Constitutional law

The Supreme Court in Kranti Associates (P) Ltd. v. Masood Ahmed Khan [(2010) 9 SCC 496] laid down the most comprehensive and authoritative summary of the law on recording of reasons by administrative and quasi-judicial authorities. In para 51 of the judgment, the Court distilled the entire line of precedent into eleven guiding principles on why reasons must be recorded.

The Sabarimala case represents one of the most significant "clashes of values" in Indian constitutional history. It pits the Right to Equality against the Right to Religious Freedom, forcing the Supreme Court to decide where the State's power to regulate religion ends and the individual's right to worship begins.

The Supreme Court of India, while considering an SLP in Gummadi Usha Rani & Anr. v. Sure Mallikarjuna Rao & Anr, expressed serious displeasure over a trial court’s reliance on non-existent, allegedly Artificial Intelligence (AI)-generated case law. The Court added that such misconduct strikes at the very integrity of the adjudicatory process and cannot be brushed aside as a mere error of law.

Whenever there is a conflict between the lawyer’s duty to the court and their duty to the client, he has to give preference to his duty to the court over his duty to the client, the Supreme Court observed In Re: Peddi Raju and Others [Suo Moto Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 3 of 2025].

In Vineeta Srinandan v. High Court of Judicature At Bombay On Its Own Motion [2025 INSC 1408], the Supreme Court reiterated that the power to punish for contempt is not a tool to silence critics or shield judges from scrutiny. It declared that contempt jurisdiction must never become a personal armour for the judiciary.

In Fathima Thasneem v. State of Kerala [2018: KER:65441], the Kerala High Court held that the collective right of an educational institution to enforce a uniform dress code for discipline and equality overrides a student's individual right to wear religious attire, such as a hijab (headscarf) and full-sleeved shirts.

In C. Selvarani vs. The Special Secretary Cum District Collector and Ors., the Supreme Court of India held that a person who converts to a religion with the sole intent of claiming reservation benefits is committing a fraud on the Constitution. Religious conversions undertaken for the purpose of gaining benefits of reservation compromise the integrity of the reservation system.

The distinction between reportable and non-reportable judicial decisions is based on their precedential value and legal significance.

The conflict between the right of media to report criminal proceedings by pronouncing innocence or guilt of the parties, and its impact on the individual’s right to dignity, reputation and privacy, under the constitution was examined by a Five Judge Bench of the High Court of Kerala, in Dejo Kappan v Deccan Herald & Others [2024:KER:82715].

The Record of the Trial Court should not be referred to as Lower Court Record (LCR). Instead, it should be referred as the Trial Court Record (TCR), says the Supreme Court (SC) in Sakhawat & Another v State of Uttar Pradesh [2025 INSC 777].