India: Constitutional & Administrative Law

In a landmark judgment delivered on 31.10.2025, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has fortified the bedrock principle of attorney-client privilege while delineating clear boundaries for investigative agencies seeking to summon advocates.

The Delhi High Court, in Uma Bharti & Anr. v. The Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors. [W.P.(CRL) 2429/2026], directed local police to protect a live-in couple whose relationship was opposed by the woman’s father and brother. The order, passed by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Saurabh Banerjee on 13.08.2026, reaffirms that a consenting adult’s choice to reside with a partner of their choosing remains constitutionally protected, irrespective of familial or societal disapproval.

The enactment of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (“BNSS”) in 2023 signals a paradigm shift in India’s criminal procedural framework, aimed to enhance the efficiency, integrity, and responsiveness of the criminal justice system. Effective from 1 July 2024, the BNSS replaces the previously governing Code of Criminal Procedure (“CrPC”) of 1973. This new legislation introduces a range of reforms, including the integration of technology in trial processes, the provision for trial in absentia, zero FIR, and e-FIR, all aimed at streamlining the criminal justice procedures.

Every time a person clicks “I agree” on a website, downloads an app or opens a bank account, a separate act of consent may be given to an organisation processing that person’s personal data. Until recently, there has been no mechanism under Indian law through which an individual could manage, in one place, the consents given to different organisations, including reviewing and withdrawing those consents.

Expecting someone to remember pages of oral explanations is unrealistic. By requiring written grounds, the Court has ensured that individuals can consult their lawyers, prepare their defense, and exercise their right to bail meaningfully. It’s a small procedural shift, but one that makes a world of difference to personal liberty.

This issue examines a consistent judicial theme in contemporary criminal law: coercive powers must be exercised strictly within statutory and constitutional limits. The Delhi High Court has clarified that Look Out Circulars cannot be used as instruments of debt recovery. Mere loan default or financial distress, without allegations of fraud or serious economic wrongdoing, cannot justify restricting the fundamental right to travel abroad. Similarly, the Supreme Court has cautioned against continuing criminal proceedings arising from a predominantly commercial dispute after a settlement has been fully implemented and recognised by the Debt Recovery Tribunal.

The High Court of Delhi through its judgment dated 09.07.2026 in Delhi Waste Management Limited v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation, dismissed batch of writ petitions seeking refund of service tax and labour cess deducted from the contractual payments.

The digital age has transformed how personal information persists online, creating lasting associations between individuals and past events that would have once faded from public memory. When judicial records, news articles, and other content remain permanently searchable, they can continue to affect lives long after cases are resolved or circumstances have changed. This raises fundamental questions about whether Indian constitutional law recognizes a right to be forgotten and how courts should balance indi

The Petitioner was a registered taxable person under the GST regime, whose GST registration was cancelled vide Order-in-Original dated 27.01.2023. Upon such cancellation, the Petitioner initially decided to discontinue its business and, accordingly, did not prefer an appeal against the said order within the prescribed statutory period under Section 107 of the CGST Act.