insult, and criminal intimidation involving his family members were part of the proceedings. Read sexual relations with marriage promise case HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Also read:<\/span> Custody by CCI without judicial authorisation amounts to unlawful detention; Tripura HC restores minor’s custody to mother<\/a><\/p>\n

EDUCATION LAW| Revision of CLAT 2026 merit list stayed<\/p>\n

In Consortium of National Law Universities v. Avneesh Gupta<\/span>5<\/sup><\/a>, the Allahabad High Court stayed the order directing revision of the CLAT 2026 merit list and observed that a single challenge did not justify revising the entire merit list and declined to interfere with the ongoing counselling process. Read CLAT 2026 merit list case HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

EMPLOYMENT LAW| Removal for social media allegations against employer set aside<\/p>\n

In Madanjit Kumar v. Central Electronics Ltd.<\/span> 2026 SCC OnLine Del 720<\/a><\/span>, the Delhi High Court held that misconduct findings against an employee for tweeting or re-tweeting corruption allegations were sustainable, but the penalty of removal from service was disproportionate. The Court set aside the removal and remitted the matter for reconsideration, emphasizing that judicial review allows scrutiny of punishment for proportionality even without re-appreciating evidence. Read tweeting\/re-tweeting corruption allegations case HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Also read:<\/span> Where authority sleeps over matter for years without satisfactory explanation, resurrection of proceedings is arbitrary: Rajasthan HC sets aside 9-year-old service tax demand<\/a><\/p>\n

LABOUR LAW| Centre’s notification on continuation of existing labour courts and tribunals upheld<\/p>\n

In M.K. Suresh Kumar v. Union of India<\/span> <\/span>2026 SCC OnLine Ker 2389<\/a>, the Kerala High Court held that the Centre’s notification directing the continuation of existing Labour Courts, Industrial Tribunals, and National Tribunals under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947<\/a> until new tribunals under the Industrial Relations Code, 2020<\/a> are constituted is valid. The Court found no grounds for interference and dismissed the writ petition, observing that the notifications were intra vires Section 103 of the IR Code. Read about Notification on continuation of existing labour courts and tribunals HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

PERSONAL LIBERTY| Right of Interfaith Live-In Couples to Cohabit upheld<\/p>\n

In Noori v. State of U.P.<\/span> 2026 SCC OnLine All 456<\/a>,<\/span> the Allahabad High Court held that interfaith live-in relationships are not illegal and are protected under Article 21<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>. The Court allowed petitions by 12 interfaith couples, observing that their relationships did not violate the Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, and affirmed their fundamental right to choose their partners. Read<\/span> Interfaith Live-In Couples case HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Also read:<\/span> Subsequent refusal to marry due to Kundali mismatch despite prior assurances, raises doubts; Delhi HC denies bail in false promise of marriage case<\/a><\/p>\n

PERSONALITY RIGHTS| Swami Ramdev’s rights protected against AI-generated deepfakes<\/p>\n

In Swami Ramdev v. John Doe<\/span>6<\/sup><\/a>, the Delhi High Court held that the voice, name, and likeness of Swami Ramdev are exclusively attributable to him. The Court granted an ex parte ad interim injunction restraining the defendants from creating or distributing any AI-generated images, videos, or merchandise that infringe upon his personality rights. Read Ramdev’s personality rights case HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Also read:<\/span> Delhi High Court protects Jubin Nautiyal’s personality rights; Directs take down of AI generated deep fakes<\/a><\/p>\n

TRADE MARK| “Chacha” held distinctive for garments; interim injunction granted<\/p>\n

In Chacha Saree Bazar (P) Ltd. v. Chacha Cloth House<\/span>7<\/sup><\/a>, the Delhi High Court held that the word “Chacha” is distinctive in relation to garments and not a generic term. The Division Bench of C. Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla set aside the Commercial Court’s refusal of interim relief and restrained the use of the mark Chacha Cloth House<\/span>, observing that its use prima facie infringed the registered trademarks Chacha Saree Bazar Pvt. Ltd.<\/span> and allied marks. Read Chacha trade mark case HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Also read:<\/span> Trademark registration, Marketing agreement execution & e-commerce availability confers Territorial Jurisdiction in infringement suit: Delhi HC<\/a><\/p>\n

TRANSGENDER RIGHTS | Identity of trans person protected against extra medical tests for passport<\/p>\n

In Khush R. Goel v. Union of India<\/span> 2026 SCC OnLine All 441<\/a><\/span>,<\/span><\/a> the Allahabad High Court held that passport authorities cannot require a transgender person to undergo fresh medical tests when valid identity documents have been issued under the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019<\/a>. The Court directed the authorities to issue the passport based on the existing certificate and identity card, observing that the impugned instructions violated the Act. Read Identity of trans person case HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

THIS WEEK’S KEY LEGISLATIVE UPDATE<\/h2>\n

AVIATION REGULATION| DGCA notifies new airline ticket refund rules with 48-Hour Look-In option<\/p>\n

The Directorate General of Civil Aviation has issued updated Civil Aviation Requirements on airline ticket refunds and cancellations, effective 26 March 2026, introducing a mandatory 48-hour “look-in option” allowing passengers to cancel or amend bookings without extra charges, except fare differences, and requiring airlines to refund statutory taxes, process refunds within defined timelines and cap cancellation fees, in a bid to strengthen passenger rights and transparency in the refund process. Read airline ticket refunds update HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

CONSUMER PROTECTION| CCPA issues notices to six E-Commerce platforms over sale of restricted devices<\/p>\n

On 20 February 2026, the Central Consumer Protection Authority issued notices to six e-commerce platforms for allegedly listing and selling restricted wireless transmitting devices such as drone jammers and GPS jammers without mandatory licences or regulatory disclosures, flagging potential violations of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019<\/a> and directing them to furnish compliance and procurement details. Read notice details HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

CORPORATE LAW| Government of Punjab (Pakistan) remits merger stamp duty<\/p>\n

The Government of the Punjab, Pakistan has issued a notification remitting stamp duty on corporate mergers approved under the Companies Act, 2017, effectively waiving duty on asset transfers arising from SECP or court-sanctioned merger schemes to support lawful corporate restructuring and address provincial inconsistencies in tax treatment. Read notification details HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

FAMILY LAW| Gujarat Marriage Registration Amendment Bill, 2026 Explained<\/p>\n

The Government of Gujarat has introduced the Gujarat Marriage Registration (Amendment) Bill, 2026, proposing key changes to streamline registration procedures, incorporate provisions for voluntary marriage counseling, tighten timelines for issuance of certificates, enhance digital record-keeping, and strengthen penalties for non-compliance, aiming to improve transparency and efficiency in marriage registration. Read about Gujarat Marriage Registration Amendment Bill details HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

GOVERNANCE| Union cabinet approves name change from “Kerala” to “Keralam”<\/p>\n

The Union Cabinet has approved the proposal to rename the State of Kerala as “Keralam”, forwarding the draft Bill to Parliament for enactment. The move reflects an effort to align the official name with the native Malayalam pronunciation and cultural identity and will take effect upon passage of the legislation and presidential assent. Read name change details HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

URBAN DEVELOPMENT| Karnataka Government notifies model building bye-law amendments for municipalities<\/p>\n

The Government of Karnataka has notified amendments to the Model Building Bye-Laws, 2018, enabling municipalities to adopt revised standards on land use, building setbacks, parking norms, fire safety, elevators, accessibility, and sustainability measures to streamline approvals, improve safety and promote uniform development regulation across urban local bodies in the State. Read amendment details HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

OTHER DEVELOPMENTS OF THIS WEEK<\/h2>\n

NEWS<\/p>\n