The Gujarat High Court has granted regular bail to Sumersing Bharatlal Meena, accused of luring RE-NEET aspirants through Telegram channels with offers of question papers for Rs 25,000 to Rs 10 lakh, noting that the chargesheet has been filed, he has been in custody since June 13, 2026 and the offence is triable by a Magistrate.
A Bench of Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and Atul S. Chandurkar has set aside the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s refusal of regular bail to Kanha @ Kanhaiya Singh in a POCSO and SC/ST Act case, holding that courts must not impose a judge’s views on morality in bail matters, and directing his release on bail after over a year in custody, subject to his custody in a connected conviction appeal.
The Telangana High Court has set aside a trial court order permitting a potency test of an accused in a sexual offence case, holding that medical and scientific tests of an accused cannot be ordered routinely or merely because the allegation is grave, and must meet the tests of relevance, necessity and proportionality.
The Patna High Court has ordered the State to pay interim compensation to a family whose house and boundary walls were demolished during an encroachment proceeding without any authorising order, holding that the demolition violated the right to shelter under Article 21 and the protection of property under Article 300-A. A house is not merely four walls but has a ‘divine spirit’, the Court observed, and its demolition is akin to ‘Brahma Hatya’.
The Supreme Court has dismissed the State of Karnataka’s petition challenging a Karnataka High Court order that declared the arrest of a Kodagu homestay owner illegal and awarded him Rs 5 lakh compensation. Declining to interfere, the Court left the High Court’s findings intact. The High Court had held that the arrest rested on a provision of the Foreigners Act that had already been repealed.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has set aside a National Security Act detention order, holding that it was vitiated by non-application of mind, as the District Magistrate had relied on stale cases and on cases in which the detenu had actually been acquitted, but which were shown as pending or ending in conviction. The Court reiterated that preventive detention requires a live and proximate link between past conduct and the apprehended breach of public order, and that a measure curtailing personal liberty demands strict adherence to its safeguards.
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a plea by the father of a murder victim seeking a direction to conduct a Narco Analysis Test on the accused, holding that accused persons who have categorically declined consent cannot be compelled to undergo the test. Following the Supreme Court’s decision in Selvi, the Court held that the involuntary administration of narco analysis violates the right against self-incrimination under Article 20(3), and that the victim’s right to a fair trial under Article 21, however weighty, cannot override that constitutional protection.
The Allahabad High Court has granted protection to a same-sex couple in a live-in relationship, holding that two consenting adults have a fundamental right under Article 21 to live together peacefully, irrespective of their sexual orientation or of social and family opposition. Relying on Navtej Singh Johar and Supriyo, the Court held that while legal recognition of same-sex marriage is a matter for the legislature, the absence of marital status gives no third party or authority the licence to attack the dignity or physical safety of adult citizens.
The Kerala High Court has closed a writ petition challenging a State Police Chief circular said to prohibit police participation in temple ceremonies, after recording the State’s affidavit clarifying that the circular bars only participation in religious rituals while in police uniform, except on official duty, and does not curtail policing functions at festivals or the religious rights of any devotee or denomination. The petition was disposed of on that clarification, without a ruling on the circular’s validity.
The Patna High Court has expunged the personal aspersions made by a District Magistrate, sitting as an appellate authority under the Bihar Public Grievance Redressal Act, against a complainant, a Sanskrit scholar and former Vice-Chancellor. While declining to disturb the order on the drainage grievance itself, the Court held that a quasi-judicial authority must decide on facts and law and cannot attack a litigant’s personal character, invoking A.M. Mathur and the ‘good name’ passage from Shakespeare’s Othello.