Search cases

State vs. Asaram — Prison caregiver engagement and parole suppression

The Supreme Court permitted Asaram to hire a trained caregiver for medical assistance while in prison on 06 August 2026. On 14 October 2026, the court allowed Asaram to withdraw his interim bail application in the Gujarat rape case and directed that his appeal against the Jodhpur conviction proceed after he surrenders following his parole.

State vs Chhattisgarh Police — Custodial Death Case (January 2024)

In January 2024, a 34-year-old man died while in the custody of Chhattisgarh Police. On 12 August 2026, the Supreme Court ordered a CBI investigation into the matter after noting a state-level cover-up and awarded Rs 25 lakh in compensation to the victim's family. On 13 October 2026, the Supreme Court granted the CBI an additional three months to complete the investigation into the custodial death.

State vs Prajwala and others — Human trafficking case

A Supreme Court judgment delivered in May 2026 in the Prajwala case, described as a significant victory for anti-human trafficking advocates. The case relates to human trafficking and forced labour practices in India.

State of Uttar Pradesh vs Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind and others — Bulldozer Justice case

The Supreme Court of India issued a verdict on 13 November 2024 prohibiting authorities from demolishing properties solely because an individual is accused of a crime and established pan-India guidelines for such actions. In a subsequent development regarding the State of Uttar Pradesh vs Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind and others case, Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind President Maulana Arshad Madani formally opposed a demolition order issued by the Rampur Development Authority concerning Jauhar University as reported on 18 July 2026.

State of Gujarat vs Sanjiv Bhatt — 1990 custodial death case

In June 2019, a Gujarat court sentenced former IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt to life imprisonment for his role in a 1990 custodial death case. On 29 April 2025, the Supreme Court dismissed his application for bail and refused to suspend his sentence. The court has since directed that his appeal against the conviction be heard on an expedited basis.

Navtej Singh Johar vs Union of India — Section 377 challenge

In this litigation, the Supreme Court of India declared Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code unconstitutional to the extent that it criminalized private consensual sexual acts between adults. The five-judge Constitution Bench ruled on 6 September 2018 that the provision was irrational and arbitrary. As of 15 November 2018, the central government had yet to implement the court's directive to conduct public sensitization programs regarding the decriminalization.

Extra Judicial Execution Victim Families Association vs Union of India

This public interest litigation concerns 1,528 alleged extra-judicial killings by security forces and police in Manipur. In a landmark judgment delivered on 13 July 2016, the Supreme Court of India ordered an investigation into these incidents, ruling that the state cannot use excessive force under the cover of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act. As reported on 12 November 2018, this decision continues to serve as the foundational ruling for subsequent petitions regarding alleged extra-judicial executions in the region.

Shakti Vahini vs Union of India — Khap Panchayat guidelines

The Supreme Court issued guidelines to address the interference of Khap panchayats in marriages between consenting adults. The court ruled that such self-appointed village bodies cannot prevent adults from exercising their right to choose their partners.

National Legal Services Authority vs Union of India — Transgender rights case

Following the 2014 Supreme Court judgment recognizing transgender people as a third gender and directing the government to provide social welfare, activists have reported that implementation of these benefits remains slow and inadequate. State governments are beginning to introduce specific welfare measures like pensions and housing.

Naz Foundation (India) Trust vs Suresh Kumar Koushal and Another

This case concerns the legality of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code regarding consensual same-sex relations. The Supreme Court decided to refer curative petitions seeking a re-examination of its 2013 verdict that had criminalized such activity to a five-judge bench.