1. Attorney General Questions Supreme Court’s Authority to ‘Rewrite’ Constitution
During a Presidential reference concerning the powers of Governors, Attorney General R Venkataramani challenged the Supreme Court’s April ruling that imposed timelines for Governors and the President to grant assent to bills. He asked whether the judiciary could effectively “rewrite” constitutional provisions. The bench responded that the ruling likely arose because the bills in the Tamil Nadu case had been pending before the Governor for an extended period, necessitating judicial intervention to ensure timely constitutional compliance.
2. Supreme Court Dismisses NCPCR Plea on Muslim Girls’ Marriage Validity
The Supreme Court rejected a plea by the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) challenging Punjab and Haryana High Court orders that granted protection to two Muslim couples, where the brides were 15–16 years old. The Court held that NCPCR lacked locus standi, stating it could not be aggrieved when the High Court extended protection to the individuals. The ruling indirectly upholds the High Court’s stance that, under personal law, Muslim girls can marry upon attaining puberty, typically presumed at 15.
3. Supreme Court on Cadets Disabled During Military Training
The Supreme Court has initiated a suo motu case to address the difficulties faced by military cadets who suffer disabilities during training. It directed the Central government to respond and explore ways to support such cadets, including possible re-induction into the defence forces if they regain fitness or alternative rehabilitation measures. The move aims to ensure that cadets injured while preparing to serve the nation are not left without institutional support or future opportunities.
4. Supreme Court on Section 195 CrPC and IPC Offences
The Supreme Court held that offences under Sections 172–188 IPC, which concern contempt of the lawful authority of public servants, cannot be split to bypass the bar under Section 195 CrPC. Courts can take cognizance only when a written complaint is made by the concerned public servant or their administrative superior. While severance of offences may be allowed in specific cases depending on facts, allegations, and evidence, it cannot undermine the safeguard provided by Section 195(1)(a)(i) CrPC.
5. Supreme Court Directions on Assistive Technology for CLAT
The Supreme Court has directed the Consortium of NLUs to provide assistive facilities to visually impaired candidates in all future editions of the Common Law Admission Test. Facilities will include screen readers, customised devices, and the option of a scribe. The Court clarified that its interim directions, issued in December 2024, for similar accommodations in the All India Bar Examination would also apply equally to the CLAT.
6. Supreme Court on Governor’s Assent to State Bills
The Supreme Court observed that permitting a Governor to withhold assent to Bills passed by a State legislature permanently would undermine the authority of an elected government and subject it to the discretion of an unelected Governor. This observation was made during the hearing of a Presidential reference under Article 143, which questioned the Court's April ruling that set timelines for the President and Governors to act on legislative proposals.
7. Supreme Court on Toll Collection and Poor Road Conditions
The Supreme Court held that citizens cannot be compelled to pay toll charges in addition to vehicle taxes when roads are riddled with potholes and fail to meet the required standards. The Court dismissed the National Highways Authority of India’s challenge to a Kerala High Court order that had suspended toll collection at the Paliyekkara toll plaza on NH 544 for four weeks, citing inadequate road maintenance and severe traffic issues.
8. Plea Before Supreme Court on BCI's Ban on New Law Colleges
The Supreme Court has sought the Bar Council of India’s response to a plea challenging its three-year moratorium on setting up new law colleges. The petitioner argued that a blanket ban is arbitrary and stifles genuine educational initiatives, urging the Court to replace it with targeted, transparent, and region-specific regulations to weed out sub-standard institutions while allowing credible proposals.
9. Supreme Court Advises Jharkhand HC to Consider Judge's Transfer Plea Gracefully
The Supreme Court urged the Jharkhand High Court to adopt a considerate approach while handling the transfer plea of a woman Additional District Judge. The Judge sought relocation to stay closer to her son, who is preparing for board examinations. The Court remarked that High Courts should act like a parent towards judicial officers and avoid an egoistic stance, ensuring that humanitarian grounds are given due weight in such matters.
10. Supreme Court to Frame National Policy on Stray Dogs
The Supreme Court modified its earlier order regarding stray dogs in the Delhi NCR, directing that dogs be released from shelters after being dewormed and vaccinated. A three-judge Bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta, and NV Anjaria expanded the matter to cover the entire country and transferred similar pending High Court cases to itself. NGOs and dog lovers approaching the Court were directed to deposit ?2 lakh and ?25,000, respectively. The ruling aims to establish a uniform national policy for managing stray dogs.
