The Central Government informed the Delhi High Court that rules to implement the Industrial Relations Code, 2020, will be finalised by the end of February 2026.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta submitted that public objections and suggestions have already been invited, and the rule-making process is underway.

The Court rejected the petitioners’ plea to continue the old rules till new ones are framed, observing that it would revive repealed laws.

Noting that earlier concerns regarding procedural gaps and tribunal constitution had been addressed through fresh notifications, the Court disposed of the petition.

The Kerala High Court held that Bar Associations do not qualify as “employers” under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, and therefore lack authority to constitute an Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) for examining sexual harassment complaints against advocates.

The matter arose from a challenge to an inquiry report prepared by an ICC formed by the Kollam Bar Association.

The Court stated that Bar Associations function as professional bodies and do not maintain an employer-employee relationship with their members.

It ruled that the ICC was invalidly constituted and set aside its report, while keeping the factual issues relating to the allegations open.

[E Shanavas Khan v. The Kollam Bar Association & Ors.]

The Madras High Court ruled that a student does not have a legal or statutory right to claim a gold medal through a writ petition under Article 226.

The case arose from a plea filed by a B.Com student seeking directions to Pondicherry University and her college to award her a gold medal.

The Court held that academic honours are part of an academic scheme and decisions on eligibility must be left to academic authorities. It upheld the university’s condition that all examinations must be cleared in the first attempt and refused to interfere.

However, considering the petitioner’s academic performance, the Court directed the college to issue an academic merit certificate.

[Vennila v. State]

The Telangana High Court quashed overstay penalties and directions to surrender an Indian passport imposed on a three-year-old minor holding both Indian and British passports.

The Court said that executive instructions or immigration guidelines cannot curtail the statutory right of Indian citizenship by descent during minority. It observed that under the Citizenship Act, 1955, the requirement of renunciation arises only upon attaining majority.

In the absence of any formal adjudication or written order declaring cessation of citizenship, authorities could not insist on passport surrender or levy fines.

The Court also held that denying an exit permit in such circumstances was unsustainable under law.

The Supreme Court has directed the Central government to notify the constitution of a tribunal to adjudicate the inter-State water dispute between Tamil Nadu and Karnataka over the Pennaiyar (Dakshina Pinakini) River.

The Court held that there was no reason to delay the process further and ordered that the notification be issued within one month. Tamil Nadu had approached the Court alleging that Karnataka’s upstream decisions adversely affected the downstream water flow. 

While the Centre earlier suggested resolving the issue through ministerial talks, the Court accepted Tamil Nadu’s plea for a statutory tribunal.

The verdict was reserved in December 2025 and pronounced on February 2, 2026. 

[The State of Tamil Nadu v. The State of Karnataka & Anr.]

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has observed that the rapid growth of private schools is largely due to the failure of the public education system to meet citizens’ expectations. 

The Court held that private schools have emerged not by choice, but due to governmental inability to deliver quality public education.

While affirming that private schools are entitled to earn reasonable profits under Article 19(1)(g), the Court cautioned against commercialization and profiteering. It upheld the fee regulation framework but stressed that excessive interference should be avoided.

The Court also directed that fee-fixing committees must be headed by retired High Court judges.

[New Convent High School, Gogji Bagh Srinagar v. UOI]

The National Council of Churches of India (NCCI) has approached the Supreme Court challenging the constitutional validity of anti-conversion laws enacted by 12 States, including Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, and Rajasthan.

A Bench led by CJI Surya Kant tagged the matter with similar petitions to be heard by a three-judge Bench.

NCCI argued that the laws are discriminatory, vague, and presume adult religious conversions to be coerced.

It flagged misuse by vigilante groups, reverse burden of proof provisions, and infringement of Articles 14, 21 and 25, seeking an interim stay on the impugned laws.

[National Council of Churches in India v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.]

The Karnataka High Court has taken suo motu cognisance of rampant illegal sand mining in the State, observing that the situation is grim if even the Home Minister feels helpless in curbing the activity.

Triggered by media reports and the Home Minister’s admission in the Legislative Assembly, the Court noted that powerful interests across party lines appear to be involved.

A Division Bench remarked that the issue may require a court-monitored probe by a central agency or a Special Investigation Team.

The Court also flagged environmental damage, threats to whistleblowers, public safety risks, and the failure of enforcement mechanisms meant to control illegal mining.

Bristol Myers Squibb approached the Supreme Court seeking to prevent Zydus Lifesciences from manufacturing and selling a biosimilar version of its cancer drug nivolumab.

The case arose from an appeal against a Delhi High Court order that permitted Zydus to sell the biosimilar, citing public interest as the drug is life-saving.

BMS alleged patent infringement, while Zydus denied the claim and maintained that its product does not infringe existing patents. The High Court had noted that the patent is nearing expiry and allowed the biosimilar’s sale for the remaining period.

The Supreme Court will hear the appeal on February 4.

The Madras High Court allowed the limited use of an artificial intelligence-based system to assist in court proceedings in arbitration matters.

The case arose from arbitration-related matters involving Gammon–OJSC Mosmetrostroy JV and Chennai Metro Rail Limited. The Court approved a trial run of the AI tool “Superlaw Courts” for organising documents, creating searchable records, and retrieving relevant excerpts from case files.

It clarified that the system will not make legal inferences, assess credibility, interpret intent or give legal opinions. The Court directed that all interactions with the AI tool be recorded for transparency and stated that final adjudication would be carried out entirely by the judge.

The matters are scheduled for final hearing from February 12, 2026.

[Gammon v. Chennai Metro Rail Corporation]

Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas acted as legal advisor to Shadowfax Technologies and selling shareholder International Finance Corporation for its INR 1,907.27 crore initial public offering (IPO).

JSA Advocates and Solicitors and Linklaters served as domestic and international counsel to the book-running lead managers.

The IPO includes a fresh issue of 8.06 crore shares amounting to INR 1,000 crore and an offer for sale of 7.32 crore shares valued at INR 907.27 crore.

ICICI Securities, Morgan Stanley India Company and JM Financial acted as lead managers.

The Delhi High Court has temporarily restrained Dabur India Limited from selling its cooling oil “Cool King Thanda Tael,” holding that its packaging is deceptively similar to Emami Limited’s “Navratna” trade dress.

The Court found that the overall get-up of Dabur’s product closely imitates the essential features of Emami’s packaging, including colour scheme, bottle shape, visual elements and arrangement, creating a likelihood of consumer confusion.

While observing that individual elements like the colour red or descriptive words cannot be monopolised, the Court held that Emami’s distinctive combination had acquired secondary meaning through long use.

Granting interim relief, the Court barred Dabur from using the impugned or any deceptively similar trade dress.

[Emami Ltd. v. Dabur India Ltd]

West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee has approached the Supreme Court challenging the Election Commission of India’s decision to conduct a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls ahead of the 2026 Assembly elections.

In her PIL, Banerjee warned that the hurried SIR process could lead to mass disenfranchisement of eligible voters and disrupt the level playing field among political parties.

She urged that elections be held on the basis of existing electoral rolls and sought directions to accept valid identification documents and correct minor discrepancies suo motu.

The plea alleges constitutional violations and highlights risks to migrant and marginalised voters.

The Supreme Court granted bail to three accused named Aditya Sood, Ashish Mittal, and Santosh Gaikwad - allegedly involved in tampering with blood samples after the 2024 Pune Porsche crash that killed two software engineers.

The Court noted that the accused had been in custody for around 18 months and that continued incarceration would cause undue prejudice, especially when the main offence itself carries a limited sentence.

The Bench observed that the investigation is complete and charge sheets have been filed.

While granting bail, the Court clarified that any violation of bail conditions would result in cancellation of bail.