The Madras High Court held that the mere presence of a Dargah on land does not automatically place the property under the Waqf Board’s control. The Court ruled that the Board must first establish, in accordance with law, that the property is a valid Waqf before claiming jurisdiction.
The Madras High Court directed the Tamil Nadu government not to take further steps in a corruption case against DMK leader KN Nehru until June 23. The order came after the State indicated its intention to withdraw a review petition challenging directions to register a criminal case.
The Madras High Court quashed criminal proceedings against two men, holding that merely questioning the legality of police action cannot constitute a criminal offence unless the essential ingredients of the alleged offences are clearly established. The Court found the accusations vague and legally insufficient.
The Madras High Court stressed that election petitions must be decided within a reasonable time, warning that prolonged delays undermine electoral accountability and democratic principles. Criticising the six-year pendency of the Radhapuram election appeal, the Court described the situation as a “grave mockery of justice.”
The Madras High Court observed that false cases under the POCSO Act not only harm the accused but also divert valuable judicial time and investigative resources away from genuine child sexual abuse victims, thereby undermining the purpose and effectiveness of the protective legislation.
The Madras High Court observed that voluntary removal of the thali may, depending on the facts of a case, cause emotional anguish and amount to mental cruelty. However, the Court clarified that removal of the thali is not automatically a ground for divorce and must be assessed in context.
The Madras High Court refused to ban the Tamil film Karuppu, observing that portraying judicial corruption and criticising the judiciary cannot automatically amount to contempt, while emphasising that judges are not beyond scrutiny and freedom of artistic expression must be protected in a democratic society.
The Madras High Court sought a response from the Election Commission of India on allegations that Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam used children during the 2026 Tamil Nadu election campaign, while questioning whether a political party itself could face disqualification for corrupt practices.
The Madras High Court ruled that a wife’s act of secretly arranging their daughter’s marriage without informing the father amounts to mental cruelty under matrimonial law, and granted divorce after finding her conduct caused distress preventing continuation thereafter.
The Madras High Court expressed concern over alleged misuse of the 1098 child helpline system, observing that some Child Welfare Committee-linked officials allegedly pressured children into making false abuse allegations against fathers, while directing Tamil Nadu to frame safeguards ensuring fair recording of children’s statements.
