Four Supreme Court rulings of 2026 every aspirant should know
Updated 23 Oct 2026. Legal reasoning and current affairs sections both draw on fresh Supreme Court rulings: the article invoked, the case name, the bench and the principle. These four map onto Article 21 (dignity and health, the right to die with dignity), Article 341 and the 1950 Presidential Order, and the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, each with an older landmark case examiners can pair it with.
Supreme Court rulings and facts, 2026
| Case or item | Date | Holding or fact |
|---|---|---|
| Dr Jaya Thakur v Govt of India | 30 Jan | Menstrual health read into Article 21 |
| Hamsaanandini Nanduri | 17 Mar | 12 weeks adoptive-mother leave, any age |
| Chinthada Anand v State of AP | 24 Mar | SC status only for Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists |
| Post-facto clearance case | 29 Jul | Only by Section 3 EPA notification, prospective |
| Just Rights for Children Alliance | 15 Oct | Internet access within Article 21 and 19(1)(a) |
| Court strength | 2026 Bill | 38 including CJI (1950: 8; 2019: 34) |
| Article 124(1) | Constitution | Parliament fixes the number of judges |
| Money Bill, Article 109 | Constitution | Rajya Sabha recommends changes within 14 days |
| Common Cause | 2018 | Right to die with dignity, living wills |
What an exam could ask
- A case-to-principle match could be asked pairing Dr Jaya Thakur, Harish Rana's case, Chinthada Anand and the post-facto clearance ruling with menstrual health, passive euthanasia, SC status on conversion and Section 3 of the EPA.
- The earlier landmarks could be asked alongside the new rulings: Aruna Shanbaug (2011) and Common Cause (2018); the 1950 Order with the 1956 and 1990 additions; Vanashakti (May 2025) and its recall.
- The new sanctioned strength of the Supreme Court (38) and the route used (Article 123 ordinance, then a Bill reported to have passed as a Money Bill) could be asked, with the 1950 and 2019 figures.
- A legal reasoning passage could be asked that sets out Article 21 and tests whether a stated right (menstrual health, internet access, dying with dignity) falls within it.
- The bench and citation (2026 INSC 97, 2026 INSC 283) could be asked in a detail-level question.
Angles to revise, not predictions.
What happened
Four 2026 rulings stand out. In January, in Dr Jaya Thakur v Government of India, the Court read menstrual health into Article 21 and ordered free sanitary napkins and gender-segregated toilets in schools. In March it allowed withdrawal of life support for Harish Rana, in a vegetative state since 2013, applying the Common Cause framework, reported as the first passive euthanasia actually permitted by an Indian court. Also in March, in Chinthada Anand v State of Andhra Pradesh, it held that only persons professing Hinduism, Sikhism or Buddhism can be Scheduled Castes, so conversion ends that status. In July a three-judge bench prospectively quashed the 2021 office memorandum allowing post-facto environmental clearances. The Court's strength rose to 38.
Words to know
- Article 21
- Guarantees life and personal liberty. In 2026 the Court read menstrual health into it (with Articles 14 and 21A), applied it to withdrawal of life support, and read internet access into it with Article 19(1)(a).
- Continuing mandamus
- A writ under which the Court keeps a matter open and monitors compliance over time, as it did in the menstrual health case against the Union and the states.
- Common Cause (2018)
- The judgment that recognised the right to die with dignity and living wills under Article 21, modified in 2023. Aruna Shanbaug (2011) had first recognised passive euthanasia in principle. Active euthanasia remains illegal in India.
- Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950
- Issued under Article 341, which lets the President specify Scheduled Castes. It originally covered only Hindus; Sikhs were added in 1956 and Buddhists in 1990. The SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act dates from 1989.
- Post-facto environmental clearance
- Clearance granted after a project has already started. The Vanashakti judgment of May 2025 first barred it; that ruling was recalled in November 2025 by a bench led by CJI Gavai, with Justice Bhuyan dissenting. The July 2026 ruling on review allows it only through a statutory notification under Section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, never by an office memorandum. The EIA Notification 2006 is issued under the same Act.
- Strength of the Supreme Court
- Article 124(1): the Court consists of the CJI and as many other judges as Parliament fixes by law. The original strength in 1950 was 8; the 2019 amendment took it from 31 to 34; the 2026 ordinance and Bill took it to 38. Article 123 allows ordinances when Parliament is not in session.
- Articles 14 and 21A
- Article 14 is equality before law; Article 21A makes education a fundamental right for ages 6 to 14, given effect by the RTE Act of 2009.
- Money Bill
- Under Article 110 a Money Bill can be introduced only in the Lok Sabha and the Speaker certifies it; the Rajya Sabha can only recommend changes within 14 days. Rojer Mathew (2019) referred the scope of the Money Bill route to a larger bench; the Aadhaar Act 2016 was passed as a Money Bill.
Full timeline
Dr Jaya Thakur v Government of India (2026 INSC 97): Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan read the right to menstrual health into Article 21, with Articles 14 and 21A, and direct free biodegradable sanitary napkins for girls in Classes 6 to 12 and functional gender-segregated toilets in schools, under a continuing mandamus
Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K.V. Viswanathan permit withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment for Harish Rana, applying Common Cause (2018) as modified in 2023 and waiving the 30-day reconsideration period; AIIMS Delhi carries it out and the Court asks the Centre to consider legislation on passive euthanasia. Rana dies on 24 March
Hamsaanandini Nanduri v Union of India: Justices Pardiwala and Mahadevan hold that Section 60(4) of the Code on Social Security, 2020, which gave adoptive mothers leave only if the child was under three months, violates Articles 14 and 21; adoptive mothers get 12 weeks regardless of the child's age
Chinthada Anand v State of Andhra Pradesh (2026 INSC 283): Justices P.K. Mishra and Manmohan hold that only persons professing Hinduism, Sikhism or Buddhism can be Scheduled Castes under the 1950 Presidential Order and that conversion to another religion ends that status, so a Madiga pastor was not protected by the SC/ST Act
The President promulgates the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Ordinance under Article 123, raising judges excluding the CJI from 33 to 37 and total strength from 34 to 38
CJI Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul Pancholi quash the Centre's 2021 office memorandum allowing post-facto environmental clearances, prospectively only; such clearances can be allowed only by a statutory notification under Section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986; the 2017 notification stands as a one-time measure and clearances already granted remain valid
Lok Sabha passes the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Bill, 2026 by voice vote, replacing the May ordinance and fixing the sanctioned strength at 38 including the CJI
As reported by one outlet: the Bill went through the Lok Sabha as a Money Bill, so the Rajya Sabha could only recommend changes within 14 days; the same route was used in 2019, and the Money Bill question is pending before a seven-judge bench
Just Rights for Children Alliance v S. Harish: Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K.V. Chandran hold that access to the internet is a fundamental right under Article 21 read with Article 19(1)(a), children included, and decline to endorse blanket age-based bans while calling for parental controls and child modes on platforms
A different conversion ruling: Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Shree Chandrashekhar dismiss Tamil Nadu's appeal against the Madras High Court order striking down GO 31 of 2024, holding that conversion to Islam alone does not make a person a member of the notified backward class Muslim communities
Sources
- https://thewire.in/law/five-significant-observations-from-the-supreme-court-verdict-on-menstrual-hygiene
- https://www.scobserver.in/supreme-court-observer-law-reports-scolr/dr-jaya-thakur-v-government-of-india18873/
- https://thewire.in/gender/menstrual-health-isnt-just-hygiene-its-a-constitutional-right
- https://www.theweek.in/news/india/2026/03/11/euthanasia-laws-sc-implements-guidelines-calls-for-legislation.amp.html
- https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/india/passive-euthanasia-sc-allows-withdrawal-of-life-support-to-32-year-old-in-vegetative-state-since-2013/
- https://www.dtnext.in/news/national/harish-rana-indias-first-person-to-be-allowed-passive-euthanasia-dies-in-aiims
- https://www.etvbharat.com/en/bharat/panel-will-be-formed-to-implement-sc-order-allowing-passive-euthanasia-to-youth-aiims-enn26031108057
- https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2026/03/17/sc-strikes-down-3-month-cap-on-maternity-benefits-for-adoptive-mothers/
- https://barandbench.com/news/litigation/supreme-court-strikes-down-section-604-of-social-security-code-which-restricted-maternity-benefits-of-adoptive-mothers
- https://www.livelaw.in/amp/top-stories/supreme-court-quashes-law-denying-maternity-leave-to-adoptive-mother-if-adopted-child-is-aged-above-3-months-526711
- https://www.verdictum.in/app-lite/court-updates/supreme-court/chinthada-anand-v-state-of-andhra-pradesh-026-insc-283-conversion-to-christianity-sc-status-1610592
- https://www.scobserver.in/supreme-court-observer-law-reports-scolr/scheduled-caste-status-of-persons-professing-christianity/
- https://thesouthfirst.com/beyond-south/converts-to-christianity-ineligible-for-scheduled-caste-benefits-and-protections-supreme-court
- https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2026/05/18/supreme-court-judges-increase-ordinance-2026-explained/
- https://newsonair.gov.in/president-approves-increase-in-sanctioned-strength-of-judges-in-supreme-court-from-33-to-37/
- https://www.dailyexcelsior.com/president-murmu-promulgates-ordinance-to-increase-supreme-court-judge-strength-by-four/
- https://www.business-standard.com/india-news/supreme-court-bars-executive-route-for-post-facto-environmental-clearances-126072901652_1.html
- https://theprint.in/judiciary/sc-junks-2021-office-memorandum-allowing-post-facto-environmental-clearances-valid-notification-must/2999768/
- https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/centre-cant-grant-retrospective-environmental-clearance-through-om-route-valid-notification-a-must-supreme-court
- https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2026/08/03/lok-sabha-passes-supreme-court-number-of-judges-amendment-bill-2026/
- https://www.barandbench.com/news/lok-sabha-passes-bill-to-increase-supreme-court-judge-strength-to-38
- https://thewire.in/politics/in-less-than-10-minutes-and-without-debate-lok-sabha-passes-bill-to-increase-supreme-court-judges
- https://www.barandbench.com/columns/money-bill-or-constitutional-shortcut-the-supreme-court-judges-bill-and-parliamentary-integrity
- https://lawchakra.in/supreme-court/supreme-court-holds-internet-access-is-fundamental-right-of-every-individual-including-children-under-article-21/
- https://www.thehansindia.com/news/cities/new-delhi/internet-fundamental-right-for-children-sc-1133435
- https://courtbook.in/posts/internet-access-a-fundamental-right-for-everyone-including-children-supreme-court
- https://swarajyamag.com/legal/converts-to-islam-cannot-claim-backward-class-reservation-based-on-pre-conversion-caste-status-supreme-court
- https://www.thenewsminute.com/amp/story/news/hindu-backward-class-person-converting-to-other-religion-not-entitled-to-reservation-sc
You may have heard it as: Supreme Court landmark judgments 2026, important SC judgments 2026 for CLAT, menstrual health Article 21 judgment, free sanitary napkins schools Supreme Court, Harish Rana passive euthanasia, passive euthanasia India first case, Chinthada Anand judgment, converts lose Scheduled Caste status, Madiga pastor SC/ST Act judgment, ex post facto environmental clearance judgment, Vanashakti case 2026, Supreme Court 38 judges, Supreme Court strength increased, internet fundamental right children.
Test yourself
1.Buddhists were added to the Scheduled Castes list under the 1950 Presidential Order in which year?
Correct. The 1950 Order, issued under Article 341, covered only Hindus. Sikhs were added in 1956 and Buddhists in 1990.
Not quite. The 1950 Order, issued under Article 341, covered only Hindus. Sikhs were added in 1956 and Buddhists in 1990. It goes into your error book.
2.How many judges did the Supreme Court have at its start in 1950, including the CJI?
Correct. The original strength was 8. The 2019 amendment took it from 31 to 34 and the 2026 Bill to 38.
Not quite. The original strength was 8. The 2019 amendment took it from 31 to 34 and the 2026 Bill to 38. It goes into your error book.
3.Which 2018 judgment recognised the right to die with dignity and living wills under Article 21?
Correct. Common Cause (2018) did so, modified in 2023. Aruna Shanbaug (2011) first recognised passive euthanasia in principle.
Not quite. Common Cause (2018) did so, modified in 2023. Aruna Shanbaug (2011) first recognised passive euthanasia in principle. It goes into your error book.
4.On a Money Bill, the Rajya Sabha can only recommend changes within how many days?
Correct. A Money Bill (Article 110) starts only in the Lok Sabha; under Article 109 the Rajya Sabha has 14 days to recommend changes.
Not quite. A Money Bill (Article 110) starts only in the Lok Sabha; under Article 109 the Rajya Sabha has 14 days to recommend changes. It goes into your error book.
5.Under which Article does Parliament fix the number of Supreme Court judges by law?
Correct. Article 124(1) says the Court consists of the CJI and as many other judges as Parliament fixes by law.
Not quite. Article 124(1) says the Court consists of the CJI and as many other judges as Parliament fixes by law. It goes into your error book.