Author: Adv. Fiza Ahmand

News Summary The Supreme Court of India recently quashed criminal proceedings against a woman’s in-laws in a dowry harassment case, holding that vague and general allegations…

The 129th Constitutional Amendment Bill, 2024 proposes Article 82A to enable simultaneous Lok Sabha and State Assembly elections. Supporters cite cost savings, efficiency, and policy continuity, but the plan raises serious constitutional and federal concerns. Aligning terms could mean cutting short or extending legislative tenures, undermining democratic accountability. Allowing the Election Commission to defer polls without Article 356 weakens federal safeguards. While administrative benefits are real, unchecked deferment powers risk legal challenges and erode neutrality. Lasting reform requires phased implementation, broad consensus, and strict safeguards. Efficiency must not trump democratic principles or citizens’ right to regular elections.

The Supreme Court’s April 2025 ruling in State of Tamil Nadu v. Governor of Tamil Nadu ended the misuse of “pocket veto” by Governors. It held that Article 200 doesn’t allow indefinite inaction and set clear timelines—one month for assent and three months for reconsideration—strengthening State legislatures’ authority and federal balance. By invoking Article 142 to deem delayed Bills as assented, the Court prevented democratic paralysis. While some critics call this judicial overreach, the ruling reinforces accountability and aligns with global democratic practices. It ensures Governors act constitutionally, not politically, safeguarding federalism and legislative primacy.

Waqf assets are inalienable Islamic endowments used for religious and social services; India has over 870,000 registered waqf properties. The 2025 Waqf (Amendment) Act is challenged in a consolidated Supreme Court petition (W.P.(C) No.269/2025) led by Asaduddin Owaisi. Petitioners seek a stay on denotifying waqf-by-user lands, non-Muslim board appointments, and collectors’ powers. The Court proposed interim measures to protect existing waqfs, allow investigations without changing status, and permit limited non-Muslim membership. The dispute raises constitutional issues on religious autonomy, equality, federalism and minority rights, with calls for safeguards and transparency.

The Supreme Court, in Ghanshyam Soni v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr. [2025 INSC 803], quashed an FIR and chargesheet under Section 498A IPC, holding that vague and sweeping allegations cannot sustain a criminal trial. A Bench of Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma noted that the wife’s accusations against her husband’s family lacked specific details, dates, or evidence, and included distant relatives. The Court stressed that while Section 498A protects genuine victims, its misuse causes injustice. Exercising powers under Article 142, it quashed the proceedings to prevent harassment of innocent family members.

The Supreme Court of India, while closing the Salwa Judum case, held that passing a law by Parliament or a State Legislature cannot by itself amount to contempt of court. The Bench of Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma clarified that legislation is a valid exercise of legislative power and cannot be treated as defiance of a judicial order unless found unconstitutional. The Court reaffirmed the principle of separation of powers, stressing that legislatures can make or amend laws, but their validity can only be tested through judicial review, not contempt proceedings.

The Supreme Court of India granted interim protection to former Telangana intelligence chief T Prabhakar Rao, accused in the state’s phone-tapping case under the previous BRS government. Rao, alleged to have overseen illegal surveillance of about 1,200 people, was directed to return to India within three days of receiving his passport and cooperate with the probe. The case involves misuse of intelligence staff for political surveillance and evidence destruction. Several officers have already been arrested. The next hearing is on August 5, 2025, with the court seeking a status report from the state.