Manupatra Academy

Explore. Learn. Upskill. All Things Law

Courses, Cases, Research, and Resources in One Place

New

Internships

Opportunities : Playbook : Videos

Learn More

Law Notes (1^st - 5^th Year)

Structured notes with flashcards to help law students grasp core subjects quickly.

Know More

Manupatra Certified Legal Research Program

Module-based learning : Legal research skills : Certification test

Learn More

Courses

Structured learning : Practice-oriented modules : Different stages of legal practice

Learn More

News and Recent Judgment Gist

News
Gist

1. Delhi High Court dismisses review plea against cash aid for EWS school uniforms

Delhi High Court dismisses review plea against cash aid for EWS school uniforms

The Delhi High Court dismissed a review petition filed by the NGO Justice For All, which had sought reconsideration of the court's January 23 judgment upholding the Delhi government's decision to provide cash to students admitted under the economically weaker section (EWS) and disadvantaged group categories in private schools to buy uniforms. A bench of Justices Subramonium Prasad and Renu Bhatnagar refused to interfere with the policy. The petitioner argued that under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, the Delhi government should provide uniforms instead of cash to EWS and disadvantaged group students in aided and unaided private schools. The Delhi government had said the Cabinet believed procuring and distributing uniforms would not be feasible because of operational constraints, and it introduced a policy on June 10, 2025, to pay students a suitable amount for uniforms. In its October 12 decision, the bench said the grounds in the review petition amounted to an attempt to argue the entire case again. It said a policy decision could not be interfered with unless it was so arbitrary, whimsical or capricious that it shocked the court's conscience. The court said the government's decision to provide cash instead of uniforms because of difficulties faced by the government could not be said to be completely arbitrary, whimsical or capricious. It added that all materials provided by the GNCTD, including the new policy dated 10.06.2025 and note for Council of Ministers, had been considered before deciding the policy was not against the mandate of the statute. On January 23, the High Court upheld the government's decision to transfer money directly to eligible students in private schools to buy uniforms. It observed that authorities would face "genuine" difficulty in processing individual uniform orders for every student. The court held that providing a uniform subsidy through Direct Benefit Transfer did not violate the Right to Education Act or its rules and would help ensure students received uniforms on time. It said it would be impossible to carry out the exercise of taking measurements of every student, placing orders for different kinds of uniform cloth on the GeM portal, after procurement getting uniforms stitched as per measurements and finally distributing uniforms in schools before commencement of a new session. The High Court therefore maintained its earlier ruling that the Delhi government's cash-transfer policy for uniforms is lawful and does not warrant judicial interference.

2. Allahabad High Court cancels bail of accused who reneged on marriage promise, summons Meerut SSP

Allahabad High Court cancels bail of accused who reneged on marriage promise, summons Meerut SSP

The Allahabad High Court has cancelled the bail of Nitish alias Siddharth alias Sethi, who is accused of obtaining bail by promising to marry the complainant and then going back on that promise. A non-bailable warrant was issued against him and Meerut SSP B.B.G.T.S. Murthy was directed to ensure compliance within 24 hours, but the accused was not produced before the High Court as ordered. The High Court then summoned the SSP, who personally brought Nitish from jail and produced him before the court; the SSP remained in court during proceedings that lasted about 45 minutes. The court has ordered action against the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut. According to the case, Manasi lodged a complaint on 17 November 2025 at Sardhana police station alleging that Nitish, a resident of Mohalla Tyagiyan in Sardhana, had harassed her on the pretext of marriage. Police arrested Nitish and sent him to jail. He moved the High Court for bail and during the hearing offered to marry Manasi; on that basis he was granted bail on 18 March. He later refused to marry her, after which Manasi again approached the High Court. The single bench of Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal passed the order on her bail cancellation application and fixed the next hearing for 8 October 2026. On the warrant, Sardhana Inspector Pratap Singh arrested Nitish but produced him before the court of the CJM, Meerut instead of the High Court; on 28 September the CJM sent him to jail although the order was to produce him before the High Court. On 8 October Manasi again appeared before the High Court but Nitish was not present, and the High Court directed the Meerut SSP to produce him by 24 October. On Saturday the SSP and Sardhana CO Ashutosh Kumar brought Nitish from jail and produced him before the single bench of Justice Deshwal; his case was listed at serial number 31 and the hearing ran from 3.15 pm to 4 pm. Manasi and the accused Nitish appeared in court, and Nitish refused before the judge himself to marry Manasi.

3. Kerala High Court says all benches equal, no bench has supervisory role over another

Kerala High Court says all benches equal, no bench has supervisory role over another

The Kerala High Court, in 2026 (Ker) 601, observed that all Judges of a High Court are equal in status and power, with the Chief Justice as primus inter pares, and that no Bench can assume a supervisory or mentorship role over another. A Division Bench of Justice Devan Ramachandran and Justice Basant Balaji made the observations while hearing a writ appeal. The appellant had challenged a Labour Court, Kollam order that extended the time for the Thiruvananthapuram Service Co-operative Bank to complete fresh disciplinary proceedings against her. The Labour Court's award dated 29 September 2023 had set aside the disciplinary enquiry and punishment imposed on the appellant and granted the Bank liberty to initiate fresh proceedings within three months. After the Bank sought more time and the Labour Court allowed it, a Single Judge dismissed Bindhu's writ petition. In an earlier intra-court appeal, a Division Bench found that the Single Judge had not considered a substantive ground against the Labour Court's order and requested reconsideration. The Single Judge dismissed the writ petition again and observed that a Division Bench could not normally remand a matter. The appellant filed the present appeal. The Court said the power of a Division Bench to order remand to, or request consideration by, a Single Bench for valid cause, especially where a germane aspect was not considered, is inherent. It noted that a Single Bench and a Division Bench exercise the same jurisdiction under Article 226, and that an intra-court appeal provides an additional level of judicial scrutiny without making the Single Judge subordinate. The Bench relied on Roma Sonker v. M.P. State PSC, (2018) 17 SCC 106, and Baddula Lakshmaiah v. Sri Anjaneya Swamy Temple, (1996) 3 SCC 52. It described all Benches as constituent parts of the same High Court acting under unified authority, with larger Benches having no supervisory or mentorship role over smaller Benches. It said a Bench cannot assume superiority by advising, counselling or criticising another Bench, as this strikes at judicial propriety, and observed that judicial strength flows from discipline, not dominion, relying on Rohan Vijay Nahar v. State of Maharashtra (2026).

4. Congress cites Justice Kaul memoir to question judicial independence under Modi government

Congress general secretary in-charge communications Jairam Ramesh on Sunday (October 25, 2026) cited former Supreme Court judge Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul's yet-to-be-released memoir 'Without Fear of

Congress cites Justice Kaul memoir to question judicial independence under Modi government

Congress general secretary in-charge communications Jairam Ramesh on Sunday (October 25, 2026) cited former Supreme Court judge Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul's yet-to-be-released memoir 'Without Fear of Favour' to flag "serious questions" regarding the independence of the judiciary under the Modi government. Ramesh shared a media report which quoted the pre-publication manuscript of the memoir as stating that former Chief Justice of India Justice D.Y. Chandrachud was "too deferential to the Government" when it came to appointments. In a post in Hindi on X, Ramesh said the book raised serious questions regarding the independence of the judiciary during the Modi government's tenure. He said Justice Kaul highlighted several concerning incidents, including government interference in the appointment of judges, attempts to secure government approval prior to Collegium meetings, and the government's absurd questioning regarding the caste of a judge belonging to a minority community. Ramesh said matters that many were previously hesitant to discuss openly have now been documented by Justice Kaul with measured, deliberate language. He noted that a former Chief Justice of India has not denied that discussions with the government take place prior to judicial appointments. He said that when former CJI Justice Chandrachud acknowledges that the government engages with the CJI and plays a role in the appointment process, the concerns surrounding judicial independence become even more profound. Ramesh also described as equally grave Justice Kaul's revelation that, after a Bench he presided over raised the possibility of reconsidering certain aspects of a court ruling in a PMLA case, the matter was reassigned to a different bench without any consultation with him. He said this points to the extent of the government's day-to-day interference in the functioning of the Supreme Court. Ramesh asked that when there is pressure to obtain government approval for judicial appointments, and when benches hearing sensitive cases are altered, one must ask in the interest of safeguarding democracy if this does not constitute pressure on the judiciary and an erosion of its independence, then what does. He asserted that the institution tasked with upholding the Constitution must remain free from the pressures of those in power, and that in a democracy, the independence of the judiciary is not merely an option but an absolute necessity.

5. Former SC judge Sanjay Kaul says collegium is not insulated from political pressure and flags NJAC resentment

Former SC judge Sanjay Kaul says collegium is not insulated from political pressure and flags NJAC resentment

Former Supreme Court judge Sanjay Kishan Kaul writes in his forthcoming memoir Without Fear or Favour, to be published by Juggernaut Books later this month, that it is fantasy to imagine the collegium is isolated from political pressures. He traces the dynamic to the political establishment’s inability to reconcile itself to the Supreme Court’s October 2015 decision striking down the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC), and says the government’s lingering resentment over that ruling has shaped its dealings with the judiciary since. Kaul says the problem is not consultation between the judiciary and the executive, which he considers inevitable, but what he calls pre-approval — seeking the government’s nod before the collegium had formally deliberated on a candidate. He writes that any political class will assert itself if given a wedge in the door. The NJAC, created through a constitutional amendment and a companion law passed with overwhelming parliamentary support, would have included the Union law minister and two eminent persons alongside three senior judges, and any two members could have blocked a proposed appointment. A five-judge Constitution bench struck down the arrangement by a 4:1 majority and restored the collegium system, which resulted from Supreme Court rulings in the 1990s giving the judiciary primacy in recommendations for appointments to constitutional courts. Kaul believes the NJAC should have been allowed to function before being rejected outright, while drawing a distinction between disagreeing with a constitutional ruling and disregarding it; he writes that once the Supreme Court has ruled on a constitutional question, that law must stand as declared and the political branches must follow the system in letter and spirit. His account of friction with former Chief Justice of India Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud is rooted in that distinction. Kaul, who joined the Supreme Court collegium in June 2022 and retired in December 2023, says he repeatedly argued that the court needed to engage the government firmly but collectively, and he believed the chief justice was too deferential on appointments and preferred to manage the relationship with the executive himself. Kaul acknowledges that the collegium is deeply imperfect, with opacity, excessive concentration of power and informal channels leaving the process vulnerable to pressure. The supplied excerpt also begins an account of a candidate from a minority faith whose elevation was questioned by the government, but it cuts off before completing the point.

1. Gir Vanvaso Resort vs. Pancard Clubs Limited (22.07.2026 - SC)(MANU/SC/1207/2026)

The Supreme Court of India addressed the dispute between Gir Vanvaso Resort and Pancard Clubs Limited, focusing on the ownership and possession of a resort under Corporate Insolvency Resolution Proces

2. Anumandala Rajesh Reddy vs. State of Karnataka and Ors. (24.08.2026 - SC)(MANU/SC/1206/2026)

The Supreme Court of India addressed the appeals by Anumandala Rajesh Reddy against the State of Karnataka and others, focusing on whether the High Court erred in quashing proceedings initiated by Red

3. Indroneel Goho vs. Razouvonuo Thong and Ors. (29.09.2026 - SC)(MANU/SC/1203/2026)

The Supreme Court of India addressed the appeal by Indroneel Goho against Razouvonuo Thong and others, focusing on whether the criminal proceedings for cheating under Sections 417 and 420 of the IPC s

4. Zaki Ullah Khan vs. State of U.P. and Ors. (15.07.2026 - SC)(MANU/SC/1202/2026)

The Supreme Court of India addressed whether the deed granting fishing rights to Zaki Ullah Khan constituted a lease of immovable property, thus requiring registration and stamp duty. The Collector of

5. Rasilaben and Ors. vs. Dinesh Deumal Harani and Ors. (21.07.2026 - SC)(MANU/SC/1201/2026)

The Supreme Court of India addressed whether Rasilaben and others should be impleaded as necessary parties in a suit filed by Dinesh Deumal Harani, who sought a declaration of his status as a tenant o

View More Gist.. View More News..

Law Students Hub

Notes : Flashcards : Landmark Cases & more…

Learn More

New

Legal Glossary

Complex terms decoded : Easy explanations

Learn More

On-demand Courses

Recorded classes : Comprehensive reading material :Quiz

Learn More

Self-Paced Certification

Courses to upskill or reskill

Learn More

Webinars

Recordings of experts views :Diverse topics

Learn More

Law Teachers Hub

Readings : Resources for legal educators

Learn More

Legal Posts

Explainers : Blogs : Articles : Case Analysis

Learn More

Survey Reports

AI Adoption : Technology in law

Learn More

Illustrated Cases

Legal Design : Supreme Court Cases : Multilingual Exploration

Learn More

New

Case Infographics

Quickly understand key facts, court decisions, and legal principles through easy-to-follow infographics.

Know More

Our Partners

Why Join Manupatra Academy

Brought to you by Manupatra the leaders in legal tech domain.

Curated Resources: A vast repository of meticulously compiled resources tailored for educators and learners.
Diverse Courses: An array of courses designed to cater to various levels of expertise, from beginners to advanced.
User-Friendly Interface: Accessible on any device, our intuitive interface ensures seamless navigation.

What Our Learners Say

User-Friendly Interface: Accessible on any device, our intuitive interface ensures seamless navigation.

Certification Courses 3-Day Civil Drafting Workshop

It was extremely beneficial and practical… really helped me understand the nuances of civil drafting and boosted my confidence in preparing real pleadings.

Certification Courses 3-Day Civil Drafting Workshop

The sessions were so insightful and well-structured… the faculty explained every concept with patience and clarity, which made learning much easier.

Certification Courses 3-Day Civil Drafting Workshop

Honestly, it was a great learning experience… the course covered everything from plaints to petitions in such a smooth and engaging way.

Certification Courses 3-Day Civil Drafting Workshop

The workshop was very hands-on and practical… I really liked the live feedback and the real examples shared during drafting exercises.

Certification Courses 3-Day Civil Drafting Workshop

Very well conducted and informative… I just wish it could’ve been a bit longer because the sessions were that helpful.

Certification Courses Mastering Microsoft Word for Legal Work

The session was honestly eye-opening! I never realized how much time I was wasting on formatting until now.

Certification Courses Mastering Microsoft Word for Legal Work

Really practical and focused on what lawyers actually need… I can already see how it’ll save hours in my daily work.

Certification Courses Mastering Microsoft Word for Legal Work

The trainer made even the technical tools so easy to understand… and I loved how they used real pleading examples.

Certification Courses Mastering Microsoft Word for Legal Work

Very relevant for lawyers and interns alike… it bridges the tech gap we all face while working on documents.

Certification Courses Mastering Microsoft Word for Legal Work

A concise and super useful masterclass… I now feel confident managing citations, templates, and formatting with ease.