Supreme Court Observer

☀️ Good Morning! 🪧 Yesterday, the Supreme Court was scheduled to hear a contempt petition on the recent Delhi CEC protests. The Bench deferred the matter and stated that it will be taken up on Thursday. Read our report on the special Sunday sitting to know more about the Court's directions: https://bit.ly/4hSGSkx 📊 By the end of September 2026, pendency at the Supreme Court increased marginally by 380 cases, after a decline in August. Our analysis of the pendency in the Supreme Court: https://bit.ly/4ydH5EZ ⚖️ In our newsletter, we trace earlier exchanges between parliamentary panels and the judiciary, from the 1948 observations of Federal Court and provincial Chief Justices to recent meetings on virtual courts and legal aid. Read: https://bit.ly/3UiWnKM

☀️ Good Morning! 🏛️ A Joint Parliamentary Committee was recently scheduled to visit the Supreme Court for an "informal chat" with sitting judges on the issue of simultaneous elections. In this week's newsletter we examine what this means for the separation of powers: https://bit.ly/3UiWnKM 🪧 In a special Sunday sitting, the Court heard a contempt petition alleging violation of its Friday order on transport services in Delhi. A habeas corpus petition challenged mass detentions. Read our hearing report: https://bit.ly/4hSGSkx ⛓️‍💥 For four decades, Indian courts have given discordant answers on whether confessions made to the police can form the basis for preventive detention. A recent ruling tightens the reliance on supporting evidence. Read: https://bit.ly/3VHZeNI

Good morning 🌞 👨🏾‍⚖️ Three new judges at the top Court: What does their record reveal so far, and what do legal practitioners have to say about them? Watch our video to find out: https://bit.ly/4rPk7SW 🗳️ On 23 September, Justice Dipankar Datta opined that the petitions challenging the Election Commissioners law need not be referred to a larger bench. Contributing editor V. Venkatesan argues that his conclusion is difficult to reconcile with his own method: https://bit.ly/4dtmjtv 🚌 Last week, the Supreme Court noted that private unaided schools in several states are yet to implement the 25 per cent quota mandated under the Right to Education Act, 2009. Here's what happened at the hearing: https://bit.ly/3U8iovL

🌅 Good Morning! ⚖️ Our latest analysis explains why the challenge to the Election Commissioners law must be heard by five judges. Whether the selection committee appointing ECI members should have executive dominance remains judicially unsettled. Read here: https://bit.ly/4dtmjtv 🧑🏻‍⚖️ On 6 October, Justices Sunita Agarwal, Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Aparesh Kumar Singh were sworn in as Judges of the Supreme Court. Our video provides a brief overview on each judge: https://bit.ly/4rPk7SW 📑 Our judge profiles: * Justice Sunita Agarwal: https://bit.ly/4zlZh0m * Justice D.K. Upadhyaya: https://bit.ly/3VOW7DB * Justice A.K. Singh: https://bit.ly/4dpo6jm 📚 Last month, the Supreme Court came down heavily on the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights for its inaction in the implementation of the 25 per cent quota for Economically Weaker Section, as mandated under Section 12(1)(c) of the Right to Education Act, 2009. We report: https://bit.ly/3U8iovL

🌦️ Good Morning! 7️⃣ Yesterday, a seven-judge Constitution Bench disposed of a case pending for over 20 years in a hearing that lasted for less than 15 minutes. The case concerned the interplay between legislative privileges and the freedom of speech under Article 19. Our hearing report: https://bit.ly/3VSFjvr 🧑🏻‍⚖️ Yesterday, three new judges were appointed to the Supreme Court. Their recommendation was confirmed by the Union government on 5 October. Our judge profiles provide all the details: * Justice Sunita Agarwal: https://bit.ly/4zlZh0m * Justice D.K. Upadhyaya: https://bit.ly/3VOW7DB * Justice A.K. Singh: https://bit.ly/4dpo6jm 🗃️ Our latest issue of the Supreme Court Observer Law Reports (SCO.LR) identifies five important judgements from last week. Find concise summaries and mindmaps for each of the judgements here: https://bit.ly/4rRqYLJ

Today, Justices Sunita Agarwal, Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Aparesh Kumar Singh were sworn in as Judges of the Supreme Court. All the three judges were serving as Chief Justices at the Gujarat, Delhi and Telangana High Courts respectively. The Union had notified their appointment on 5 October, a week after the Supreme Court Collegium recommended their names on 28 September 2026. Our judge profiles provide all the relevant details about each appointee: - Justice Sunita Agarwal: https://www.scobserver.in/judges/sunita-agarwal/ - Justice D.K. Upadhyaya: https://www.scobserver.in/judges/devendra-kumar-upadhyaya/ - Justice A.K. Singh: https://www.scobserver.in/judges/aparesh-kumar-singh/ Our newsletter sheds light on what legal practitioners think about the appointments: https://www.scobserver.in/journal/from-resolution-to-statement/

🌱 Good Morning! 7️⃣ Today, a seven-judge Constitution Bench is scheduled to hear a batch of petitions on whether immunities enjoyed by law makers under Article 194 override the fundamental right to freedom of speech under Article 19. More in our case background: https://bit.ly/4jbKeBz ⚖️ Yesterday, the Supreme Court issued notice on petitions challenging the functioning of the ECI, including allegations that Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar took decisions without the concurrence of the other two Election Commissioners. Hearing Report: https://bit.ly/3UaghaG ♀️ Yesterday, the Court heard a suo moto petition on the recent instances of sexual assault and rape in Delhi. The Bench observed that the Court, the State Government and the Police needed to take unanimous measures. We report: https://bit.ly/4y4bmGl 📬 Volume 10 Issue 1 of the Supreme Court Observer Law Reports (SCO.LR) identifies five important judgements from last week. Read: https://bit.ly/3VqQQ57

🌅 Good Morning! 🧑🏻‍⚖️ The Collegium statement recommending Chief Justices Sunita Agarwal, D.K. Upadhyaya and A.K. Singh to the Supreme Court offered little insight to the reasoning behind the decision. We spoke to legal practitioners to get insight into the reasoning. Read: https://bit.ly/4rOYGBE 🌧️ The Court has received unusually high media attention in the past four months as it tackled multiple controversies and politically charged matters. Read our Monsoon review: https://bit.ly/47uPBV8 📆 Last month, the Court heard and issued directions in matters concerning the challenges to the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) in Delhi and West Bengal, and the ethnic violence in Manipur. Our monthly review covers highlights from September: https://bit.ly/4xSJJzW

🌅 Good Morning! 🌧️ During its Monsoon Session, the Court saw new appointments and remained abuzz with activities. Our review covers key developments between 1 June and 30 September 2026. Read here: https://bit.ly/47uPBV8 📆 Last month, the Supreme Court routinely heard and issued directions in matters concerning the challenges to the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) in Delhi and West Bengal, and the ethnic violence in Manipur. Read our monthly review: https://bit.ly/4xSJJzW ⚖️ The Supreme Court agreed to list a petition that questions whether unilateral decisions taken by the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) without concurrence with other Election Commissioners are unconstitutional. Our case background: https://bit.ly/4AFuAV4

🌸 Good Morning! ⚖️ The Supreme Court is set to hear a petition challenging whether the Chief Election Commissioner can make unilateral decisions without the consensus of other members of the Election Commission of India. Our case background: https://bit.ly/4AFuAV4 📆 In September, the Supreme Court routinely heard matters concerning the student protests at Jantar Mantar, the challenge to the SIR in Delhi and West Bengal, and the ethnic violence in Manipur. Our monthly review: https://bit.ly/4xSJJzW 🌧️ During its Monsoon Session, the Court received unusually high media attention as it tackled multiple controversies and politically-charged matters. Our review covers key developments between 1 June and 30 September 2026. Read here: https://bit.ly/47uPBV8

🌼 Good Morning! 🧑🏻‍⚖️ On 28 September 2026, three new judges were recommended for appointment to the Supreme Court. Read our report to know more about their judicial record so far: https://bit.ly/4AEicof 🗳️ Yesterday, the Court agreed to list a plea that alleges unilateral decision-making by Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar. What do the petitioners seek? We report: https://bit.ly/4jeI44b 📚 Every week, we identify the most significant decisions of the top court, summarise them and provide accessible HTML versions with assistive mind maps. Read our latest issue: https://bit.ly/47nvTKV

🌅 Good Morning! 📚 In “Courting Equality” Mihira Sood traces the origins of “irretrievable breakdown of marriage” as a grounds for divorce. We feature an excerpt from the book: https://bit.ly/4rB0PRj 📬 In Volume 9, Issue 4 of the Supreme Court Observer Law Reports (SCO.LR), we identified five of the most important judgements from 21 to 25 September 2026. Read: https://bit.ly/47nvTKV 📃 Last month, the Tribunal Reforms Bill, 2026 received the President's assent. We recount the four-decade long turf war between Union and judiciary, and examine why the Act is likely to trigger further litigation. Watch here: https://bit.ly/4xRlOke

The Supreme Court Collegium has recommended the appointment of three High Court Chief Justices to the Supreme Court 1) Justice Sunita Agarwal, Chief Justice, High Court of Gujarat (PHC: Allahabad) 2) Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, Chief Justice, Delhi High Court (PHC: Allahabad) 3) Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh Chief Justice, Telangana High Court (PHC: Jharkhand) Currently there are 34 sitting judges in the Supreme Court. If their appointment is notified, the top court will have 37 sitting judges, one less of its sanctioned strength.

🌤️ Good Morning! ⚡ Justices Dipankar Datta and S.C. Sharma passed a unanimous order last week, referring challenges against the ECI Appointments Act, 2023 to a larger bench. Yet, in their "split verdict", Justice Datta opined against the reference. Has this ever happened before? Read more in our newsletter: https://bit.ly/3VfCtR2 📊 We break down the two opinions and the joint order: - Summary - https://bit.ly/4h82IkU - Matrix - https://bit.ly/4dz9Zb6 👮🏽‍♀️ Extending the safeguard under Article 22(1), the Court held that the authority responsible for failing to furnish written grounds for an arrest cannot be the one to decide on re-arrest of the same person. Our analysis: https://bit.ly/4haZBZB

🌅 Good Morning! 👨🏻‍⚖️ On 23 September, a Division Bench in the Supreme Court delivered a ‘split’ opinion on whether the challenge to the Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023 should be referred to a larger Bench. ❓The matter was then referred to a larger bench despite the difference. 📖 Read our Order Matrix (https://bit.ly/4dz9Zb6) and Order summary (https://bit.ly/4h82IkU) to know more! 5️⃣ In our latest issue of the Supreme Court Observer Law Reports, we identify five of the most important judgements from last week. Read: https://bit.ly/4y7HbP7

🌼 Good Morning! 🗳️ Yesterday, the Supreme Court referred the ECI Appointments Act challenge to a larger bench despite a split opinion on the need for a reference. Our report: https://bit.ly/4hmEimB ⛓️‍💥 This week, the Court held that the police must obtain a magistrate's approval for re-arresting a person who was released due to an Article 22 violation. We analyse the ruling: https://bit.ly/4haZBZB 🪙 On Tuesday, a seven-judge Constitution Bench reserved judgement in a reference pending since 1999 on state government powers of levying surcharges on sales tax. We report in detail: https://bit.ly/4hbmo7z

The Supreme Court has published its Division Bench order referring the ECI Appointments Act, 2023 challenge to a larger bench. The 70-page document includes the split opinions. Read it here: https://www.scobserver.in/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/ECI-Reference-Judgement-Supreme-Court-Jaya-Thakur-v-Union-of-India.pdf

On 22 September, a seven-judge Constitution Bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant reserved judgement in a 27-year-old reference on whether state governments can impose a surcharge, additional tax, levy or cess calculated on the basis of a validly levied sales or purchase tax. Read our detailed hearing report: https://www.scobserver.in/reports/states-power-to-impose-surcharge-on-sales-tax-seven-judge-bench-reserves-judgement/

Supreme Court delivers split verdict on challenge to ECI appointments law. Justice Dipankar Datta said the ECI must not only be independent, but "appear to be independent". Justice SC Sharma held that the challenge raised a substantial question of law. The Bench directed the matter to be placed before the CJI for consideration by a larger Bench. Read the full report: https://www.scobserver.in/reports/sc-delivers-split-verdict-sends-eci-appointments-law-challenge-to-larger-bench/

🌅 Good Morning! 🗳️ Yesterday, the Supreme Court issued notice on a plea regarding the SIR in Delhi and heard submissions on the use of Aadhaar, capacity of BLOs and notices on logical discrepancy. We report: https://bit.ly/4Arf7Ij 🪙 A 7-judge bench led by CJI Surya Kant reserved judgement on whether state governments can collect sales tax based on annual turnover. We explain the 29 year history of this case: https://bit.ly/4ya7lkp 5️⃣ In our latest issue of the Supreme Court Observer Law Reports, we identify five of the most important judgements from last week. Read: https://bit.ly/4y7HbP7