The Madhya Pradesh High Court has directed the Indore Municipal Corporation to launch a top-priority drive to remove stray dogs from major tourist areas like Chhappan Dukan and Sarafa.

The Court warned that failure to act could result in the personal appearance of the Municipal Commissioner.

It expressed concern over public safety and stressed strict compliance with Supreme Court directions on managing stray dog populations.

The civic body has been asked to file an action taken report along with details of sterilisation efforts by January 13.

[Rupesh Sharma v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.]

The Madras HC has held that teaching the Bhagavad Gita does not render a trust a religious organisation for the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, and cannot be a ground to deny FCRA registration.

The Court was hearing a plea by Arsha Vidya Parampara Trust, which teaches Vedanta, Sanskrit, and Yoga. It found that the Home Ministry’s view that the Trust “appears to be religious” was only tentative and did not meet the clear finding required under Section 11 of the FCRA.

The Court also said that once an alleged FCRA violation is compounded under Section 41, it cannot be used against the applicant again.

The rejection was set aside and the application directed to be reconsidered within three months.

[Arsha Vidya Parampara Trust v. UOI & Anr.]

The Calcutta High Court has declined to grant interim relief seeking a CBI investigation into the chaos that occurred during footballer Lionel Messi’s visit to Kolkata on December 13 at the Salt Lake Stadium.

The Court noted that a criminal investigation by a State-constituted Special Investigation Team and an enquiry headed by a retired High Court judge are at a preliminary stage.

Reiterating that investigation is a statutory function of the police, it held that a CBI probe cannot be ordered on mere allegations.

The Court further observed that the State was competent under the Commissions of Enquiry Act, 1952, to appoint an enquiry committee. Notice was issued to the State and the event organiser, and the matter has been listed for February 16, 2026.

[Suvendu Adhikari & Anr. v. The State of West Bengal & Ors.]

The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has held that Child Welfare Committees have no statutory power to recommend punitive or legal action against educational institutions under the Juvenile Justice Act.

The Court set aside an order passed by the Child Welfare Committee, Srinagar, which had directed action against a private school for allegedly expelling a minor student.

It observed that the Juvenile Justice Act does not confer any supervisory, disciplinary, or regulatory powers on CWCs over schools.

The Court emphasised that CWCs must function strictly within the limits of powers granted under the Act and cannot assume authority not expressly provided by law.

[Private School v. Child Welfare Committee, Srinagar]

The Madras High Court invoked Prophet Muhammad’s teaching that a worker must be paid before his sweat dries, while directing a municipal corporation to settle pending legal fees of its former standing counsel.

Justice G.R. Swaminathan observed that principles of fairness in labour jurisprudence apply equally to professional services such as legal work.

While noting procedural lapses and some delay on the part of the lawyer, the Court held that the corporation could not indefinitely withhold legitimate dues.

It directed payment of the pending fees within two months, without interest, and also flagged concerns over disproportionate public spending on select law officers at the cost of others.

The Gujarat High Court has directed an educational institution sealed for lacking a fire safety NOC to first undergo a fire safety inspection before any consideration of de-sealing.

Taking note of student safety concerns and the upcoming examination schedule, the Court asked the managing trust to apply afresh for inspection under the applicable fire safety rules.

It directed the Ahmedabad Fire Officer to conduct the inspection within one week and place a report on record.

The Court permitted limited access to the premises only for essential administrative work, clarifying that this would not amount to relaxation of the sealing order.

[Vivekanand Education Foundation v. State of Gujarat & Ors.]

The Madras High Court suggested that an audit be conducted into fees paid to government law officers, observing that public funds should not be distributed to a favoured few without accountability.

The Court noted that Additional Advocate Generals were appearing even in small matters that could be handled by junior government counsel, raising concerns over the prudent use of public money.

The observations were made while hearing a petition by a former standing counsel of the Madurai City Municipal Corporation seeking the settlement of pending fee claims.

While clarifying that courts cannot enquire into the quantum of fees paid to senior counsel, the Court emphasised that good governance requires public money to be drawn in a measured, transparent, and responsible manner.

[P Thirumalai v. The Madurai City Municipal Corporation]

The Andhra Pradesh High Court examined serious lapses in the management of hundi collections at the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams (TTD) following a theft reported at the Parakamani Complex in April 2023.

The Court said the issue goes beyond accounting and directly affects the religious faith of devotees. It observed that outdated and manpower-heavy procedures make the system vulnerable to pilferage and misappropriation.

Emphasising that offerings are infused with intangible religious sentiment, the Court directed TTD to place on record an immediate reform plan along with a long-term strategy involving mechanisation, digitalisation, and the use of Artificial Intelligence.

The matter has been listed for further compliance.

[M Sreenivasulu v. The State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.]

The Chhattisgarh High Court dismissed a review petition filed by a government employee. It imposed a cost of ₹50,000, holding that the plea was misconceived and amounted to an abuse of the judicial process.

The review sought reconsideration of an order dismissing a writ appeal arising from disciplinary proceedings imposing stoppage of four annual increments with cumulative effect.

The Court found no apparent error on the face of the record and observed that the petitioner was attempting to reargue the case on its merits.

It also noted that the review was filed through a new counsel after the matter had already attained finality up to the Supreme Court.

[Sanjeev Kumar Yadav v. State of Chhattisgarh]

The Madras High Court has directed the Tamil Nadu government to take a final decision on framing a Standard Operating Procedure for granting permission to political meetings by January 5, 2026.

The Court noted that multiple political parties had submitted suggestions and objections and asked the State to frame the SOP after giving due consideration to all inputs.

It clarified that any party aggrieved by the final SOP would be at liberty to challenge it independently.

The direction was issued against the backdrop of public safety concerns, including incidents such as the Karur stampede.

The Delhi High Court has set aside the Lokpal’s sanction permitting the CBI to file a chargesheet against TMC MP Mahua Moitra in the alleged cash-for-query case.

The Court held that the Lokpal failed to properly consider Moitra’s submissions, violating statutory requirements under the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013.

It emphasised that granting sanction for prosecution must follow due process and procedural fairness.

Directing a fresh consideration, the Court asked the Lokpal to re-examine the matter and take a reasoned decision within one month.

The Supreme Court has clarified that a judicial officer is not expected to invoke the RTI Act to seek reasons for their suspension.

Declining to interfere with the suspension of a Principal District Judge from Madhya Pradesh, the Court held that the appropriate remedy is to make a representation before the competent authority, not file RTI applications.

The Bench also expressed growing concern over judges passing palpably incorrect orders just before retirement, warning that such conduct undermines judicial discipline and accountability.

The Delhi High Court has sought a detailed status report from the Delhi government on the enforcement of the 2023 fare notification for auto rickshaws and taxis, amid complaints of overcharging and refusal to ply by the meter.

Issuing notice to the Transport Department and the Deputy Commissioner of Police (Traffic), the Court directed disclosure of steps taken to implement the notified fares.

This includes data on challans issued, standard operating procedures followed, and existing grievance redressal mechanisms.

The directions were passed while hearing a plea alleging routine fare violations and higher charges by app-based aggregators using government-approved autos.

[Anil Nimesh v. Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.]

The Supreme Court modified its August 12 order concerning action against old vehicles in the Delhi-NCR.

The Court clarified that diesel vehicles older than 10 years and petrol vehicles older than 15 years will be subject to enforcement action if they do not meet BS-IV emission standards.

Vehicles conforming to BS-III or lower emission norms will once again be liable for action, including impounding. The earlier protection will now extend only to BS-IV and higher vehicles.

The modification was issued after the Commission for Air Quality Management sought changes, pointing out that blanket protection made it difficult for authorities to proceed against higher-polluting vehicles.