In this episode of SCO explains, we examine how the Court has drawn a principled line between protecting symbols from genuine insult and resisting the attempts to impose symbolic conformity.

On 2 December, the Supreme Court heard a habeas corpus petition alleging the disappearance of a family of 5 Rohingya persons. The petition challenged the deportation on grounds of procedure, not as a matter of sovereign policy.During the hearing, CJI Surya Kant observed that India cannot lay a red carpet for intruders and that we ought to focus on the poor among Indian citizens who lack certain privileges. This prompted a public letter. In this video, we summarise the events that followed.

The Supreme Court recently released a new Standard Operating Procedure that limits the length of written submissions and requires counsel to specify time required for oral arguments. In this video we draw from last week’s newsletter to explain what this procedure entails and why it’s likely to be opposed by arguing counsel.

We break down the Supreme Court's judgment in All India Judges Association v. Union of India. Delivered on 19 November by former CJI B.R. Gavai, the Court rejected all proposals for reservation .
The Bench described the plea as driven more by “heartburn” than an enforceable legal right, noting that the material on record did not show any consistent imbalance or disadvantage to civil judges that could justify creating a separate class. It also noted the need for a uniform national model for determining seniority in higher judicial services, directing the adoption of a four-point annual roster for assigning seniority to all recruits within a year.

Since 1989, the All India Judges Association v. Union of India case has remained open before the Supreme Court under a continuing mandamus, allowing the Court to address issues concerning judicial services, especially recruitment and promotion. Many civil judges retire without ever reaching the rank of Principal District Judge, let alone being considered for elevation to the High Court.This was among the final Constitution Bench matters of former Chief Justice B. R. Gavai’s tenure. The judgement, delivered on 19 November 2025, settled key questions on how seniority in the District Judiciary should be determined. In this video, we summarise the key arguments in the case.

CJI Surya Kant takes charge of the Court facing a pendency crisis: over 90,000 pending cases. This backlog didn't happen suddenly. It defied past trends as monthly case filings (institutions) skyrocketed and disposals failed to keep pace, even with a full strength of judges. While CJI Surya Kant has acknowledged the pendency numbers, what is in store?

On 9 October, a five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court unanimously held that judicial officers with seven years of prior Bar experience are eligible for recruitment as District Judges. The Court directed all states and High Courts to amend service rules within three months. The 139-page Judgement held that Article 233 is a complete code and rejected the idea of a fixed quota for practising advocates. It clarified that eligibility will rest on a combined seven years of Bar and/or judicial experience, with a minimum age of 35 years.

The Court's decision to restore the Bhushan Steel takeover makes clear that the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is a framework for revival, not destruction. We look at how the Review Bench acknowledged delays caused by external factors (like the ED and former promoters) and reaffirmed two core principles: the supremacy of the Committee of Creditors’ commercial wisdom and the narrowed locus of former promoters to stall the process