The Allahabad High Court clarified that the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh may decide seniority disputes relating to Elders Committees under the Advocates Act, but cannot directly interfere in elections of independent Bar Associations registered as societies across Uttar Pradesh.
Justice B. V. Nagarathna urged stronger solidarity among women lawyers, stating sisterhood is necessary to confront structural inequalities in the legal profession, while speaking at the launch of The Constitution is my Home by senior advocate Indira Jaising.
The Supreme Court of India granted interim bail to Tasleem Ahmed and Khalid Saifi in the 2020 Delhi riots conspiracy case, while referring broader questions on UAPA bail jurisprudence and interpretation of K.A. Najeeb judgment to a larger Bench.
The Supreme Court of India stayed all ongoing and upcoming State judicial service examinations pending review of the controversial three-year legal practice requirement for entry-level judges, while hearing proceedings in Bhumika Trust v. Union of India mentioned urgently by petitioner Jayant Singh Yadav.
The Union Government of India informed the Supreme Court of India that certain persons deported to Bangladesh would be brought back for verification of citizenship status before authorities decide further action, following submissions made by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta.
An appeal before the Supreme Court of India challenges the Madhya Pradesh High Court verdict declaring the Bhojshala–Kamal Maula Mosque Complex a Hindu temple, with petitioner Qazi Moinuddin seeking reversal of the May 15 judgment.
The Supreme Court of India clarified that courts may proceed with sedition cases under Section 124A IPC if the accused raises no objection, while hearing a plea by an accused jailed for 17 years whose appeal remains pending before the Madhya Pradesh High Court.
A petition before the Supreme Court of India sought a court-monitored Central Bureau of Investigation probe into alleged corruption and horse-trading during Vijay’s Tamil Nadu Assembly trust vote, with petitioner K K Ramesh claiming the floor test violated democratic principles.
The Supreme Court of India held that disciplinary proceedings against judicial officers are invalid unless authorised by the High Court Chief Justice or a committee constituted by him, while upholding reinstatement of a dismissed Uttarakhand civil judge and restricting Registrar General powers.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court refused to recognise an alleged triple talaq divorce, observing that courts cannot validate a practice declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of India in Shayara Bano v. Union of India, while calling the husband’s plea “vexatious and frivolous”.
