While hearing the petitions filed to challenge the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the voter list going on across the country, the Supreme Court has expressed concern over the issue of infiltrators. During the hearing on Wednesday (November 26, 2025), the Supreme Court asked whether any non-Indian should also be given the right to participate in the elections because of being an Aadhar card holder. The court said that the purpose of Aadhaar is to provide social welfare benefits to all people, but it cannot give the right to vote.

The bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said that Aadhaar does not provide proof of full citizenship, hence we had said that it can be included only as a document in the documents required for SIR.

CJI Surya Kant said, ‘If Aadhaar gives someone the right to get ration, should he also be given the right to vote? Suppose a person from a neighboring country lives here to work?

The court made it clear that Aadhaar cannot be considered an indisputable document of citizenship. Its objectives are limited. The court also refused to accept the suggestion that the Election Commission should work like a post office and automatically accept every Form 6 application. The court said that the Election Commission has the right to determine the authenticity of the documents given along with Form 6 for registering names in the voter list. The bench said that the Election Commission is not a post office.

During the hearing, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for some petitioners, said that the SIR process is affecting democracy. He said that the SIR process is an unconstitutional burden on common voters, there are many voters who cannot read and write and if they do not fill the form, they will be removed from the voter list. He urged the court that if someone is removed from the list, then a fair and impartial process should be used.

Kapil Sibal said that Aadhaar is not proof of citizenship, but it does give the possibility that the card holder may be a citizen. If you want to snatch Aadhaar then go through this process and let this process be proved correct in the court.

Justice Surya Kant became the new Chief Justice of the country on Monday (November 24, 2025). President Draupadi Murmu administered the oath of office to him as the 53rd CJI. Former Chief Justice Bhushan Ramakrishna Gavai was also present at his swearing-in ceremony. Justice BR Gavai reached the swearing-in ceremony in the CJI’s official car, but after the program he went back in another car.

A statement regarding this has been issued by the office of former CJI Gavai. According to the statement, ‘Justice BR Gavai set a new example. After the swearing-in ceremony, he left the official car designated for the CJI and went back to Rashtrapati Bhavan in another car so that the Chief Justice’s car was available for the new CJI Surya Kant to go to the Supreme Court.

Justice BR Gavai retired from the post of CJI on 23 November. He became the 52nd Chief Justice of the country in May this year. During his tenure, he heard many important cases and gave verdicts. On November 21, a bench of five judges of the Supreme Court sent a presidential reference and replied to 14 questions asked by President Draupadi Murmu. November 21 was Justice Gavai’s last working day as CJI and he was also included in this bench.

Justice BR Gavai was the second Dalit judge after Justice KG Balakrishnan to head the Indian judiciary. Overwhelmed by the honor he received on his last working day, Justice Gavai said that he is leaving the institution with a feeling of complete satisfaction after completing a journey of four decades as a lawyer and judge and as a student of justice.

Justice BR Gavai had also said during this time that he is secular. Although he follows Buddhism, he has not done any in-depth study of any religion. He had said that he believes and respects every religion like Hinduism, Islam, Sikhism and Buddhism.

Justice BR Gavai had also told that his father was also secular and a true follower of Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar and his thinking about religions came from his father only. He told that his father was associated with politics and when he used to go on his political tour and someone told him that the Dargah here is very famous or the Gurudwara somewhere is famous, then he used to visit those religious places.

(With inputs from Nipun Sehgal)

Justice Surya Kant has become the new Chief Justice of India. On Monday (November 24, 2025), President Draupadi Murmu administered the oath of office to him as CJI. He took oath as CJI in the presence of Vice President CP Radhakrishnan, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Defense Minister Rajnath Singh, Home Minister Amit Shah, Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla, BJP President JP Nadda, former President Ramnath Kovind and former Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar.

Justice Bhushan Ramakrishna Gavai’s tenure as CJI ended on November 23, 2025. He remained in this post for six and a half months. Justice Surya Kant’s tenure as CJI will be for about one and a half years. He will retire on February 9, 2027. At present he is 63 years old.

CJI Surya Kant was born on February 10, 1962 in Hisar, Haryana. He was born in a normal family. Former CJI BR Gavai, while talking about his friendship with Justice Surya Kant in his farewell, had said that both of them come from very normal families.

Justice Gavai had told that CJI Surya Kant studied in a government school in Hisar and he himself studied in a municipal school in Amravati, Maharashtra. CJI Surya Kant graduated from Government Post Graduate College, Hisar in 1981 and then obtained Bachelor’s degree in Law in 1984. He studied law from Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak in 1984. In the year 2000, he became the youngest Advocate General of Haryana.

Opposing the bail plea of ​​Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, Gulfisha Fatima, Meena Haider and other accused in the Delhi riots, Delhi Police told the Supreme Court that when intellectuals become terrorists, they are more dangerous. Delhi Police cited Red Fort car blast and white collar terror module here. During the hearing, some video clips of Sharjeel Imam’s speech were also shown, in which he was saying things like cutting off the north-eastern state of Assam from India, stopping the milk and water of Delhi and protesting fiercely.

During the hearing on the bail petitions of the accused in the Supreme Court on Thursday (November 20, 2025), Delhi Police said that nowadays a trend has been seen that intellectuals first study with government money and become doctors-engineers and then get involved in anti-national activities.

Additional Solicitor General SV Raju appeared before the bench of Justice Arvind Kumar and Justice NV Anjaria to present the side of Delhi Police. He said that when intellectuals become terrorists, they become more dangerous than those working at the grassroots level. ASG Raju was referring to the white collar terror module running from Haryana’s Al Falah University, which was recently busted by the investigating agencies. The agencies had recovered 2,900 kg of explosive material for making IED from a doctor. The very next day after this incident, this doctor’s colleague Dr. Umar Nabi exploded a car near the Red Fort, in which 14 people lost their lives. Many doctors have been arrested after this incident.

During the hearing, Delhi Police also played some video clips of Sharjeel Imam’s speech in the court, in which he is seen saying that there should be traffic jams in cities across India. In these speeches, Sharjeel Imam is saying things like cutting off Assam from India by stopping the chicken neck, stopping the milk and water of Delhi and protesting fiercely. In the video he is saying that the government has to be deactivated and the courts cannot be trusted. Delhi Police alleged that Sharjeel was trying to instigate Muslims with his speeches.

Delhi Police said that the CAA protests were just a show and an attempt to cover up the truth, the real objective was to change the government and strangulate the economy. ASG Raju said that the CAA protests were deliberately staged during US President Donald Trump’s visit to India to attract international media attention and tarnish India’s image by spreading lies that Muslims are being targeted in the country. Sharjeel Imam’s lawyer Advocate Siddharth Dave opposed this and said that an attempt is being made to influence the court by showing short excerpts of long speeches.

In view of the increasing pollution levels in Delhi-NCR and the Air Quality Index (AQI) which has reached dangerous levels, the Supreme Court has asked the Commission of Air Quality Management (CAQM) to consider giving instructions to carry forward sports activities in schools. While hearing on Wednesday (November 19, 2025), the Supreme Court said that the sports activities and competitions to be held in Delhi-NCR in November-December should be postponed for the time being and scheduled for later, so that the AQI improves by then.

According to the report of Live Law, Advocate Aparajita Singh told the court that sports activities and competitions are to be held in many schools of Delhi-NCR in November, while the AQI has reached a very poor condition.

A bench of Chief Justice Bhushan Ramakrishna Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran was hearing the case. Advocate Aparajita Singh told the bench that children are the most vulnerable and organizing sports competitions at such a time would be equivalent to putting them in a gas chamber. On their arguments, the court has directed CAQM to consider the sports competitions.

According to the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), till 9 am on Wednesday, Delhi’s AQI was 392, which falls in the very poor category. On Tuesday, AQI was 314 at 7 am and 374 was recorded at 4 pm. With this, the air quality in Delhi remained in ‘very poor’ category for the sixth consecutive day.

Data from CPCB’s ‘Sameer’ app also revealed that 18 out of 38 monitoring centers have recorded AQI levels in the ‘severe’ category. Centers located at Chandni Chowk, DTU, Bawana, Anand Vihar, Mundka, Narela and Wazirpur have recorded AQI above 400. According to CPCB, AQI between 0 to 50 is considered ‘good’, 51 to 100 ‘satisfactory’, 101 to 200 ‘moderate’, 201 to 300 ‘poor’, 301 to 400 ‘very poor’ and 401 to 500 ‘severe’.

Talking about the weather, the minimum temperature was recorded at 10.2 degrees Celsius which is 2.1 degrees less than the average. The maximum temperature is likely to be around 26 degrees Celsius. India Meteorological Department said that the relative humidity has been recorded at 97 percent at 8.30 in the morning.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday (November 18, 2025) withdrew an old order by a three-judge bench of Chief Justice Bhushan Ramakrishna Gavai (CJI BR Gavai), due to which a judge got angry. The court withdrew its May 16 verdict in the Vanshakti case, in which it had ordered the demolition of all constructions in cases where environmental clearance was taken after construction. The bench of CJI BR Gavai, Justice K Vinod Chandran and Justice Ujjal Bhuiyan gave this decision with a majority (2:1). Justice Bhuiyan did not agree on this and expressed strong disagreement with the majority decision.

CJI Gavai wrote the judgment in 84 pages, while Justice Bhuyan expressed his dissent in 97 pages. With this decision of the court, the threat of demolition of many important public infrastructure projects across the country including AIIMS in Odisha has been averted.

The decision, taken by a majority (2:1) bench of CJI Gavai and Justice Vinod K Chandran, said that if the May 16 order is not withdrawn, it will result in the demolition of various buildings, projects constructed with public money worth about Rs 20,000 crore, PTI reported. The decision of May 16 was given by Justice Abhay S. It was given by the bench of Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuiyan.

The decision cited the potentially devastating impact on projects of national importance, including a 962-bed hospital at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) in Odisha and a greenfield airport. During the hearing, the Center submitted a list of projects which are stalled and whose existence is in danger.

Justice Ujjal Bhuiyan has termed the CJI’s recall judgment as ignoring the basic principles of environmental jurisprudence and a step towards retrogression. In its order dated May 16, the bench of Justice Bhuiyan and Justice Oka had declared post-facto environmental clearance (approval given later) illegal and ordered the demolition of such constructions. Also, the government was stopped from giving such approval.

A review petition was filed in the court challenging the order of May 16, on which the bench of CJI Gavai withdrew the order of May 16. Justice Bhuiyan has written a 97-page dissenting judgment, in which he has expressed strong disagreement with the decision of CJI Gavai. He wrote, ‘The precautionary principle is the cornerstone of environmental jurisprudence. There is only the principle of compensation for polluters. The precautionary principle cannot be ignored through polluters pay. The review judgment is a step backward in the direction of environmental protection. Justice Bhuiyan called the majority decision an innocent expression of opinion which ignores the basic principles of environmental jurisprudence.

The third judge of the bench, Justice K Vinod Chandran, also wrote his judgment separately and said that dissent is part of the democratic judicial process, but it should be done rising above one’s personal conviction of right and wrong. Criticizing the order of May 16, he said that it ignored the powers and legal principles granted under the Environmental Protection Act. He described the review as appropriate, mandatory and prompt.

A major decision has been given on Monday (November 17, 2025) on the matter of banning construction work amid increasing pollution in Delhi and National Capital Region (NCR). The Supreme Court has rejected the suggestion to stop all construction work in Delhi. The court said that a large number of people will be affected by this. Instead of taking such steps, we have to think about long-term solutions. CAQM takes appropriate steps according to the pollution situation.

The court asked the central government to hold a meeting with the governments of Punjab, Haryana, UP and Rajasthan and give suggestions on long-term solutions to deal with the air pollution crisis, so that a permanent solution to this problem can be found. For this the court has given one day’s time to the government. In the hearing to be held on Wednesday (November 19, 2025), the court also sought an affidavit regarding whether the equipment being used to monitor pollution in Delhi is capable of this.

Court said that balance has to be struck between environmental concerns and development

A bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) BR Gavai on Monday (November 17, 2025) said that the court is not in favor of issuing strict directions to curb the rapidly increasing pollution levels in Delhi, as the court cannot take the place of experts. The court said that it is necessary to strike a balance between environmental concerns and development.

Central government will have to take the lead – Supreme Court

While hearing the case, the Supreme Court has reiterated that it cannot take the responsibility of Delhi’s pollution management every year and the basic responsibility in this matter lies with the Central Government. The court said that the livelihood of millions of families depends on construction and all related sectors, hence imposing a blanket ban can have serious social and economic consequences.

Also read: Indian Defence: 5 most dangerous postings of India, where there is no enemy and one has to fight every day to survive.

Chief Justice Bhushan Ramakrishna Gavai has described the Supreme Court’s decision in the 1979 rape case as a moment of institutional embarrassment. He admitted that the court disappointed the citizens with its decision in this case. CJI BR Gavai also said that it is the vigilance and courage of the people that they kept the court accountable for years.

According to the report of Times of India, CJI BR Gavai has said these things in his address at the 30th Sunanda Bhandare Memorial Lecture. Here he was giving his views on gender equality and development of law in building an inclusive India. In the year 1979, the Supreme Court had released two policemen in the case of rape of a tribal girl in the police station. The court had accepted that the policemen had relations with the girl with her consent. The court said that no marks were found on the girl’s body, which would prove that she was forced and she protested against it.

CJI BR Gavai said, ‘In my view, this decision is the most disturbing moment in the institutional and judicial history of India, where the judicial system could not protect the dignity of the very person it was meant to protect. This decision was also a turning point for the country, due to which groups of people and women’s organizations across the country ignited the movement for the rights of modern Indian women.

CJI Gavai said that this decision exposed the shortcomings of the criminal law and stimulated the need for amendments in it. This judgment redefined the concept of consent and strengthened legal protections in custodial rape.

He said that many revolutionary laws were brought for gender justice and except the 1979 decision, the court also contributed to gender equality through many decisions. He said that as a result, the structural inequalities inherent in family and customs ended and women moved from the margins of dependency to the center of constitutional citizenship.

On the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of voter lists going on in Bengal and Tamil Nadu, the Supreme Court has asked the petitioners why they are so apprehensive about the exercise. The court has issued a notice to the Election Commission on the petitions filed against Bengal and Tamil Nadu SIR.

According to the report of Bar and Bench, on Tuesday (November 11, 2025), the bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi was hearing six petitions filed against the ongoing SIR in Bengal and Tamil Nadu. The ruling party in the state, DMK Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), CPIM and Congress have filed petitions regarding SIR taking place in Tamil Nadu, while Congress filed the petition for Bengal.

The court has sent a notice to the Election Commission on the petitions and sought its response. The court has also asked the petitioners why they are so apprehensive about the SIR. The court told the petitioners that if they were satisfied with the reply, they would cancel the exercise. Earlier, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, on behalf of DMK, argued in the court that this process is being done in a hurry, whereas earlier it used to take three years to revise the voter list. This is the first time that this process is happening so quickly.

Kapil Sibal said that the Election Commission is saying that the process will be done in a month. He said that the ultimate thing will be that lakhs of people will be removed from the voter list. On this the court said, ‘You have filed your counter. We are issuing notice. If we are satisfied, we will cancel the process. We are issuing notices on all writ petitions. Hearing is already going on in the court regarding Bihar SIR.

SIR was first started from Bihar in the month of June, against which many people including Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) and National Federation for Indian Women filed petitions. Although the process has been completed in Bihar, the matter is still pending in the court.

The Supreme Court has said that it is aware of fake videos being made through Artificial Intelligence (AI). Chief Justice Bhushan Ramakrishna Gavai (CJI BR Gavai) has said that he and his fellow judge Justice Vinod Chandran have also seen the fake video made about themselves. This discussion took place in the court during the hearing of a petition in which a demand has been made to make appropriate rules regarding the use of AI in the judiciary.

It is believed that the Chief Justice was saying this about the fake video of shoes being thrown towards him. Keep in mind that on October 6, 2025, at around 11:35 am, a lawyer had thrown his shoe towards the Chief Justice, which did not reach him. There was no clear video of the incident, but later a fake video circulated on social media in which the shoe was seen passing by the Chief Justice.

The Supreme Court has asked to put the petition up for hearing after 2 weeks. Chief Justice Gavai, who is retiring this month, indicated that he did not want to hear the case. He asked the lawyer appearing for petitioner Karthikeya Rawal, ‘What do you want. Should I dismiss the petition or should it be posted for hearing after 2 weeks?

It has been said in the petition that now the courts themselves also use AI, but it is being used for positive purposes. The court should also pay attention to the dangers of AI. Generative AI automatically reviews the available data and draws conclusions. There is a possibility of getting wrong or misleading information through this technology. The information available through this lacks transparency and may be full of bias.

The petitioner has demanded that the court should set guidelines for the use of AI technology so that the judicial process is not affected by false or misleading AI content. The petition also states that morphed videos of court proceedings can damage the credibility of the judiciary and create misconception among the public.