Judiciary Week in Review: Supreme Court Reins in Timelines, High Courts Tackle Sabarimala, GST, and Rape Law Nuances

New Delhi – India's higher judiciary delivered a series of landmark judgments and significant directives this past week, reinforcing the principles of separation of powers, delving into the complexities of tax law, and navigating sensitive social issues. The Supreme Court made waves by striking down key provisions of the Tribunals Reforms Act and setting aside its own prior ruling on timelines for Presidential assent to bills. Meanwhile, High Courts across the country addressed pressing local issues, from crowd management at Sabarimala to the misuse of rape laws and the scope of GST.

Supreme Court on Separation of Powers and Judicial Independence

In a week marked by major constitutional pronouncements, the Supreme Court delivered two pivotal judgments underscoring the delicate balance between judicial, legislative, and executive powers.

A five-judge Constitution Bench, in a special reference case, unanimously held that prescribing judicial timelines for Governors and the President to grant assent to bills is an unconstitutional "usurpation of powers." Setting aside a previous Division Bench ruling from April 2025 that had imposed structured timelines, the court emphasized that such matters fall within the executive domain. The ruling stated that the earlier decision was "antithetical to the spirit of the Constitution and the doctrine of separation of powers," effectively restoring discretion to the constitutional heads on this legislative function.

In another significant move to protect judicial autonomy, a bench led by Chief Justice B.R. Gavai invalidated key provisions of the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021. The Court found that the contested sections amounted to a "legislative overwrite" of its previous binding judgments on the matter. "The provisions of the impugned Act cannot be sustained as they violate separation of powers and judicial independence principles," the bench ruled, striking them down as unconstitutional. The judgment also directed the Centre to establish a National Tribunals Commission within four months to oversee appointments and administration, a move aimed at insulating tribunals from executive influence.

The apex court also recalled its May 2025 Vanashakti judgment, which had prohibited retrospective environmental clearances, acknowledging that earlier rulings had permitted post-facto clearances in limited situations. This decision signals a potential shift in environmental jurisprudence, creating pathways for regularizing projects that previously operated without clearance.

Kerala High Court Navigates Religious Practice, Public Order, and Criminal Law

The Kerala High Court was exceptionally active, handling a diverse docket that spanned public interest litigation, tax disputes, and nuanced interpretations of criminal law.

In a closely watched matter concerning the Sabarimala pilgrimage, the Court refused to order the early opening of the traditional forest route ( Kanana Patha ), asserting that the "mode of access to a temple is not an essential religious practice." This decision, coupled with a separate order capping daily spot bookings for pilgrims at 75,000 due to overcrowding, highlights the court's proactive role in balancing religious sentiment with public safety and administrative feasibility. The court also took suo motu cognizance of the appointment of a police controller with a pending criminal case for Sabarimala duty, sternly remarking that "only officers of integrity should serve at Sabarimala."

On the criminal law front, the High Court delivered a crucial judgment distinguishing between consensual relationships and rape. In Pradeep v. Station House Officer , Justice G. Girish observed that a man starting a new marriage for a "greener pasture" does not retrospectively invalidate consent in a prior sexual relationship. The ruling clarifies that such a scenario does not automatically convert the past relationship into rape based on a false promise of marriage, providing a significant precedent against the misuse of rape laws in cases of failed relationships.

The Court also addressed several key tax matters, holding that cooperative societies not engaged in banking are not entitled to TDS exemption under the Income Tax Act and that a cancelled GST registration cannot be restored solely to claim Input Tax Credit (ITC).

Delhi and Karnataka High Courts on Commercial Disputes, Individual Rights, and Tax Law

The High Courts of Delhi and Karnataka adjudicated on a wide spectrum of issues, from high-stakes commercial litigation and intellectual property rights to the fundamental rights of undertrials.

The Delhi High Court continued its focus on commercial and tax law. In a significant ruling for foreign education consultants, the court held that their services to students, for which they receive commission from foreign universities, qualify as an 'export of services' under GST law. It also granted a permanent injunction in favor of Ferrero Spa, restraining local manufacturers from producing glass jars that mimic the distinctive shape of the Nutella jar, reinforcing protections for trade dress. The court also came down heavily on the practice of filing simultaneous bail pleas, with Justice A. Badharudeen of the Kerala High Court mandating an undertaking in all future bail applications to prevent such "bench hunting."

Meanwhile, the Karnataka High Court championed individual rights and public welfare. It held that an undertrial prisoner's rights to education, rehabilitation, and legal access must be balanced against security concerns during prison transfers. In a unique case involving Aadhaar, the court ruled that a deceased person's fingerprint cannot be used to search the UIDAI database for identification, citing both technical limitations and privacy considerations. Further, it directed the state to enforce rules mandating speed limits, helmets, and safety harnesses for children riding pillion on two-wheelers, underscoring its commitment to road safety.

CESTAT Clarifies Complex Tax Provisions

The Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) delivered several key rulings clarifying intricate tax laws. It held that rehabilitating or renewing railway wagons qualifies as "original works" and is thus exempt from service tax. In another case, it ruled that demurrage and despatch money are related to vessel detention, not freight, and cannot be taxed as such. These specialized decisions provide crucial guidance for industries navigating the complexities of indirect taxation.

This week's judicial activity showcases a judiciary deeply engaged in its constitutional role as a check on executive and legislative power, a protector of individual rights, and an arbiter of complex commercial and social disputes. From the Supreme Court's high-level constitutional interpretations to the High Courts' on-the-ground interventions in public life, the courts remain a vital pillar of governance and justice in India.