Search cases

Rahul Gandhi and others vs Union of India — SIR irregularities

Rahul Gandhi, Asaduddin Owaisi, and other INDIA bloc leaders have challenged the Election Commission's Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls in the Supreme Court, alleging procedural irregularities and voter deletions. On 27 October 2026, the Supreme Court granted the petitioners 10 days to file their rejoinder to an affidavit submitted by the Election Commission, which maintains that the revision process was conducted unanimously.

Transfer petition regarding PIL on Vande Mataram status

The Supreme Court is hearing a petition to transfer a public interest litigation from the Delhi High Court that seeks to grant the song Vande Mataram status equal to the national anthem and establish national policy guidelines for educational institutions. On 27 October 2026, the Supreme Court issued a formal notice to the Union Government regarding this transfer petition and requested a response to related petitions challenging the use of the full six-stanza version of the song.

In re: Regulation of trade margins on medicines and medical devices

The Supreme Court is reviewing the regulatory framework for medicine and medical device pricing after the government capped trade margins on cancer drugs at 30 percent. In an affidavit filed on 23 October 2026, the Centre acknowledged that hospitals overcharging patients on anti-cancer drugs and medical consumables constitutes malpractice. The court has directed the government to consider extending price controls to all non-patented medicines and consumables, with the next hearing scheduled for 27 October 2026.

In re: Menstrual Hygiene Policy compliance

The Supreme Court declared menstrual hygiene a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution on 18 October 2026. Following this, the court granted defaulting states and Union Territories a four-week deadline on 19 October 2026 to submit reports regarding the availability of sanitary facilities and funding in schools, warning that further non-compliance could lead to contempt proceedings.

In re: Regulation of protests in Delhi

The Delhi High Court is hearing petitions from a trader and advocate Rishabh Saxena seeking a standard operating procedure to regulate public protests in the national capital to mitigate traffic disruptions and business losses. On 13 October 2026, the court directed the Central government to respond to these requests while seeking clarity on related proceedings in the Supreme Court. On 16 October 2026, the court recorded an assurance from the Delhi Police to regulate a specific protest by the Citizens for Justice and Peace in Connaught Place.

Delhi Union of Journalists vs Union of India and Others — Petition regarding police conduct against journalists

The Delhi Union of Journalists has filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court of India alleging police violence against independent reporters during Delhi protests. During proceedings on 15 October 2026, the Court granted interim protection to a woman journalist, discussed the challenges in defining journalists versus content creators, and considered forming a women-led committee to investigate sexual violence allegations. The matter is pending, with the next hearing scheduled for 3 November 2026.

In re: Mandatory age verification at liquor outlets

A petition before the Supreme Court seeks mandatory age verification at liquor outlets and a ban on the sale of liquor in discreet packaging. On 14 October 2026, the Court expressed displeasure over the Union government's failure to appear in the matter and directed the Centre and states to file formal responses to the plea.

Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India and Others — PIL seeking expedited NDPS trials

Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay filed a public interest litigation in the Supreme Court seeking mandatory timelines for forensic reports, expedited trials, and a national strategy to address the drug menace in India. Following the issuance of notices to the Centre and states on 10 August 2026, the Supreme Court tagged the petition with ongoing suo motu proceedings concerning the national drug crisis on 24 August 2026.

Indian Young Lawyers Association vs State of Kerala — Sabarimala review case

A nine-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court is hearing a reference arising from the 2018 Sabarimala verdict to examine broader questions of religious freedom, the Essential Religious Practices test, and the maintainability of Public Interest Litigation. As of 12 May 2026, the court has questioned the locus standi of the original petitioners and expanded the scope of the reference to include issues such as Parsi excommunications.

In re: Stray dog menace in Meghalaya

The Meghalaya High Court is hearing a Public Interest Litigation concerning the management of stray dogs in the state. Following directives to form a committee under the Animal Birth Control Rules and acquire shelters, the court mandated on 5 September 2025 that stray dogs be captured, vaccinated, and kept under observation. The High Court previously sought permission from the Supreme Court to retain jurisdiction over the matter as reported on 1 September 2025.

Centre for Public Interest Litigation vs Union of India — CAG appointment process

The Centre for Public Interest Litigation filed a petition in the Supreme Court challenging the Comptroller and Auditor General appointment process and seeking the establishment of an independent selection committee. During a hearing as reported on 1 August 2025, the Solicitor General argued that the proposed reforms would require a constitutional amendment. The case is pending before the Supreme Court as of 1 August 2025.

Aruna Roy and Nikhil Dey vs Union of India — MGNREGA wages during lockdown

Activists Aruna Roy and Nikhil Dey filed a public interest litigation in the Supreme Court requesting a direction for the payment of full wages to MGNREGA workers during the COVID-19 lockdown period.