The Supreme Court and several High Courts delivered rulings whose impact extended well beyond courtrooms, reshaping debates on federalism, rights, governance and public safety.
Take a look at top cases that sparked debate in 2025:
Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025
One of the most politically sensitive legal battles of the year was the challenge to the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. Multiple petitions questioned the constitutional validity of changes affecting waqf properties — religious endowments meant for charitable and community use.
A Supreme Court bench led by then Chief Justice of India BR Gavai, with Justices Surya Kant and Vikram Nath, heard arguments that the amendments gave excessive powers to district collectors to decide whether land claimed as waqf belonged to the government. Petitioners also challenged the removal of the “waqf by user” concept and changes to the composition of waqf boards, arguing these violated Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution.
The Supreme Court declined to stay the entire law but put key provisions on hold, including a clause requiring a person to have practised Islam for five years to create a waqf. The court said these measures were paused "to protect the interest of all the parties and balance the equities during pendency of this batch of matters."
Stray dogs and public safety
The issue of stray dogs emerged as an unexpected flashpoint. Acting on reports of rising dog-bite incidents, particularly in Delhi-NCR, the Supreme Court took suo motu cognisance and issued a series of directions.
Initial orders called for stray dogs to be captured, sterilised and housed without release. Following protests by animal welfare groups and objections from civic bodies, the court revisited its stance. In August, a larger bench clarified that sterilisation, vaccination and release back into the same locality remained the rule under the Animal Birth Control Rules, 2023, except in cases of rabies or aggressive behaviour.
In November, the court directed that stray dogs found within hospitals, schools, railway stations and other institutional premises be removed, sterilised and relocated to shelters, and not released back into those areas.
Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls
The Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls became a major election-law controversy, particularly ahead of assembly elections in several states.
A Supreme Court bench led by Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Dipankar Datta examined claims that SIR was being used as a backdoor citizenship verification exercise. Petitioners warned of mass disenfranchisement due to deletions without due process.
While acknowledging the Election Commission’s authority to revise rolls, the court cautioned that citizenship determination falls under a separate legal framework. Interim directions required the acceptance of a wide range of identity documents and mandated individual notice and hearing before any deletion.
Presidential Reference assent to bills timeline
In a rare constitutional development, President Droupadi Murmu invoked Article 143 and sought the Supreme Court’s opinion on whether courts could impose timelines on governors and the President for granting assent to Bills.
The reference followed an April ruling by a two-judge bench that had laid down deadlines for governors to decide on pending state legislation. A five-judge Constitution Bench headed by then CJI BR Gavai heard the matter.
In November, the court opined that timelines could not be judicially imposed on governors or the President, describing earlier directions as “erroneous” and suffering from “legal infirmities”. However, it clarified that governors do not have “unfettered” powers to sit on Bills indefinitely.
Aravalli hills and environmental governance
Environmental regulation returned to the spotlight with Supreme Court orders on mining in the Aravalli range. Accepting expert recommendations, the court adopted a uniform definition identifying hills rising 100 metres above local relief as part of the Aravallis.
The bench directed the environment ministry to prepare a Management Plan for Sustainable Mining and placed restrictions on fresh mining leases until then. The ruling was seen as a move towards landscape-level environmental protection, especially in Rajasthan and Haryana. The ruling also sparked debate across activists and political parties.
However, the apex court put the new definition in abeyance, proposing for a constitution of a new committee to analyse the matter in depth.
Justice Yashwant Varma cash recovery row
The judiciary faced an unprecedented moment after sacks of unaccounted cash were found at the official residence of then Delhi High Court judge Yashwant Varma in March.
Following an in-house inquiry, then CJI Sanjiv Khanna wrote to the President and the Prime Minister recommending further action. Justice Varma was transferred to the Allahabad High Court, and by August, the Lok Sabha Speaker initiated impeachment proceedings.
A parliamentary panel is currently examining the matter. Justice Varma alleged conspiracy to frame him under corruption charges.
Tribunals Reforms Act struck down
In November, the Supreme Court invalidated key provisions of the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021, holding that Parliament had reintroduced measures previously struck down by the court.
The bench ruled that excessive executive control over appointments and tenure of tribunal members violated judicial independence and directed the government to work towards setting up an independent National Tribunals Commission.
Experience mandatory for judicial services
In May, in All India Judges Association v. Union of India, the Supreme Court restored the requirement of a minimum three years of legal practice for entry into judicial services.
The court held that courtroom experience is essential for effective judging and later clarified that judges already appointed would not be affected. States have since begun revising recruitment rules accordingly.
Nithari killings's accused set free
In November, the Supreme Court acquitted Surendra Koli in the final case linked to the Nithari killings of 2005–06, ordering his immediate release.
The court cited weak evidence and procedural lapses, bringing an end to one of India’s most notorious criminal cases nearly two decades after skeletal remains were discovered in Noida.
Digital arrest scams and CBI probe
Amid a surge in cybercrime, the Supreme Court ordered the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to probe “digital arrest” scams on a pan-India basis.
The bench granted the agency a “free hand” to investigate the alleged role of bankers under the Prevention of Corruption Act, particularly in cases involving mule accounts.
Unnao rape case chaos
On December 23, the Delhi High Court suspended the life sentence of former BJP MLA Kuldeep Singh Sengar in the Unnao rape case of 2017.
The bail grant led to huge controversy with the CBI and the victim approaching Supreme Court challenging the directive.
The Supreme Court, on December 29, stayed the Delhi HC order. A special vacation bench headed by CJI Surya Kant, and Justices JK Maheshwari and AG Masih, said that there are various substantial questions of law that require registration (in the matter).
"If convict has been released on bail, such an order shall not be normally stayed by this court without hearing such person. But given the circumstances, where convict is already under imprisonment in the culpable homicide case, we stay the operation of the Delhi High Court order. Sengar shall not be released," CJI Surya Kant said.
Year 2025 reshaped legal and political debate
Beyond verdicts, 2025 also saw rare institutional developments — three Chief Justices of India in a single year, public disclosure of judges’ assets, a reservation policy for SC/ST staff in the apex court, and even a shoe attack on a sitting CJI during court proceedings.
Together, these rulings and events ensured that the judiciary remained central to India’s political and constitutional conversations in 2025, influencing governance, civil rights and the balance of power between institutions.
