SC 9-Judge Bench Examines Article 25-26 Interplay in Sabarimala Review, Highlights 'Lakshman Rekha' for Social Reform

SC 9-Judge Bench Rules BWSSB Triple Test Not Binding for IRC 2020 Section 2(p)

The Supreme Court's 9-judge bench has held that the landmark 1978 'Triple Test' for defining 'industry' under the ID Act will not be a binding precedent for interpreting the identical provision in the new Industrial Relations Code, 2020. This could weaken worker protections just as more workers move to the private sector post-liberalisation.

CEC Removal Procedure Matches SC Judge; 2023 Act Appointment Panel Challenged Under Anoop Baranwal

Opposition demands CEC removal after leaked objections. CEC removal requires special majority in both Houses (same as SC judge), making it politically difficult. Meanwhile, the 2023 Act for appointing CEC/ECs, which replaced CJI with a Cabinet Minister, faces a split verdict in the Supreme Court. This touches Article 324, the Anoop Baranwal judgment, and independence of the Election Commission.

Seven Years After Article 370 Abrogation: J&K Statehood Delay Undermines Integration Gains

Seven years after the abrogation of Article 370, Jammu and Kashmir remains a Union Territory. While security gains and reduced separatism are notable, the delay in restoring statehood threatens to undermine the integration achievements. The article argues that withholding statehood now demoralises the electorate and breaches the Supreme Court's assurance of temporary UT status.

Nine-Judge SC Bench Set to Define 'Industry' under ID Act; NMC Proposes Single Nationwide Doctor Licence

Today's digest packs multiple high-yield facts: NMC proposes a UID-based single licence for doctors valid across India, a nine-judge Supreme Court Bench is set to pronounce its verdict on the meaning of 'industry' under the Industrial Disputes Act, and Bangladesh holds its first presidential election in 35 years. For aspirants, the NMC draft regulation and the SC verdict are direct Prelims and Mains material for healthcare policy, labour law, and constitutional interpretation.

Maharashtra Panel Recommends BNS Amendment for Social Media Defamation After 11 Years of 66A

A Maharashtra government committee has recommended amending the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) to specifically criminalize defamatory social media posts, 11 years after the Supreme Court struck down Section 66A of the IT Act. The move aims to tackle online defamation while incorporating safeguards against misuse, but faces legal scrutiny over potential conflict with free speech rights under Article 19(1)(a).

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.

Supreme Court Uses Article 142 to Quash CJP Protest FIRs; 2,873 Individuals Excluded

The Supreme Court invoked Article 142 to quash thousands of FIRs filed during CJP protests, except for 2,873 individuals with serious criminal antecedents. This controversial use of 'complete justice' powers bypasses the statutory quashing procedure under BNSS, reigniting debate on judicial overreach. For aspirants, this is a critical case study on Article 142's scope and limitations.