Assam Woman Gets Citizenship Under CAA 2019 Using 2019 Police Report As Proof of Bangladeshi Origin

Supreme Court Rules Police Cannot Independently Investigate Sex Determination Cases Under PC&PNDT Act

The Supreme Court has ruled that police cannot independently investigate offences under the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994. Only the Appropriate Authority, a specialised body under the Act, can investigate. Police may assist but cannot take over the investigation, and any separate criminal offences (IPC/BNS) can be investigated independently. This clarifies a long-standing legal confusion and is crucial for understanding the enforcement mechanism of this social legislation.

Patna HC Rules Religious Freedom Under Article 25 Subject to Public Order and Morality

Patna High Court holds that the right to profess and practise religion under Article 25 is not absolute and can be restricted for public order, morality, and health. This reiterates the essential religious practices doctrine and clarifies that constitutional protection does not extend to every mode of exercise. A plea for 300 devotees in a religious procession in Siwan, Bihar, was dismissed citing past law-and-order incidents.

SC Quashes NEET Protest FIRs Under Article 142, Orders Compensation Policy for Suicide Victims

Supreme Court used Article 142 to quash all FIRs registered against NEET protesters across India, while ordering compensation policy for families of students who died by suicide. This judgment underscores the balance between protest rights and criminal liability, and the government's commitment to address exam leak issues.

SC Directs Govt to Frame Statutory Rules Under IT Act Barring Social Media for Minors Below 18

The Supreme Court has directed the Centre to frame statutory rules under the IT Intermediary Guidelines to enforce a minimum age of 18 for social media membership, citing inconsistencies with Indian contract and majority laws. This move directly impacts the liability of digital platforms operating in India and is crucial for understanding judicial intervention in digital regulation and child protection.

SC Questions 10-Fold Mark-Up on Cancer Drug (₹3,000 to ₹27,000) Under DPCO 2013

The Supreme Court has called the steep pricing disparity on essential medicines — especially a cancer drug sold at ₹27,000 to consumers despite being supplied to retailers for ₹3,000 — as 'carnage'. The case challenges the enforcement of the Drugs (Prices Control) Order, 2013, and raises critical questions about healthcare affordability, taxpayer burden under Ayushman Bharat, and the role of private hospitals in overcharging patients.

SC Replaces 2023 Gender Stereotype Handbook with 2026 Report on Compassionate Court Practices for Trial Judges

The Supreme Court has released a new report replacing its 2023 gender stereotype handbook, shifting focus from language to courtroom trauma. It mandates trial judges to develop an 'Emotional Quotient', control aggressive cross-examinations, and prevent secondary traumatisation of sexual assault survivors, following the Allahabad HC's controversial 'preparation vs attempt' ruling.

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 Upholds Clinical Establishments Rules 2012: Price Range Fixing Under Article 47

The Union Health Ministry defended the constitutional validity of the 2012 Clinical Establishments Rules before the Supreme Court, arguing that price regulation of healthcare services is essential to fulfill the mandate of Article 47 (DPSP). This is a key case for understanding the balance between fundamental rights (Article 19(1)(g)) and reasonable restrictions in the interest of public health.