A Division Bench headed by the Chief Justice of the Madras High Court held that the State cannot demand an Environmental Clearance Certificate or Pollution Control Board approval before processing an application for an Essentiality Certificate for a medical college, since neither is among the criteria in Form 2 of the 1999 Regulations (paras 17-18). It set aside a single judge's order and directed the State to decide Chettinad Academy's application within Form 2 (para 20).
The Madras High Court answered a death reference against the prosecution and acquitted a man sentenced to death under the POCSO Act for alleged aggravated penetrative sexual assault on five children (paras 1, 30). It found material improvements and signs of tutoring in the children's evidence, no medical corroboration, and a trial that denied him effective legal representation (paras 17, 21, 28). Compensation paid to the children need not be recovered (para 29).
The Rajasthan High Court refused to cancel a registered sale deed of agricultural land although the buyers had stopped payment of the cheques recorded in it. Where the parties intend title to pass on execution and registration, non-payment of the price only entitles the seller to recover it, not to avoid the sale (paras 20-23). The Court upheld the trial court's decree directing the buyers to deposit Rs 24 lakh with interest for the seller (paras 1, 25).
The Punjab and Haryana High Court held a litigant guilty of criminal contempt for scurrilous, uncorroborated allegations against High Court judges and judicial officers who dealt with his criminal complaint (paras 42, 51). Filing the material in court was publication, the reference was within time, fair comment under Section 5 needs a finally decided case, and truth under Section 13(b) was not proved (paras 37, 41, 45, 49). Sentence is to be heard on 12.10.2026 (para 53).
In an interim order, the Rajasthan High Court restrained the State from dispossessing a government employee from his official quarter in Gandhi Nagar, Jaipur, until the next hearing, while he challenges an order of 03.08.2026 alleging that he had sub-let it (paras 3, 8). The Court gave the State two weeks to reply; it recorded the petitioner's case but decided nothing on the merits (paras 1-7).
The Punjab and Haryana High Court quashed a Jalandhar FIR under Section 295-A IPC against the directors, producer and actor of the film "Yaarian 2" over a song showing a clean-shaven, non-Amritdhari actor wearing the Sri Sahib (Kirpan) (paras 1-2, 18). The inadvertent portrayal, an expression of creative liberty, was not a deliberate and malicious insult to the Sikh religion, and mens rea was lacking (para 14).
The Punjab and Haryana High Court held that the orders refusing certification to the Punjabi film "Chardikala" were passed by a CBFC Regional Officer who lacked competence, since no power under Section 4 of the Cinematograph Act had been delegated before 29.08.2026 (para 4.1). With the orders withdrawn, it disposed of the appeal, directing a fresh decision by the Chairperson after supplying the committee records and hearing the filmmaker (paras 8-11).
Delhi High Court directs Delhi Police to decide within a week a fresh application by the Kshatriya Karni Sena to hold a September 20 protest at Jantar Mantar against newly notified UGC equity regulations.
Delhi High Court rejects a habeas corpus plea by Swatantra Bhardwaj challenging his arrest over the alleged assault of a teenage CJP protester's father at Jantar Mantar, finding his key argument was never raised in the petition itself and the underlying FIR had not been quashed.
Delhi High Court waives ₹25,000 in costs imposed on a litigant after his counsel — then eight months pregnant and advised bed rest — could not appear for cross-examination, holding a litigant should not bear a heavy financial burden once genuine cause for the lawyer's absence is shown.
Hearing a contempt petition over delay in proceedings against a former minister and IAS officers accused of favouritism in municipal tenders, Madras High Court remarks that it is "very difficult" to get corruption cases registered against powerful men in the country.
Hearing Suryakant Gulabrao Yewale's application for anticipatory bail, the Bombay High Court directed the Director General of Police and the Investigating Officer to file replies, after recording submissions on whether the applicant is involved in the crime and on which directors of the company that bought the land have been made accused (paras 2-5). The State said affidavits would be filed within two weeks; ad-interim protection continues till 28.09.2026 (paras 6-8).