Today, On 25th March, The Supreme Court of India has dismissed the plea of National Highways Authority of India seeking prospective application of the 2019 ruling that struck down excluding landowners from solatium and interest. The Court reaffirmed that landowners deserve compensation.
The Supreme Court of India held that confiscation proceedings under the Bihar Special Courts Act do not automatically end when a public servant dies. Especially if assets stand in names of relatives who were also parties to proceedings.
The Allahabad High Court held that a Special Court or Magistrate is not obliged to order FIR registration merely because an applicant from the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe community files an application under Section 173(4) of BNSS.
Supreme Court ruled that High Courts cannot disturb the finality of Apex Court orders. It added that non-parties affected by a judgment in rem may seek appropriate remedies in service matters.
The Gujarat High Court set aside the man’s conviction for cruelty and abetment, stating that a single incident of slapping his wife for staying at her parental home without informing was not cruelty while acquitting him in law.
As we step into February 2026, it’s essential to reflect on the Supreme Court’s most impactful judicial pronouncements in January 2026. This monthly recap below lists a series of significant rulings that have shaped legal discourse across various domains.
The Supreme Court held that merely mentioning a caste name without intent to insult does not attract the SC/ST Act. It said allegations must show caste-based abuses or that the caste name was hurled as an abuse, in fact.
The Delhi High Court asked, “‘Do you know the law?’” while slamming Rajasthan Police for arresting minors without informing Delhi Police. It said such actions violated legal jurisdiction and raised serious concerns over procedural lapses and accountability in law enforcement.
TMC leader Kunal Ghosh is likely to appear before a three-judge bench of the Calcutta High Court on June 16. As per sources, he has been asked to be present at 12:30 pm that day.
A Mumbai court denied bail to a lawyer who forged Bombay High Court orders and posed as an IAS officer, stating it “cannot ignore the antecedents” and that granting bail would send a wrong message to society.
