SC Recognises Menstrual Health under Article 21; Only 5 States Have Leave Policies

Health Ministry Backs Same-Sex Partners' Medical Decision Rights Under Mental Healthcare Act, 2017

The Union Health Ministry has told the Delhi High Court that excluding same-sex partners from making medical decisions for each other solely based on sexual orientation is unethical. This marks a significant administrative shift, though the government maintains that 'spouse' under Indian marriage laws only applies to heterosexual couples, creating a nuanced legal landscape for exam aspirants.

SC Recognises Student Mental Health Under Article 21 in Sukdeb Saha (2025); NEET Paper Leak Tests Institutional Responsibility

The Supreme Court has expanded the right to life (Article 21) to include student mental health, holding institutions responsible for student suicides under Sukdeb Saha v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2025). The NEET paper leak of 2026 becomes the first major test of this new constitutional principle, forcing the state to move beyond individual controversies toward structural reform in examinations and recruitment.

SC Directs Uniform Policy for Demolition & Rehabilitation of Unauthorised Homes Under Article 21

The Supreme Court has ruled that the state's power to demolish unauthorised constructions must be balanced with the duty to rehabilitate affected families, invoking Article 21 (right to dignity, shelter, livelihood). The court directed the Union and State governments to consider formulating a uniform demolition and rehabilitation policy.

Maharashtra Panel Recommends BNS Amendment for Defamatory Social Media Posts; Shreya Singhal Precedent

A Maharashtra government panel has recommended amending the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) to specifically criminalize defamatory social media posts, reviving the spirit of the now-struck-down Section 66A of the IT Act. This raises critical constitutional questions about balancing free speech (Article 19(1)(a)) with the right to reputation (Article 21), especially after the Supreme Court struck down Section 66A in Shreya Singhal vs Union of India (2015) for vagueness and overbreadth. For exam aspirants, understanding the legal framework of defamation, the concept of reasonable restrictions, and the proportionality standard is crucial.

Madras HC Rules Child Can Claim Reservation Through Mother, Rejects Patrilineal Caste Tracing

The Madras High Court has ruled that a child can claim Scheduled Caste (SC), Most Backward Class (MBC), or Other Backward Class (OBC) reservation benefits through their mother's nativity if the child is born and brought up in that community, rejecting the 'patriarchal society' argument. This landmark judgment links the core of reservation to social disadvantage, not lineage, and has direct implications for the interpretation of equality under Articles 14, 15, and 16 of the Constitution.

Madras HC: No Sanction Needed Under BNSS Section 218 for Disproportionate Assets Cases

The Madras High Court has ruled that no prior sanction is required under Section 197 CrPC or Section 218 BNSS to prosecute public servants for disproportionate assets, because such an offence has no nexus with official duty. The ruling, which refused to discharge former DMK Minister M.R.K. Panneerselvam and his family, clarifies a key examiner-relevant dimension of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

SC Upholds Telangana MLA Danam Nagender Disqualification Under Anti-Defection Law (Tenth Schedule)

Supreme Court upheld the disqualification of Telangana MLA Danam Nagender for defecting from BRS to Congress. The court rejected the 'ghar wapsi' argument, reinforcing that voluntarily giving up party membership under the Tenth Schedule cannot be condoned by claiming regret. This judgment reaffirms judicial review over Speaker's decisions in anti-defection cases.

SC Clarifies States Can Withdraw Cases Against Paper Leak Protesters; Grave Offenders Excluded

Supreme Court clarified that states can withdraw cases against students who protested peacefully against paper leaks, but this relief does not extend to those with criminal antecedents (grave and heinous offences). This balances the right to protest with public order concerns.