Supreme Court Weekly Round Up [February 16-22, 2026]

1. [Abu Salem] The Supreme Court of India declined to entertain a plea filed by gangster Abu Salem, who sought release in the 1993 Bombay blasts case by claiming that he had completed 25 years of imprisonment in terms of the Court’s 2022 ruling. Salem, a convict in the 1993 Mumbai serial blasts, was extradited from Portugal on November 11, 2005, after a prolonged legal battle. The bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta refused to grant any interim relief and asked Salem to pursue his remedies before the Bombay High Court, which is already seized of the matter.
Click here to read more

2. [Sabarimala] After five years of the review petitions being taken up last, the Supreme Court of India took up the batch of petitions challenging its September 2018 decision wherein a 5-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court by a 4:1 majority had ruled that the traditional ban on women aged 10–50 years entering the Sabarimala temple was unconstitutional. A CJI Surya Kant led bench took up the petitions and has ordered that the same will be heard by a 9-judge bench starting April 7, 2026. "The nine judge bench shall begin hearing the review case on April 7, 2026 at 10.30 am. The review petitioners shall be heard from April 7 to 9, 2026. The parties opposing the review will be heard from April 17-16, 2026. Rejoinder submissions will be heard on April 21. Parties to adhere to the time schedule".
Click here to read more

3. [Definition of Industry] The Supreme Court will commence hearing arguments on the scope of the definition of “industry” under Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 from 17 March 2026. A Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul Pancholi said, "This is the first matter before a nine-judge bench...we are starting the Constitution Benches with this matter..".
Click here to read more

4. [Himanta Sarma] The Supreme Court refused a petition filed by CPI leader Annie Raja seeking action against the alleged hate speeches and a controversial video featuring Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma. A CJI Surya Kant led bench came down heavily on Raja for approaching the Supreme Court directly under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. "You are undermining the authority of the high court..why the supreme court is a playground for such political battles..," CJI told Senior Advocate AM Singhvi.
Click here to read more

5. [Beant Singh Assassination] The Supreme Court of India deferred to March 11 the hearing on a plea filed by Beant Singh assassination convict Jagtar Singh Hawara, seeking his transfer from Delhi’s Tihar Jail to any prison in Punjab. The bench of Justices M M Sundresh and N Kotiswar Singh adjourned the matter after Solicitor General Tushar Mehta sought an adjournment on behalf of the Union government. Hawara, a member of the banned terrorist outfit Babbar Khalsa, is serving imprisonment for the remainder of his natural life in connection with the August 31, 1995 blast at the entrance of the civil secretariat in Chandigarh, which killed former Punjab Chief Minister Beant Singh and 16 others. He has been lodged in Tihar Jail for several years.
Click here to read more

6. [Fodder Scam] The Supreme Court of India observed that the accused persons in the Deoghar fodder scam case, including former Bihar Chief Minister Lalu Prasad Yadav, are now well into their senior years, with many in their 60s, 70s and even 80s. A Bench of Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice N. Kotiswar Singh made the remark while hearing appeals filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation challenging a Jharkhand High Court order that granted bail to Yadav and suspended his sentence in the Deoghar treasury case.
Click here to read more

7. [Hate Speech] The Supreme Court directed amendments to another petition seeking guidelines to regulate public speeches of constitutional functionaries. A Bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Joymalya Bagchi told the petitioner that the plea should be filed against all functionaries engaging in such hate speeches and not target particular persons. "Withdraw this.. File a simple plea on what conditional safeguards have been laid down and how it's violated by political parties," the CJI said.
Click here to read more

8. [Tribunals] The Supreme Court has asked the Union government to place before it in four weeks, a comprehensive and uniform proposal on the functioning of tribunals across the country. A CJI Surya Kant led bench observed that quasi-judicial bodies cannot be permitted to become dysfunctional or defunct. The bench also comprising justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul Pancholi called for Centre to take a holistic decision on the future of the tribunal system. "Let the institutions not be defunct. The government has to take a call. Bring a proposal before us for judicial consideration,” observed the bench", it has said.
Click here to read more

9. [Revanth Reddy] The Supreme Court upheld an order of the Telangana High Court closing a criminal case against Chief Minister A Revanth Reddy under SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. A Chief Justice of India Surya Kant led bench rejected the petition filed by the complainant N Peddi Raju who approached the top court challenging the dismissal of the case by the high court in July 2025. "We read in between lines, how these political battles take place,” observed the bench also comprising justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul Pancholi and held that the view taken by the high court was both “possible and plausible”.
Click here to read more

10. [AI in Judiciary] A CJI Surya Kant led bench of the Supreme Court has raised concerns over growing use of artificial intelligence (AI) in drafting of petitions, relying on recent instances where lawyers cited judgments and quotations that either were found to be non-existent. “We have been alarmingly told that some lawyers have started using AI for drafting,” CJI Kant noted during a hearing. Justice Nagarathna, also on the bench, recalled an instance where a fictitious judgment was cited and said, "There was a case of Mercy vs Mankind which does not exist". The judge further observed how actual supreme court judgment were cited but the quoted portions did not exist in the judgment.
Click here to read more

11. [Snake Venom Case] The Supreme Court heard YouTuber and influencer Elvish Yadav’s plea seeking quashing of criminal proceedings against him in the alleged snake venom and rave party case registered in Uttar Pradesh. In August 2025, the court had stayed the trial court proceedings initiated against Yadav. The bench of Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh heard detailed submissions on the maintainability of the case, particularly the invocation of provisions under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, the NDPS Act, and the IPC.
Click here to read more

12. [I-PAC Raids] The Supreme Court took up the plea filed by Enforcement Directorate against West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee and certain state police officers over their obstruction of a search at the office of political consultancy firm I-PAC. As the matter was taken up, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the bench comprising Justices PK Mishra and KV Vishwanathan that the ED's rejoined was ready and would be filed. Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra went on to tell the bench that the ED must justify how it has been weaponized in the state. In a sharp response, Additional Solicitor General SV Raju said, "It has not been weaponized, it has been terrorized..".
Click here to read more

13. [Anjel Chakma] The Supreme Court has placed the public interest petition seeking urgent judicial intervention to address continuing constitutional failure to prevent and respond to racially motivated violence against citizens from India’s North-Eastern states before the Attorney General of India for consideration. "The PIL raises some vital questions for robust mechanism under the criminal laws for prevention of group based violence on the grounds of race, place of birth, language. As of now, we deem it appropriate that the aforesaid issue ought to be brought before the competent authority, in the good offices of the Learned Attorney General. The instant writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to hand over the soft copy of the same to the office of AG, to enable the AG to take up this matter with the appropriate authority", the Chief Justice of India ordered.
Click here to read more

14. [Rape Attempt verdict] The Supreme Court has set aside the Allahabad High Court's decision from March 17, 2025 which had held the acts of grabbing a minor girl’s breasts, breaking the string of her pyjama and attempting to pull down her lower garment were insufficient to infer an attempt to rape. A CJI Surya Kant led bench while setting aside the impugned judgment dated has ordered that the original summons order passed by the Special Judge (POCSO), Kasganj be restored. Also Read - Supreme Court to Hear in Open Court Review Pleas Against 3-Year Practice Rule for Judicial Service "It goes without saying that the observations made by this Court through this judgment are only from a prima facie perspective on the case made by the complainant, and they shall not be taken to be any opinion on the guilt of the accused persons, which is the subject matter of the ongoing trial", the court's judgment clarifies.
Click here to read more

15. [Delhi Riots] The Supreme Court of India issues notice on a plea filed by United Against Hate member Khalid Saifi, challenging the denial of bail by the Delhi High Court in a case alleging a larger conspiracy behind the 2020 Delhi riots, involving charges under the Indian Penal Code and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). The bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and P.B. Varale, however, orally makes it clear that Saifi cannot claim parity with the Supreme Court’s January 2026 judgment that granted bail to five co-accused in the same case.
Click here to read more

16. [Exhumations] The Supreme Court passed an interim order restraining the forcible exhumation and relocation of the bodies of tribal Christians from their village burial grounds in Chhattisgarh, while issuing notice on a writ petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution. The bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and N V Anjaria directed that the status quo be maintained. “In the meantime, it is provided that no further exhumation of buried bodies shall be permitted,” the Court ordered.
Click here to read more

17. [Beant Singh Assassination] The Supreme Court fixed March 18 for hearing a plea filed by Balwant Singh Rajoana, who was convicted in the 1995 assassination of former Punjab Chief Minister Beant Singh, seeking commutation of his death sentence to life imprisonment on the ground of prolonged delay in deciding his mercy petition. Rajoana has remained incarcerated for more than 29 years, including over 15 years on death row. Also Read - Supreme Court to Hear in Open Court Review Pleas Against 3-Year Practice Rule for Judicial Service The bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and N V Anjaria took note of submissions made by counsel appearing for the Centre, who sought time in the matter.
Click here to read more

18. [Divorce by Khula] The Supreme Court of India has recently granted leave in a Special Leave Petition filed before it that has challenged the Kerala High Court's 2021 decision whereby it had overruled a 49-year-old judgment that effectively barred Muslim women from resorting to extra judicial modes of dissolving marriage, has been challenged before the Supreme Court of India. While listing the issue for regular hearing on April 22, 2026, court has requested Senior Advocate Shoeb Alam, to assist it in this matter, as it involves a question of Muslim personal law.
Click here to read more

19. [Warning Labels on Packaged Food] The Supreme Court has asked Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) to consider introducing mandatory front-of-package warning labels (FOPL) on packaged food products high in sugar, sodium and saturated fat. A Bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K.V. Viswanathan observed that such regulatory measures are essential to safeguard citizens’ right to health. In April last year, court had directed the Expert Committee constituted by the FSSAI to prepare its recommendation and submit a Report within 3 months.
Click here to read more

20. [Vikram Bhatt] The Supreme Court has granted regular bail to filmmaker Vikram Bhatt, his wife Shwetambari V Bhatt, in a case pertaining to nearly ₹30 crore in alleged fraud. Notably, last week court had granted interim relief to Bhatt's wife. Bhatt and his wife had approached the top court after the Rajasthan High Court on January 31, 2026 had refused them any relief. Justice Vinod Kumar Bharwani's bench had emphasised it would not be appropriate to grant bail at this juncture. A CJI Kant led bench asked the parties to make earnest efforts to settle the dispute through mediation and directed the parties to appear before the Supreme Court Mediation Centre with a view to explore the possibility of settling their payment dispute.
Click here to read more

21. [Ghooskhor Pandat] Filmmaker Neeraj Pandey has filed an affidavit before the Supreme Court stating that the controversial title of his upcoming film, earlier titled Ghooskhor Pandat, has been “unequivocally withdrawn” and will not be used in any form. Denying allegations of hurting religious sentiments, Pandey asserted that neither he nor his production house had any “deliberate or malicious intention” to outrage the religious feelings of any community. He maintained that the film does not insult or attempt to insult any religion, caste, or community through its title, visuals, promotional material, or narrative.
Click here to read more

22. [ADAG Probe] Anil Ambani has filed an affidavit before the Supreme Court, undertaking that he will not travel abroad without prior permission of the Court and will fully cooperate with the ongoing investigations by the Directorate of Enforcement and the Central Bureau of Investigation into alleged financial irregularities involving Anil Dhirubhai Ambani Group (ADAG) companies. The affidavit was filed in response to a writ petition moved by former bureaucrat EAS Sarma, seeking a court-monitored investigation into alleged loan frauds exceeding ₹40,000 crore by ADAG entities.
Click here to read more

23. [Tamil Nadu Waqf Board] The Supreme Court has stayed the order of the Madras High Court while held that the Tamil Nadu Waqf Board cannot be allowed to exercise any powers and functions under the Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development Act, 1995. "Of Course, the High Court is wrong. High Court order rendering the board defunct is stayed. Doctrine of necessity has to function," the Chief Justice of India observed. Senior Advocate P Wilson told the bench also comprising Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul Pancholi that 8 members were already appointed to the Board and only three posts were remaining to be appointed.
Click here to read more

24. [DV Case] The Supreme Court issued notice to Indian cricketer Mohammed Shami on a batch of petitions filed by his wife Hasin Jahan, seeking transfer of multiple matrimonial proceedings from West Bengal to Delhi. The petitions were listed before the bench of Justices Manoj Misra and Manmohan. Jahan has sought the transfer of proceedings including her maintenance case and a complaint under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act.
Click here to read more

25. [Hate Crime Case] The Supreme Court of India heard a plea filed by Noida-based Muslim cleric Kazeem Ahmad Sherwani, raising concerns over an alleged hate crime and the failure of the Uttar Pradesh Police to invoke appropriate penal provisions. The bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta noted that in an earlier hearing, the Court had questioned why Sections 153B and 295A of the Indian Penal Code, dealing with imputations prejudicial to national integration and deliberate acts intended to outrage religious feelings, were not invoked in the FIR.
Click here to read more

26. [CAA] Nearly 6 years after the introduction of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (CAA), the Supreme Court ordered that the batch of petitions filed before it challenging the validity of the amendment will be heard in May. CAA, which was passed on December 12, 2019, amends Section 2 of the Citizenship Act of 1955 which defines “illegal migrants”. Persons belonging to Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi or Christian communities from the neighboring countries of Afghanistan, Bangladesh or Pakistan, shall not be treated as “illegal migrants” and shall be eligible to apply for citizenship under the 1955 Act. Consequently, over 200 petitions were filed challenging the introduction of the Amendment Act in 2019, which were taken up by the Supreme Court. Notices in the pleas were issued in January 2020, but the matter could not be taken up for hearing.
Click here to read more

27. [Copyright Case] Supreme Court was told by Music composer AR Rahman that he is agreeable to displaying the names of Ustad M Faiyazuddin Dagar and his nephew in the credits to the song Veera Raja Veera from the film Ponniyin Selvan II. A CJI Surya Kant led bench was told that the song on OTT and other online platforms will carry the following line depicting credits: "Composition inspired from Dagarwani tradition Dhrupad, first recorded by Late Ustad M Faiyazuddin Dagar and his nephew."
Click here to read more

28. [Murder Probe] The Supreme Court pulled up the Andhra Pradesh Police over their investigation into the 2022 murder case involving YSR Congress Party MLC Ananta Udaya Bhaskar. A Bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul Pancholi observed that there was a clear nexus between police and those in power and said, “This is a clear case of the nexus of Police and power...Police, investigating agencies have been hobnobbing with the accused and all attempts have been made to grant default bail under 167(2) CrPC to the appellant on a platter though High Court did not grant the same," the Court observed.
Click here to read more

29. [Freebies] The Supreme Court expressed its concerns over distribution of "freebies" by political parties across states, highlighting the strain such measures place on public finances. "The economic development of the nation will be hampered by this kind of largesse distribution. Yes, it is the State’s duty to provide. But who are enjoying these freebies.. is it not something that should be looked at?” Chief Justice of India Surya Kant observed. CJI further said that states are running into deficit due to it.
Click here to read more

30. [Sonam Wanchuk] Solicitor General Tushar Mehta asked Supreme Court for some time to respond to the allegations made by Sonam Wangchuk that the transcripts of the videos cited against him by the detaining authority are incorrect. Notably, Wangchuk's wife Gitanjali J Angmo objected to the Central government's request in the case filed by her against Wangchuk's detention under the National Security Act (NSA). "There’s a video of 40 minutes. I have something to say on the contention that the translations are wrong," Mehta told a bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and PB Varale. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Angmo, argued that the authorities failed to respond to allegations in the counter affidavit and now cannot be given more time respond. However, the bench listed the case for further hearing on February 23 to hear SG Mehta. Court had earlier asked the Centre to supply to it in a pen drive the videos cited in the detention order. The pen drive was provided to court.
Click here to read more

31. [3-year practice rule for judicial service] In a significant procedural move, the Supreme Court has allowed open court hearings in review petitions challenging its judgment mandating a minimum of three years’ practice at the Bar for entry-level appointments in the judicial service. The bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justices Augustine George Masih and K Vinod Chandran passed the order on February 10, directing that the review petitions be heard in open court on February 26.
Click here to read more