India’s courts didn’t rest this week.
From the Supreme Court limiting moral turpitude as a disqualification ground, to Delhi High Court upholding India’s first platform-wide app ban under the IT Act —June 15–21, 2026 was a week worth documenting.
This edition covers SC judgements, HC orders, legal news, and policy updates — explained for judiciary aspirants, law students, and legal professionals.
LEGAL NEWS UPDATE
- CENTRE RE-APPOINTS TUSHAR MEHTA AS SOLICITOR GENERAL FOR THREE YEAR AND TENURE OF ASGs ALSO EXTENDED
- Senior Advocate Tushar Mehta has been re-appointed a Solicitor General for three years. His terms as Solicitor General have been extended for three years or until further orders, whichever is earlier. As per an order issued by the Department of Personnel and Training, Tushar Mehta’s term will take effect from July 1, 2026.
- The Appointment Committee for Cabinet has also approved the re-appointment of five Additional Solicitors General for India in the Supreme Court, namely Senior Advocates Vikramjit Bnaerjee and KM Nataraj, re-appointment will take effect from July 1, 2026 and for Senior Advocates Suryaprakash V Raju, N Venkataraman and Aishwarya Bhati will take effect from June 30, 2026.
- The ACC has also re-appointed Senior Advocate Chetan Sharma as ASG for Delhi High Court, his terms are extended for six months taking effect from July 1, 2026.
2. MADHYA PRADESH STATE LEGAL SERVICE AUTHORITY ORGANISED ‘ANUGOONJ’.
- MPSLSA organised a one-day statewide literacy and outreach programme titled ‘Anugoonj’ for the hearing and speech-impaired community at MPSLSA Auditorium in Jabalpur on 13th June 2026.
- This first-of-its kind initiative was simultaneously conducted across all district of Madhya Pradesh through their respective District Legal Service Authorities and conducted under the theme ‘Access to Justice for All’.
- The ceremony commenced with the lighting of lamp by Chief Justice of Madhya Pradesh High Court- Vivek Rusia and in his inaugural speech he observed than an inclusive justice system must recognise and respond to the unique needs of vulnerable sections of society and highlighted the importance of legal awareness through innovation in empowering hearing and speech-impaired community.
- During the Program a video representation on ‘Sanket Vaani’ was showcased, which is a digital innovation aimed at providing access to legal aid to the community.
3. BENGAL GOVERNMENT CLARIFIED THE HIGH COURT THAT TAKING PART IN YOGA DAY IS NOT MANDATORY FOR GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES
- Following the writ petition in the Calcutta High Court challenging the notification issued by the West Bengal government asking employees to participate in the official event of International Yoga Day.
- The Court dismissed the petition after the State Government clarified that the order is not mandatory in nature and no punitive action is contemplated in case of failure to attend due to personal reasons.
4. UCC BILL TO BE TABLED IN MONSOON SESSION OF M.P. ASSEMBLY IN JULY SAYS MP CM
- Madhya Pradesh CM Mohan Yadav said that the Bill on Uniform Civil Code would be introduced in the monsoon session of the Legislative Assembly commencing on July 20, 2026 to July 24, 2026 and hoped to be passed in the session itself.
- Further a six-member high-level committee formed by the state government and headed by retired Supreme Court Judge Justice Ranjana Prasad Desai, is currently working on a draft bill along with a detailed report of its finding to be submitted to state government within 60 days.
- Moreover, the CM, earlier this month invited the public to share their suggestions regarding the UCC on government portal launched recently.
- Other than Madhya Pradesh, Uttarakhand and Gujarat has already implemented UCC whereas Assam has passed UCC bill in may this year.
5. DELHI GETS ITS FIRST ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION:
- The Lieutenant-Governor of Delhi, Taranjeet Singh Sandhu opened Delhi’s first police station in Subzi Mandi dedicated exclusively for criminal offences against women, including dowry harassment, POCSO cases, domestic violence etc.
- The police station has sanctioned strength of 57 personnel where 60% of the personnel are women, who are undergone special training to handle sensitive cases and further training will be imparted to inculcate soft-skills to strengthen victim centric investigation.
- Further, other than investigation, the police stations will conduct awareness programmes and community outreach initiatives to promote awareness of women’s rights and legal remedies.
POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND CHANGES
1. India Hosts 11th BRICS Energy Ministers’ Meeting — Multilateral Energy Policy Agenda
Date: 21 June 2026 (Announcement); Meeting scheduled for 25–26 June 2026, Gurugram, Haryana
Issuing Authority: Ministry of Power, Government of India
Background:
India, holding the BRICS Chairship for 2026 — its fourth tenure after 2012, 2016, and 2021 — announced the hosting of the 11th BRICS Energy Ministers’ Meeting. The meeting is scheduled for 25–26 June 2026 in Gurugram, Haryana, preceded by the Fourth Meeting of BRICS Senior Energy Officials from 22–24 June. BRICS currently comprises eleven member nations: Brazil, China, Egypt, Ethiopia, India, Indonesia, Iran, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, and the UAE, which collectively represent approximately 40% of global GDP and nearly half of the world’s population.
Key Observations:
• India’s 2026 BRICS Chairship is anchored in the theme “Building for Resilience, Innovation, Cooperation and Sustainability (BRICS).” Within the Energy Track, the adopted theme is “सर्वेषां ऊर्जम्” (Energy for All).
• The BRICS Energy Agenda is structured around three priorities: Energy Security and Sustainability; Energy Access and Equity; and Technology and Innovation.
• India highlighted major domestic milestones: a 50-fold expansion in solar capacity over the past decade, deployment of 60 million smart meters, a target of 410 GWh of energy storage capacity by 2032, achievement of 20% ethanol blending, and rollout of E85 fuel.
• Two preparatory virtual seminars were convened on AI in the Energy Sector and Carbon Capture, Utilisation and Storage (CCUS) Technologies.
• A BRICS Youth Energy Summit is also scheduled for 17–18 August 2026 in virtual mode.
Legal Significance:
This development is significant in the context of India’s international energy law and treaty-making obligations. The outcomes of BRICS Energy Ministers’ Meetings form the basis for bilateral and multilateral agreements on cross-border energy infrastructure, green hydrogen grids, and supply-chain diversification. These commitments interact with India’s domestic energy regulatory framework, including the Electricity Act, 2003 and the National Electricity Policy. The meeting also reinforces India’s obligations under the Paris Agreement and provides a platform to advance the Global South’s energy interests.
2. India–Slovakia Comprehensive Partnership — Joint Statement and MoU Framework
Date: 15 June 2026, Bratislava, Slovak Republic
Issuing Authority: Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India
Background:
Prime Minister Narendra Modi paid a State Visit to Slovakia on 15 June 2026 — the first-ever visit by an Indian Prime Minister to Slovakia since its independence in 1993. The visit culminated in a comprehensive 28-point Joint Statement that elevated bilateral relations to a Comprehensive Partnership and was accompanied by multiple Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs) covering defence, digital technologies, education, audio-visual creation, and labour migration.
Key Observations:
• Slovakia formally extended support for India’s permanent membership in a reformed and expanded UN Security Council; it also reaffirmed a constructive approach to India’s membership of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG).
• A Letter of Intent on Defence Cooperation was signed, covering defence technologies, R&D, and industrial cooperation.
• A Memorandum of Cooperation was signed on critical infrastructure protection and post-quantum cryptography, reflecting emerging cyber-security obligations.
• Both sides welcomed the conclusion of negotiations on the India–EU Free Trade Agreement in January 2026, calling for its early signing and implementation.
• A Joint Working Group on Counter-Terrorism was agreed upon, with both leaders condemning the Pahalgam terrorist attack of 22 April 2025 and calling for the early finalisation of the Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism (CCIT) at the United Nations.
• MoUs were also executed on Digital Technologies, Higher Education, Audio-Visual Creation, and Labour Migration.
Legal Significance:
The Joint Statement is a significant instrument of India’s bilateral treaty-making practice. While it is not a binding treaty in the strict sense of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969, the MoUs signed alongside it constitute formal international obligations. The defence MoU and digital cooperation framework have direct implications for India’s domestic legislation on defence procurement and data protection. The reference to CCIT advancement underscores India’s position in international counter-terrorism law. The labour migration MoU and the agreed Social Security Agreement framework are particularly relevant in the context of India’s obligations under bilateral social security arrangements.
3. International Day of Yoga 2026 — National Policy Theme: ‘Yoga for Healthy Ageing’
Date: 15 June 2026 (announcement); 21 June 2026 (observed globally)
Issuing Authority: Ministry of Ayush, Government of India
Background:
The Ministry of Ayush formally launched the countdown and announced the theme for the 12th International Day of Yoga (IDY 2026) on 15 June 2026. The main event was hosted in Kolkata, led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, with simultaneous activities coordinated across approximately 2,500 worldwide locations through 210 Indian diplomatic missions.
Key Observations:
• The 2026 policy theme — “Yoga for Healthy Ageing” — reflects a deliberate shift in public health programming toward India’s rapidly ageing demographic.
• The Ministry of Ayush’s coordination across 210 diplomatic missions demonstrates the integration of Yoga diplomacy with India’s soft-power foreign policy objectives.
• The initiative operates under the broader framework of the National AYUSH Mission and the National Programme for Health Care of the Elderly (NPHCE).
Legal Significance:
While IDY itself is a non-legislative event, the policy theme adopted by the Ministry of Ayush has significance for health governance. The emphasis on healthy ageing connects to India’s obligations under Articles 41 and 47 of the Constitution (Directive Principles on public health and right to work), and to its commitments under the UN Decade of Healthy Ageing (2021–2030). The Ayush Ministry’s annual thematic frameworks also inform programming under the Ayushman Bharat scheme and influence regulatory priorities for the Central Council of Indian Medicine.
LEGAL NEWS — CASE LAWS
1. Child Marriage | Parents Cannot Escape Liability — Maintenance Enhanced Threefold
Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Citation: R v. S, 2026 SCC OnLine MP 15133
Week: 15–21 June 2026
The Madhya Pradesh High Court partially allowed a maintenance application, holding that a wife in a child marriage could not be denied reasonable maintenance on the basis of the circumstances of the marriage. The Court enhanced the monthly maintenance from Rs. 2,000 to Rs. 6,000 from the date of application, observing that parents who solemnise child marriages cannot escape liability for the consequences. The husband was directed to seek recourse from the parents who had contracted the marriage.
2. CGST Act | Gauhati HC Disagrees with Bombay HC on Section 122(1-A) — Partners Held Liable for Pre-2021 Transactions
Court: Gauhati High Court
Citation: Mayank Bansal v. Union of India, 2026 SCC OnLine Gau 3796
Week: 15–21 June 2026
The Gauhati High Court ruled that liability under Section 122(1-A) of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017 extends beyond a ‘taxable person’ to any individual who retained a benefit from transactions listed under Section 122(1) and at whose instance such transactions were conducted. The Court held that Section 122(1-A) is complementary rather than independent, and may be applied even in relation to transactions predating its enforcement on 1 January 2021. This directly conflicts with the position taken by the Bombay High Court on the same provision, creating a judicial split that may necessitate resolution by the Supreme Court.
SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT
- Gajula Thirupathi v. State of Telangana 2026 SCC Online SC 1104
Decided on 21-5-2026
Background and Facts
The appellant was provisionally selected as a Stipendiary Cadet Trainee Police Constable but his selection was cancelled by the state on grounds of “moral turpitude.” The cancellation stemmed from a past criminal case involving allegations of cheating under Section 417, 420 and 506 of IPC over a failed promise of marriage. The case had been mutually settled and compounded in a Lok Adalat in 2015 but the employer argued that the compromise amounted to an admission of guilt, rendering him unfit for a disciplined force. The Supreme Court considered whether this cancellation on grounds of alleged moral turpitude was legally justified.
Judgement & Key Observations
The Supreme Court termed the state’s cancellation as arbitrary and restored the appellant’s candidature.
The key highlights of the judgement were:
- The pre-marital relationships are common in the contemporary society and physical relationship between two consenting unmarried adults does not automatically amount to cheating, nor is it a ground to draw adverse inferences against a person’s character simply because it did not culminate in marriage.
- A legal compromise or compounding of an offence is not an admission of guilt. The court noted that it is illogical to assume an innocent person would never settle a case. The court denied that compromise implies guilt.
- Since the complainant herself chose not to pursue the allegations and compounded the case without any evidence of forced coercion, so, there was no basis for questioning the appellant’s integrity.
Legal Significance
The court established that employers have the discretion to judge the suitability but they cannot bypass the presumption of innocence, thus, limiting the reach of ‘moral turpitude’.
2. Rajat Kumar v. S D Adarsh Jain Kanya Maha Vidyalaya Sadhaura 2026 SCC OnLine SC 1161
Decided on 19 June 2026
Background and Facts
The case arose from two civil suits filed against the respondents, one seeking mandatory injunction for removal of a wall constructed over a common open space, and another for removal of a lintel placed on his residential wall. Both the trial court and the first appellate court concurrently ruled in the favour of the plaintiff ordering the removal of the illegal constructions. However, in second appeal, the Punjab and Haryana High Court set aside the decrees and instead directed payment of monetary compensation, considering that the constructions had existed for a long period. This substitution was challenged in the Supreme Court.
Judgement and Key Observations
The SC allowed the appeal holding that HC committed a manifest error while exercising jurisdiction under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908.
The key highlights of the judgement were:
- The courts cannot impose unprayed relief. It emphasized that courts cannot compel a litigant to accept compensation in place of an injunction when such relief was neither claimed nor consented to. The plaintiff had only sought injunctive relief and never prayed for damages and the High Court created a new remedy beyond the pleadings and contrary to established procedural law.
- The Court further held that the High Court had acted outside the scope of Section 100 CPC, as it neither properly framed nor adjudicated any substantial question of law. It also erred in directing the executing court to assess compensation despite there being no executable decree authorizing such an exercise.
Legal Significance
It reaffirms the scope of jurisdiction under second appeals under Section 100 of CPC and that the High Courts cannot, under the garb of equitable considerations such as long-standing construction, create new reliefs or restructure the nature of a decree.
3. Sarika Tyagi v. Union of India
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 770 of 2026
Decided on 19 June 2026
Background and Facts
In a Public Interest Litigation filed by women advocates practising across various courts in India, the petitioners highlighted the absence of properly equipped Ladies’ Bar Rooms, hygienic washrooms, changing rooms, nursing facilities, and other essential amenities in High Courts, District Courts, Tribunals, and other judicial forums. They also sought measures to support young and first-generation lawyers struggling to sustain themselves financially in the early years of litigation practice.
Key Observations
- The court observed that these concerns are not matters of mere convenience but issues that directly affect the dignity, safety, and equal participation of women in the legal professionand held that this a serious violation of Right to life and Dignity. A court complect acts as a ‘second home’ for practising lawyers and depriving women of basic infrastructure deprives them of equal participation.
- The court acknowledged that due to low initial stipends and high financial instability, many talented first-generation and economically disadvantaged lawyers are forced to abandon litigation and suggested some funding models to counter this:
- Contributions from successful senior advocates.
- Allocating specific portion of court fees
- Providing monthly stipend to junior lawyers for first 3 to 7 years.
- The Supreme Court issued notice to all respondents, sought assistance from the Attorney General, Advocate Generals of States, and other stakeholders, and listed the matter for further consideration on 17 July 2026.
Legal Significance
This case elevates basic workplace infrastructure and junior lawyer welfare from standard administrative requests to core, constitutional rights under Article 21.
HIGH COURTS JUDGEMENTS/ORDERS
- TELEGRAM FZ LLC & ANR. V. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
DATED: 19-06-2026
Delhi High Court
BACKGROUND:
Petitioner is a Limited Liability Company provides messaging services and the present cause of action arise as on 16.06.2026, an interim order was passed by respondent under section 69 of the IT Act 2000 and following the order, on 17.06.2026, the committee under rule 7 of IT rules 2009, after hearing the parties and all materials placed before them including the impugned order, concluded a temporary platform-wide blocking of telegram till 22.06.2026 and disabling message-editing feature till 30.06.2026- to protect integrity of re-NEET examination and maintain public order.
Aggrieved by the order, present writ petition has been filed.
The main contentions were whether there is applicability of mind when issuing the order and whether such an action by the Respondents is sustainable under law.
OBSERVATIONS:
- The court observed that there is nexus between the material placed and conclusion arrived, that Telegram was used for dissemination of misinformation and circulation of purported examination papers and which justifies temporary ban according to sec 69 and rules 2009, which show application of mind.
- Given the necessity of the situation which needed to avert disruption of public disorder and avoid cognizable offence, this action becomes proportional and the least restrictive, due to the telegram architecture, which allows multiple bots with mass dissemination and a cloud-based model which makes it impossible to identify the users.
LEGAL SIGNIFICANCE
The judgement clarified the scope of government’s power under the Information Technology Act in cases of emergency, where there are risks of dissemination of misinformation and it also expanded the expression “information” which includes not only specific content ban but in cases of necessity also includes a platform-wide or an app ban for temporary period.
2. M/S EG COMMUNICATIONS PVT LTD & ORS V. ELECTION COMMISION OF INDIA & ORS
DATED: 19.06.2026
Delhi High Court
BACKGROUND:
The Appellants are advertising companies and contended that Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) through tenders provided long-term advertising licence. The main contention arose from the communication dated 13.06.2019 via which ECI barred political advertisements during MCC, which they insisted on DMRC to include in their agreement and through another communication on 1.10.2019 ECI allowed such advertisements on bus queue shelter, Appellant contended formed a material part of their revenue made them bit for long-term nearly 10 years licence agreement.
Main issue was whether these prohibition on metro assets during MCC violates Article 14 and 19(1)(a) and (g) of the Appellants, and whether ECI’s order under Art 324 act have binding force.
OBSERVATIONS:
- The prohibition on metro stations and allowing advertisements under bus queue shelter, is not discriminatory, as the former is government linked and the latter is on public road, hence no violation of Art 14.
- The court observed that appellant’s fundamental right under art 19(1)(a) and (g) are not violated because they are free to display advertisements not political in nature even during MCC. Ban on display of political advertisements for limited time does not mean they have been restricted from displaying any advertisements.
- Under Art 324, the ECI’s instructions have binding force in the election matters.
LEGAL SIGNIFICANCE:
The judgement clarified the power of ECI under Art 324 to issue binding instructions in the election matters to conduct fair and neutral elections. It also clarified that a ban on political advertisements in government-linked spaces during the MCC is temporal and does not violate an advertiser’s fundamental rights under 19(1)(a) and (g) and neither a partial allowance of such advertisements on public places like roads violate Art 14.