Landmark Supreme Court · Sentencing
Only constitutional courts can bar remission, Supreme Court rules
In Naval Kishore v. State of Punjab, the Court held that only the Supreme Court and the High Courts can impose a fixed-term or whole-life sentence that excludes remission. A Sessions Court's no-remission life term was replaced with 25 years' rigorous imprisonment without remission.
This 'special category' of sentence was recognised by the Constitution Bench in Union of India v. V. Sriharan (2015). In a separate appeal, a three-judge bench upheld a man's conviction for the rape and murder of his six-year-old stepdaughter but commuted his death sentence to life imprisonment.
- Naval Kishore & Anr. v. State of Punjab — 2026 INSC 1048 · Aravind Kumar, Vipul M. Pancholi, JJ.
- Waris v. State of Madhya Pradesh — Three-judge bench · death sentence commuted
Landmark Supreme Court · Criminal procedure
No prior sanction needed before a Magistrate orders an FIR
A Magistrate's direction under Section 156(3) CrPC to register an FIR comes before cognizance, the Court held, so sanction under Section 197 to prosecute a public servant is not needed at that stage. The investigation, which the High Court had quashed, will resume.
Section 197 shields public servants from prosecution for acts done in the discharge of official duty unless the government sanctions it, and the bar operates when a court takes cognizance. The ruling separates that bar from the earlier step of setting an investigation in motion.
- Sri Anumandala Rajesh Reddy v. State of Karnataka & Anr. — 2026 INSC 1039 · Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta, JJ.
Landmark Supreme Court · Preventive detention
Custodial confession alone cannot sustain NSA detention
A confession made in police custody cannot by itself support a preventive detention order, the Court held. The National Security Act detention of an accused in the Sambhal violence was quashed, and costs of Rs 10 lakh were imposed on Uttar Pradesh.
The ruling protects the Article 22(5) safeguard against detention built on custodial statements. The Bombay High Court likewise set aside an MPDA Act detention, holding that an assumption that the detenu would probably get bail, without material to back it, is not a valid ground.
- Mulla Afroz v. Union of India — 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 999 · Datta, Nagu, JJ.
- Aman @ Aman Ibrahim Khan v. The Commissioner of Police, Pune — Bombay HC · MPDA detention set aside
Supreme Court · Women's safety
Safety audit of Delhi-NCR public spaces ordered within four weeks
In the suo motu case on recent rape incidents in Delhi-NCR, the Court directed police to map vulnerable spots district by district, step up patrols and audit street lighting and CCTV, including at transit hubs. Status reports are due in four weeks.
The bench described the incidents as a systemic failure of policing and administration. Separately, the Delhi High Court held that a rape survivor may take part at every stage, including regular bail hearings, and set aside a bail order passed without notice to her.
- In Re: Recent Rape Incidents in Delhi NCR — 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 996 · Pardiwala, Vinod Chandran, JJ.
- Ms G v. State (NCT of Delhi) — Delhi HC · survivor to be heard on bail
Supreme Court · Labour & service law
Rs 1 lakh each for daily-wagers in 25-year-old Bihar dues case
Bihar and Jharkhand must pay each daily-wage worker Rs 1 lakh, with 12% interest on delayed provident fund and 6% on delayed wages. The Court rejected a flat Rs 42.50-a-day rate as unfair. Untraced workers get 12 months to claim.
In a separate ruling, the Court held that a senior cannot be paid less than a junior holding the same post. Two lecturers appointed on the same day in 1990 drew different pay after advance increments; the gap had no valid basis and violated the guarantee of equality.
- Bihar State Ardh Sarkari Arajpati Karamchari Maha Sangh v. State of Bihar — 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 995 · Nath, Mehta, JJ.
- Jai Prakash Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. — 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 993 · pay parity
High Courts · Criminal procedure
Re-arrest after a vitiated arrest needs a magistrate's reasoned nod
Where an accused is freed because the grounds of arrest were not supplied, police need a magistrate's reasoned permission to arrest again, a Delhi High Court Division Bench held. Re-arresting the accused merely because charges had been added was illegal.
The ruling lays down the procedure to follow after a breach of Article 22(1), which requires that an arrested person be informed of the grounds of arrest as soon as may be. Without that step, a fresh arrest cannot cure the earlier illegality.
- Manoj Chaudhary v. State (NCT of Delhi) — 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 917 · Chawla, Bhardwaj, JJ.
High Courts · Health & consumer rights
Plastic warnings stay; Centre may use patent law for costly drugs
The Madras High Court rejected FSSAI's review of its order requiring warnings about micro- and nano-plastics on packs of water, salt and sugar, holding that consumers have a right to know.
The Kerala High Court held that Section 100 of the Patents Act lets the Centre make and supply patented medicines for non-commercial government use, and said this is warranted where life-saving drugs are priced out of reach.
- Food Safety and Standards Authority of India v. G. Subramania Koushik — 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 469 · Division Bench
- In Re Exorbitant Pricing of Life Saving Patented Medicines — 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 528 · Harisankar V. Menon, J.
High Courts · Legal profession
Bar Council told to frame a minimum stipend for junior advocates
The Madhya Pradesh High Court directed the State Bar Council to frame guidelines on a minimum stipend for junior advocates within six months. It suggested Rs 20,000 a month in cities and Rs 15,000 in rural areas, for three years.
In Delhi, the High Court imposed costs of Rs 1 lakh on counsel who joined a virtual hearing from a moving car, holding that this breached the video-conferencing rules.
- Vipin Pandey v. Rani Durgavati University — 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 391 · Vishal Mishra, J.
- South Indian Bank Ltd. v. National Highways Authority of India — Delhi HC · Om Prakash Shukla, J.