As 2025 draws to a close, India’s Supreme Court finds itself under an intensity of scrutiny rarely seen before. The year was marked by controversies around judicial conduct, high-stakes constitutional reversals, and sharper public engagement with the judiciary’s internal functioning. Together, these developments have reshaped expectations from the Court. As 2026 begins, the institution stands at a crossroads—balancing authority, accountability, and constitutional restraint.
Judicial conduct and the limits of accountability
Few issues dominated legal discourse in 2025 as much as the conduct of judges. Allegations of cash being found at the official residence of former Delhi High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma pushed the judiciary into unfamiliar political territory. What began as an internal inquiry has now escalated into a parliamentary process, with the agreeing to hear Justice Varma’s challenge to the Speaker’s decision to constitute an inquiry committee under the Judges (Inquiry) Act.
If Parliament carries the process through, 2026 could witness the first successful impeachment of a judge of a constitutional court—testing both judicial independence and legislative resolve.
The failed impeachment motion against Allahabad High Court judge Justice Shekhar Yadav, meanwhile, revealed the deeply political nature of impeachment. It reinforced that while the threshold for removing judges is constitutionally high, accountability mechanisms remain mediated by political consensus rather than institutional process alone.
Live scrutiny, virtual courts, and public perception
The hybrid court system—an outcome of pandemic-era experimentation—has expanded access to justice. At the same time, it has exposed judges to unprecedented real-time scrutiny. Oral remarks, courtroom humour, and off-the-cuff observations increasingly circulate on social media, often stripped of legal context and amplified for political ends.
The physical attack on then CJI B R Gavai inside a courtroom underscored how heightened emotions around judicial remarks can spill over into real-world consequences. Post-retirement interviews by former Chief Justices—most notably Justices D Y Chandrachud and Gavai—defending landmark verdicts such as the Babri Masjid–Ram Janmabhoomi judgment and the Aravalli hills ruling further blurred traditional boundaries of judicial silence.
The Collegium under internal strain
Criticism of the Collegium system’s opacity continued through 2025, but internal dissent brought fresh complexity. Justice B N Nagarathna’s dissent against the recommendation of Justice Vipul Manubhai Pancholi to the Supreme Court—kept out of the officially published Collegium resolutions—raised uncomfortable questions about transparency even within the system.
With Justice Surya Kant set to head the Collegium throughout 2026 and at least five Supreme Court judges retiring, appointments in the coming year will significantly shape the Court’s ideological and institutional direction. His ability to forge consensus within the Collegium will be closely watched.
Religion, faith, and constitutional boundaries
Several religion-linked disputes are poised to define the Court’s docket in 2026. These include:
- A comprehensive challenge to the amended Waqf law, where interim orders have already curtailed the role of district collectors and capped non-Muslim representation on Waqf Boards.
- The constitutional validity of the Places of Worship Act, 1991, which freezes the religious character of places of worship as of August 15, 1947.
- The Karnataka hijab ban, raising questions on personal autonomy and state regulation of freedoms.
- A review of the 2018 Sabarimala verdict, potentially reopening debate on the “essential religious practices” doctrine.
Together, these cases could recalibrate how the Court navigates faith, secularism, and state power.
Citizens versus the state: rights, elections, and liberty
The relationship between citizens and the state will remain central to the Court’s role in 2026. Challenges to the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls—first in Bihar and then nationally—have already drawn the Court into election management. The direction to include Aadhaar as an acceptable identity document has raised the evidentiary threshold for voter exclusion.
Other pending matters include challenges to the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, bail pleas under stringent anti-terror laws such as the UAPA, and cases like that of Umar Khalid, which have come to symbolise how procedural delays affect personal liberty.
Free speech and judicial tone
Free speech cases are likely to remain headline-makers under Justice Surya Kant’s leadership. His strong oral observations in past cases involving political speech, online content, and hate speech indicate a Court willing to intervene assertively. Proposals such as oversight bodies for social media platforms and identity-linked age verification reflect an evolving judicial engagement with digital speech regulation.
Policy-heavy litigation and new laws
Several policy domains will keep the Court deeply engaged:
- The Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025, which disrupts the long-standing judicial distinction between games of skill and chance.
- Judicial monitoring of Delhi-NCR’s air pollution crisis, where the Court has assumed an active policy-steering role.
- Challenges likely to arise from the phased implementation of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023.
- The Constitution (130th Amendment) Bill, 2025, and the One Nation, One Election Bill—both raising questions about constitutional structure, federalism, and democratic accountability.
What to note for Prelims?
- Judges (Inquiry) Act and impeachment procedure.
- Collegium system and judicial appointments.
- Places of Worship Act, Waqf laws, DPDP Act.
- Role of the Supreme Court in election-related disputes.
What to note for Mains?
- Judicial accountability versus independence.
- Impact of live-streaming and transparency on judicial authority.
- Supreme Court’s expanding role in policy-making.
- Balancing civil liberties with national security and public order.
