- The Supreme Court issued show-cause notices to Shiv Sena (UBT) Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Raut and journalist Nikhil Wagle in criminal contempt proceedings over public remarks concerning Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and the judiciary.
- The Supreme Court agreed to examine a plea seeking a regulatory framework for protests and processions near the Supreme Court and other judicial complexes.
- A bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi issued notice on the plea, which seeks an absolute prohibition on political protests within judicial complexes.
- The court said nobody could browbeat the judiciary, while clarifying that it was not initiating contempt proceedings at that stage against opposition leaders named in the petition.
- The Supreme Court directed law-enforcement agencies to preserve CCTV footage and other digital material connected with the October 12 march towards the Supreme Court.
- The court also permitted private parties holding relevant material from the incident to preserve it, indicating the evidentiary importance attached to the events.
- The Supreme Court issued notice to the Election Commission, the Chief Election Commissioner and the two Election Commissioners on petitions filed by Rahul Gandhi and other INDIA bloc leaders concerning the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls.
- The Delhi High Court refused to restrain the Cockroach Janta Party’s planned protest at Connaught Place, while taking on record Delhi Police’s assurance to regulate the gathering lawfully.
- The Delhi High Court bench of Acting Chief Justice Nitin Wasudeo Sambre and Justice Sanjay Sharma heard a plea by a street vendor who said the protest would affect traders’ rights.
- Police later said, citing court proceedings, that only a group of 11 persons could be permitted to protest, creating a narrow legal and administrative framework for the demonstration.
- The Delhi High Court also refused to stay an investigation into a criminal case filed against a woman journalist over alleged objectionable remarks.
- A significant legal principle discussed in current legal commentary was that High Courts may award compensation under Article 226 as a public-law remedy for unconstitutional detention.
- The Supreme Court’s ongoing national consultation on child protection brought together Supreme Court and High Court judges, state officials, child-protection specialists and civil-society representatives to review the first decade of implementation of the Juvenile Justice framework.
