The year 2024 has been nothing short of transformative for
India’s judiciary, with the Supreme Court (SC) marking some groundbreaking
decisions that reshaped the legal and policy frameworks of the country. From
striking down controversial policies like the electoral bonds scheme to
regulation of madrasa education, these rulings have ignited spirited debates
during the year. Each verdict has redefined the boundaries of constitutional
law, leaving a lasting impact on India’s political, social, and legal fabric.
Let us delve into some of the key and landmark judgements passed by the SC in
2024.
Supreme Court
strikes down electoral bonds scheme
One of the most significant rulings of the Supreme Court came on
February 15, 2024, when the SC struck down the 2017 electoral bond scheme,
declaring it unconstitutional for infringing upon the fundamental right to
information under Article 19(1)(a).
A five-judge Constitution Bench, led by Chief Justice DY
Chandrachud, ruled that anonymous donations through electoral bonds undermined
participatory democracy by depriving the public of essential transparency in
political funding. The Court said that such opacity compromises free and fair
elections, favouring corporate interests over individual rights.
The judgment invalidated amendments to the Income Tax Act,
Representation of People Act, and Companies Act, which had facilitated
anonymous and unlimited corporate donations, enabling undue influence in
politics.
SC rules against
legislative immunity for bribery
On March 4, 2024, the Supreme Court (SC), in the Jharkhand Mukti
Morcha (JMM) cash-for-votes case, overruled its 1998 judgment in the PV
Narasimha Rao case that granted immunity to legislators under Articles 105(2)
and 194(2) of the Constitution over bribes associated with legislative
activities. A seven-judge bench headed by the then CJI DY Chandrachud held that
parliamentary privileges cannot cover corruption and clarified that immunity
extends only to acts indispensable to the legislative functions, not to
criminal acts like bribery.
SC strikes down
unconstitutional location tracking condition
In a case involving a Nigerian national accused in a
drug-related case, the SC on July 8, 2024 ruled that bail conditions cannot
violate an accused’s right to privacy or subject them to continuous
surveillance. The top court found a condition requiring the accused to drop a
pin on Google Maps for location tracking to be ‘unconstitutional’. The court
emphasised that bail should not impose undue restrictions on liberty or amount
to confinement, and an accused’s right to privacy, protected under Article 21,
must be respected.
SC permits
sub-classification within Scheduled Castes category
In August 2024, a seven-judge bench of the Supreme Court ruled
by 6:1 majority that sub-classification within the Scheduled Castes (SC)
category is permissible, allowing for more targeted quotas for historically
underrepresented sub-groups.
It overruled the 2005 E V Chinnaiah ruling, which had previously
held that the SC category as a homogeneous group. The judgement led by Chief
Justice DY Chandrachud is seen as a crucial step toward benefiting marginalised
sections within the SC community.
SC says ‘consensual
sex’ is not an exception under POCSO
On August 20, the Supreme Court overturned a contentious
Calcutta High Court judgment on a POCSO case involving a 14-year-old girl. The
High Court had set aside the conviction of the accused mentioning that the
POCSO Act is ‘too harsh on consensual adolescent relationships’.
Referring to the High Court’s judgment, the SC said, “The very
fact that the juvenile is a child makes a sexual act with her exploitative,
irrespective of consent.” The top court reaffirmed strict adherence to child
protection laws and dismissed attempts to water down the POCSO Act.
SC strikes down
caste-based segregation in prisons
In October 2024, the Supreme Court of India struck down
provisions in state prison manuals that assigned tasks based on caste, calling
it “discriminatory”. The court criticised the practice of reserving cleaning
tasks for marginalised castes while assigning cooking duties to higher-caste
prisoners, stating it violated Article 15 of the Constitution. The top court
reiterated that this kind of caste-based segregation reinforced harmful
stereotypes and social hierarchies, thereby undermining the very principles of
equality and justice.
SC upholds validity
of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act
In October 2024, a five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme
Court upheld the constitutionality of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, 1955,
which grants citizenship to foreign migrants of Indian origin who arrived in
Assam between January 1, 1966, and March 25, 1971.
Section 6A refers to illegal migration from Bangladesh that the
‘Assam Accord’ of 1985 has raised a concern over. The SC upheld the provision
on the grounds of Assam’s peculiar demographic problems and the historical
context of the cut-off date of 1971.
SC upholds Uttar
Pradesh Madarsa Education Act
In November 2024, the SC upheld the Uttar Pradesh Board of
Madrasa Education Act, 2004, as constitutionally valid, thus reversing an
Allahabad High Court ruling that mentioned the Act violates the principle of
secularism. The SC held that a statute can be struck down only if it violates
fundamental rights under Part III of the Constitution or violates provisions
regarding legislative competence.
SC ruling on
‘bulldozer justice’: A violation of rule of law
In November 2024, the Supreme Court condemned the practice of
demolitions by state authorities as a form of punitive action, known as
‘bulldozer justice’. The bench of Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan ruled
that such demolitions violate the rule of law, the principle of separation of
powers, and the fundamental right to shelter. It emphasised that property
demolition without judicial oversight bypasses due process and violates the
presumption of innocence. The judgment reiterated the need for public
accountability and adherence to legal procedures.