{"id":383447,"date":"2026-05-06T17:30:15","date_gmt":"2026-05-06T12:00:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=383447"},"modified":"2026-05-06T17:47:52","modified_gmt":"2026-05-06T12:17:52","slug":"human-civil-rights-roundup-april-2026","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/06\/human-civil-rights-roundup-april-2026\/","title":{"rendered":"Menstrual Leave as Dignity, POCSO Adolescent Guidelines, Transgender Welfare Directions and More: Human and Civil Rights April 2026 Roundup"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

This Human and Civil Rights April 2026 Roundup provides an overview of important cases and key legislative updates of human and civil rights that made headlines this month, such as the Supreme Court’s<\/span> take on timely access to justice<\/span> and disabled prisoners’ rights, Delhi HC’s<\/span> decision to grant protection to consenting adults in live-in relationship, Karnataka HC’s<\/span> ruling that menstrual leave is assertion of dignity, and more.<\/span> These decisions, among others, offer valuable insights into the evolving legal landscape concerning aspects such as mental health, gender equality, media trial, elections, menstrual health, reproductive autonomy, privacy rights etc.<\/span><\/p>\n

HIGHLIGHT OF THE MONTH<\/p>\n

SPECIAL SESSION AND CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITS: WHY THE LOK SABHA BILLS DID NOT PASS<\/p>\n

During the special session of the Lok Sabha held from 16 to 18 April 2026, the House considered a set of three interlinked legislative proposals introduced by the Government as part of a broader effort to operationalise women’s reservation in legislatures. The three Bills that were introduced are:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. \n

    The Constitution (One Hundred and Thirty-First Amendment) Bill, 2026<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  2. \n

    The Delimitation Bill, 2026<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  3. \n

    The Union Territories Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2026<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Read More HERE<\/a><\/p>\n

    ACCESS TO JUSTICE<\/p>\n

    SUPREME COURT<\/span> | Supreme Court issues directions for Systemic Legal Aid Reform, Delay in Appeals and Timely Access to Justice<\/p>\n

    In a case originated from a challenge to a conviction and sentence of death confirmed by the Patna High Court, however, during the course of proceedings, the Court’s attention was drawn to a recurring and deeply concerning issue — inordinate delay in filing appeals and special leave petitions (SLPs) in matters involving legal aid, the Division Bench of Sanjay Karol<\/span>* and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, JJ., issued directions institutionalising reforms in the legal aid system, making timelines binding and directing structural changes to ensure timely filing of appeals and effective access to justice. [Shankar Mahto<\/span> v. State of Bihar<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 606<\/a>] Read More HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    Also Read:<\/span> Bombay HC: Advocates should prioritize matters under Legal Aid Scheme<\/a><\/p>\n

    CONSENSUAL ADOLESCENT RELATIONSHIP<\/p>\n

    DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | Inside Delhi High Court Guidelines for Quashing of POCSO FIR in Consensual Adolescent Relationship<\/p>\n

    In a writ petition filed under Article 226<\/a> of the Constitution of India<\/a> read with Section 528<\/a>, Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023<\/a> (BNSS), instituted by the petitioner-accused, husband of Respondent 2 (prosecutrix), seeking quashing of FIR dated 13 June 2025 registered under Section 64(1)<\/a>, Nyaya Sanhita, 2023<\/a> (BNS) and Section 6<\/a>, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012<\/a> (POCSO Act), where the prosecutrix, though a minor at the time of the alleged incident, unequivocally denied having suffered any harm and sought quashing of the FIR, thereby exposing the “disconnect between a rigid legal construct and the human lives it seeks to govern”, the Single Judge Bench of Anup Jairam Bhambhani*<\/span>, J., in view of the absence of a de facto victim, the settled matrimonial life of the parties, the birth of a child, prevent re-victimisation of the de-juré victim and the clear stand of the prosecutrix, held that continuation of proceedings would amount to abuse of process and result in manifest injustice. The Court quashed the FIR and all subsequent proceedings and issued guidelines for quashing of POCSO FIR in consensual adolescent relationship. [Harmeet Singh<\/span> v. State (NCT of Delhi)<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine Del 1707<\/a>] Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    Watch Now:<\/span> Romeo & Juliet Clause Explained: Decoding SC’s POCSO Judgment<\/a><\/p>\n

    Also Read:<\/span> Bring Romeo-Juliet clause in POCSO Act to exempt genuine relationships: SC<\/a><\/p>\n

    Madras HC flags misuse of POCSO Act in teenage relationships<\/a><\/p>\n

    DEATH SENTENCE<\/p>\n

    SUPREME COURT<\/span> | SC Flags Systemic Gaps in Death Penalty Sentencing; Mandates Structured Framework for Mitigation Analysis and Legal Aid<\/p>\n

    In proceedings arising out of a death reference and connected criminal appeal, a three-Judge Bench of Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and Vijay Bishnoi, JJ., while staying the execution of the death sentence, issued comprehensive directions to streamline the process of sentencing in capital punishment cases. The Court expressed serious concern over the failure to consider mitigating and aggravating circumstances at appropriate stages and the lack of effective legal representation, which undermines a balanced and constitutionally compliant sentencing exercise. [Aman Singh<\/span> v. State of Bihar<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 720<\/a>] Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    MADURAI DISTRICT COURT<\/span> | “Rarest of the Rare”: Death penalty to 9 Police Officials in Sathankulam Custodial Deaths Case<\/p>\n

    In a custodial death case investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), the Single Judge Bench of First Additional District Judge, G. Muthukumaran<\/span>, held that it was a clear case of abuse of authority and fell in the rarest of the rare cases; all the accused persons were convicted of the charges of murder and destruction of evidence. [CBI<\/span> v. Sridhar<\/span>, SC No. 470 of 2020] Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    GENDER EQUALITY<\/p>\n

    SUPREME COURT<\/span> | 30% women representation mandatory for Bar Associations; failure may lead to suspension: SC<\/p>\n

    In an application assailing non-compliance with the order dated 13 March 2026, pan-India 30 per cent women representation in Bar Associations mandate in Deeksha Amrutesh<\/span> v. State of Karnataka<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 472<\/a>, the three-Judge Bench of Surya Kant CJI, Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M. Pancholi, JJ., said, “We also deem it necessary to issue a word of caution and a stern warning that wherever the Bar Associations have failed to comply with, or shall be found to have defied, the directions issued hereinabove, such Bar Associations shall be liable to be suspended through a judicial order and fresh elections shall be directed to be conducted.” The Court further changed the nominating authority in cases where women members do not contest or where there is a shortfall in representation. [Deeksha Amrutesh<\/span> v. State of Karnataka<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 666<\/a>] Read More HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    Also Read:<\/span> Delhi Lakhpati Bitiya Scheme Rules<\/a><\/p>\n

    MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT<\/span> | Maternity Benefit Act Applies to Guest Faculty: MP High Court Holds Eighty Working Days Bar Inapplicable to State Government Establishments<\/p>\n

    In a writ petition filed under Article 227<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>, challenging the order passed by Principal, Government Tilak PG College, Katni (M.P.), which granted 6 months of maternity leave to the petitioner but without honorarium, a Single Judge Bench of Vishal Dhagat<\/span>, J., set aside the impugned order and held that the bar of eighty working days in the preceding twelve months, in an establishment, as per Section 5<\/a>, Maternity Benefit Act, 1961<\/a>, does not apply to establishments under State Government. [Priti Saket<\/span> v. State of M.P.<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine MP 5246<\/a>] Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    Also Read:<\/span> Supreme Court orders women reservation and electoral reforms in Bar Council elections<\/a><\/p>\n

    MEDIA TRIAL<\/p>\n

    SIKKIM HIGH COURT<\/span> | Right to Privacy Does Not Bar Fair Reporting of FIR Based on Public Records Permissible; Not a ‘Media Trial’: Sikkim HC<\/p>\n

    In a petition seeking to restrain and remove media reports during the pendency of the investigation, alleging media trial, the Single Judge Bench of Bhaskar Raj Pradhan<\/span>, J., held that simply reporting the factum of registration of an FIR and the contents thereof does not amount to a media trial; right to privacy no longer subsists, when the case becomes a legitimate subject to comment on by the press and media; reportages become unobjectionable when based on public records. [Rabden Sherpa<\/span> v. State of Sikkim<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine Sikk 26<\/a>] Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    MENSTRUAL HEALTH<\/p>\n

    KARNATAKA HIGH COURT<\/span> | Menstrual leave is assertion of dignity, not plea for privilege: Karnataka High Court orders faithful implementation of Menstrual Leave Policy across sectors<\/p>\n

    While considering a writ petition filed under Articles 226<\/a> and 227<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a> by which the petitioner, a woman working in unorganised labour sector, which sought complete and meaningful implementation of the menstrual leave policy of the State Government, a Single Judge Bench of M. Nagaprasanna<\/span>, J., held that equality, as envisioned by the Constitution, demands a more compassionate and nuanced approach, one that acknowledges difference not as a ground for discrimination, but as a basis for accommodation, thus, the call for menstrual leave, is not a plea for privilege, but an assertion of dignity, fairness and humane understanding within the spaces women inhabit. The Court orders strict and faithful implementation of the existing menstrual leave policy across sectors and stated that it becomes obligatory upon the State to undertake comprehensive measures aimed at sensitising all sectors, both organised and unorganised. [Chandravva Hanamant Gokavi<\/span> v. State of Karnataka<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine Kar 2479<\/a>] Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    Also Read:<\/span> Right to menstrual health a Fundamental Right: SC<\/a><\/p>\n

    ‘Menstrual Health can’t be barrier to a girl’s right to education’; Rajasthan High Court upholds nursing aspirant’s educational rights<\/a><\/p>\n

    MENTAL HEALTH<\/p>\n

    PATNA HIGH COURT<\/span> | Mental Healthcare as a Right: Patna High Court’s Suo Motu Action in Bihar<\/p>\n

    In a suo motu Public Interest Litigation triggered by an inspection report dated 17 February 2026 submitted by the Member Secretary of the Bihar State Legal Services Authority (BSLSA), highlighting significant shortcomings in the functioning and infrastructure of the Bihar Institute of Mental Health and Allied Sciences (BIMHAS), Koelwar, Bhojpur, and broader systemic deficiencies in mental healthcare services across the State., the Division Bench of Sangam Kumar Sahoo<\/span>,* CJ., and Harish Kumar, J., issued notice against respondent authorities and directed to submit detailed reports on constitution and functioning of Mental Health Review Boards, conditions and facilities at BIMHAS , availability of free food, medicines, hygiene, and infrastructure, role of police and prison authorities concerning mentally ill persons, legal aid services provided, rehabilitation measures post-treatment and steps taken to address deficiencies identified in the inspection report. [Court on its own motion<\/span> v. State of Bihar<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine Pat 1910<\/a>] Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    PRIVACY RIGHTS<\/p>\n

    RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT<\/span> | Rajasthan HC Quashes FIR Based on Illegal Telephone Tapping and Search Conducted Before Registration of Case<\/p>\n

    In a petition filed under Section 482<\/a>, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> (CrPC) for quashing of FIR and charge-sheet, filed by Anti-Corruption Bureau Jaipur, against petitioner, for commission of offenses under Sections 7<\/a>, 7-A<\/a> and 8<\/a>, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988<\/a> and Sections 201<\/a> and 120-B<\/a>, Penal Code<\/a> (IPC), a Single Judge Bench of Chandra Prakash Shrimali<\/span>, J., quashed the FIR and charge-sheet as it was filed on the basis of illegal telephone tapping and unauthorised search, which was conducted before registering the FIR. The arrest, also made before registration of FIR, was also found to be illegal and unconstitutional. Thus, the Court held that the FIR cannot be considered to be in accordance with law and hence, needs to be quashed. [Achleshwer Meena<\/span> v. State of Rajasthan<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine Raj 2408<\/a>] Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    Also Read:<\/span> Madras HC’s verdict on Phone Tapping and Right to Privacy<\/a><\/p>\n

    RELIGIOUS FREEDOM<\/p>\n

    ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT<\/span> | “Certain People Thrust Their Religion on Others”: Allahabad HC Refuses Relief to Young Women Accused of Compelling Friend to Convert to Islam<\/p>\n

    In a set of two writ petitions filed by women accused of compelling a friend to convert to Islam, the Division Bench of J.J. Munir<\/span>* and Tarun Saxena, JJ., dismissed the petitions, holding that a case for intervention and quashing of FIR was not made out based on the evidence. The Court also remarked that the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021<\/a> (U.P. Conversion Act), was enacted to curtail the problem of certain people thrusting their religion on others. [Aleena<\/span> v. State of U.P.<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine All 2811<\/a>] Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    Also Read:<\/span> SC raises concerns over provisions UP Conversion Act, 2021<\/a><\/p>\n

    Kerala HC permits name change in marriage certificate after conversion<\/a><\/p>\n

    REPRODUCTIVE AUTONOMY<\/p>\n

    DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | Written Consent Not Indispensable for IVF under ART Act, 2021: Delhi HC Permits Cryopreservation of Soldier’s Genetic Material<\/p>\n

    In a petition seeking extraction and cryopreservation of genetic material of the petitioner’s husband, who is in a persistent vegetative state, a Single Judge Bench of Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav<\/span>, J., disposed of the petition with directions to the respondents to undertake the necessary procedure required to take the IVF treatment to its logical conclusion after holding that written consent is not indispensable for IVF under the Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Act, 2021<\/a> (ART Act). The Court held that, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the consent of the petitioner’s husband in opting for IVF treatment would constitute sufficient compliance with Section 22, ART Act and the petitioner cannot be disentitled on the sole ground of absence of explicit written consent. [X<\/span> v. Union of India<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine Del 1606<\/a>] Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    Also Read:<\/span> Ker HC permits wife to extract brain-dead husband’s gametes<\/a><\/p>\n

    RIGHT AGAINST DEPORTATION<\/p>\n

    JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT<\/span> | Emphasising sacrosanct human values and rights, J&K and Ladakh HC orders retrieval of minor forcibly deported to Pakistan<\/p>\n

    In a case revolving around whether the deportation of a minor, residing in India on visa extensions and having a pending citizenship application, was carried out in accordance with due process of law, a Single Judge Bench of M.A. Chowdhary<\/span>, J., while emphasising the sacrosanct human values and rights, ordered the retrieval of the individual forcibly deported to Pakistan and directed the Ministry of Home Affairs to consider his application for extension of long-term visa (LTV) as well as for the grant of Indian citizenship. [Sajjad Ahmed<\/span> v. Union of India<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine J&K 217<\/a>] Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    RIGHT AGAINST INFRACTION OF PERSON<\/p>\n

    JHARKHAND HIGH COURT<\/span> | Jharkhand HC intervenes suo motu in 12-year-old’s rape and murder, criticises police’s lethargic attitude<\/p>\n

    Taking suo motu cognizance of the rape and brutal murder of a 12-year-old girl, the Division Bench of Sujit Narayan Prasad and Anubha Rawat Choudhary, JJ., emphasised that the lethargic attitude of the police warranted judicial intervention. The Court noted that despite the FIR, no arrest had been made even after 5 days, and prime evidence had not been sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL). The Court held that accountability of senior officials and protection of the victim’s family were necessary and issued directions accordingly. [Court on its own Motion<\/span> v. State of Jharkhand<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine Jhar 442<\/a>] Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    RIGHTS OF CHILDREN\/JUVENILE<\/p>\n

    ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT<\/span> |<\/span><\/span> Habeas Corpus Plea Fails Where Lawful Custody Flows from Child Welfare Committee Order: Allahabad HC<\/span><\/p>\n

    In a habeas corpus writ petition filed by the husband seeking custody of his wife (corpus) alleging illegal detention in Rajkiya Bal Grah (Balika), Vrindavan, the Single Judge Bench of Sandeep Jain<\/span>, J., dismissed the petition holding that habeas corpus not maintainable against lawful custody of State where the corpus is in custody pursuant to a judicial order passed by the Child Welfare Committee under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015<\/a> (JJ Act). [Deeksha<\/span> v. State of U.P.<\/span>, HABC No. 442 of 2026] Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    Also Read:<\/span> Habeas Corpus in Child Custody: Tri HC restores minor’s custody to mother<\/a><\/p>\n

    KERALA HIGH COURT<\/span> | Mother placing child in hostel meant for orphans not in his best interests; Kerala HC grants custody to father<\/p>\n

    In a habeas corpus petition claiming custody of a minor who was placed in a hostel by the mother after her second marriage despite the willingness of the biological father to take care, the Division Bench of Raja Vijayaraghavan V.<\/span>* and K.V. Jayakumar, JJ., while allowing the writ petition, entrusted the child’s custody to the father holding that placing the child in a hostel meant for orphans by the mother was not in his best interests. The Court also directed the District Child Protection Officer to conduct periodic inspections to monitor the child’s well-being. [X<\/span> v. State of Kerala<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine Ker 3988<\/a>] Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    RIGHTS OF DISABLED PRISONERS<\/p>\n

    SUPREME COURT<\/span> | Disabled Prisoners’ Rights: SC expands mandate of High-Powered Committee constituted in Suhas Chakma (2026) to Examine Institutional Safeguards<\/p>\n

    While considering this matter concerning the rights and conditions of detention, and institutional safeguards available to prisoners with disabilities within prison systems across the country, the Division Bench of Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta*<\/span>, JJ., noted that the present matter necessitates closer scrutiny of the extent to which the mandate of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016<\/a> (RPwD Act) and the constitutional guarantees are being effectively realised in custodial settings or not. The Court also issued several new directions emphasising on the need for an effective, structured, and uniform mechanism to address the issues highlighted in the present matter. [Sathyan Naravoor<\/span> v. Union of India<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 650<\/a>] Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    Also Read:<\/span> SC issues landmark directions on Open Correctional Institutions<\/a><\/p>\n

    SC Issues Directions to Improve Accessibility & Care for Disabled Prisoners<\/a><\/p>\n

    SC issues directions stressing access and aid for Disabled Prisoners<\/a><\/p>\n

    RIGHTS OF LGBTs<\/p>\n

    SUPREME COURT<\/span> | Supreme Court Allows a Transgender Person to Apply for Teaching Post; Ignoring Gender in Recruitment Notification<\/p>\n

    In a special leave petition assailing Delhi High Court’s directions to the petitioner to approach the Advisory Committee, set up by the Supreme Court, for redressal of their grievances, based on the principle of avoidance of plurality of litigations, the Division Bench of J.B. Pardiwala and K.V. Viswanathan, JJ., prima facie held that the Advisory Committee had no powers to adjudicate; allowed the transgender person to apply for the government vacancy irrespective of the gender it was notified for. [Jane Kaushik<\/span> v. Lieutenant Governor<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 595<\/a>] Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    Also Read:<\/span> SC Suggestions & Directions to ensure protection of transgender persons<\/a><\/p>\n

    ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT<\/span> | No Legitimate or Legal Basis for Collection of Badhai Money\/Gifts by Transgender Persons: All HC<\/p>\n

    In a writ petition filed by a transgender person seeking declaration of her territorial jurisdictions for receiving badhai money and gifts, the Division Bench of Alok Mathur and Amitabh Kumar Rai, JJ., dismissed the petition, holding that there was no legitimate or legal basis permitting any person or individual to collect\/extract any money, tax, fee, or cess from another, except in accordance with law. Thus, the rights sought by the petitioner were not recognised by the law and could not be legitimised. [Rekha Devi<\/span> v. State of U.P.<\/span>, WRIT C No. 3495 of 2026] Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    MADRAS HIGH COURT<\/span> | “Transgenders are Also Children of God”: Madras High Court Issues Welfare Directions Following Self-Immolation Incident<\/p>\n

    While considering a petition filed under Section 482<\/a>, Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023<\/a> (BNSS) for anticipatory bail, a Single Judge Bench of K.K. Ramakrishnan<\/span>, J., held that the allegations in the FIR were confined to retransmission of news already in circulation and custodial interrogation was not warranted. The Court accordingly granted bail subject to conditions. At the same time, the Court observed that the tragic self-immolation of a transgender individual demanded a broader judicial response. Emphasising compassion and constitutional obligations, directions were issued to the State Government to frame a comprehensive rehabilitation scheme for transgender persons, ensuring livelihood, education, healthcare, and meaningful inclusion in society. The petition was disposed of with these directions. [V. Sarathkumar<\/span> v. State of T.N.<\/span>, Crl OP (MD) No. 5185 of 2026] Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    Also Read:<\/span> All HC grants relief to trans person asked to take fresh medical exam by passport authorities<\/a><\/p>\n

    RIGHT TO LIBERTY<\/p>\n

    ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT<\/span> | “Deplorable state of affairs”: Allahabad HC orders release of man detained under NDPS Act<\/a> without grounds & reasoned order<\/p>\n

    In a habeas corpus writ petition filed by a man detained under the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988<\/a> (“PITNDPS Act), the Division Bench of Siddharth and Vinai Kumar Dwivedi, JJ., allowed the petition, holding that the petitioner was detained without grounds and a reasoned order, i.e., the impugned orders were passed mechanically without application of mind. [Amit Singh<\/span> v. Union of India<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine All 2864<\/a>] Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT<\/span> | Right to default bail accrues on accused if charge-sheet not filed within stipulated time: Madhya Pradesh HC<\/p>\n

    In a criminal revision filed by a man whose default bail was denied by the trial court, the Single Judge Bench of Dwarka Dhish Bansal<\/span>, J., allowed the petition, holding that the petition was maintainable and deserved to be allowed. The Court held that if the Court is closed on the last day of filing a charge-sheet, and the charge-sheet is filed on the 61st day or any other later\/subsequent day, then default bail can be granted. [Armaan Hussain<\/span> v. Union of India<\/span>, Criminal Revision No. 283 of 2026] Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    RIGHT TO LIFE<\/p>\n

    SUPREME COURT<\/span> | SC Recognises Commuter Safety as Integral Facet of Article 21; Issues Nationwide Interim Directions for Prevention of Highway Accidents<\/p>\n

    In continuation of the suo motu cognizance of systemic negligence and catastrophic infrastructure failures, that led to tragic loss of 34 lives in road accidents in Rajasthan and Telangana in November 2025; the Division Bench of J.K. Maheshwari and Atul S. Chandurkar, JJ., recognised that safety of the commuter is an integral facet of the right to live with dignity as a constitutional obligation under Article 21<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>. The Right to Life enshrined under Article 21<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a> is not merely a guarantee against the unlawful taking of life, but a positive mandate upon the State to ensure a safe environment where human life is preserved and valued. With the recognition of commuter’s safety as an important component under Article 21<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>, the Court therefore, issued certain interim directions aiming at addressing the root causes behind tragic accidents at National highways. [Phalodi Accident, In re<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 646<\/a>] Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    Also Read:<\/span> National Highways Fee Fourth Amendment Rules 2026<\/a><\/p>\n

    MADRAS HIGH COURT<\/span> | Madras HC orders independent probe into illegal panchayat ostracism depriving woman’s family of basic civic rights<\/p>\n

    In a writ petition under Article 226<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>, a Single Judge Bench of Krishnan Ramasamy<\/span>, J., noted allegations that local village panchayat leaders had passed illegal orders ostracising the petitioner’s family after she refused to allow a pathway through her land. The Court observed that such orders deprived the petitioner of access to water, groceries, worship, and social functions, thereby violating her fundamental rights under Article 21<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>. The Court held that judicial intervention was necessary and directed the official respondents to conduct an independent enquiry within 12 weeks and, if illegality is found, to take legal action including filing an FIR. [P. Revathi<\/span> v. Collector<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine Mad 3386<\/a>] Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    RIGHT TO MARRY\/FAMILY LIFE\/LIVE-IN RELATIONSHIP<\/p>\n

    ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT<\/span> | “Disturbing trend of third persons filing FIRs under U.P. Conversion Act”: Allahabad HC provides protection to inter-faith couple, seeks U.P. Home Secretary’s response<\/p>\n

    In a petition filed by a Muslim man seeking quashing of FIR filed against him alleging forceful conversion by him of a girl, the Division Bench of Abdul Moin and Pramod Kumar Srivastava, JJ., directed the Additional Chief Secretary (Home), Government of U.P., to file an affidavit stating actions taken against the disturbing trend of FIRs being lodged by third persons falsely under the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021<\/a> (UP Conversion Act). The Court also directed that State security shall be provided to the couple and their relatives. [Mohd. Faizan<\/span> v. State of U.P.<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine All 2799<\/a>] Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | Consenting Adults Have the Right to Choose Life Partners and Seek Protection even from Parents, Relatives or Friends: Delhi HC<\/p>\n

    In a writ petition filed by the petitioners under Article 226<\/a> of the Constitution of India<\/a> read with Section 528<\/a>, Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023<\/a> (BNSS) seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the State authorities to grant protection against threats to their life and limb at the hands of the father of one of the woman, the Single Judge Bench of Saurabh Banerjee<\/span>, J., affirmed the petitioners’ right to live with dignity and liberty and directed the State machinery to ensure their protection against any threats or coercion. The Court observed that “the petitioners are grown up consenting individual who are adults and are open to make their own choices out of their respective free will, be it that of choosing their respective life partners”. [Kirti<\/span> v. State (NCT of Delhi)<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine Del 1829<\/a>] Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    Also Read:<\/span> P&H HC: Officials must take immediate action in Protection pleas<\/a><\/p>\n

    DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | Consenting Adults in Live-in Relationship Entitled to Protection Under Articles 19 & 21; Marital Status Irrelevant: Delhi HC<\/p>\n

    In a writ petition seeking police protection by two consenting adults in a live-in relationship, a Single Judge Bench of Saurabh Banerjee<\/span>, J., held that the status of a relationship whether marital or a live-in arrangement is not a germane consideration while adjudicating a plea for protection under Articles 19<\/a> and 21<\/a> of the Constitution of India<\/a>. [Meena Akhilesh Yadav<\/span> v. State (NCT of Delhi)<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine Del 1566<\/a>] Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    Also Read:<\/span> Right to Life and Liberty be protected irrespective of marital status or age; Rajasthan High Court directs police protection for minor live-in couple <\/a><\/p>\n

    MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT<\/span> | MP HC Appoints Shourya Didis for 19-Year-Old Woman Who Left Matrimonial Home After Marriage to 40-Year-Old Man, Allows Her to Live With Lover<\/p>\n

    In a habeas corpus writ petition filed by the parents of a 19-year-old girl who left her matrimonial house and began living with another man, the Division Bench of Anand Pathak<\/span>* and Pushpendra Yadav, JJ., dismissed the petition. The Court allowed her to move in with her lover and appointed Shourya Didis to take care of her for six months. [Abdhesh<\/span> v. State of M.P.<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine MP 5070<\/a>] Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    VOTING RIGHTS<\/p>\n

    SUPREME COURT<\/span> | WB SIR | Voter Name Missing and Appeal Pending? Read Supreme Court’s Big Order on Voter Appeals cleared by Appellate Tribunals<\/p>\n

    While considering the matter concerning Special Intensive Revision (SIR) process in West Bengal the Division Bench of Surya Kant, CJI and Joymalya Bagchi, J., were hearing petitions and applications filed by individuals whose names have been deleted from the electoral roll and who have preferred appeals before the Appellate Tribunals. The Court in exercise of powers under Article 142<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>, directed the Election Commission of India (ECI) that wherever the Appellate Tribunals are able to decide the appeals by 21 April 2026 or 27 April 2026, as the case may be, such appellate orders shall be given effect to by issuing supplementary revised electoral roll, and all necessary consequences with respect to the right to vote shall follow. The Court also clarified that mere pendency of appeals preferred by excluded persons before the Appellate Tribunals shall not entitle them to exercise their right to vote. Elections in West Bengal will be conducted in 2 phases. [Mostari Banu<\/span> v. Election Commission of India<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 638<\/a>] Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    Also Read:<\/span> Concept of ‘Proper Parties’ not applicable in election petitions: J&K HC<\/a><\/p>\n

    GUJARAT HIGH COURT<\/span> | Every Resident Has a Right to Participate: Gujarat High Court Orders Inclusion of Voter Deleted During SIR<\/p>\n

    In a petition seeking to challenge an endorsement dated 4 April 2026 by which the electoral officer refused to include the petitioner’s name in the electoral roll after deletion following a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the electoral rolls, the Division Bench of N.S. Sanjay Gowda<\/span>* and J.L. Odedra, JJ., held once the petitioner’s inclusion in the assembly electoral roll had been duly ordered prior to the preparation of the municipal list, such right could not be defeated on technical grounds or delayed publication, and accordingly directed that his name be incorporated, permitting him to participate in the election. [Jayesh Batukbhai Patel<\/span> v. State of Gujarat<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine Guj 1874<\/a>] Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    Also Read:<\/span> West Bengal SIR: SC Big Order on Voter Appeals<\/a><\/p>\n

    WORPLACE RIGHTS\/POSH<\/p>\n

    BOMBAY HIGH COURT<\/span> | ICC Cannot Record Instigator of False POSH Complaint as “Unknown Source” When Identity is Clearly Disclosed: Bombay HC<\/p>\n

    While considering an appeal filed by the petitioner under Section 18<\/a>, Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013<\/a> (POSH Act) against the judgment and order passed by the Industrial Tribunal (Tribunal), which had dismissed the appeal as not maintainable, a Single Judge Bench of Dr Neela Gokhale<\/span>, J., held that the petitioner was clearly a person aggrieved by the Internal Complaints Committee’s (ICC) recommendations and had a statutory right to appeal. The Court further held that the ICC erred in recording the instigation of the complaint as having come from an “unknown source” under the POSH Act, despite the retraction statement clearly naming the instigator. Accordingly, the Court quashed the Tribunal’s order and directed modification of the ICC’s conclusion to reflect that the instigation came from the identified individual. The Court accordingly disposed of the petition. [ABC<\/span> v. XYZ<\/span>, Writ Petition No. 15 of 2026] Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    LEGISLATIVE UPDATES<\/p>\n

    JAN VISHWAS (AMENDMENT OF PROVISIONS) ACT, 2026<\/p>\n

    Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2026: Decriminalization & Penalty Reforms<\/p>\n

    On 8-4-2026, the Ministry of Law and Justice issued the Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2026 to amend certain enactments for decriminalizing and rationalizing offences to further enhance trust-based governance for ease of living and doing business. Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    Delhi Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2026: Decriminalization of Minor Offences & Rationalized Penalties<\/p>\n

    On 16-4-2026, the Department of Law, Justice and Legislative Affairs notified the Delhi Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2026 to amend certain laws in its application to the National Capital Territory of Delhi, to decriminalize minor offences and rationalize punishments to promote trust-based governance for enhancing ease of living and doing business. The provisions came into force on 16-4-2026. Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    ELECTION<\/p>\n

    131st Constitutional Amendment: Linking Delimitation with Women’s Reservation<\/p>\n

    On 16 April 2026, during a special parliamentary session, the Constitution (One Hundred and Thirty First Amendment) Bill, 2026, was introduced in the Lok Sabha, marking a significant step towards enabling fresh delimitation and operationalising women’s reservation in legislatures. Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    Union Territories Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2026: Changes to Delimitation, Representation and Women’s Reservation in UT Legislatures<\/p>\n

    On 16 April 2026, the Union Territories Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2026 was introduced in Lok Sabha proposing to amend the Government of Union Territories Act, 1963<\/a>, the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Act, 1991<\/a>, and the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganization Act, 2019<\/a>. Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    Delimitation Bill, 2026: Redrawing Constituencies and Advancing Women’s Representation<\/p>\n

    On 16 April 2026, the Delimitation Bill, 2026 was introduced in Lok Sabha with the objective of redefining electoral representation in India in accordance with contemporary demographic realities and recent constitutional amendments. Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    Elections 2026: ECI Calls for Responsible Use of Social Media and AI Tools<\/p>\n

    On 19 April 2026, the Election Commission of India (ECI) has circulated instructions reiterating that all stakeholders must ensure responsible and ethical use of social media and digital platforms during the ongoing General Elections and bye-elections. Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    MATERNAL MENTAL HEALTH<\/p>\n

    NMHP and Maternal Mental Health: Improving Access to Care for Postpartum Mother<\/p>\n

    Recognising the growing need for accessible and comprehensive mental healthcare, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare implemented the National Mental Health Programme (NMHP), which also includes targeted support for postpartum mothers. Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    LABOUR AND WORKMEN’S RIGHTS<\/p>\n

    Draft Maharashtra Industrial Relations Rules, 2026: Key Highlights, Aims & Major Changes<\/p>\n

    On 28 April 2026, the Industries, Energy, Labour and Mining Department issued Draft Maharashtra Industrial Relations Rules, 2026, to modernize industrial relations administration, promote industrial peace, protect workers’ rights, and support ease of doing business in Maharashtra through balanced, transparent, and efficient regulatory mechanisms. Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    Uttar Pradesh Revises Minimum Wages Following Industrial Unrest in Noida: Effective April 2026<\/p>\n

    On 17 April 2026, the Government of Uttar Pradesh notified the revised Minimum Wages for workers employed in scheduled employments across the state. Read More<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

    Also Read<\/h3>\n