Constitutional Law & Healthcare Regulation
2026 INSC 45
In the Matter of: 3S and Our Health Society Vs. Union of India
Right to health under Article 21 encompasses protection against unvalidated AI clinical diagnostics. Union Government directed to frame statutory regulatory standards under Clinical Establishments Act.
Ratio Decidendi: When artificial intelligence software is deployed for therapeutic or clinical decision-making, absence of algorithmic transparency and clinical audit directly imperils citizen life protected under Article 21.
Criminal Procedure & Digital Evidence
2026 INSC 42
Pynchemalangaki Bareh Vs. State of Meghalaya
Mandatory cryptographic hash logs and chain-of-custody protocols under Section 61 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023. Uncertified mirror image held inadmissible.
Ratio Decidendi: Under the new criminal evidentiary regime of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, digital evidence cannot be admitted on mere ocular testimony of the investigating officer without cryptographic hash verification certificates.
Commercial Law & Arbitration
2026 INSC 40
M/s ABC Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. National Highways Authority of India
Scope of Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Patent illegality does not permit appellate re-interpretation of commercial price escalation clauses.
Ratio Decidendi: An arbitral tribunal is the ultimate master of facts and contract construction. If an interpretation is plausible within contractual boundaries, the Section 34 Court cannot substitute its view.
Constitutional Law & Federal Governance
2025 INSC 182 / (2025) 3 SCC 410
State of NCT of Delhi Vs. Union of India (Executive Powers Ref.)
Electoral accountability and federal balance under Article 239AA. Civil service control and legislative competence of the National Capital Territory assembly.
Ratio Decidendi: In a democratic form of government, the elected representative cabinet must exercise control over civil servants implementing legislative policies, subject only to express constitutional carve-outs.
Securities Regulation & Corporate Fraud
2025 INSC 110
Securities and Exchange Board of India Vs. Alpha Capital Holdings
Standard of proof for insider trading under SEBI (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Regulations. Circumstantial evidence and digital trails.
Ratio Decidendi: Direct documentary proof of tip-off is rare in insider trading; preponderance of probability established through asymmetric trading patterns and contemporaneous phone records is legally sustainable.
Constitutional Law & Electoral Transparency
2024 INSC 113 / (2024) 4 SCC 1
Association for Democratic Reforms & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors. (Electoral Bonds Case)
Electoral Bond Scheme declared unconstitutional. Infringement of voter’s Right to Information under Article 19(1)(a). Proportionality standard applied.
Ratio Decidendi: Information about funding of political parties is essential for voters to exercise their freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) effectively. Blanket anonymity violates proportionality.
Arbitration Jurisprudence
2024 INSC 300 / (2024) 4 SCC 329
Cox and Kings Ltd. Vs. SAP India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.
Application of Group of Companies Doctrine in Indian Arbitration. Non-signatory affiliates can be bound upon mutual commercial intent.
Ratio Decidendi: The Group of Companies doctrine has an intrinsic existence in Indian arbitration law under Section 7 of the 1996 Act. Non-signatory entities participating in contract negotiation and performance can be bound.
Constitutional Law & Federalism
2023 INSC 1058 / (2024) 6 SCC 1
In Re: Article 370 of the Constitution of India
Upholding presidential notification abrogation of Article 370. Sovereignty of Jammu and Kashmir merged with the Union of India upon accession.
Ratio Decidendi: Article 370 was an asymmetric federal feature designed as a temporary transitional provision. The President possessed power under Article 370(3) to declare the article non-operational.
Family Law & Civil Rights
2023 INSC 920 / (2024) 2 SCC 1
Supriyo @ Supriya Chakraborty & Anr. Vs. Union of India (Marriage Equality Case)
No fundamental right to marry exists in the Constitution. Reading gender-neutral terms into Special Marriage Act held beyond judicial competence.
Ratio Decidendi: While queer couples possess fundamental rights against discrimination under Articles 14, 15, and 21, the legal status of marriage is a statutory creation requiring parliamentary enactment.
Constitutional Law — Basic Structure Doctrine
(1973) 4 SCC 225 / AIR 1973 SC 1461
Kesavananda Bharati Sripadagalvaru Vs. State of Kerala
Parliament’s constituent power under Article 368 is not unlimited; the Basic Structure of the Indian Constitution cannot be abrogated or destroyed.
Ratio Decidendi: Article 368 does not enable Parliament to alter the basic structure or framework of the Constitution. Supremacy of Constitution, Republican democracy, rule of law, and judicial review form inviolable pillars.
Fundamental Rights & Natural Justice
(1978) 1 SCC 248 / AIR 1978 SC 597
Maneka Gandhi Vs. Union of India
Procedure established by law under Article 21 must satisfy tests of reasonableness and fairness under Article 14 and 19. Golden Triangle doctrine.
Ratio Decidendi: Procedure depriving a person of personal liberty cannot be arbitrary, oppressive, or fanciful; it must embody natural justice (audi alteram partem) and be just, fair, and reasonable.
Constitutional Law — Right to Privacy
(2017) 10 SCC 1 / AIR 2017 SC 4161
Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) Vs. Union of India (Privacy Judgment)
Right to Privacy declared an intrinsic part of the Right to Life and Personal Liberty under Article 21 and the freedoms guaranteed by Part III.
Ratio Decidendi: Privacy is the constitutional core of human dignity. Any state encroachment must survive the threefold test: legality (statutory law), legitimate state aim, and strict proportionality.