Congress leader Sanyam Lodha filed the petition against a Rajasthan High Court order. Earlier, the High Court directed the state to conduct elections by April 15, 2026. Lodha has challenged this timeline and demanded immediate polls.

The petition states that the Constitution mandates elections before the end of a local body’s term. Despite this rule, terms of 52 urban bodies ended over a year ago. Elections have not taken place so far.

The plea argues that the state appointed administrators instead of elected representatives. It calls this step a clear constitutional violation. The petition also claims that the High Court ignored provisions of the Rajasthan Municipal Act, 2009. Sections 7 and 11 do not allow any extension after a term ends.

Earlier, a High Court bench led by Acting Chief Justice S.P. Sharma heard multiple petitions. The court asked the government to finish delimitation by December 31, 2025. It also directed the state to hold panchayat and municipal polls together.

The state government defended its position in court. It said it was considering the “One State, One Election” model. Officials claimed the plan would save time and resources while strengthening local governance.

The Supreme Court’s hearing may now decide the next course of action.

The post Rajasthan local body elections may see Supreme Court hearing today appeared first on India Podcast.

Wangchuk was detained on September 26, only two days after protests in Ladakh demanding Statehood and Sixth Schedule status. The protests turned violent, leaving four people dead and nearly 90 injured. Authorities accused the climate activist of encouraging the unrest, but his family insists he only supported peaceful democratic rights.

The Supreme Court earlier asked the Centre and the Ladakh administration to respond to the amended petition. The case will now appear before a bench led by Justices Aravind Kumar and N.V. Anjaria. The new date gives both sides more time but also adds pressure on the government to clarify its position.

Wangchuk’s supporters believe the detention raises deeper concerns about public order and dissent in Ladakh. Many hope the upcoming hearing will bring clarity and restore trust in due process.

The post Sonam Wangchuk NSA Detention Hearing Moved to December 8 appeared first on India Podcast.

A Bench led by Chief Justice B.R. Gavai took up the matter and confirmed that these salary-related pleas will be heard along with the main SEBI-Sahara case. Lawyers representing the employees urged the Bench to address their concerns urgently. The CJI responded positively and ensured a joint hearing.

The Court previously sought responses from the Centre, SEBI, and other stakeholders to SICCL’s request for permission to proceed with the property sale. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta stated that the Union Ministries of Finance and Cooperation should be part of the proceedings. The Court accepted this and directed both ministries to file their replies before November 17.

Senior advocate and amicus curiae Shekhar Naphade received instructions to compile complete details of the 88 properties proposed for sale. The Bench also asked him to study each property’s status, including whether they are encumbered or disputed. The Court noted that it will later decide whether the sale should happen in parts or as a single block.

The Bench also asked the Sahara Group to verify salary claims made by employees. It instructed the amicus to examine the issue of arrears and present findings on the next hearing date. All related applications, including intervention pleas, will come up for final consideration on November 17.

The post SEBI-Sahara Case Supreme Court Hearing on Salary Plea Set appeared first on India Podcast.

Wangchuk was arrested on September 24 after violent protests in Leh, Ladakh. He is currently in Jodhpur prison. The petition argues his detention is politically motivated and violates his fundamental rights. The case will be heard by a bench led by Justices Arvind Kumar and N.V. Anjaria.

The Ladakh administration has defended its actions. It dismissed allegations of victimisation as baseless and claimed the arrest was based on credible documents and legal grounds. Authorities said investigations were ongoing into financial irregularities and foreign funding issues involving the Himalayan Institute of Alternatives, Ladakh (HIAL).

Officials also cited the cancellation of FCRA registration of SECMOL, another organisation linked to Wangchuk. They accused him of provocative remarks, including references to other South Asian countries, and of inciting youth. A June 2025 video allegedly suggested an “Arab Spring”-style movement and self-immolation protests. The administration urged an impartial legal process.

The post Supreme Court to Hear Sonam Wangchuk Arrest Plea appeared first on India Podcast.

The petitions challenge a Delhi High Court order that denied bail under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). SC to shortly hear bail pleas of Sharjeel Imam, Umar Khalid, Gulfisha Fatima, and Meeran Haider comes after five years of custody as undertrials.

Earlier, a Division Bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur rejected bail for nine accused. The judges said the February 2020 riots were not “a regular protest” but a “well-orchestrated conspiracy.” The order stressed that violence under the guise of protest cannot be permitted.

Lawyers for the activists argue that the trial has faced long delays. They seek bail on grounds of parity with co-accused who already secured relief. Natasha Narwal, Devangana Kalita, and Asif Iqbal Tanha were granted bail in June 2021. Former Congress councillor Ishrat Jahan was released in March 2022.

The Supreme Court’s verdict will be closely tracked. It could influence how future bail pleas under UAPA are handled.

The post SC to Shortly Hear Bail Pleas of Sharjeel Imam, Umar Khalid appeared first on India Podcast.

The West Bengal Government argued that Governors and the President cannot interfere with the legislative process by delaying or questioning bills passed by elected Assemblies. It said that the will of the people, expressed through their representatives, must remain supreme.

A five-judge Constitution Bench led by Chief Justice B. R. Gavai heard the matter. The state government stressed that Governors cannot question the competence of laws passed by Assemblies, as such issues fall under the judiciary’s domain.

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for West Bengal, said the executive has no authority to block the will of the sovereign people. He emphasized that the Constitution does not allow Governors or the President to interfere in the lawmaking process.

The People’s will can’t be subject to whims of Governors, WB Govt tells SC argument highlighted a key tension between state governments and Governors over pending bills. The bench, however, asked whether bills inconsistent with constitutional provisions must still receive assent.

The post People’s Will Can’t Be Subject to Whims of Governors, WB Govt Tells SC appeared first on India Podcast.