On 21 July 2025 a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court (Hon'ble Justices Anil S. Kilor & Shyam C. Chandak) delivered a lengthy (reported ~671-page) judgment that quashed a 2015 special-court conviction of 12 persons for the 11 July 2006 serial blasts on Mumbai’s Western Railway local line.

Three lawyers—Advocates Prashant Upadhyay, Harsh Kushwaha, and Prashant Yadav—have filed a petition before the Madhya Pradesh High Court (Indore Bench) seeking the removal of sponsored advertisements and celebrity endorsements that promote online legal services. These ads, circulated via platforms like YouTube and Instagram, feature a popular actor in a judicial role urging viewers to "purchase the best online legal services" through fixed-price packages.

Impact of Online Gaming Bill, 2025 in India.

The Himachal Pradesh High Court drew a vital distinction: mere appreciation of another country—absent any disassociation or incitement—does not constitute sedition. The ruling highlights the need for evidentiary thresholds in BNS-based sedition allegations, especially when digital actions are involved. It also underscores procedural safeguards, discouraging unnecessary custody once the investigative process is complete.

The Chhattisgarh High Court strengthens the recognition of male victims of mental cruelty in marital disputes. In circumstances of economic distress, emotional abuse like taunting and humiliation can be as damaging as physical maltreatment. The judgment also reaffirms that desertion requires clear evidence of intent to abandon the marital relationship—with the wife’s letter serving as pivotal proof.