Today, On 19th February, The Supreme Court continued hearing the detention challenge of Ladakh activist Sonam Wangchuk. Kapil Sibal argued, “Showing selective content is insufficient; all material must be supplied,” stressing authorities have a constitutional duty to provide complete relied-upon documents.
The Supreme Court has stayed further exhumation of buried bodies of tribal Christians in Chhattisgarh villages and issued notice to the State government. The PIL alleges forced digging up of graves, denial of burial rights, and violation of fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 21.
The Supreme Court declined to hear a plea seeking action against Assam CM Himanta Biswa Sarma over his alleged ‘Miya’ remarks, calling direct petitions before elections a “disturbing trend.” The Court directed petitioners to approach the Guwahati High Court instead.
The Supreme Court of India criticised Jharkhand Police for filing successive FIRs to prolong custody despite bail granted earlier orders. A bench of Aravind Kumar and P. B. Varale ordered release, noting abuse of process.
Today, On 11th February, The Central government and the Leh administration told the Supreme Court that they have decided not to release detained climate activist Sonam Wangchuk on health grounds, stating that his medical condition is stable and does not warrant any special relief.
The Delhi High Court allowed a mother to travel to the US with her minor son to pursue postgraduate studies. The Court emphasized her Right to Life under Article 21, stating she cannot be denied education for personal growth.
Today, On 3rd February, The Central government and Ladakh administration told the Supreme Court that all procedural safeguards were followed while detaining climate activist Sonam Wangchuk under the National Security Act (NSA). The Centre emphasized that “Sonam Wangchuk has been given a fair treatment.”
Today, on 2nd February, In the Sonam Wangchuk’s NSA detention, the Centre told the Supreme Court that referring to the Central government as ‘them’ misleads the young generation and risks pushing impressionable minds toward destabilising, Nepal-like political narratives, dangerous paths.
The Allahabad High Court ruled that no government permission is required to hold religious prayer meetings within private premises in Uttar Pradesh. The court said such gatherings are protected under Article 25 of the Constitution, as long as they do not spill into public spaces.
The Allahabad High Court reaffirmed that the right to life and liberty under Article 21 must be protected at all times, making it clear that such fundamental rights cannot be denied or diluted even when disputes arise regarding the legality of a marriage.
