Supreme Court Landmark Judgments 2025–26 — Top 8 Rulings That Shaped India

Summary. This article summarises the 8 most consequential Supreme Court rulings between mid-2024 and early 2026 — covering reservation policy, electoral funding, executive overreach, federalism, and minority rights. Each entry gives the Bench size, judges involved, central holding, and practical implications for citizens, governments, and litigants. The Court delivered an unusually high number of constitutional decisions in this period, partly reflecting the docket-clearance push by the Chief Justice’s office.

1. State of Punjab v. Davinder Singh — Sub-classification of SC reservation (1 August 2024)

Bench: 7-judge Constitution Bench (CJI Chandrachud, Justices B. R. Gavai, Vikram Nath, Bela Trivedi, Pankaj Mithal, Manoj Misra, S. C. Sharma)

Holding: By a 6:1 majority, the Court held that states can sub-classify Scheduled Castes to give preference within the SC quota to more disadvantaged sub-castes. This overruled the 2004 E. V. Chinnaiah judgment which had held that SCs are a homogeneous class.

Implications: States can now identify the most-disadvantaged SCs within the broader SC list and reserve a portion of the SC quota specifically for them. Within 30 days, several states (Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Punjab) initiated sub-classification studies. Justice Trivedi dissented, emphasising the homogeneity of the SC list under Article 341.

2. Association for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India — Electoral Bonds Scheme (15 February 2024 + reasoning February 2025)

Bench: 5-judge Constitution Bench (CJI Chandrachud, Justices Sanjiv Khanna, B. R. Gavai, J. B. Pardiwala, Manoj Misra)

Holding: Unanimous. The Electoral Bonds Scheme of 2018 violates the right to information under Article 19(1)(a) and is unconstitutional. The Court directed SBI to disclose the unique alphanumeric numbers of all bonds purchased and encashed, enabling matching of donor with recipient.

Implications: The 2018 scheme stood struck down. Since 12 April 2019, electoral bonds worth ₹16,518 crore had been issued; the disclosure showed the major beneficiaries and donors for the first time. Parties have since shifted back to direct corporate donations and EC-disclosed channels.

3. Aligarh Muslim University v. Naresh Agarwal — AMU minority status (8 November 2024)

Bench: 7-judge Constitution Bench (CJI Chandrachud, Justices Sanjiv Khanna, J. B. Pardiwala, Manoj Misra, Surya Kant, Dipankar Datta, Satish Chandra Sharma)

Holding: By a 4:3 majority, the Court held that AMU’s minority status is a question of fact to be determined by a regular Bench applying the standard set out in this 2024 judgment. The earlier 1967 Azeez Basha ruling that AMU is not a minority institution was overruled. The matter was sent back to a regular Bench for fact-finding.

Implications: AMU’s claim to minority status under Article 30(1) is no longer barred by Azeez Basha. The actual decision on facts is pending before a regular Bench.

4. State of Tamil Nadu v. Governor of Tamil Nadu — Governor’s bill assent (April 2024)

Bench: 3-judge Bench (CJI Chandrachud, Justices J. B. Pardiwala, Manoj Misra)

Holding: A Governor cannot indefinitely sit on bills passed by the State Legislature. The Governor must, within a reasonable time, either grant assent, withhold assent, return for reconsideration, or reserve for the President. “Pocket veto” is constitutionally impermissible.

Implications: Several states with Opposition governments where bills had been pending — Tamil Nadu, Kerala, West Bengal, Punjab — used this judgment to compel Governors to act. The decision is a significant rebalancing of Centre-state relations.

5. Article 370 abrogation challenge — Final reasoning (December 2023, follow-up rulings 2024–25)

Bench: 5-judge Constitution Bench (CJI Chandrachud, Justices Sanjiv Khanna, B. R. Gavai, Surya Kant, A. S. Bopanna)

Holding: Unanimous. Article 370 was a temporary provision; the August 2019 abrogation by Presidential Order is constitutional. Jammu & Kashmir is restored full integration with India. State Assembly elections were directed to be held by 30 September 2024 — held in October 2024 with a new Government.

Implications: J&K’s transition to a Union Territory with a Legislative Assembly is now constitutionally settled. Statehood restoration remains a separate political process; Court directed Government to act on it expeditiously.

6. Re: Plea for marriage equality — review (April 2025)

Bench: 5-judge Constitution Bench (CJI Sanjiv Khanna, Justices B. R. Gavai, Surya Kant, Hima Kohli, P. S. Narasimha)

Holding: Review of the October 2023 Supriyo @ Supriya Chakraborty judgment dismissed. The Court reaffirmed that same-sex marriage is for Parliament to legislate and the judiciary cannot read marriage rights into existing statutes. However, the Court directed Government to constitute a high-powered committee to address day-to-day rights (joint bank account, ration card, hospital access) for same-sex partners.

Implications: Marriage-equality status quo continues — Parliament-level legislation needed. The committee’s recommendations on partner-level rights are pending Cabinet review.

7. Bilkis Bano case — Remission set aside (January 2024)

Bench: 2-judge Bench (Justices B. V. Nagarathna, Ujjal Bhuyan)

Holding: The Gujarat Government’s August 2022 remission of the 11 convicts in the Bilkis Bano gangrape case set aside. The convicts were directed to surrender within 2 weeks. The Court held that the remission order was passed by a Government that lacked jurisdiction (the appropriate Government was Maharashtra, where the trial was held, not Gujarat).

Implications: All 11 convicts were sent back to jail. The judgment clarified that for remission, the appropriate Government is the one where the trial concluded, not where the offence took place.

8. Right to be free from adverse climate effects (April 2024)

Bench: 3-judge Bench (CJI Chandrachud, Justices J. B. Pardiwala, Manoj Misra)

Holding: In M. K. Ranjitsinh v. Union of India (about Great Indian Bustard protection vs solar transmission lines in Rajasthan-Gujarat), the Court read into Articles 14 and 21 a fundamental right to be free from adverse effects of climate change.

Implications: Climate change is now a fundamental-rights issue litigable in courts under Article 32. This becomes a foundational citation for environmental, infrastructure and policy challenges going forward.

Why this period was unusual

Two reasons drove the high constitutional output:

1. Five-Judge / Seven-Judge Bench docket clearance — CJI Chandrachud (in office until 10 November 2024) and CJI Sanjiv Khanna (from 11 November 2024) prioritised pending Constitution Bench matters. 15 Constitution-Bench judgments were delivered in 2024 alone — the highest in any single year since independence.

2. Long-pending cases reaching maturity — Cases like Davinder Singh (sub-classification, pending since 2014), AMU (since 2005), and electoral bonds (filed in 2018) reached the Bench in this window after multiple postponements.

Frequently asked questions

Official links

Disclaimer. SarkariBaba is an independent information publisher. Always read the full text of the judgment from main.sci.gov.in for legal citations; this article is a summary for general readers.