Supreme Court Weekly Round Up [January 12- January 18, 2026]

1. [Alemla Jamir Bail] The Supreme Court granted regular bail to Alemla Jamir, an accused linked to the National Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN), who had been in custody for six years under the stringent provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). The Bench of Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice N. Kotiswar Singh passed the order, observing that a substantial part of the trial had already been completed and many witnesses had been examined. The Court also took into account that Jamir had been incarcerated for a prolonged period and is a woman.
Click here to read more

2. [Ayush Doctors] The Supreme Court sought responses from the Union Ministries of Law, Health, and AYUSH on a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking recognition of AYUSH doctors as ‘Registered Medical Practitioners’ (RMPs) under Indian law, similar to their allopathic counterparts. The Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi issued notices after hearing Advocate Ashwini Upadhyay, who appeared for the petitioner, his son, law student Nitin Upadhyay. 
Click here to read more

3. [Polavaram Water Dispute] The Supreme Court disposed of the Telangana government’s writ petition filed under Article 32 challenging the expansion of the Polavaram Multipurpose Irrigation Project, while granting liberty to the state to file a fresh suit to raise its grievances in an appropriate forum. The Bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi heard the plea filed by Telangana against the Union of India and the Andhra Pradesh government, alleging illegal diversion of Godavari river waters beyond the limits fixed under the Godavari Water Disputes Tribunal Award.
Click here to read more

4. [Abu Salem] The Supreme Court asked gangster Abu Salem to justify his claim of having spent 25 years in jail, while hearing his plea of premature release. A bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta has asked Salem to produce the Maharashtra State Rules to ascertain if it allows remission to a convict under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (TADA) Act. Salem, a convict in the 1993 Mumbai serial blasts, was extradited from Portugal on November 11, 2005, after a prolonged legal battle.
Click here to read more

5. [Abbas Ansari] The Supreme Court made absolute the interim bail earlier granted to Uttar Pradesh MLA Abbas Ansari in a case registered against him under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, involving allegations of extortion and assault. A Bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant passed the order after being informed by Advocate Nizam Pasha that Ansari had not misused the interim bail granted to him by the Court.
Click here to read more

6. [Coal Scam] The Supreme Court appointed a new judge, Sunaina Sharma, to hear the trials in the coal scam cases being probed by the Central Bureau of Investigation. A CJI Surya Kant led bench considered the names of three judicial officers submitted by the Delhi High Court to replace Special CBI Judge Sanjay. Court was told by Senior Advocate R. S. Cheema, that the incumbent Judge Bansal was allowed last year to continue from April 8, 2025, for a period of six months and eight months had passed since then.
Click here to read more

7. [Savarkar Portrait] The Supreme Court came down heavily on a retired civil services officer who had filed a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking removal of Vinayak Damodar Savarkar’s portraits from the Indian Parliament and other public places, terming the plea “frivolous and a waste of judicial time.” The Bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant pulled up the petitioner, who appeared party-in-person via video conference from Chennai, for misusing the forum of the Court under the guise of public interest.
Click here to read more

8. [Stray Dogs case] The Supreme Court indicated that it may soon fix liability on state authorities and dog feeders for injuries and deaths caused by stray dog attacks, as the long-running Stray Dogs case resumed before the bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta, and NV Anjaria. After three days of intense hearings last week, the Bench continued examining the issue of stray dogs in institutional premises and the failure of municipal bodies to effectively implement sterilization and control measures. The Court will next hear the matter on January 20 at 2 PM.
Click here to read more

9. [Terror Funding Case] The Supreme Court heard the bail plea of Shabir Ahmad Shah, who is facing prosecution under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) for allegedly conspiring to secede Jammu and Kashmir from India. The Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta heard detailed arguments from Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves, appearing for Shah, and Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra, representing the National Investigation Agency (NIA).
Click here to read more

10. [Ankita Bhandari Murder] A letter-petition has been submitted to the Supreme Court seeking its intervention through epistolary jurisdiction under Article 32 read with Article 142, urging a court-monitored further investigation into unresolved constitutional issues arising from the Ankita Bhandari murder case, even after the trial concluded in conviction. Filed by Advocate Hitendra D. Gandhi, the representation does not seek a retrial or re-appreciation of evidence. Instead, it raises concerns about what it describes as a persistent and unexamined “VIP / extra-service corridor”, alleged compromise of digital evidence, demolition of the crime scene, and the absence of accountability beyond the convicted accused.
Click here to read more

11. [Section 17 PC Act] The Supreme Court has delivered a split verdict while deciding a writ petition challenging the constitutional validity of Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Under the said section, no police officer shall conduct any enquiry or inquiry or investigation into any offence alleged to have been committed by a public servant under the Act, where the alleged offence is relatable to any recommendation made or decision taken by such public servant in discharge of his official functions or duties, without the previous approval of the authority prescribed therein.
Click here to read more

12. [Jana Nayagan] The Supreme Court directed that the plea filed by KVN Productions, seeking CBFC certification for the upcoming Tamil film ‘Jana Nayagan’ starring actor Vijay, be heard by a division bench of High Court on January 20. The Bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih heard the petition filed by the film’s producers after the Madras High Court declined to grant immediate relief in the matter concerning certification delays by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC).
Click here to read more

13. [Passive Euthanasia Case] The Supreme Court reserved its judgment on a plea seeking permission for passive euthanasia for Harish Rana, a man who has remained in a permanent vegetative state for over 13 years following a traumatic brain injury. The Bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K.V. Viswanathan heard detailed submissions in a case that once again brings to the fore the ethical, legal and constitutional questions surrounding end-of-life decisions.
Click here to read more

14. [Kerala SIR] The Supreme Court directed that the list of voters deleted during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Kerala be made public. The Court took note of concerns that nearly 24 lakh names have been removed from the draft rolls without affording sufficient opportunity for objections. The Bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant was hearing petitions challenging the conduct of the revision process in the state.
Click here to read more

15. [Creamy Layer in SC ST quota] The Supreme Court heard a plea seeking exclusion of the “creamy layer” from reservations extended to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, but made it clear that it was not examining the issue on merits at this stage. The Bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vijay Bishnoi took on record multiple intervention applications, including one filed by the All India SC/ST Employees of the Railways opposing the plea.
Click here to read more

16. [I-PAC raids] The Supreme Court issued notice on petitions filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and its officers alleging interference by West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee and senior state police officials during a search conducted at the office of political consultancy firm I-PAC and the residence of its director Prateek Jain. The Bench of Justices P.K. Mishra and Vipul M. Pancholi observed that the matter raised “larger questions” concerning the independence of investigations by central agencies and possible interference by state authorities, warranting examination by the top court.
Click here to read more

17. [Mahant Narendra Giri Death] The Supreme Court has granted bail to Aadya Prasad Tiwari, an accused in the case concerning death of Akhil Bharatiya Akhara Parishad president Mahant Narendra Giri. A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and SC Sharma has allowed the plea filed against Allahabad High Court's judgment and order dated 14th October, 2025, whereby it had rejected the appellant’s prayer for bail. Tiwari figured as an accused in FIR No.322 of 2021 dated 21st September, 2021 registered at Police Station George Town, District Prayagraj under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, was arrested on 22nd September, 2021. However, the police report (charge-sheet) was filed also under Sections 120-B and 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Click here to read more

18. [Justice Yashwant Varma Removal notice] The Supreme Court rejected a petition filed by Allahabad High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma, who had challenged the decision of the Lok Sabha Speaker to admit a motion seeking his removal and to constitute an inquiry committee under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968. The Bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma passed the order. Justice Varma had approached the Apex Court questioning the Speaker’s decision to allow the removal motion to be taken up and to initiate the statutory process for inquiry into the allegations against him. He had contended that the Speaker’s action was legally unsustainable and sought judicial intervention to stall the inquiry process.
Click here to read more

19. [Mukul Roy Anti-Defection Case] The Supreme Court stayed the operation of the Calcutta High Court judgment that had set aside the disqualification of Trinamool Congress leader and former BJP MLA Mukul Roy under the anti-defection law, observing that the use and evaluation of electronic evidence required careful judicial scrutiny. The Court was dealing with a plea filed by TMC Leader Subhranshu Roy. The Bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi issued notice to Ambika Roy and BJP leader Suvendu Adhikari, directing them to file their counter affidavits within four weeks.
Click here to read more

20. [Telangana Phone Tapping Case] The Supreme Court has ordered that the interim protection granted to former Telangana Special Intelligence Bureau (SIB) chief T Prabhakar Rao, accused in the phone tapping case, shall continue till March 10. A bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan told the state, "We granted custodial interrogation, now the purpose is served. Now what more remains...you just want to keep him in jail...".
Click here to read more

21. [UMEED Portal] The Supreme Court refused to entertain a writ petition filed by a Waqf Muttawalli alleging technical glitches in the Union government’s UMEED portal for uploading details of Waqf properties, while granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the concerned authorities for redressal of grievances. The bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi held that no case was made out for invoking Article 32 of the Constitution.
Click here to read more

22. [Karishma Kapoor] The Supreme Court sought the response of actor Karisma Kapoor on an application filed by Priya Kapur seeking certified copies of court records relating to divorce proceedings between Kapoor and her former husband, late industrialist Sunjay Kapur. The matter was considered in chambers by a Bench led by Justice A.S. Chandurkar. During the hearing, counsel appearing for Karisma Kapoor opposed the plea, describing it as frivolous and an attempt to access personal and confidential information. The Court directed Kapoor to place her objections on record and granted her two weeks’ time to file a detailed response.
Click here to read more

23. [Judiciary 3-year practise rule] The Supreme Court has agreed to consider a plea to declare the mandatory three-year practice requirement for eligibility to the post of Civil Judge (Junior Division)—as upheld by the judgment dated 20.05.2025 in All India Judges’ Association & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors., as unconstitutional, ultra vires, and void ab initio insofar as it applies to persons with benchmark disabilities. In its order the Supreme Court bench of CJI Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vijay Bishnoi noted that in March 2025 the court had in SUO Motu Writ Petition No.2 of 2024 (In re: Recruitment of Visually Impaired in Judicial Services) had directed for suitable amendment in the minimum eligibility conditions for appointment of judicial officers at the junior division level. Subsequently, the bench noted, vide the impugned judgment in May 2025 it laid down a mandatory condition of three years’ practice at the bar has been prescribed to acquire eligibility to appear in the competitive examination.
Click here to read more

24. [Arbitration Council of India] The Supreme Court has issued notice in a writ petition seeking a direction to the Union of India to immediately constitute the Arbitration Council of India (ACI) and frame uniform policies and guidelines governing arbitral institutions and arbitrators, as envisaged under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Bench of Justices JK Maheshwari and Atul S Chandurkar issued notice returnable in six weeks.
Click here to read more

25. [Maintenance] The Supreme Court on January 13, 2026 held that a Hindu widowed daughter-in-law is entitled to seek maintenance from the estate of her deceased father-in-law. Court observed that denying such a claim on a narrow or technical interpretation of the statute would expose her to destitution and social marginalisation, thereby offending her fundamental right to live with dignity. A bench of Justices Pankaj Mithal and S V N Bhatti said that a son or the legal heirs are bound to maintain all dependent persons out of the estate inherited, that is, all persons whom the deceased was legally and morally bound to maintain.
Click here to read more