Последние посты
Supreme Court Observer
22 сент., 03:35
🌅 Good Morning!📹 Our newsletter revisits the _Harshita Grover_ interim order, in which the Supreme Court barred sharing clips of its proceedings without prior permission. Read: https://bit.ly/4yQvpc2🗃️ Our latest issue of the Supreme Court Observer Law Reports (SCO.LR) identifies five important judgements from 14 to 18 September 2026. Read: https://bit.ly/4y7HbP7🧑🏻🦽 In our latest commentary, Vijay K. Tiwari examines the _Bhumika Trust_ judgement and argues that it is a step back in disability jurisprudence. Read: https://bit.ly/4yJrlKDSupreme Court ObserverClipped justice - Supreme Court ObserverAn intervention asks whether open justice can survive prior permission for sharing courtroom videos onlineSupreme Court Observer
21 сент., 12:36
Volume 9 Issue 3 of the Supreme Court Observer Law Reports is here!Catch the whole issue here: https://www.scobserver.in/journal/sco-lr-2026-volume-9-issue-3/The Supreme Court delivered 18 reportable and non-reportable judgements last week. In this issue, we have identified five of the most important judgements, including decisions on:- Grant of disability pensions for ex-servicemen : https://www.scobserver.in/supreme-court-observer-law-reports-scolr/grant-of-disability-pensions-for-ex-servicemen/ - Presumption of guilt under POCSO Act, 2012 : https://www.scobserver.in/supreme-court-observer-law-reports-scolr/presumption-of-guilt-under-pocso-act-2012/ - Validity of methanol regulation : https://www.scobserver.in/supreme-court-observer-law-reports-scolr/validity-of-maharashtras-methanol-regulation/ - Interim relief under Section 92, CPC : https://www.scobserver.in/supreme-court-obseSupreme Court ObserverSCO.LR | 2026 | Volume 9 | Issue 3 - Supreme Court ObserverIn this issue, we identify five important judgements from 14 September to 18 September 2026Supreme Court Observer
21 сент., 04:26
🌸 Good Morning!👨🏻⚖️ Did you know that the petition challenging the three-year practice rule was filed on behalf of persons with disabilities? Vijay K. Tiwari explains why the Bench failed to address the petitioners' concerns. Read: https://bit.ly/4yJrlKD🪙 The Supreme Court recently held that a trust which lacks a separate juristic personality cannot be prosecuted if money allegedly linked to a criminal offence finds its way into the trust. Our analysis: https://bit.ly/4cVV2Qh⛏️ A three-judge Bench permitted mining blocks containing "virgin forest land" in Karnataka to be auctioned and leased, making forest clearance a second step in the process. We examine the history and consequences of this decision: https://bit.ly/4yftFcgSupreme Court ObserverThe second coming of charity in disability discourse - Supreme Court ObserverThe Supreme Court’s decision on the 3-year practice criteria marks a step back in disability jurisprudenceSupreme Court Observer
18 сент., 03:30
🌅 Good Morning!👩🏽⚖️ Yesterday, the Supreme Court took note of status reports on human rights violations in Manipur and issued directions to ensure the safety of persons displaced within the state. Our report: https://bit.ly/4y5tmko⚖️ The law governing tribunals has been through repeated back and forth between the executive and judiciary. Our timeline provides an accessible overview: https://bit.ly/4hca3P9🪧 In its latest order on the Jantar Mantar protests, the Court directed the High-Powered Enquiry Committee to first examine alleged use of pellet guns, violence against women protesters and the destruction of property. Our report: https://bit.ly/3USu5H2Supreme Court ObserverManipur Violence | SC reiterates the need of special courts to hear cases - Supreme Court ObserverThe Bench directed the Manipur Legal Service Authority to furnish information on unnatural death cases in the stateSupreme Court Observer
17 сент., 09:43
Today, the Supreme Court emphasized the need for setting up two special courts to facilitate speedy disposal of cases in the Manipur ethnic violence. It issued directions to safeguard internally displaced persons. We report: https://www.scobserver.in/journal/manipur-violence-court-reiterates-the-need-of-special-courts-to-hear-cases/Supreme Court ObserverManipur Violence | SC reiterates the need of special courts to hear cases - Supreme Court ObserverThe Bench directed the Manipur Legal Service Authority to furnish information on unnatural death cases in the stateSupreme Court Observer
17 сент., 03:30
🌇 Good Morning!🪧 In its latest order, the Supreme Court declined to reconstitute the High-Powered Enquiry Committee investigating allegations of police excesses in the 20 July Jantar Mantar Protest. We report: https://bit.ly/3USu5H2🏛️ We examine two recent Collegium developments: the February policy decision to transfer prospective Chief Justice two months before their appointment date, and the Union’s 5 September notification appointing new CJs at eight High Courts. Read: https://bit.ly/4dBbJ3y🏭 In August 2026, the nine-judge Constitution Bench delivered its verdict in the reference seeking a reconsideration of the definition of "industry". Our video summarises the 489-page judgement and the five opinions authored by the judges on the Bench. Watch here: https://bit.ly/4h6TK5YSupreme Court ObserverJantar Mantar Protests | Objections to HPEC “premature”, says Supreme Court - Supreme Court ObserverThe inquiry will first look at pellet guns, violence against women protesters and the destruction of propertySupreme Court Observer
16 сент., 03:36
🌅 Good Morning!🏛️ Recent appointments reveal that transferring judges prior to their elevation as Chief Justice must allow sufficient time for consultation with State governments. Our latest analysis: https://bit.ly/4dBbJ3y⚖️ In our latest issue of the Supreme Court Observer Law Reports (SCO.LR) we identify five notable judgements published between 7 and 11 September 2026. Read: https://bit.ly/4iu3ytq🏭 On 20 August, a nine-judge Constitution Bench delivered its verdict in the reference seeking a reconsideration of the definition of "industry". Our video summarises the judgement and the separate opinions authored by the judges on the Bench. Watch here: https://bit.ly/4h6TK5YSupreme Court ObserverCollegium’s familiarisation policy: an incomplete reform - Supreme Court ObserverRecent appointments reveal that transfer of judges prior to their elevation as Chief Justice must factor time for state government consultation.Supreme Court Observer
15 сент., 03:30
🌸 Good Morning!👨🏻⚖️ Our newsletter analyses the Punjab Government’s objection to the appointment of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra as the Chief Justice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Read: https://bit.ly/4iu9uTc🪧 In his commentary, Advocate Sarthak Gupta argues that no petition in the Jantar Mantar protests sought the quashing of FIRs under the Supreme Court’s Article 142 jurisdiction. Read: https://bit.ly/3SYbj0j⚖️ Volume 9 Issue 2 of the Supreme Court Observer Law Reports (SCO.LR) identifies five of the most important judgements published by the Court last week. Read: https://bit.ly/4iu3ytqSupreme Court ObserverBench or bias? - Supreme Court ObserverFrom recusal pleas to judicial appointments, litigants and governments have reasons to care who sits on the bench.Supreme Court Observer
14 сент., 03:34изменён
🌻 Good Morning!🤝 In our latest commentary, Advocate Sarthak Gupta argues that the Supreme Court treated the mass registration of FIRs against Jantar Mantar protestors as a dispute to be settled rather than an abuse of process. Read: https://bit.ly/3SYbj0j🪧 Last week, the Court directed confidential access to the High-Powered Enquiry Committee for vulnerable witnesses in its probe into alleged police excesses at Jantar Mantar. Read: https://bit.ly/4xMaKpg🗃️ For the first time since May, the Court recorded more disposals than institutions. Read our monthly pendency report for August: https://bit.ly/4xOMzH2Supreme Court ObserverThe CJP Order and the limits of Article 142 - Supreme Court ObserverThe quashing of FIRs reads less like an adjudication and more like a settlement agreement that received a judicial stamp.Supreme Court Observer
11 сент., 03:30
🌼 Good Morning!🪧 Yesterday, the Supreme Court directed that the High Power Enquiry Committee examining alleged police excesses during the student protest at Jantar Mantar function under its direct supervision. Read: https://bit.ly/4xMaKpg🗃️ After a significant spike in July, pendency in the Supreme Court fell by 1,079 cases to 94,639 by the end of August. We analyse: https://bit.ly/4xOMzH2⚖️ The first Supreme Court Observer Law Reports (SCO.LR) issue of September 2026 is out. Our shortlist of important judgements covers the district magistrate's power, discretion in imposing penalties, juvenility as a defence after case disposal, and more: https://bit.ly/4xagdFiSupreme Court ObserverSC says Jantar Mantar HPEC would report directly to Bench, opened access for vulnerable witnesses - Supreme Court ObserverBench kept inquiry panel under its direct supervision, while asking it to ensure confidential access for vulnerable witnessesSupreme Court Observer
10 сент., 03:34
🌼 Good Morning!💉 Last week, the Gujarat High Court quashed the rejection of a couple's IVF treatment request, after finding that the Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Act, 2021 (ART Act) prescribes separate age limits for men and women. Read: https://bit.ly/4d21uVO👨🏻⚖️ On 1 September, the Supreme Court directed seven states to raise the retirement age of district judiciary officers to 62, revisiting the question for the first time since 2002. Read: https://bit.ly/46fa9QX⚖️ In Volume 9, Issue 1 of the Supreme Court Observer Law Reports (SCO.LR), we shortlist five notable judgements from last week. Read: https://bit.ly/4xagdFiSupreme Court ObserverGujarat HC adds a second route around reproductive age limits - Supreme Court ObserverCourt permits a fresh IVF request, extending reproductive choice beyond the Supreme Court’s transitional exception.Supreme Court Observer
9 сент., 03:38
🌼 Good Morning!👨🏻⚖️ On 1 September, the Supreme Court directed seven states to raise the retirement age of district judiciary officers from 60 to 62 years to arrest the “attrition of experienced judicial talent”. We analyse the move: https://bit.ly/46fa9QX🤰🏽Last week, the Gujarat High Court permitted a couple to approach an authorised clinic for assisted reproductive technology (ART) services, extending reproductive choice beyond the Supreme Court’s transitional exception. Read: https://bit.ly/4d21uVO⚖️ In our latest issue of the Supreme Court Observer Law Reports (SCO.LR), we shortlist five important judgements from 31 August to 4 September 2026. Read: https://bit.ly/4xagdFiSupreme Court ObserverBridging the “yawning gap”: The retirement age of District Judges - Supreme Court ObserverSupreme Court raises District Judges’ retirement age to 62 to arrest the “attrition of experienced judicial talent”.Supreme Court Observer
8 сент., 03:34
🌸 Good morning!🗃️ In the first issue of the Supreme Court Observer Law Reports (SCO.LR) this month, we have identified five important judgements from the top court. Read the judgements alongside our assistive mindmaps, sharp summaries and citation features: https://bit.ly/4xagdFi👨🏻⚖️ Our newsletter examines how the recent discussion on the appointment of distinguished jurists to the Supreme Court has revived the debate on achieving a balanced judiciary. Read: https://bit.ly/46HFFHt🏛️ The Supreme Court is hearing a petition challenging BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra’s 12-year tenure and seeking a declaration that the office of BCI Chairperson remain neutral, independent and free from conflicts of interest arising from partisan political office. Read: https://bit.ly/3UBI8ACSupreme Court ObserverSCO.LR | 2026 | Volume 9 | Issue 1 - Supreme Court ObserverIn this issue, we shortlist five important judgements from 31 August to 4 September 2026Supreme Court Observer
7 сент., 03:32
🌼 Good Morning!🏛️ On 2 September, the Supreme Court said that BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra was a “pro tem” chairperson until fresh elections. It directed the BCI to consult the Attorney General and Solicitor General before making major policy decisions. We explain the challenge: https://bit.ly/3UBI8AC🌐 We analyse a 2026 ruling on how AI hallucinations can creep into executive directions. This was the Court’s second intervention in a case involving AI-hallucinated directions this year. Read: https://bit.ly/4h6RooV♿ In a recent disability rights ruling, the Supreme Court held that earning capacity must be assessed in the “open, competitive market”, rather than based on retention in a highly accommodated role. We analyse: https://bit.ly/4x6dVHaSupreme Court ObserverWhat is the challenge against BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra? - Supreme Court ObserverThe Court’s response suggests a focus on Mishra’s 12 year long tenure while concerns regarding PEARL-FIRST Trust remainSupreme Court Observer
4 сент., 03:36
🛃 On Wednesday, the Supreme Court set aside a customs order after finding that AI hallucinated citations were used to impose a penalty of ₹425.28 crore! Our analysis: https://bit.ly/4h6RooV👨🏾⚖️ Last week, the Court emphasised that legal aid is more than mere appointment of a counsel and extends to sustained, quality representation. Our report: https://bit.ly/4yg4Uwr⚖️ The Court is set to decide whether BCI Chairperson Mannan Kumar Mishra's five-year tenure violates the BCI Rules. Read our background of the case: https://bit.ly/4xE4WygSupreme Court ObserverWhen an AI hallucination enters an executive order - Supreme Court ObserverA recent Supreme Court decision raises questions on whether safeguards governing AI-assisted adjudication extend to departmental authorities.Supreme Court Observer
3 сент., 03:32изменён
🌸 Good Morning!⚖️ Last week, Justice Sandeep Mehta wrote three letters to CJI Surya Kant alleging malpractices by the Rajasthan High Court Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma. Later, the Collegium recommended Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal’s transfer from the Chhattisgarh High Court to the Rajasthan High Court and separately proposed his appointment as its Chief Justice.✉️ We explain the allegations in Justice Mehta’s leaked letters: https://bit.ly/4zNshPg 👨🏻⚖️ We examine whether the Collegium resolutions addressed questions of accountability: https://bit.ly/4h8QJ5x🏛️ Last week, the Supreme Court restored a criminal appeal dismissed by the Rajasthan High Court over a filing defect and the absence of counsel. We examine the role of “quality legal assistance” in a litigant’s journey: https://bit.ly/4yg4Uwr📆 August 2026 saw the Supreme Court focus on the Jantar MantarSupreme Court ObserverRaising a complaint - Supreme Court ObserverJustice Sandeep Mehta’s leaked letters presents a unique opportunity for the Supreme Court to reassure public faith in itselfSupreme Court Observer
2 сент., 03:33
🌞 Good morning!🪧 Yesterday, the Supreme Court permitted the Delhi Police to register a fresh FIR against 2873 "alleged offenders" of the 20 July Jantar Mantar protests. All existing FIRs were quashed. We report: https://bit.ly/4xsPW67👨🏾⚖️ On Monday, the Collegium recommended the transfer of Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal to the Rajasthan High Court and proposed his elevation as its Chief Justice. In light of SC Justice Sandeep Mehta's leaked letters, we analyse this move: https://bit.ly/45VGjRs⚖️ Last week, the Court delivered 4 reportable judgements. In our latest issue of SCO.LR, we summarise all 4, along with a bonus decision from 22 August. Read: https://bit.ly/4zNshPgSupreme Court ObserverSC quashes Jantar Mantar protest FIRs across India, permits fresh FIR against 2873 - Supreme Court ObserverCJI said the order would provide a “healing balm” to protesters while preserving the State’s right to prosecute alleged offendersSupreme Court Observer
1 сент., 04:00
🌞 Good Morning!🗃️ Our latest issue of the Supreme Court Observer Law Reports (SCO.LR) summarises judgements from 24 to 28 August, with one bonus decision from 22 August. Read: https://bit.ly/3SjBUoj⚖️ Our newsletter analyses Justice Mehta's letters to the CJI alleging malpractices by the Rajasthan High Court's Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma. Read: https://bit.ly/4zNshPg3️⃣ We trace a visual history of how the three-year practice rule in the recruitment to the district judiciary has evolved since 1924. Read: https://bit.ly/3SwNwEtSupreme Court ObserverSCO.LR | 2026 | Volume 8 | Issue 5 - Supreme Court ObserverIn this issue, we shortlist four important judgements from 24 to 28 August 2026 with one bonus decision from 22 August.Supreme Court Observer
31 авг., 03:31
🌇 Good Morning!👨🏻⚖️ Our newsletter analyses Justice Sandeep Mehta’s leaked letters to CJI Surya Kant and examines how they present a unique opportunity for the Supreme Court to reinforce public confidence in the institution. Read: https://bit.ly/4zNshPg3️⃣ Our timeline traces a brief history of how the three-year practice rule in the district judiciary has evolved since 1924. Read: https://bit.ly/3SwNwEt🏭 The 2020 Code defines “industry” afresh. We analyse how a future Supreme Court bench might treat the commercial-character limb after the recent judgement on the definition of “industry”. Read: https://bit.ly/4wUmDZbSupreme Court ObserverRaising a complaint - Supreme Court ObserverJustice Sandeep Mehta’s leaked letters presents a unique opportunity for the Supreme Court to reassure public faith in itselfSupreme Court Observer
28 авг., 03:30изменён
🌼 Good Morning!🌳 Recently, the Supreme Court set aside the 2017 NGT finding that the World Culture Festival organised by the Art of Living Foundation had damaged the Yamuna floodplain. Our analysis: https://bit.ly/4iz8mNW🗃️ On 25 August, the Court sought details on the number and status of appeals filed before tribunals against the deletion and inclusion of voters in West Bengal’s electoral rolls. The petitioners had submitted that the data was not in the public domain. Read: https://bit.ly/4gPYle2⚖️ The Tribunals Reforms Act, 2026 marks the Union's fifth attempt at tribunal reform in the last decade. Prashant Reddy T. analyses the Act, pointing out how it leaves tribunals partially dependent on their parent ministries. Read: https://bit.ly/4gkHcsISupreme Court ObserverProving the polluter: What the Yamuna floodplain verdict demands of environmental liability - Supreme Court ObserverThe Supreme Court holds that the polluter pays principle presupposes a proven polluter and a documented ecological baseline.
