Daily Bulletin

In a special Sunday sitting on October 11, 2026, the Supreme Court directed authorities to ensure free movement of people and restore normal metro and rail services in Delhi, which were restricted during recent protests. Hearing a contempt plea against a clampdown on protests demanding the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, a Special Bench issued notice to the Union Home Secretary and Delhi Police Commissioner. The Court also heard a habeas corpus petition concerning over 7,000 detainees but did not grant immediate relief on their release, scheduling a compliance hearing for October 13.

An investigation into the Election Commission of India's (ECI) electoral roll revision process has revealed that over 13 crore names were removed from draft voter rolls across 30 States and Union Territories. The report highlights that two of the three Election Commissioners, Shri Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Shri Vivek Joshi, had internally raised significant questions about the large-scale deletions under the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) process, which began in Bihar in June 2025.

The Supreme Court held that the Right to Health under Article 21 imposes a positive duty on the State to ensure clear Front-of-Package Labelling (FoPL) on food products. In the case of 3S and Our Health Society v. Union of India, the Court emphasised that such labelling on foods High in Fat, Sugar, or Salt (HFSS) is vital for enabling informed consumer choices. The ruling aligns with the State's duty under Article 47 to protect public health, particularly that of children.

The Supreme Court will hold a special sitting on October 11, 2026, to hear petitions concerning the mass detention of protestors in Delhi. A bench of Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana will hear habeas corpus petitions seeking the release of Cockroach Janta Party founder Abhijeet Dipke, co-convenor Saurav Das, and other members. The pleas argue that the detentions, made ahead of a planned protest on October 10, violate the fundamental right to peaceful assembly under Articles 14, 19, 21, and 22 of the Constitution.

The Supreme Court acquitted a man in a POCSO case, overturning concurrent convictions by a trial court and the Meghalaya High Court due to significant procedural lapses. In Charming Rupon v State of Meghalaya, a bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta cited an unexplained 10-day delay in filing the FIR and the victim's failure to identify the accused in court. The Court also noted that the victim's testimony was unreliable as she admitted to being tutored, and it drew an adverse inference against the prosecution for failing to examine a pivotal witness.

The Supreme Court issued directives on protests in the national capital, ordering in a special sitting on October 11 that there be no illegal detention of persons gathering peacefully. The Court's intervention came amid ongoing protests by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) demanding the resignation of the Chief Election Commissioner, which prompted a plea from the lawyers' body Lawyers Voice citing disruption to the city. The bench also directed that metro, rail, and internet services must function normally unless restricted in accordance with the law.

The Kerala High Court has directed the Centre to make the Data Protection Board functional within eight weeks from October 11, 2026. A Division Bench issued the order while disposing of a PIL concerning passenger data collection, observing that citizens' privacy was being compromised. The court stated that concerns regarding the Digi Yatra portal could be addressed by the Board, constituted under the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023.

The Supreme Court established a three-stage framework to attribute mens rea, or criminal intent, to corporations, allowing them to be held directly liable for offences requiring such intent. In the case of Sanofi India Ltd. v. Central Bureau of Investigation, the Court held that this direct liability is distinct from vicarious liability. The framework examines a company's constitutional documents, delegation of power, and statutory purpose to determine if an individual's act and state of mind can be treated as the corporation's own.