{"id":400520,"date":"2026-11-04T15:30:01","date_gmt":"2026-11-04T10:00:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=400520"},"modified":"2026-11-04T15:22:27","modified_gmt":"2026-11-04T09:52:27","slug":"supreme-court-october-2026-key-rulings-top-stories","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/11\/04\/supreme-court-october-2026-key-rulings-top-stories\/","title":{"rendered":"Supreme Court October 2026 Roundup: child online safety, CJP protests, election nomination rights, and other key developments"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

October 2026 saw the Supreme Court of India address a wide spectrum of legal questions, delivering significant rulings with far-reaching implications for law, governance, and the administration of justice. From interpreting statutory provisions and clarifying legal principles to intervening in matters raising larger questions of public importance, the month brought several noteworthy developments in the country’s highest court.<\/p>\n

The Supreme Court October 2026 Roundup brings together the month’s landmark judgments, significant judicial interventions, and key developments shaping India’s legal landscape. The roundup also tracks judicial appointments, Collegium recommendations, and the latest figures on case pendency before the Supreme Court. Catch up on the latest Supreme Court judgments featured in SCC Weekly and explore the Know Thy Judge series for insights into the judiciary.<\/p>\n

Top Stories of October 2026<\/p>\n

How will platforms detect child abuse material? Supreme Court proposes a National Hash & URL Database, Time-Bound Reporting; Recognises right to internet access<\/a><\/p>\n

In a case concerning the continued circulation of child sexual exploitation and abuse material (CSEAM) on social media platforms, a Division Bench of J.B. Pardiwala and K.V. Chandran, JJ., emphasised the need for a comprehensive framework for its detection, removal and reporting. The Court called for a National Hash & URL List Database, time-bound reporting obligations, effective grievance redressal and accountability of intermediaries. It further held that the right to access and use the internet is a fundamental right under Article 21<\/a> read with Article 19(1)(a)<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>, observing that children’s safety must be ensured by targeting harmful material rather than restricting their internet access. The Court also underscored the need for proportionate online safeguards, age-appropriate sex education and digital safety awareness. The Union of India has been directed to file an affidavit of compliance, and the matter will be heard next on 10 December 2026.<\/p>\n

[Just Rights for Children Alliance v. S. Harish, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 2205<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Delhi Metro closures and alleged illegal detentions during CJP protest: What did the Supreme Court say on 11 October?<\/a><\/p>\n

The Division Bench of Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana, JJ., took up an urgent hearing on a Sunday, in habeas corpus petitions alleging violation of the Court’s order dated 9 October 2026 concerning restrictions on public transportation in Delhi and of a habeas corpus petition alleging illegal detention of a large number of individuals on 10 October 2026.. The Court noted the allegations regarding metro station closures, disruption of public movement and detention beyond the area covered by the prohibitory order under Section 163<\/a>, Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023<\/a> (BNSS). Finding that the petitioners had made out a prima facie case, the Court issued notice to the alleged contemnors and directed to file counter-affidavit including a compliance report by 13 October 2026. along with a compliance report, by 13 October 2026.<\/p>\n

[Shailendra Mani Tripathi v. Govind Mohan, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 2129<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Delhi metro and rail shutdown ahead of Jantar Mantar Protest appears “overreaching”; SC calls for regulated operations, consideration of alternative protest sites<\/a><\/p>\n

In the midst of hearing the day’s matters (M A Baby v. Union of India), a 3-Judge Bench of Surya Kant, CJ., Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana, JJ., took up an oral mentioning made at about 1:00 p.m. by senior counsel and other counsel, who pointed out communications directing the cessation or cancellation of Metro trains and Mail\/Express trains arriving at New Delhi and Hazrat Nizamuddin Railway Stations, in view of anticipated crowd movement towards Jantar Mantar. The Court observed that the notifications appeared to be “overreaching” as they impose a complete ban upon essential public transportation. Accordingly, the Court recorded the Solicitor General’s agreement to impress upon the authorities to reassess the prohibitions in favour of regulated operation, having regard to proportionality and public convenience. The Court further directed the competent authorities to consider suitable sites with basic amenities for peaceful and lawful protests and to report compliance within 4 days.<\/p>\n

The Court observed that,<\/p>\n

“Although there shall be no outright prohibition on the movement of Metro trains, a prudent decision may be made to permit the operation of Metro trains and other rail services in a suitable and regulated manner. Such a decision should be widely publicised to prevent further inconvenience.”<\/p>\n

[M A Baby v. Union of India, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 2121]<\/a><\/p>\n

Notable Judgments of October 2026<\/p>\n

Electricity Law<\/p>\n

Supreme Court: Sinking Fund contribution alongside depreciation permissible in DVC Tariff; Review contrary to binding precedent violates Article 141<\/a><\/p>\n

In a case concerning the permissibility of including the “Sinking Fund” in tariff determination of electricity generated and supplied by Damodar Valley Corporation (DVC), a Division Bench of J.B. Pardiwala and K. Vinod Chandran*, JJ., allowed the appeal and set aside the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity’s order allowing review of its earlier judgment. The Court held that the contribution to the Sinking Fund, constituted for redemption of bonds issued by DVC, could be treated as an item of expenditure recoverable through tariff, alongside depreciation on the capital assets acquired out of the bond proceeds, in terms of Section 40<\/a>, Damodar Valley Corporation Act, 1948<\/a> and the Terms and Conditions of Tariff Regulations, 2009 (CERC). Rejecting the contention of double allowance, the Court held that the issue had already been considered and upheld by the Supreme Court in Bhaskar Shrachi Alloys Ltd. v. Damodar Valley Corpn., (2018) 8 SCC 281.<\/p>\n

[Damodar Valley Corporation v. Maithan Alloys Ltd., 2026 SCC OnLine SC 2297<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Armed Forces<\/p>\n

SC upholds war injury pension for Kargil veteran; declares ‘what a policy says, it is and not what is in the imagination of the policymaker’<\/a><\/p>\n

In a civil appeal concerning the grant of war injury pension in place of disability pension, the Division Bench comprising Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok Aradhe, JJ., examined whether rheumatoid arthritis developed by an Army personnel during his posting at Kargil under Operation Rakshak qualified for War Injury Pension under Category E(i), Part II, Para 4.1 of the Ministry of Defence Policy Letter dated 31 January 2001.<\/p>\n

The Court held that pensionary benefits could not be denied by adopting a restrictive interpretation unsupported by the language of the policy or the relevant notification. Accordingly, the Court dismissed the Union of India’s appeal, upholding the concurrent decisions of the Armed Forces Tribunal and the High Court, and directed the Government to expressly clarify whether the prescribed pensionary benefits would apply whenever operations are notified under Category E(i).<\/p>\n

[Union of India v. Narender Kumar, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 2272<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Elections<\/p>\n

Independent Election Commission and Analysis of the Collegium System: Inside Justice Dipankar Datta’s opinion on the EC Act challenge<\/a><\/p>\n

While considering the challenge to various provisions of the Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023<\/a> (2023 Act), especially Section 7<\/a> of the 2023 Act<\/a> which deals with composition of Selection Committee for the appointment of Chief Election Commissioner (CEC), the Division Bench of Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ., delivered a split verdict over referring this matter to a larger Bench for consideration.<\/p>\n

Datta, J., opined that it has been clearly laid down by judicial precedents that free and fair elections are a basic feature of the Constitution<\/a> and that the Election Commission of India (ECI) should be insulated from exclusive executive control in relation to appointments of the CEC and the Election Commissioners (ECs). Hence, Datta, J., rejected the plea for referring the matter before a larger Bench. In his opinion, Datta, J., emphasised that, “There can be no gainsaying that free and fair elections, to a large extent, depend on a truly independent ECI. It is not enough for the ECI to be independent, it must also appear to be independent.”<\/p>\n

Per contra, Sharma, J., opined that the present petitions are eligible to be placed before the Chief Justice of India for constitution of a Constitution Bench to adjudicate the constitutional validity of Sections 7<\/a>, 6<\/a> and 8<\/a> of the 2023 Act<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Given the split opinion over whether the present petitions and the applications should be heard by a Constitution Bench of 5 Judges, the present Division Bench thus directed papers to be placed before the CJI for considering the desirability of constituting a Constitution Bench of such number of Judges as may be considered appropriate, to decide the question of vires of Section 7<\/a> of the 2023 Act<\/a>. Furthermore, taking grim note of the time taken to decide references, the Court requested the Chief Justice to explore the necessity of constituting a permanent five-Judge Bench to decide pure constitutional issues.<\/p>\n

Also Read:<\/span> Inside Justice Satish Chandra Sharma’s opinion referring EC Act, 2023 challenge to Constitution Bench<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n

[Dr. Jaya Thakur v. Union of India, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 1980]<\/a><\/p>\n

Can courts step in during an election? Supreme Court on obstruction in filing nominations in Andhra Pradesh<\/a><\/p>\n

In a special leave petition filed by Yuvajana Sramika Rythu Congress Party, the principal opposition party in Andhra Pradesh, alleging that its candidates were prevented from filing nominations for the 2026 municipal elections in Andhra Pradesh, a Division Bench of Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana, JJ., held that judicial restraint during an ongoing election process does not preclude intervention where alleged violence or coercion threatens a level playing field. The Court further held that<\/p>\n

“Free and fair elections are a basic structure of the Constitution<\/a>. Right to freely participate in such election by filing nomination papers without hindrance is a facet of the free and fair election process.”<\/p>\n

Accordingly, the Court issued interim directions requiring the State Election Commission (the Commission) to postpone publication of the final list of candidates until 25 October 2026, consider the representations made by the petitioner party and various candidates, provide an opportunity for affected candidates to file nominations where warranted and strengthen security arrangements at nomination centres.<\/p>\n

[Yuvajana Sramika Rythu Congress Party v. State of A.P., 2026 SCC OnLine SC 2299<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Service Law<\/p>\n

Who ranks senior: direct recruits, special or compassionate appointees? SC upholds Clause 10 of T.N. Special Absorption Rules, ranking 1983 direct recruits higher<\/a><\/p>\n

In appeals and transferred cases concerning the inter se seniority of direct recruits, special appointees (temporary appointees regularised under the T.N. Special Absorption Rules, 1987) and compassionate appointees in ministerial posts in Tamil Nadu, a Division Bench of S.V.N. Bhatti and Shree Chandrashekhar*, JJ., upheld Clause 10 of the Special Absorption Rules and held that direct recruits selected through the November 1983 TNPSC examination would rank above special appointees, irrespective of their dates of appointment. The Court further held that compassionate appointees could not claim seniority over the direct recruits merely on the basis of their initial appointment dates. However, inter se seniority between special and compassionate appointees must be determined by their respective dates of regularisation, unless applicable recruitment rules prescribe otherwise. The Court modified the judgment dated 3 April 2006 of the Madras High Court accordingly.<\/p>\n

[M. Prema v. State of T.N., 2026 SCC OnLine SC 2094]<\/a><\/p>\n

Family and Personal Laws<\/p>\n

Supreme Court: Gift of temple inam property to State Government void ab initio; State is custodian, not owner<\/a><\/p>\n

In a case concerning the validity of a gift of temple inam land to the Government of Tamil Nadu by a temporary trustee, a Division Bench of Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok Aradhe*, JJ., allowed the appeals and set aside the Madras High Court’s judgment dismissing the writ petition challenging the alienation. Emphasising that property dedicated to a deity vests in the deity and is held in trust for its benefit and the community of worshippers, the Court held that a gift of inam property granted for the support and maintenance of a religious institution is null and void ab initio under Section 41(1), Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959, and was incapable of valid registration under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908<\/a>, as applicable to Tamil Nadu.<\/p>\n

[K. Ramalingam v. State of T.N., 2026 SCC OnLine SC 2195<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Laws<\/p>\n

Record of default from Information Utility is enough to admit a petition; disputes over amount and a company’s profits do not stop CIRP: Supreme Court<\/a><\/p>\n

In two appeals against the NCLAT’s judgment upholding the admission of GSTAAD Hotels Pvt. Ltd. and Neo Capricorn Plaza Pvt. Ltd. into CIRP, the Division Bench of Augustine George Masih* and Dipankar Datta, JJ. held that at the admission stage, default only has to be shown on a preponderance of probabilities from the documents on record. The Court said the adjudicating authority (AA) does not need to work out the exact amount owed. It also held that a record of default from an information utility (IU) is enough by itself, and that a company being profitable is no answer to default.<\/p>\n

[Deepak Raheja v. Omkara Assets Reconstruction (P) Ltd., 2026 SCC OnLine SC 2184<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

IBC appeal limitation: Supreme Court says time runs from NCLAT pronouncement, not collection of certified copy<\/a><\/p>\n

In an appeal filed under Section 62<\/a>, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016<\/a> (IBC), the Division Bench of S.V.N. Bhatti and N.V. Anjaria, JJ., held that the limitation period for an appeal under Section 62 commences from the date of pronouncement of the NCLAT order, and only the time requisite for obtaining a certified copy can be excluded under Section 12(2)<\/a>, Limitation Act, 1963<\/a>. The Court stated that the period of inaction before applying for the certified copy cannot be excluded. As the appeal was filed beyond the statutory limit of 45 days and the further condonable period of 15 days, the Court dismissed it for being barred by limitation.<\/p>\n

[Commr. of Central Tax v. Sreenivasa Rao Ravinuthala, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 2150<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Constitutional Law<\/p>\n

Supreme Court: Conversion to Islam does not automatically confer Backward Class Muslim status or reservation benefits under Article 16(4)<\/a><\/p>\n

In a case concerning the issuance of a Backward Class (Muslim) community certificate to a person who converted to Islam from the Hindu social order, a Division Bench of Prashant Kumar Mishra* and Shree Chandrashekhar, JJ., dismissed the State’s special leave petition and upheld the quashing of G.O.(Ms.) No. 314 dated 9 March 2024. Emphasising that conversion to Islam does not, by itself, confer membership of any particular notified Backward Class Muslim community, the Court held that pre-conversion caste or community status cannot automatically be transposed into a notified Muslim Backward Class category and that a community certificate cannot dispense with the substantive constitutional and statutory requirements governing entitlement to reservation under Article 16(4)<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>.<\/p>\n

[State v. Sameer Ahamed N., 2026 SCC OnLine SC 2187<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Money-Laundering<\/p>\n

Sahara Group Money Laundering Case: Supreme Court grants bail to executive, directs trial court to frame charges within 4 months<\/a><\/p>\n

In a case concerning the grant of regular bail to an accused in a money laundering case registered under Sections 3<\/a> and 4<\/a> read with Section 70<\/a>, Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002<\/a> (PMLA), a Division Bench of M.M. Sundresh and Prasanna B. Varale, JJ., set aside the Calcutta High Court’s order rejecting bail. Taking note of the appellant’s incarceration for about 1 year and 3 months, the fact that cognizance was yet to be taken qua the appellant and the considerable time likely to be required for completion of the trial, the Court held that continued incarceration was not required for that purpose. The Court accordingly granted bail to the appellant, subject to the terms and conditions imposed by the trial court, and directed the trial court to frame charges within 4 months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.<\/p>\n

[Anil Valiaparampil Abraham v. Directorate of Enforcement, Kolkata Zone-1, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 2206]<\/a><\/p>\n

Taxation<\/p>\n

Electricity subsidy: Capital or Revenue receipt? Supreme Court applies ‘purpose test’, Holds Pondicherry power subsidy is Revenue<\/a><\/p>\n

In an appeal against the judgment of the Madras High Court, affirming the concurrent findings that the electricity subsidy received by the appellant constituted a revenue receipt, the Division Bench of Prashant Kumar Mishra* and Shree Chandrashekhar, JJ., held that the character of a subsidy must be determined with reference to the purpose for which it is given; the “purpose test” requires the scheme to be examined as a whole, and the general object of fostering industrial growth cannot, by itself, determine the character of the receipt.<\/p>\n

[MEPCO Industries Ltd. v. CIT, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 2080<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Criminal Law<\/p>\n

Electoral mandate confers public authority, not unbridled power to command or intimidate; SC cancels bail in Dombivli doctors’ assault case<\/a><\/p>\n

While examining the legality of the Bombay High Court’s exercise of discretion in restoring bail to an elected municipal corporator and co-accused facing allegations of assaulting and intimidating doctors on duty at a municipal hospital, a Division Bench of Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta*, JJ., held that once the High Court had earlier stayed the bail orders upon forming a prima facie view of their serious infirmity, its subsequent departure without identifying any intervening circumstance and furnishing “cogent and discernible reasons” rendered the exercise of discretion unsustainable.<\/p>\n

Considering the relevance of criminal antecedents, possibility of witness intimidation, influence of the accused and the wider impact upon the medical fraternity, the Court set aside the order restoring bail, cancelled the bail granted to the accused and directed expeditious trial with adequate protection to material witnesses.<\/p>\n

The Court further reiterated that an electoral mandate cannot become a substitute for the authority of law and that “no person, howsoever high the office held, can claim supremacy over the discipline of law”.<\/p>\n

[State of Maharashtra v. Ramesh Sukrya Mhatre, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 2053<\/a>]<\/p>\n

“Casting the shadow of criminality on a pure civil dispute”: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against GPA Holder in Civil Land Dispute<\/a><\/p>\n

In a case concerning the alleged criminalisation of a purely civil dispute arising out of a sale of land, a Division Bench of Satish Chandra Sharma* and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, JJ., held that the criminal proceedings against the petitioner, a general-power-of-attorney (GPA) holder and confirming party to the subsequent sale, could not be sustained when the FIR against the landowners had already been quashed. Emphasising that the foundational ingredients of cheating were absent and that the petitioner’s culpability could not be stretched beyond that of the landowners, the Court observed that the case was a classic instance of “casting the shadow of criminality on a pure civil dispute” and reiterated the principle of judicial consistency and propriety in quashing the FIR against the petitioner as well.<\/p>\n

[Sudha Rakesh v. State of Karnataka, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 2062<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Labour Law<\/p>\n

Triple Test, sovereign functions and the Industrial Relations Code: Nine-Judge Bench verdict in Bangalore Water Supply explained<\/a><\/p>\n

In a reference on whether the nearly 5 decades old landmark decision in Bangalore Water Supply & Sewerage Board v. A. Rajappa, (1978) 2 SCC 213<\/a>, which laid down the “Triple Test” for determining whether an undertaking falls within the ambit of “industry” under Section 2(j)<\/a>, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947<\/a> (Industrial Disputes Act), remains a good law, the Constitution Bench of Surya Kant*, CJ, and Satish Chandra Sharma, Alok Aradhe, Vipul M. Pancholi, B.V. Nagarathna**, P.S. Narasimha**, Dipankar Datta**, Ujjal Bhuyan and Joymalya Bagchi**, JJ., by 5:4 ratio, established that the “Triple Test” remained the governing legal framework for Section 2(j) of the repealed Industrial Disputes Act. The Court held that:<\/span><\/p>\n

All matters currently pending before courts, tribunals, and labour authorities under the repealed Industrial Disputes Act continue to be governed and adjudicated under the original Triple Test laid down in Bangalore Water Supply.<\/p>\n

Industrial Relations Code, 2020 (Industrial Relations Code) was an independent, distinct enactment that must be interpreted entirely on its own terms, text, and statutory scheme whenever a proper controversy arises under it.<\/p>\n

[State of U.P. v. Jai Bir Singh, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 1684<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Supreme Court Case Disposal and Pendency Status1<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

Pending cases<\/p>\n\n\n\n<\/colgroup>\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n

Case Type<\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Numbers<\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

Civil Cases<\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

74284<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

Criminal Cases<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

22703<\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

Total<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

96987<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Coram-wise Case Pendency2<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

\n\n\n\n<\/colgroup>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n

Coram<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Pending Cases<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

3-Judge Bench<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

<\/span> 1,262<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

5-Judge Bench<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

<\/span> 175<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

7-Judge Bench<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

32<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

9-Judge Bench<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

46<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Case Disposal Status<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n<\/colgroup>\n\n\n\n\n
\n  <\/td>\n\n

Civil Cases<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Criminal Cases<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Total Cases<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

Disposal in last month<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

3,146<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

1,942<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

\n

5,088<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

Disposal in current year<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

43,938<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

20,065<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

64,003<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

SC Collegium Recommendations, Appointments and Transfers in October<\/p>\n

Supreme Court Collegium recommends 9 Advocates as Judges of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court<\/a><\/p>\n

SC Collegium recommends 11 Judicial Officers and Advocates as Judges of Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh High Courts<\/a><\/p>\n

Supreme Court Collegium recommends four High Court Judges as Chief Justices of Delhi, Gujarat, Telangana and Uttaranchal High Courts<\/a><\/p>\n

Supreme Court Collegium recommends 9 for appointment as Madhya Pradesh and Bombay High Court Judges<\/a><\/p>\n

SCC Weekly<\/p>\n

2026 SCC Vol. 8 Part 3: Supreme Court rulings on river pollution, mental cruelty, autism and more<\/a><\/p>\n

2026 SCC Vol. 8 Part 1: Key Supreme Court Cases on Prisons Environment Law, IBC, Criminal Law, & more<\/a><\/p>\n

2026 SCC Vol. 8 Part 2:8 Supreme Court rulings on arrest, cheque bounce, contempt and more<\/a><\/p>\n

2026 SCC Vol. 7 Part 5: Key Supreme Court Cases on Constitution, GST, Criminal Law and more<\/a><\/p>\n

Know Thy Judge<\/span><\/p>\n

Know Thy Judge | Justice BV Nagarathna: The Arc Moving Toward a First Woman CJI<\/a><\/p>\n

Supreme Court of India: Justice Joymalya Bagchi’s stellar career and notable judgments<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n

1.<\/a> National Judicial Data Grid<\/a><\/p>\n

2.<\/a> National Judicial Data Grid<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Explore the Supreme Court’s key judgments and developments from October 2026, covering child online safety, internet access, election nomination rights, insolvency, service law, reservation, PMLA bail and other significant rulings.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67512,"featured_media":400521,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[45673,34119],"tags":[118811,98818,40856,118800,34510,118821,13191,97669,46130,117627,118801,5181,118806,118802,118810,87842,33065,118812,118803,118816,116869,118809,30361,118819,47449,43744,6121,40198,118807,54263,19261,118808,118820,79440,21114,117625,118818,2672,118817,117811,43718,118804,5941,118813,118805,118799,56447,118814,45469,118815,46414,39715],"class_list":["post-400520","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-columns-for-roundup","category-scmonthly","tag-alleged-illegal-detention","tag-armed-forces-pension","tag-assault-on-doctors","tag-bangalore-water-supply-triple-test","tag-cancellation-of-bail","tag-capital-versus-revenue-expenditure","tag-child-custody","tag-child-online-safety","tag-child-sexual-abuse-material","tag-cirp-admission","tag-cjp-protests","tag-compassionate-appointment","tag-definition-of-industry","tag-delhi-metro-closures","tag-delhi-metro-shutdown","tag-digital-safety","tag-direct-recruitment","tag-election-commission-act","tag-election-commission-appointments","tag-election-nomination-disputes","tag-electricity-subsidy","tag-freedom-of-assembly","tag-ibc","tag-ibc-appeal-limitation","tag-industrial-relations","tag-information-utility","tag-insolvency","tag-insolvency-proceedings","tag-internet-access-rights","tag-landmark-judgments","tag-money-laundering","tag-national-hash-and-url-database","tag-nclat-limitation-period","tag-pmla-bail","tag-quashing-of-fir","tag-record-of-default","tag-religious-conversion-and-reservation","tag-reservation","tag-reservation-eligibility","tag-right-to-internet-access","tag-right-to-protest","tag-seniority-of-direct-recruits","tag-service-law","tag-service-law-seniority","tag-supreme-court-decisions","tag-supreme-court-judgments-october-2026","tag-supreme-court-roundup","tag-temple-inam-property","tag-triple-test","tag-validity-of-gift-deeds","tag-war-injury-pension","tag-welfare-of-the-child"],"yoast_head":"\nSupreme Court October 2026: Explore Key Judgments and Top Stories | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Explore top news making stories and landmark judgments by Supreme Court in October 2026.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/11\/04\/supreme-court-october-2026-key-rulings-top-stories\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Supreme Court October 2026 Roundup: child online safety, CJP protests, election nomination rights, and other key developments\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Explore top news making stories and landmark judgments by Supreme Court in October 2026.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/11\/04\/supreme-court-october-2026-key-rulings-top-stories\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-11-04T10:00:01+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/11\/Supreme-Court-October-2026.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Apoorva\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Supreme Court October 2026 Roundup: child online safety, CJP protests, election nomination rights, and other key developments\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Apoorva\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/11\\\/04\\\/supreme-court-october-2026-key-rulings-top-stories\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/11\\\/04\\\/supreme-court-october-2026-key-rulings-top-stories\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Apoorva\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9\"},\"headline\":\"Supreme Court October 2026 Roundup: child online safety, CJP protests, election nomination rights, and other key developments\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-11-04T10:00:01+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/11\\\/04\\\/supreme-court-october-2026-key-rulings-top-stories\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":3425,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/11\\\/04\\\/supreme-court-october-2026-key-rulings-top-stories\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/11\\\/Supreme-Court-October-2026.webp\",\"keywords\":[\"alleged illegal detention\",\"Armed forces pension\",\"Assault on Doctors\",\"Bangalore Water Supply triple test\",\"Cancellation of Bail\",\"capital versus revenue expenditure\",\"child custody\",\"child online safety\",\"Child Sexual Abuse Material\",\"CIRP admission\",\"CJP protests\",\"compassionate appointment\",\"definition of industry\",\"Delhi Metro closures\",\"Delhi Metro shutdown\",\"Digital Safety\",\"Direct Recruitment\",\"Election Commission Act\",\"Election Commission appointments\",\"election nomination disputes\",\"Electricity Subsidy\",\"freedom of assembly\",\"IBC\",\"IBC appeal limitation\",\"Industrial relations\",\"Information Utility\",\"Insolvency\",\"Insolvency Proceedings\",\"internet access rights\",\"Landmark Judgments\",\"money laundering\",\"National Hash and URL Database\",\"NCLAT limitation period\",\"PMLA Bail\",\"quashing of FIR\",\"record of default\",\"religious conversion and reservation\",\"reservation\",\"reservation eligibility\",\"Right to Internet Access\",\"right to protest\",\"seniority of direct recruits\",\"Service Law\",\"service law seniority\",\"Supreme Court decisions\",\"Supreme Court judgments October 2026\",\"Supreme Court roundup\",\"temple inam property\",\"Triple Test\",\"validity of gift deeds\",\"War Injury Pension\",\"welfare of the child\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Legal RoundUp\",\"Supreme Court Roundups\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/11\\\/04\\\/supreme-court-october-2026-key-rulings-top-stories\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":[\"WebPage\",\"FAQPage\"],\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/11\\\/04\\\/supreme-court-october-2026-key-rulings-top-stories\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/11\\\/04\\\/supreme-court-october-2026-key-rulings-top-stories\\\/\",\"name\":\"Supreme Court October 2026: Explore Key Judgments and Top Stories | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/11\\\/04\\\/supreme-court-october-2026-key-rulings-top-stories\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/11\\\/04\\\/supreme-court-october-2026-key-rulings-top-stories\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/11\\\/Supreme-Court-October-2026.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-11-04T10:00:01+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9\"},\"description\":\"Explore top news making stories and landmark judgments by Supreme Court in October 2026.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/11\\\/04\\\/supreme-court-october-2026-key-rulings-top-stories\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/11\\\/04\\\/supreme-court-october-2026-key-rulings-top-stories\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/11\\\/04\\\/supreme-court-october-2026-key-rulings-top-stories\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/11\\\/Supreme-Court-October-2026.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/11\\\/Supreme-Court-October-2026.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"Supreme Court October 2026\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/11\\\/04\\\/supreme-court-october-2026-key-rulings-top-stories\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Supreme Court October 2026 Roundup: child online safety, CJP protests, election nomination rights, and other key developments\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9\",\"name\":\"Apoorva\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Apoorva\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/author\\\/scc-editor\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Supreme Court October 2026: Explore Key Judgments and Top Stories | SCC Times","description":"Explore top news making stories and landmark judgments by Supreme Court in October 2026.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/11\/04\/supreme-court-october-2026-key-rulings-top-stories\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Supreme Court October 2026 Roundup: child online safety, CJP protests, election nomination rights, and other key developments","og_description":"Explore top news making stories and landmark judgments by Supreme Court in October 2026.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/11\/04\/supreme-court-october-2026-key-rulings-top-stories\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2026-11-04T10:00:01+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/11\/Supreme-Court-October-2026.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Apoorva","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Supreme Court October 2026 Roundup: child online safety, CJP protests, election nomination rights, and other key developments","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Apoorva"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/11\/04\/supreme-court-october-2026-key-rulings-top-stories\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/11\/04\/supreme-court-october-2026-key-rulings-top-stories\/"},"author":{"name":"Apoorva","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9"},"headline":"Supreme Court October 2026 Roundup: child online safety, CJP protests, election nomination rights, and other key developments","datePublished":"2026-11-04T10:00:01+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/11\/04\/supreme-court-october-2026-key-rulings-top-stories\/"},"wordCount":3425,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/11\/04\/supreme-court-october-2026-key-rulings-top-stories\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/11\/Supreme-Court-October-2026.webp","keywords":["alleged illegal detention","Armed forces pension","Assault on Doctors","Bangalore Water Supply triple test","Cancellation of Bail","capital versus revenue expenditure","child custody","child online safety","Child Sexual Abuse Material","CIRP admission","CJP protests","compassionate appointment","definition of industry","Delhi Metro closures","Delhi Metro shutdown","Digital Safety","Direct Recruitment","Election Commission Act","Election Commission appointments","election nomination disputes","Electricity Subsidy","freedom of assembly","IBC","IBC appeal limitation","Industrial relations","Information Utility","Insolvency","Insolvency Proceedings","internet access rights","Landmark Judgments","money laundering","National Hash and URL Database","NCLAT limitation period","PMLA Bail","quashing of FIR","record of default","religious conversion and reservation","reservation","reservation eligibility","Right to Internet Access","right to protest","seniority of direct recruits","Service Law","service law seniority","Supreme Court decisions","Supreme Court judgments October 2026","Supreme Court roundup","temple inam property","Triple Test","validity of gift deeds","War Injury Pension","welfare of the child"],"articleSection":["Legal RoundUp","Supreme Court Roundups"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/11\/04\/supreme-court-october-2026-key-rulings-top-stories\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":["WebPage","FAQPage"],"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/11\/04\/supreme-court-october-2026-key-rulings-top-stories\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/11\/04\/supreme-court-october-2026-key-rulings-top-stories\/","name":"Supreme Court October 2026: Explore Key Judgments and Top Stories | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/11\/04\/supreme-court-october-2026-key-rulings-top-stories\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/11\/04\/supreme-court-october-2026-key-rulings-top-stories\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/11\/Supreme-Court-October-2026.webp","datePublished":"2026-11-04T10:00:01+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9"},"description":"Explore top news making stories and landmark judgments by Supreme Court in October 2026.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/11\/04\/supreme-court-october-2026-key-rulings-top-stories\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/11\/04\/supreme-court-october-2026-key-rulings-top-stories\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/11\/04\/supreme-court-october-2026-key-rulings-top-stories\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/11\/Supreme-Court-October-2026.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/11\/Supreme-Court-October-2026.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"Supreme Court October 2026"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/11\/04\/supreme-court-october-2026-key-rulings-top-stories\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Supreme Court October 2026 Roundup: child online safety, CJP protests, election nomination rights, and other key developments"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9","name":"Apoorva","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Apoorva"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-editor\/"}]}},"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/11\/Supreme-Court-October-2026.webp","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/400520","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67512"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=400520"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/400520\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":400524,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/400520\/revisions\/400524"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/400521"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=400520"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=400520"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=400520"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}