SIR Judgment Live Updates: Supreme Court to deliver verdict

2 min readBengaluruJun 2, 2026 05:27 PM IST

Karnataka High Court Justice R Nataraj said, "Law has lost its teeth because we don't deal with offenders firmly". (File Photo)The Karnataka High Court observed that people are committing crimes casually and in a routine manner while issuing a notice last month on a bail petition of an engineering student allegedly involved in a sexual assault case. During the hearing on May 29, Justice R Nataraj orally said, “If you chop a leg or hand, perhaps only then people will realise how to comply with the law. Because we have a democracy, everybody takes it (for granted).” “Law has lost its teeth because we don’t deal with offenders firmly. That is why committing an offence has become so easy, unlike in the Middle East,” Justice Nataraj added.

While seeking bail, the petitioner’s counsel argued that his client had not committed any crime and had been in jail for 2 months, which would harm his professional life.

To which, the bench orally said, “Let him be in prison for a few more days… If convicted by the trial court, he may have to go back to jail”.

The bench issued notice to the respondents and posted the matter for further hearing on June 8.

The victim, a classmate, stated in her complaint that the petitioner allegedly expressed his love for her in July 2023, which she accepted. On September 12, 2023, the accused persuaded her to accompany him to his apartment, claiming he wanted to convince her to reconcile with him and allegedly sexually assaulted her.Story continues below this ad Traumatised by the sexual assault, the complainant allegedly fell into depression and underwent treatment at a hospital in Manipal. She later moved to Bengaluru, where she filed a complaint with the National Commission for Women (NCW). After the case was referred to the police, the accused appeared before them on March 20, 2026, and gave his statement. He was allowed to go home. However, on April 4, the woman filed a police complaint again, alleging rape and following which he was taken into custody.

2 min readBengaluruJun 2, 2026 05:27 PM IST

While seeking bail, the petitioner’s counsel argued that his client had not committed any crime and had been in jail for 2 months, which would harm his professional life.

To which, the bench orally said, “Let him be in prison for a few more days… If convicted by the trial court, he may have to go back to jail”.

The bench issued notice to the respondents and posted the matter for further hearing on June 8.

Centre notifies appointment of five Supreme Court judges | India News Hindustan Times

From Appearing For Cases To Heading Supreme Court Bench, Who Is V Mohana? NDTV

3 min readNew DelhiMay 30, 2026 05:16 AM IST

The verdict comes after over a decade since the first petition was moved in 2013, and the last petition in 2021.

THE Delhi High Court on Friday upheld the 2012-2013 regulation over broadcast and cable services that fixes 12 minutes of ads per hour, with a 10-minute cap on commercial advertisements and a 2-minute cap for self-promotional ads. A division bench of Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Amit Mahajan disposed of 17 petitions, filed by entertainment channels, news broadcasters, regional channels among others, challenging the regulation by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) as being violative of Article 14 (right to equality) and Article 19 (right to free speech). The regulation was brought in in 2012 and amended in 2013.The verdict comes after over a decade since the first petition was moved in 2013, and the last petition in 2021. The broadcasters had pointed out that their primary revenue source is advertising and the time ceiling interferes with it, undermines the broadcasters’ economic viability and impacts their right to commercial speech. The Centre, on the other hand, had argued that since advertisements is a major source of revenue for broadcasters, they deliberately lengthen the duration of commercial breaks, thus reducing the quality of viewing experience. It was also argued that the broadcasters do not have unfettered right to access or use airwaves which is scarce public property. The bench, recording the well-settled position of law that spectrum and airwaves constitute scarce, finite public resources which vest in the people, and are held by the State in a fiduciary capacity as trustee, reasoned that “broadcasters cannot claim an unfettered right to exploit spectrum for commercial purposes,” and thus the state can regulate the manner and extent of such usage. “The measures taken by TRAI to impose a temporal limit on advertisements, in order to ensure that no material resource is exploited for excessive commercial gain by broadcasters, bear a proximate and rational nexus to the constitutional mandate of ensuring that material resources of the community are distributed and utilised so as to subserve the common good,” the court held.Story continues below this ad The bench reasoned, “Once broadcasters avail themselves of the privilege of utilising public spectrum under statutory licence, they cannot disclaim the corresponding obligation to adhere to conditions designed to regulate its use in the public interest. The imposition of a temporal ceiling on advertisements is one such condition, directed not at suppressing expression, but at structuring the use of a public resource in a manner consistent with viewer welfare.”

Sohini Ghosh is a Senior Correspondent at The Indian Express. Previously based in Ahmedabad covering Gujarat, she recently moved to the New Delhi bureau, where she primarily covers legal developments at the Delhi High Court

Professional Profile

Background: An alumna of the Asian College of Journalism (ACJ), she previously worked with ET NOW before joining The Indian Express.

Core Beats: Her reporting is currently centered on the Delhi High Court, with a focus on high-profile constitutional disputes, disputes over intellectual property, criminal and civil cases, issues of human rights and regulatory law (especially in the areas of technology and healthcare).

Earlier Specialty: In Gujarat, she was known for her rigorous coverage in the beats of crime, law and policy, and social justice issues, including the 2002 riot cases, 2008 serial bomb blast case, 2016 flogging of Dalits in Una, among others.

She has extensively covered health in the state, including being part of the team that revealed the segregation of wards at the state’s largest government hospital on lines of faith in April 2020.

With Ahmedabad being a UNESCO heritage city, she has widely covered urban development and heritage issues, including the redevelopment of the Sabarma

2 min readMumbaiMay 29, 2026 09:55 PM IST

The FIR was lodged based on a complaint by the trust, which manages the Lilavati Hospital in Bandra (West). (File Photo)The Supreme Court on Friday issued notice on an appeal by the Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust, challenging a Bombay High Court verdict that quashed and set aside the “non-bonafide” Rs 2 crore bribery FIR registered against HDFC Bank Managing Director and CEO Sashidhar Jagdishan. The FIR was lodged based on a complaint by the trust, which manages the Lilavati Hospital in Bandra (West). An SC bench of Justices M. M. Sundresh and N. Kotiswar Singh issued notice to Jagdishan seeking his response during the next hearing.On May 5, the Bombay HC had granted major relief to Jagdishan by quashing the FIR and proceedings arising out of it based on a complaint lodged by the trust through its authorised representative and trustee, Prashant Kishor Mehta. The complaint had claimed Jagdishan accepted a Rs 2.05 crore bribe to assist a group comprising Chetan Mehta and other former trustees in maintaining alleged illegal control over the trust. A special bench of Justices Makarand S. Karnik and Nitin R. Borkar of the HC had observed that the complaint was the “fallout of recovery proceedings initiated by petitioners-financial institutions against the Lilavati trust” and there is “serious acrimony, distrust, and strained relations to the core between the erstwhile trustees and present trustees.” The HC had also rejected the plea to transfer the investigation to the CBI. Aggrieved by the HC verdict, the trust approached the SC earlier this month, arguing that the HC “erroneously passed the impugned order in contravention of settled legal provisions, and it deserves to be set aside.” Jagdishan argued that the bank and its CEO were being drawn into an internal dispute within the trust and allegations against him lacked substantive material, as held by the High Court. The trust responded that irrespective of larger disputes related to the trust, a probe was required in case an individual personally benefited from its funds.

3 min readKolkataMay 29, 2026 01:16 AM IST

After hearing the argument, the Magistrate ordered judicial custody of both Pappu and Biswas, and reserved the order for the Grade One status for the former DCP.

A vacation court in Kolkata on Thursday rejected the bail plea of history-sheeter and real estate developer Biswajit Poddar alias Sona Pappu and sent him and former Deputy Commissioner of Police Santanu Sinha Biswas to judicial custody till June 1 in connection with extortion and land-grabbing cases. The two were produced by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) at the Bankshall court after their 14-day custody ended on Thursday.During the hearing, Pappu’s counsel moved a bail plea, citing his “medical condition”. The counsel of Biswas, on the other hand, sought Grade One status for him in jail custody, citing that there was a threat to his life in jail as he was a police officer. “Grade One” status typically refers to a Division I prisoner classification, which entitles the inmate to better food, clothing, and living conditions. “One of the accused was a police officer who dealt with sensitive and high-profile cases. So there is a threat to his life if he is sent to jail custody. He has been an IO (Investigating Officer) in several cases over a period of time, and those convicts or undertrials are in jail. There can be an untoward incident,” the counsel of Biswas told the court. Citing his age – Biswas is 62 years old – the counsel said that his client was suffering from various ailments. “He is not a habitual offender, and he has not been convicted. By his social status, which comes by education, family; and he is the son of a former MP, there is danger to my client’s life,” the counsel of Biswas added.Story continues below this ad The ED opposed Pappu’s bail plea and urged the court to keep the matter for Monday for the regular bench hearing. “We pray for judicial custody for both.

They have placed an application for Grade One status for Santanu Sinha Biswas, but he is not undertrial as we have not filed a prosecution complaint. Also, we need time to verify whether the submission they have made that there are convicts or undertrials of cases investigated by Biswas are lodged in that particular jail. We leave it up to the court to see whether he is a Grade One prisoner or not,” the ED’s counsel submitted. After hearing the argument, the Magistrate ordered judicial custody of both Pappu and Biswas, and reserved the order for the Grade One status for the former DCP. The Enforcement Directorate is probing a money laundering case involving Sona Pappu. On May 18, the ED had arrested Pappu following raids at his residence and multiple locations linked to him, and reportedly seized over Rs 2 crore in cash, property documents and a handgun. The ED has alleged that Sona Pappu used intimidation tactics to acquire others’ land and property at throwaway prices. The ED further claimed that Pappu operated on behalf of Jay Kamdar, a businessman from Behala, and Biswas, the Kolkata police officer, playing a pivotal role in this land syndicate.

Tanusree Bose is a dedicated journalist reporting for The Indian Express from Kolkata. Her work focuses sharply on the complex administrative, political, and judicial developments across West Bengal, establishing her as an authoritative voice in regional news coverage.

Experience

Current Role: Reports for the prestigious national daily, The Indian Express, providing her content with a high level of Trustworthiness.

Geographical Expertise: Provides focused, in-depth coverage of West Bengal, demonstrating an intimate knowledge of the state's news and political nuances.

Core Authority: Her reporting portfolio highlights deep Expertise in crucial, often sensitive, beats, including:

State Politics and Governance: Covering the ruling Trinamool Congress (TMC), opposition strategies (BJP), and internal political controversies.

Judicial and Administrative Affairs: Closely mo

AS THE Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that the Election Commission’s SIR of electoral rolls was constitutional, the Opposition parties, led by the Congress, said the verdict raised many questions. The petitioners who had challenged the exercise in court said the judgment had put a stamp of approval on the disenfranchisement of millions of electors in a “hurried” and “discriminatory” drive.Congress leader Abhishek Manu Singhvi, who is the chairman of All India Congress Committee Law, Human Rights and RTI Department, said the Supreme Court has given a judgment principally on the legal and constitutional validity of the SIR process but the challenge mounted by the Opposition was to “its operational reality… the lack of justice in the process, leading to a substantial denial”.Singhvi raised several shortcomings on the part of the EC in conducting the exercise and said it was unfortunate that the Supreme Court made no comments on them.

“The SIR is always a matter of substance, never merely a matter of form. The issue was never about the power to conduct SIR. What was being questioned was the mode, manner, timing, and style in which it was being carried out,” he said. “How were 7.5 crore people in several states of the country removed before a decision on their citizenship was even made? How was the right to vote of these millions of people stripped away by an institution that doesn’t even have that authority,” he asked. Congress communications in-charge Jairam Ramesh alleged the Prime Minister Narendra Modi-led government was facing “an unprecedented wave of anger and outrage for its complete and utter failures of governance” and, “unable to face the electorate in a fair contest”, it had “opted to manipulate the lists of who can and cannot vote to skew the balance in its favour”.

“Broadly speaking, this is what the SIR is for. It may have legal sanction but look at how it has been implemented. The story is the same in Bengal or Bihar. Voters are selectively deleted en masse and then made to face an appeals process that is arbitrary and ultimately meaningless” he said in a post on X.Story continues below this ad Reiterating its earlier stand on SIR, the AAP demanded a level-playing field and complete transparency in the exercise. A senior AAP leader from Punjab, where the SIR exercise is scheduled to take place ahead of the Assembly polls next year, said democracy could not survive if Constitutional bodies such as the EC acted in “a partisan manner”. “The BJP wants to capture power in Punjab by manipulating voter lists and simultaneously weaken Punjab’s rights and institutions…,” the leader alleged. Samajwadi Party MP and spokesperson Rajeev Rai said the SC judgment on SIR was “disappointing” for those who trust in democracy and the electoral process. “People look at the Supreme Court with hopes. SC’s silence on lots of people deprived (of voting rights) is an unfortunate situation,” he said. Major General Anil Verma (retd), the head of the Association of Democratic Reforms (ADR), the first petitioner to challenge the SIR, said the judgment was “disappointing”.Story continues below this ad

Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra, who was among the petitioners against the EC’s June 24, 2025 SIR order, said in a post on X: “SC’s Bihar SIR decision today puts a stamp of approval on ECI’s illogical, hurried & discriminatory practices that ultimately led to 27 lakh valid voters unable to vote after Bengal SIR & whose fate is still in limbo. Justice must be done & must also be seen to be done.” The EC had started the SIR with Bihar in July last year, following it up with the implementation in nine other states, including West Bengal, and three Union Territories from November 2025. Earlier this month, the Poll panel announced the SIR schedule for 22 states/UTs. Another petitioner, Swaraj India president Yogendra Yadav, said on X that he felt the case had been decided in August last year itself. “The case was effectively decided when the ap

4 min readChandigarhUpdated: May 27, 2026 08:55 PM IST

During the contempt proceedings, the petitioners alleged that despite clear directions, the university authorities imposed an additional condition that employees would become eligible for minimum pay scale only after completing 10 years of service. (File Photo)

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Vice-Chancellor Karamjeet Singh and Registrar Karamjit Singh Chahal guilty of contempt of court for “willfully disobeying” judicial directions relating to grant of minimum pay scale benefits to daily wage employees. A bench of Justice Pankaj Jain ordered both the officials to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. The court, however, suspended the operation of the sentence till July 7, 2027, to enable the respondents to file an appeal.The contempt petitions were filed by Parveen Kumar and some other employees of the GNDU, through Senior Advocate Puneet Jindal, alleging non-compliance of earlier writ court directions granting benefits of minimum pay scale, dearness allowance and grade pay to eligible daily wage workers. The court noted that the original writ petitions had been disposed of relying upon the Supreme Court judgment in State of Punjab versus Jagjit Singh and the court had held that employees serving for long periods were entitled to minimum pay scale benefits and, in certain cases, regularisation.

Justice Jain also referred to findings recorded in a 2024 order, wherein it was observed that employees who had completed 10 years of service by the end of December 2006 were entitled to regularisation and could not be denied the benefit on the ground of lack of sanctioned posts or minimum educational qualification. That order further held that employees who had not completed 10 years but continued in service would still be entitled to minimum pay scale plus dearness allowance and grade pay from the date they completed 10 years of service till regularisation. Quoting from earlier judgments, Justice Jain reiterated that “daily wage workers who work at par with regular employees though cannot claim pay parity with regular employees yet are entitled to minimum pay. The minimum pay includes dearness allowance and grade pay”. The court further reproduced findings from earlier rulings stating, “The petitioners are working for last 30-40 years and are not part timer whereas they are daily wager and work at par with regular employees…”Story continues below this ad During the contempt proceedings, the petitioners alleged that despite clear directions, the university authorities imposed an additional condition that employees would become eligible for minimum pay scale only after completing 10 years of service.

Referring to a March 25, 2025 order, Justice Jain observed, “It is apparent that an effort is being made to misinterpret the order passed by the Writ Court as well as the settled law as recorded in the decision rendered by the Apex Court in State of Punjab versus Jagjit Singh, 2017 (1) SCC 148, where no such condition of completion of 10 years of service for making an individual eligible for minimum of pay scale has been prescribed.” The court had earlier framed charges against the Registrar under Sections 10 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, observing that the authorities were “depriving the petitioners of their entitlement” under the order passed by the Writ Court “by circumventing its operation and intent.” On May 27, after considering affidavits filed by the respondents, Justice Jain concluded, “Keeping in view their incorrigible attitude, they are held guilty of willfully disobeying the orders passed by this court and consequently are held guilty of committing contempt of court.”Story continues below this ad The court then ordered, “Accordingly, both the respondents are sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month. However, the operation of the sentence shall remain suspended till July 7, 2027 to

The petitioners had contended that while there is no dispute that citizenship is a prerequisite for voting, the core question was whether the ECI can determine citizenship at all.Supreme Court SIR Judgment LIVE: The Supreme Court on Wednesday will pronounce judgment on petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls carried out by the Election Commission of India (ECI). Reserved: Earlier this year, a bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi had reserved its decision in the matter. The pleas claimed that the Election Commission does not have the power to carry out SIR on such a large scale.Story continues below this ad The court, while refusing the stay on the SIR process, had, however, said that it would examine whether ECI had the powers to do the special revision.

Live Blog

SIR Judgment Live Updates: Supreme Court to deliver verdict The Indian Express

SIR Judgment Live Updates: Supreme Court to deliver verdict

People will obey laws if hands and legs are chopped, says Karnataka High Court

People will obey laws if hands and legs are chopped, says Karnataka High Court

Discussion (0)

Centre notifies appointment of five Supreme Court judges | India News

From Appearing For Cases To Heading Supreme Court Bench, Who Is V Mohana?

Delhi High Court upholds TRAI regulation fixing 12 minutes of ads per hour

Supreme Court seeks HDFC CEOs response to Lilavati Trust’s challenge of order quashing FIR against him

Court reserves order on former Bengal DCP’s plea for Grade 1 status in jail

Supreme Court verdict on SIR raises more questions than it answers: Opposition

High Court sends GNDU V-C, Registrar guilty of contempt, awards 1-month jail

SIR Judgment Live Updates: Supreme Court to deliver verdict

People will obey laws if hands and legs are chopped, says Karnataka High Court

More in general

Top 10 medical universities in Georgia for international students in 2026

India increased LNG imports by 28% in June

Suriyas Vishwanath and Sons cant surpass Karuppu after 5 days, earns Rs 128.60 cr worldwide

People will obey laws if hands and legs are chopped, says Karnataka High Court

Discussion (0)

Centre notifies appointment of five Supreme Court judges | India News

From Appearing For Cases To Heading Supreme Court Bench, Who Is V Mohana?

Delhi High Court upholds TRAI regulation fixing 12 minutes of ads per hour

Supreme Court seeks HDFC CEOs response to Lilavati Trust’s challenge of order quashing FIR against him

Court reserves order on former Bengal DCP’s plea for Grade 1 status in jail

Supreme Court verdict on SIR raises more questions than it answers: Opposition

High Court sends GNDU V-C, Registrar guilty of contempt, awards 1-month jail

More in general

Top 10 medical universities in Georgia for international students in 2026

India increased LNG imports by 28% in June

Suriyas Vishwanath and Sons cant surpass Karuppu after 5 days, earns Rs 128.60 cr worldwide