Search cases

In re: Resignation of 6 AIADMK MLAs

The Supreme Court dismissed petitions challenging the acceptance of the resignations of six AIADMK MLAs who joined the Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam, ruling on 26 October 2026 that resignation and disqualification processes operate independently. The court also declined to order a CBI investigation into the legislators' actions, while maintaining that any related FIR should be handled by relevant authorities. This follows a 13 October 2026 Madras High Court judgment that upheld the resignations but directed the Speaker to conclude pending disqualification proceedings.

Challenge to the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of Seats in Educational Institutions and of Appointments or Posts in the Services under the State) (Amendment) Act, 2022

On 12 October 2026, the Karnataka High Court struck down the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of Seats in Educational Institutions and of Appointments or Posts in the Services under the State) (Amendment) Act, 2022, ruling that the 50 percent total reservation ceiling is a binding constitutional principle. Following this, the Karnataka Cabinet formally resolved to challenge the decision by filing a special leave petition in the Supreme Court on 15 October 2026, a move that is opposed by the Dr. Ambedkar Scheduled Castes Federation.

Public Interest Litigation on Execution by Hanging

A Public Interest Litigation challenged the constitutionality of Section 354(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which mandates execution by hanging. On 13 September 2026, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition and upheld the constitutional validity of the current execution method. The Court declined to refer the matter to a larger bench, effectively closing the case.

School Manager vs. Father of Students — Caste-based Abuse Case

The Supreme Court quashed SC/ST Act proceedings against a school manager accused of assaulting and hurling caste-based abuses at a parent in a classroom in January 2020. On 20 August 2026, the Court ruled that an incident occurring within a private, closed space without the presence of the public does not meet the statutory requirements for an offence under the SC/ST Act, effectively closing the case.

State v Two Advocates — Quashing of gangster charges based on Executive 'Gang Charts'

In a judgment delivered as reported on 27 August 2026, the Supreme Court quashed proceedings against two advocates under the U.P. Gangsters Act. The Court held the legislation is stillborn for failing to create an independent offence and ruled that prosecuting individuals based solely on administrative gang charts violates constitutional principles.

Rishi Malhotra vs Union of India — Challenge to hanging as a mode of execution

In this public interest litigation, Rishi Malhotra challenged the constitutional validity of execution by hanging under Section 354(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, arguing that it is not a dignified form of death. The Supreme Court dismissed the plea on 18 August 2026, declining to refer the earlier judgment in Deena v. Union of India.

In Re: Article 370 of the Constitution

A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court unanimously upheld the Union government's 2019 decision to abrogate Article 370, ruling that Jammu and Kashmir did not retain sovereignty upon acceding to India. In its judgment delivered on 11 December 2023, the Court also directed the Election Commission of India to hold elections in the region by 30 September of the following year.

C.R. Jaya Sukin vs Union of India — Inauguration of new Parliament building

A public interest litigation was filed in the Supreme Court seeking a direction that the new Parliament building be inaugurated by the President of India rather than the Prime Minister. The Supreme Court refused to entertain the petition.

Shreya Singhal vs Union of India

A landmark Supreme Court case that challenged the constitutionality of Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, which criminalized sending offensive messages online.

Teesta Setalvad vs Union of India — Hindutva definition judgment review petition

Social activist Teesta Setalvad filed a plea seeking a review of the Supreme Court's 1995 judgment, which defined Hindutva as a 'way of life'. The Supreme Court declined to entertain the plea to reconsider or revisit the two-decade-old verdict.

Kedar Nath Singh vs State of Bihar

The Supreme Court reaffirmed its 1962 ruling in this matter, clarifying that criticism of the government does not constitute sedition unless it incites violence.

In re: Challenge to the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act

The Supreme Court of India struck down the 99th Constitutional Amendment Act and the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act as unconstitutional and void on 16 October 2015. The Court held that legislative involvement in judicial appointments threatened judicial independence, despite criticism from government figures regarding the decision as reported on 19 October 2015.

Ram Singh and others vs Union of India — Jat reservation case

The Supreme Court quashed the Central government's notification that included the Jat community in the Central List of Other Backward Classes (OBC), thereby denying them the benefit of job and educational reservations. The Court held that the government's decision was based on flawed conclusions about the social backwardness of the community.