Supreme Court Weekly Round Up [September 15-21, 2025]

1. [Vantara] The Supreme Court noted that no contravention of law has been reported by the SIT as against Vantara and the complaints stand closed. The SIT after thorough investigation in coordination with multiple agencies has clearly opined and concluded that there is no violation of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, Recognition of Zoo Rules, 2009, CZA guidelines, Customs Act, 1962, Foreign Trade (Regulation and development) Act, 1992, Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 or the Convention of International Trade in Endangered Species of wild Fauna and Flora.
Case Title: C R Jaya Sukin vs. Union of India & Ors.
Bench: Justices Mithal and PB Varale
Click here to read more

2. [PHED Scam] The Supreme Court on issued notice on a petition filed by former Rajasthan minister Mahesh Joshi, seeking regular bail in connection with a Jal Jeevan Mission-linked money laundering case. A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and AG Masih have issued notice on the petition moved by the Minister making it returnable in four weeks.
Case Title: SH. MAHESH JOSHI vs. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT
Bench: Justices Datta and Masih
Click here to read more

3. [Bhima Koregaon] The Supreme Court on granted six weeks’ medical bail to Bhima Koregaon accused Mahesh Raut, who was arrested under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). The Bench of Justice MM Sundresh and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma noted that Raut, who suffers from Rheumatoid Arthritis, an autoimmune disorder affecting bones and muscles, had already been granted bail by the High Court, but the order was stayed.
Case Title: NIA v. Mahesh Sitaram Raut
Bench: Justice MM Sundresh and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma
Click here to read more

4. [Evidence Act] The Supreme Court on September 15, 2025 held that a compact disc is an electronic record and once the requirements under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 are satisfied, such video evidence becomes admissible like a document. The Court clarified that the video recorded therein is akin to the contents of a document which can be seen and heard by the court to draw appropriate inferences.
Case Title: Kailash S/o Bajirao Pawar Vs State of Maharashtra
Coram: Justices Manoj Misra and Ujjal Bhuyan
Click here to read more

5. [River Jojari] The Supreme Court on took suo motu cognizance of pollution in the River Jojari in Rajasthan, caused primarily by the discharge of industrial waste from nearby factories. The Bench noted that the contamination was affecting hundreds of villages along the river and rendering the drinking water non-potable for local communities.
Bench: Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta
Click here to read more

6. [Conversion Laws] The Supreme Court has granted four weeks to the states for filing their responses on various petitions challenging the constitutional validity of anti-religious conversion laws enacted by several states in the country. The laws under challenge include the Himachal Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 2019; the Madhya Pradesh Freedom of Religion Ordinance, 2020; the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Ordinance, 2020; and a similar enactment in Uttarakhand. These statutes aim to prohibit forced or fraudulent religious conversions, but have come under intense scrutiny over alleged misuse and infringement on individual freedoms.
Case Title: Citizens for Justice and Peace v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. & connected matters
Bench: CJI Gavai and Justice Vinod Chandran
Click here to read more

7. [Local Body elections] The Supreme Court has granted the Maharashtra State Election Commission time till January 31, 2026 to conduct the local body elections in the State. A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi has extended the timeline as a one time measure clearly specifying that no further extension shall be given. In May this year, the Supreme Court of India had directed that Maharashtra local body elections, which had been delayed since 2022 due to a challenge to Other Backward Classes (OBC) reservation, be conducted within four months.
Case Title: Rahul Ramesh Wagh vs The State of Maharashtra & Ors
Bench: Justices Kant and Bagchi
Click here to read more

8. [Stubble burning] The Supreme Court, while hearing a case on the vacancies in Pollution Control Boards in the states of Haryana, Punjab, Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan has suggested the introduction of penal provisions to punish farmers who burn stubble. When Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati told the CJI Gavai led bench that "Provisions are there under the CAQM Act...ultimately it comes down to implementation..erring officers can be punished..", the CJI went on to clarify, "Forget erring officers...why dont you consider a penal provision for agriculturists..".
Case Title: MC Mehta vs. Union of India
Bench: CJI Gavai and Justice Chandran
Click here to read more

9. [Chhota Rajan] The Supreme Court allowed a plea filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation challenging the order granting Chhota Rajan bail and suspending his sentence in the Jaya Shetty Murder Case. A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta noted that Rajan was absconding for over 27 years and was convicted in four cases. "Why suspension of sentence to such a man," the bench said today.
Case Title: CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, NEW DELHI vs. RAJENDRA SADASHIV NIKALJE @ CHHOTA RAJAN @ NANA SHETH @ SIR & ANR.
Bench: Justices Nath and Mehta
Click here to read more

10. [Global Ayyappa Sangamam] The Supreme Court refused to interfere with the Kerala High court's decision allowing the Travancore Devaswom Board (TDB) and the state government to hold the “Global Ayyappa Sangamam” on 20 September 2025. A bench of Justices PS Narasimha and Atul S Chandurkar has rejected petitions filed before it and thus allowed the Sangamam to take place.
Case Title: AJEESH KALATHIL GOPI vs. STATE OF KERALA
Bench: Justices Narsimha and Chandurkar
Click here to read more

11. [Temple funds] The Supreme Court recently refused to stay the Madras High Court's decision putting an end to the State’s plan to use Rs. 80 crore from surplus temple funds for building and renting marriage halls in 27 temples across the State. "Devotees do not offer their money to the temple for setting up marriage halls...If there is a marriage party going on in a temple premises and all kinds of vulgar songs are played, is that the purpose of a temple land?", court has said.
Case Title: THE JOINT COMMISSIONER/EXECUTIVE OFFICER ARULMIGHU DHANDAYUTHAPANI SWAMY TEMPLE PALANI. vs. RAMA RAVIKUMAR
Bench: Justices Nath and Mehta
Click here to read more

12. [Sikh Marriages] Reinforcing the constitutional promise of equal treatment, the Supreme Court has directed all States and Union Territories to frame and notify rules for the registration of Sikh marriages solemnised by the Anand Karaj rite within four months. The Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta further ordered that, until such rules are notified, authorities must register Anand Karaj marriages under existing frameworks without discrimination.
Case Title: Amanjot Singh Chadha vs. Union of India and Ors.
Bench: Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta
Click here to read more

13. [Fake degree] The Supreme Court has directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), Delhi, to investigate allegations that a Bachelor of Commerce (Honours) degree claimed by the petitioner, Advocate Naresh Dilawari, was forged and not issued by Magadh University, Bodh Gaya. The matter came before the Bench of Justice Manoj Misra and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan after the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana filed Interlocutory Application No. 161167/2025, seeking permission to place on record additional documents.
Case Title: Naresh Dilawari v. Charanjit Singh Oberoi
Bench: Justice Manoj Misra and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
Click here to read more

14. [POCSO Act] The Supreme Court has said a man cannot be convicted of rape and penetrative sexual assault, when the allegation is only of touching the private organs of the minor girl. A bench of Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Joymalya Bagchi modified the conviction of appellant, Laxman Jangde, from the offences under Section 376 AB of the IPC and under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, to those under Section 354 of the IPC and under Section 10 of the POCSO Act.
Case Title: Laxman Jangde Vs State of Chhattisgarh
Bench: Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Joymalya Bagchi
Click here to read more

15. [Khajuraho Vishnu Idol] The Supreme Court refused restoration of a 7-foot beheaded idol of Lord Vishnu at the Javari temple in Khajuraho, Madhya Pradesh. A bench of CJI BR Gavai and Justice Vinod Chandran was told that the idol was mutilated during the Mughal invasions. Refusing any relief, the CJI said, "Go and ask the deity now. You say you are a staunch devotee of Lord Vishnu, so go and pray now". The Court further opined that as Khajuraho is an archaeological site, the permission from Archeological Survey of India would be required.
Case Title: Rakesh Dalal vs. Union of India
Bench: CJI Gavai and Justice Chandran
Click here to read more

16. [Custodial Torture] The Supreme Court on refused a petition filed by the brother of a minor who was brutally tortured in police custody by several officers of Botad Town Police Station in State of Gujarat. A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta refused the plea while saying "we have all sympathies for you", but the Gujarat High Court should be approached first.
Case Title: PINJARA TANJILA ALTAFBHAI vs. STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
Bench: Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta
Click here to read more

17. [Rape] The Supreme Court has suspended the sentence of Father Edwin Pigarez, a Roman Catholic priest convicted for repeatedly raping a minor parishioner, noting that he has already undergone nearly a decade of incarceration. The Bench of Chief Justice BR Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran was hearing an application filed by Fr. Pigarez seeking suspension of sentence and bail during the pendency of his appeal.
Case Title: Fr. Edwin Pigarez v. State of Kerala & Anr.
Bench: CJI BR Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran
Click here to read more

18. [Ill treatment of Lawyers] The Supreme Court on fixed October 6 to hear a plea filed by Advocate Matthews J. Nedumpara seeking a series of reforms, including video recording of court proceedings and measures to address alleged ill-treatment of lawyers and litigants. The plea filed by Nedumpara and others calls for mandatory video recording of proceedings in all courts and tribunals in India, preservation of such records, and access to them as a matter of right for litigants, lawyers, and stakeholders.
Case Title: Shri Mathews J Nedumpara & Ors. v. The Supreme Court of India & Ors.
Bench: CJI BR Gavai, Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice NV Anjaria
Click here to read more

19. [AGR demand] The Central government asked the Supreme Court for some time to arrive a solution with regard to the fresh adjusted gross revenue (AGR) demand of Rs 9,450 crore raised by the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) to Vodafone Idea. "In light of larger public interest, Government has also infused 49% equity. Some solution may be required, subject to this court's approval.", Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the Supreme Court today.
Case Title: Vodafone Idea Ltd. v. Union of India
Bench: CJI Gavai, Justices Chandran and Anjaria
Click here to read more

20. [Banu Mustaq] The Supreme court has dismissed the petition against the Karnataka government' decision to invite International Booker Prize winner Banu Mushtaq to inaugurate this year’s Dasara festivities, atop the Chamundeshwari Hills, on 22 September, 2025. "Why did you file this petition", a miffed Justice Vikram Nath asked the petitioner before it. "This is a state event not a private one...dismissed..", the bench also comprising Justice Sandeep Mehta went on to order.
Case Title: HS Gaurav vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.
Bench: Justices Nath and Mehta
Click here to read more

21. [Air India Crash] A public interest litigation has been filed before the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution seeking complete disclosure of data retrieved from the black boxes of the crashed Air India Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner (VT-ANB) and the appointment of independent professionals to oversee the investigation into the Ahmedabad air disaster of June 12, 2025, which claimed over 260 lives, including passengers, crew, and people on the ground.
Case Title: Safety Matters Foundation v. Union of India
Click here to read more

22. [Section 498A] The Supreme Court on September 18, 2025, quashed a dowry harassment FIR filed in 2016 by a woman against her former husband, after noting that courts in Australia and Austria had already ruled on the couple’s marital and custody disputes. A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Prashant Kumar Mishra allowed the appeal filed by Nitin Ahluwalia, an Australian citizen of Indian origin, challenging the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s March 23, 2017, order that had refused to quash the FIR. The complaint had been lodged on December 7, 2016, by his ex-wife, Tina Khanna Ahluwalia, an Austrian citizen.
Case Title: Nitin Ahluwalia Vs State of Punjab & Anr
Bench: Justices Sanjay Karol and Prashant Kumar Mishra
Click here to read more

23. [Varavara Rao] The Supreme Court refused a plea moved by Bhima Koregaon case accused Pendyala Varavara Rao seeking to modify one of his bail conditions. Rao, accused Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, is required to seek prior permission from the Trial Court if he wishes to leave the Greater Mumbai area. Senior Advocate Anand Grover submitted before court that Rao's health is deteriorating, Court was further told that his wife used to take care of him but she has now shifted to Hyderabad, and there is no one to look after him.
Case Title: P. VARAVARA RAO Vs. NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY AND ANR.
Bench: Justices Maheshwari and Bishnoi
Click here to read more

24. [Land Allotment Case] The Supreme Court, on September 15, 2025, dismissed a plea filed by former Karnataka Chief Minister and current Union Minister H D Kumaraswamy against the High Court's order that withdrew interim protection granted to him against the summons issued by the Tehsildar in a land allotment case, thereby exposing him to coercive proceedings. A bench of Justices Pankaj Mithal and Prasanna B Varale declined to interfere with the interim order of September 8, 2025, noting that the writ appeal was pending before the division bench of the High Court.
Case Title: H D Kumaraswamy Vs The State of Karnataka & Anr
Bench: Justices Pankaj Mithal and Prasanna B Varale
Click here to read more

25. [Circumstantial Evidence] The Supreme Court, on September 17, 2025, set aside the concurrent convictions of a man in a kidnap-cum-murder case, applying the five golden principles which form the 'panchsheel of the proof' in cases based on circumstantial evidence. A bench of Justices Pankaj Mithal and Prasanna B Varale held that both the trial court and the high court had erred in convicting the appellant, Thammineni Bhaskar, on a complete misreading of the evidence.
Case Title: Thammineni Bhaskar Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh
Bench: Justices Pankaj Mithal and Prasanna B Varale
Click here to read more

26. [Vedanta] Justice Sanjay Kumar has also recused from hearing the PIL filed seeking a thorough investigation by the Regulatory bodies such as SEBI, RBI and MCA into the affairs of Vedanta Limited, Hindustan Zinc Limited and Vedanta Resources Limited along with its sister concern. Notably, on September 8, 2025, Justice Vinod Chandran had recused after the matter was listed before a bench of CJI Gavai, Justice Chandran and Justice Chandurkar which took up the PIL filed by Shakti Bhatia raising crucial and important question over the regulatory bodies and their willingness to conduct enquiries into Vedanta.
Case Title: Shakti Bhatia vs. Union of India
Bench: Justices Sanjay Kumar and Alok Aradhe
Click here to read more

27. [Tombs in Madras High Court compound] The Supreme Court of India has agreed to hear a petition challenging Madras High Court's decision to allow relocation of the tomb of David Yale and Joseph Hymners, the son and friend of Elihu Yale, the then Governor of East India Company, situated within the compound of the Law College within the campus of the high court. A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta has issued notice on the plea and ordered status quo. The high Court's bench of Justice M Dhandapani had observed that the structure has neither archaeological value nor historical importance.
Case Title: T Mohan vs. B Manoharan
Bench: Justices Nath and Mehta
Click here to read more

28. [Waqf Amendment Act] The Supreme Court has refused to stay the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 in its entirety. "Presumption is always in favour of the constitutionality of the statute. Though entire Act is sought to be challenged..we have considered prima facie challenged to each of the sections and after hearing the parties that case was not made out to stay the statute.", CJI BR Gavai observed in court today. In May this year, the Supreme Court had reserved its order on interim relief in a batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, which, among other provisions, abolishes the concept of "waqf by user" and introduces sweeping changes to the registration and classification of waqf properties across India.
Case Title: In Re: The Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025
Bench: CJI Gavai and Justice AG Masih
Click here to read more

29. [Custodial Deaths] The Supreme Court on reserved its orders in a suo motu case concerning custodial deaths and the lack of functional CCTV cameras in police stations across Rajasthan. The matter arose after the Court took cognizance of a news report highlighting that 11 people had died in police custody in the state within the last eight months.
Case Title: In Re: Lack of Functional CCTVs in Police Stations
Bench: Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta
Click here to read more

30. [Himachal Ecological Crisis] The Supreme Court on reserved its order in a case concerning ecological imbalance in Himachal Pradesh, warning that the crisis extends beyond the State to the entire Himalayan region. The Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta cautioned that if unregulated development continues, “the entire State may vanish in thin air from the map of the country.” Justice Mehta underscored that the problem was not confined to Himachal. “This is not going to be limited to Himachal only… the entire Himalayan region,” he observed, adding that another ecological incident had been reported on September 12, during the pendency of the case.
Case Title: In Re: Issues Relating to Ecology and Environmental Conditions Prevailing in the State of Himachal Pradesh
Bench: Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta
Click here to read more

31. [Bihar SIR] The Supreme Court assumed that the Election Commission of India, as a constitutional authority, was following the law in conducting the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of Bihar’s electoral rolls and warned that any illegality would render the exercise void. The Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi fixed October 7 for final arguments on the validity of the Bihar SIR, refusing to entertain piecemeal opinions on the process.
Case Title: Association for Democratic Reforms & Ors v. Election Commission of India & Anr.
Bench: Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi
Click here to read more

32. [POSH Act] The Supreme Court has refused an Special Leave Petition (SLP) challenging a 2022 judgment of the Kerala High Court which, while partly affirmed the importance of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act), and adopted what the petitioners described as a “narrow and restrictive” interpretation of the law’s scope.
Case Title: Yogamaya MG v. State of Kerala & Ors.
Bench: CJI Gavai, Justices Chandran and Chandurkar
Click here to read more

33. [Section 152 BNS] The Supreme Court on extended interim protection to the Foundation running the online news outlet The Wire in its plea challenging Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), a provision stated to have replaced the sedition law under the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi noted that the petitioners had not been called by any police authority to join the investigation.
Case Title: Foundation for Independent Journalism v. Union of India
Bench: Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi
Click here to read more

34. [AIFF] The Supreme Court gave its approval to the Constitution of the All India Football Federation (AIFF), after considering objections and suggestions from stakeholders and ensuring its conformity with the National Sports Code, 2011 as well as the statutes of FIFA and the Asian Football Confederation. A bench of Justices P S Narasimha and Joymalya Bagchi said, ''It is high time we recognize that sporting 'facilities and opportunities' are 'material resources of the community', and their organizers are 'the institutions of the national life . As 'places of public resort,” sporting institutions and bodies must remain accessible, not just for pursuing sport, but also for its administration".
Case Title: All India Football Federation Vs Rahul Mehra & Ors
Bench: Justices P S Narasimha and Joymalya Bagchi
Click here to read more