The Supreme Court allowed a plaintiff's amendment, sought after the trial had begun, to challenge a compromise decree affecting part of the suit land that he said he learned of only later, holding that due diligence under the proviso to Order VI Rule 17 CPC was shown and the nature of the suit was unchanged (paras 13.2, 14). Arguable limitation and Order XXIII Rule 3A objections were left to the trial court (paras 16.2, 17).
A Bench led by the Chief Justice kept in force its interim directions of 24.07.2026 barring the extraction, monetisation, posting or hosting of recordings of court proceedings on social media without permission, and gave the Solicitor General two weeks to file a comprehensive proposal on preventing commercial exploitation and misleading use of court live streams (paras 1-5).
The Supreme Court quashed the arraignment of a college student in an NDPS case over a packet of marijuana allegedly handed to her by two sellers near her college. Nothing was recovered from her, the case rested on confessions that cannot be relied on, and a user last in the chain of supply is in one way a victim; the focus must be on breaking supply, not punishing users (paras 3-8).
A Bench led by the Chief Justice set aside a Rajasthan High Court Division Bench judgment of 28.07.2026 in a dispute between the Rajasthan Housing Board and the highest bidder, and sent the intra-court appeal back for a fresh decision within three months. Material on a later auction of the adjacent plot was not before the High Court, and the Board's ex-post facto ratification of its Chairman's decision needs fresh consideration (paras 3-5).
On a father's appeal, the Supreme Court set aside a Patna High Court order that had quashed cognizance of murder (Sections 302 and 201 IPC) over his son's drowning. A post-mortem showing drowning does not rule out foul play; the boy was last seen with the accused, who was seen fleeing; and a Magistrate may take cognizance despite a police closure report, examining Section 161 statements at that stage (paras 8-12).
The Supreme Court granted bail to a man accused of possessing one kilogram of methamphetamine, after the Madras High Court had refused it. He had been in custody for almost two years, the trial had not begun though the chargesheet cites 46 witnesses, his arrest rested on co-accused statements whose worth is for the trial court, and his cardiac condition also weighed (paras 8-12). The merits and statutory safeguards were left open (para 11).
The Supreme Court made absolute the interim protection it had granted to a man accused under Section 15 of the NDPS Act as the registered owner of a vehicle allegedly used to carry 120 kg of poppy husk. He had joined the investigation, and on the totality of circumstances he was granted anticipatory bail, on conditions of cooperation and surrender of any passport (paras 3, 6-8).
The Supreme Court granted anticipatory bail to a man accused, with the complainant's ex-husband, of fraudulently executing an agreement to sell her plot after she signed what she believed were mortgage papers. On a prima facie view of the record, it directed his release on arrest on terms set by the Investigating Officer, with appearance before the Faridabad Magistrate when directed (paras 1-7).
The Supreme Court suspended the sentence of a man accused of escorting, on a motorcycle, a goods carrier from which the Narcotics Control Bureau allegedly recovered 697 kg of ganja. The co-accused in the goods carrier and his own pillion rider had been granted bail, and the NCB had not sought cancellation, so he was entitled to parity and to bail while his appeal is pending (paras 2-7).
Acting on a report that a fake medical college was being run from a dilapidated farmhouse in Etah, Uttar Pradesh, the Supreme Court directed the UGC and all regulatory authorities to issue a public advisory: no one should take admission in, or deal with, an institution without first verifying its authenticity. The Union of India must monitor compliance (paras 3, 8-9, 12).
The Supreme Court set aside a POCSO conviction for the sexual assault of a minor girl with an intellectual disability, holding that the offender's identity was not proved: neither the child nor her cousin could identify the appellant in court, both said the mother had supplied his name, the FIR came ten days late and omitted key facts, and the teacher to whom the child first disclosed was never examined (paras 46-62).
A Hindu widow who inherited a Delhi agricultural holding as a limited owner before the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954 became its absolute owner under Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the Supreme Court held. As she died in 1973, the holding devolves on her own heirs under Section 53 of the 1954 Act, not on her first husband's family, because 'personal law' in Section 51(2) means the law in force at her death (paras 37-44).