1. Supreme Court Raises Questions over UP's Anti-Conversion Law, Says India Is a Secular Country
The Supreme Court recently raised serious concerns regarding the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, observing that the law appears to impose an “onerous procedure” on individuals seeking to change their religion. The Court was hearing a batch of petitions related to six criminal cases registered by the Uttar Pradesh Police under various provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the 2021 anti-conversion law.
2. Collegium System Embedded within Constitutional Framework; Preserves Judiciary’s Autonomy: Justice Surya Kant
Justice Surya Kant emphasised that the Collegium system of judicial appointments is deeply rooted in the Constitutional framework and is essential to preserving the judiciary’s independence. He clarified that the Collegium was not a later invention but an inherent part of the original Constitutional design. Justice Kant underscored that this system ensures a delicate balance between the three branches of government, safeguarding judicial autonomy as envisioned by the framers of the Constitution.
3. Sonam Wangchuk’s Wife Tells Supreme Court She Was Followed by Police and IB, Kept Under Surveillance During Jail Visits
Gitanjali J Angmo, wife of climate activist Sonam Wangchuk, informed the Supreme Court that she has been under continuous surveillance by the Rajasthan Police and the Intelligence Bureau during her visits to Jodhpur Jail, where Wangchuk is under preventive detention. She further stated that she has been followed and monitored in Delhi since September 30, the day she held a press conference in the national capital, raising concerns over the alleged violation of her privacy and personal liberty.
4. AI Can Guide, but Lawyers, Judges Must Be the Final Arbiter: Supreme Court Justice Surya Kant
Artificial Intelligence may support the judicial system, but it cannot replace the essential human role in delivering justice, Supreme Court Justice Surya Kant observed. He emphasised that while technology can guide, the human must govern and remain the final arbiter in the justice process. Justice Kant noted that AI can aid in research, drafting, or identifying inconsistencies. Still, it cannot grasp emotions or moral weight, affirming that technology should augment, not replace, judges and lawyers in their pursuit of justice.
5. Madras High Court Recognises Cryptocurrency as Property Under Indian Law
In a significant ruling, the Madras High Court has held that cryptocurrency qualifies as “property” under Indian law, capable of ownership and being held in trust. Justice Anand Venkatesh, while hearing Rhutikumari v. Zanmai Labs Pvt Ltd (involving WazirX), observed that though cryptocurrency is intangible and not legal tender, it bears all characteristics of property. “It is capable of being enjoyed and possessed in a beneficial form, and held in trust,” the Court stated, marking a key precedent in Indian digital asset jurisprudence.
6. Delhi High Court: Order Terminating Arbitration for Non-Filing of Claim Not an ‘Arbitral Award’
The Delhi High Court has clarified that an order passed under Section 25(a) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, terminating arbitral proceedings for non-filing of a statement of claim, cannot be treated as an arbitral award. The Court reasoned that for any order to qualify as an award, it must adjudicate an issue forming part of the dispute referred to arbitration. Mere termination for default, without resolving the substantive dispute, does not constitute an arbitral award.
7. Kerala High Court: Appointment of Temple Priests from a Particular Caste or Lineage Not an Essential Religious Practice
The Kerala High Court has held that the appointment of santhis exclusively from a particular caste or lineage cannot be considered an essential religious practice warranting constitutional protection. The Court upheld the decisions of the Travancore Devaswom Board and the Kerala Devaswom Recruitment Board to recognise experience certificates issued by Thanthra Vidyalayas for the recruitment of part-time priests, emphasising that temple appointments must align with the constitutional values of equality and non-discrimination.
8. Delhi High Court: SC/ST Act Cannot Be Invoked to Prevent Banks from Exercising Mortgage Rights
The Delhi High Court has ruled that provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, dealing with wrongful occupation or dispossession of land, cannot be used to obstruct a bank’s lawful exercise of mortgage rights. The Court stayed the summons issued by the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes to the Managing Director and CEO of Axis Bank, observing that recovery actions under valid mortgage agreements do not amount to offences under the SC/ST Act.
9. Bombay High Court: Borrower Cannot Demand One-Time Settlement as a Matter of Right
The Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court has held that borrowers or guarantors cannot claim entitlement to a One-Time Settlement for repayment of dues as a matter of right. The Court emphasised that decisions regarding OTS proposals fall within the commercial wisdom of banks and financial institutions. It further clarified that courts cannot compel banks to reveal internal parameters for evaluating such settlements or mandate their acceptance of OTS requests.
10. Former ASG Pinky Anand Appointed Judge of the Bahrain International Commercial Court
Senior Advocate and former Additional Solicitor General of India, Pinky Anand, has been appointed as a judge of the Bahrain International Commercial Court. The BICC, modelled on the Singapore International Commercial Court, aims to strengthen Bahrain’s position as a global hub for commercial dispute resolution and is scheduled to be launched on November 5, 2025.
