The Supreme Court will hear a plea on Tuesday filed by an accused in the murder of tailor Kanhaiya Lal, who was killed by two Muslim men, challenging the release of the film ‘Udaipur Files’.
The Supreme Court reviewed a petition from former Punjab DSP Gursher Singh Sandhu concerning the controversial jail interview of gangster Lawrence Bishnoi. Sandhu argued he was unfairly targeted despite not being implicated in the FIR. The Court dismissed his petition, allowing him to seek relief at the High Court, where investigations revealed security failures leading to multiple suspensions.
The All India Muslim Personal Law Board plans to file a contempt plea in the Supreme Court against the government’s launch of the Waqf Umeed Portal, deeming it illegal as the Waqf Amendment Act, 2025 is under judicial review. They argue it disrespects court authority and disrupts religious property management.
The Supreme Court examined the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, comparing Waqf to Hinduism’s Moksha and addressing its religious significance. Kapil Sibal argued that Waqf is a divine dedication, unlike mere charity, countering the Centre’s claims. The case highlights the essence of charity across religions and its implications for religious endowments.
The Supreme Court of India has heard the bail plea of Suman Shaik, a Bangladeshi national accused of human trafficking through the India-Bangladesh border. Justices Surya Kant and N.K. Singh presided over the case, focusing on the illegal movement of foreign nationals. The court’s decision on bail is pending.
The Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, passed by the Indian Parliament, alters the 1995 Waqf Act, prompting widespread debate and legal challenges. Notable changes include expanded government control and inclusion of non-Muslims in Waqf Boards, raising concerns about religious autonomy. The Supreme Court is currently reviewing its constitutional validity amidst ongoing hearings.
The Supreme Court of India will hear petitions challenging the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, on May 5. Critics question its constitutional validity, especially amid disputes over data and provisions. The Central Government supports the law’s implementation, arguing against delays, while various political and civil groups oppose it and seek legal intervention.
Advocate Mathews J. Nedumpara petitioned the Supreme Court to reform the current collegium system and senior advocate designations, alleging favoritism and elitism. Despite being cautioned by the Chief Justice, he argued that the system unfairly benefits a small elite, violating constitutional rights. The petitioners demand an overhaul for enhanced judicial fairness and equality.