Article 22(1) | Police Pay 'Scant Regard' To Arrest Safeguards, Scorn Judgments Enforcing Fundamental Rights : Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court last week strongly criticised the police's approach to constitutional safeguards, observing that they have "traditionally paid scant regard" to the requirements of Article 22(1) of the Constitution and often fail to appreciate the significance of fundamental rights when exercising the power of arrest. Referring to a series of landmark Supreme Court judgments which...

YouTuber Can't Invoke Writ Jurisdiction To Restore Channel Deleted Over Alleged Copyright Strikes: Uttarakhand High Court

The Uttarakhand High Court has held that a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution cannot be invoked by a YouTuber to seek reinstatement of a YouTube channel deleted on account of alleged copyright strikes. In doing so the court said that public law remedy is not a relief in a contractual dispute between a YouTuber and the social media platform. The petitioner, a YouTuber, had...

'Sought To Negate Court Orders': Karnataka High Court Strikes Down State Laws Denying Pension Benefits To Private Aided School Employees

Highlighting the parity between government and aided school employees, the Karnataka High Court has struck down two state enactments that sought to deny pensionary benefits and additional increments to teachers and non-teaching staff of private aided educational institutions. [2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 279]The Division Bench of Justice Pradeep Singh Yerur and Justice S.G Pandit in its order held...

Does Rejection Of Bail Bar Subsequent Challenge To Legality Of Arrest? Allahabad High Court Answers

Distinguishing the Supreme Court's 2025 judgment in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Kusum Sahu [2025 LiveLaw (SC) 1110], the Allahabad High Court last week held that rejection of a regular bail application does not, by itself, bar a subsequent challenge to the legality of an arrest and judicial remand under Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India. A Bench of Justice JJ Munir and Justice...

Insurance Company Can't File Writ To Challenge Compensation Granted To Beneficiary Under Govt Welfare Scheme: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that an insurance company cannot invoke the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution to challenge compensation awarded to a beneficiary under a government welfare scheme by relying on alleged violations of the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) executed between the insurer and the State Government.It held that such a dispute is...

Gauhati High Court Upholds Amendment To Arunachal Pradesh Police Rules Aimed At 'Equitable Distribution' Of Promotion Opportunities

Upholding the constitutional validity of Rule 5(1)(b) of Arunachal Pradesh Police Service (Amendment) Rules 2025, the Gauhati High Court held that allocating promotional quota to Arunachal Pradesh Police Service (Entry Grade) based on sanctioned strength of Inspectors in three feeder cadres does not violate Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.The Rules fix the promotional quota for the...

Gujarat High Court Refuses To Review Order Rejecting Disclosure Of Somnath Temple ASI Survey Documents

The Gujarat High Court refused to review its order dismissing a plea seeking disclosure of archaeological survey report, ground penetrating radar (GPR) survey, maps, structural analysis, photographs, videography and all the related documents concerning the Somnath Temple site. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 210]For context, the court had in June dismissed a PIL seeking such disclosure with Rs. 2 Lakh...

Allahabad High Court Calls For Crowd Behaviour Science To Prevent Stampedes At Mathura-Vrindavan Religious Gatherings

The Allahabad High Court has held that the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution casts a positive obligation on the State to create and maintain conditions in which lives are not lost to preventable disasters. It held that institutionalising the science of crowd behaviour in academia, administration and policy is a constitutional imperative.The Court was hearing a writ...

Reservation For Women, Persons With Disabilities Not Mandatory In Allotment Of Akshaya Centres: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court recently held that the government need not provide reservation to women or differently-abled persons while allotting Akshaya Centres as there are no legal provisions mandating the same. [2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 419]Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas reasoned that allotment of Akshaya Centres is a contractual arrangement and since no government employment is provided, there is no...

Once Posts Merge Into One Cadre, State Can't Prescribe Different Pay Scales Based On Pre-Merger Status: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that once the State Government merges two posts into a single cadre with retrospective effect, it cannot thereafter prescribe two different pay scales for members of that unified cadre on the basis of the post each of them held before the merger. It held that such a classification answers to no difference in qualifications, duties or responsibilities and...

Parents' Salary Income From Private Sector Must Be Considered To Decide If A Person Falls Under Non-Creamy Layer: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday (July 29) held that salary income of the parents must be included while deciding whether a person falls under Creamy Layer or not for the purpose of reservation in professional colleges. [2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 408]Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas dismissed two writ petitions filed by KEAM and NEET aspirants praying for a declaration that they fall under the...

Senior Citizens Act | Asking Daughter To Shift To Second Floor So Elderly Parents Can Occupy Ground Floor Not Eviction: Madras High Court

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court upheld an order directing a daughter and her husband to shift from the ground floor of their house to the second floor, enabling the elderly parents to occupy the ground floor on account of their advanced age. [2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 355]Justice M. Dhandapani held that the order by the appellate authority did not evict the petitioners, but merely...