Calcutta HC Puts the West Bengal CM's Election on Trial

Welcome to this week’s issue of the Indian Legal Brief (ILB). Here are the judgments, orders, regulatory changes, and developments that matter to your practice — without the noise.

The Supreme Court is in its partial-working-days regime until July 13, so the week’s biggest news came from the High Courts and the regulators rather than the constitution benches. The headline: a single judge of the Calcutta High Court admitted former Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee’s petition challenging the election of the sitting Chief Minister, Suvendu Adhikari, and ordered the voting machines and counting-centre footage preserved for trial. Two more election petitions — one rejected at the threshold in Kerala, one over Telugu-only voter-roll forms in Telangana — kept poll litigation in the spotlight. Off the courtroom beat, the Reserve Bank reopened and widened India’s credit-derivatives market and cleared 732 dead FEMA circulars off the books, while Anil Ambani’s personal-insolvency appeal reached the NCLAT without any early relief. Here’s what happened.

From the High Courts

Calcutta HC Admits Mamata Banerjee’s Bid to Void the CM’s Election — and Orders the EVMs Preserved

Bench: Justice Gaurang Kanth, Calcutta High Court — June 23, 2026

On June 23, a single judge of the Calcutta High Court admitted an election petition filed by former Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee challenging the election of Suvendu Adhikari — the BJP leader who became West Bengal’s first BJP Chief Minister after the 2026 Assembly elections — from the Bhabanipur constituency. Justice Gaurang Kanth held that the petition disclosed a valid cause of action and satisfied the requirements of Section 86(1) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and declined to dismiss it at the gate.

The Court issued notice, gave the respondents four weeks to file their affidavits-in-opposition (with a rejoinder in the following four weeks), and listed the matter for hearing after twelve weeks. Crucially, it directed that the EVMs and the VVPAT units used across Bhabanipur’s polling stations, along with the CCTV footage from the counting centre, be preserved pending the trial. Adhikari had defeated Banerjee in Bhabanipur by 15,105 votes — 73,917 to 58,812. At the outset of the hearing, Justice Kanth disclosed a past association with the BJP before proceeding to admit the petition.

Why it matters: A sitting Chief Minister’s election is now formally on trial, and the Court’s order to preserve the EVMs, VVPATs and counting-centre CCTV footage gives the challenge real evidentiary teeth. For election-law practitioners, the admission is a reminder that the Section 86(1) threshold is a genuine filter but not a high wall — a petition that pleads particulars of a cause of action will cross it — and that machine-and-footage preservation orders are now a standard, and consequential, first move in post-poll litigation. Watch the twelve-week listing for how the trial frames its issues.

---

Kerala HC Throws Out the Petition Against Congress MP K.C. Venugopal at the Threshold

Bench: Justice G. Girish, Kerala High Court — June 24, 2026

The same week that an election petition cleared the gate in Calcutta, one was stopped at it in Kochi. On June 24, the Kerala High Court rejected a petition filed by CPI(M) leader and former Alappuzha MP A.M. Ariff challenging the 2024 Lok Sabha election of Congress general secretary K.C. Venugopal from Alappuzha. Justice G. Girish invoked Order VII Rule 11(a) of the Code of Civil Procedure — rejection of a plaint that fails to disclose a cause of action — and noted that the petition was also defective and remained unnumbered.

Ariff had alleged irregularities in the conduct of the poll and acts amounting to bribery, but the Court found the pleadings did not disclose a triable cause of action warranting further proceedings.

Why it matters: Read alongside the Calcutta admission, this is the other half of the election-petition lesson: the threshold under Section 86 / Order VII Rule 11 turns entirely on the quality of pleading. Vague allegations of “irregularities” and “bribery”, without material particulars, will not survive a Rule 11 challenge — and procedural defects such as an unnumbered petition compound the problem. Counsel drafting election petitions should treat the particulars of corrupt practice as the make-or-break of the case.

---

Karnataka HC Cancels a Seer’s Anticipatory Bail in a POCSO Case

Bench: Justice M. Nagaprasanna, Karnataka High Court — June 25, 2026

On June 25, the Karnataka High Court set aside the anticipatory bail granted to Vachanananda Swamiji, the Jagadguru of the Panchamasali Peetha at Harihar, in a case under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. Justice M. Nagaprasanna was troubled that pre-arrest bail had been granted in offences punishable under Sections 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12 of the POCSO Act a full week before the complaint was even registered, and without the victim being heard.

The very fact that the victim has not been heard in a case concerning POCSO would also be a ground for obliteration of the order granting bail.

The Court gave the seer liberty to seek regular bail before the trial court within three weeks, directing that the application be considered on its merits and uninfluenced by its observations.

Why it matters: A pointed procedural marker for POCSO practice: anticipatory bail cannot pre-empt the registration of a complaint, and a victim’s right to be heard is not a formality the bail court can skip. For defence and prosecution alike, the ruling signals that High Courts will scrutinise — and undo — pre-arrest protection that looks like it was engineered ahead of the FIR, while leaving the regular-bail route open.

---

Telangana HC Asks the ECI to Justify Telugu-Only Voter-Roll Forms

Telangana High Court — June 26, 2026

The churn around the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls produced a fresh front this week. On June 26, the Telangana High Court issued notice to the Election Commission on a writ petition by Karimnagar social worker M.A. Mujeeb Ayyub challenging the printing and distribution of SIR enumeration forms exclusively in Telugu outside the Greater Hyderabad limits. The ECI explained that forms are printed in both English and Telugu within GHMC given its urban population, but only in Telugu elsewhere, with English and Urdu sample forms carried by booth-level officers to help.

How do you justify this?

The Court pressed the point that many younger voters schooled under CBSE and other central boards may not read Telugu well enough to follow a procedural electoral document, and posted the matter to June 29.

Why it matters: This is the SIR exercise generating language-access and minority-rights litigation in a second state, after the Supreme Court upheld the SIR framework in ADR v. ECI in May. For election-law and constitutional practitioners, it signals that the next wave of SIR challenges is shifting from the validity of the exercise to the mechanics of its rollout — form language, accessibility, and the adequacy of BLO workarounds — where courts have shown they will demand justification.

---

Bombay HC: Drinking Water Is an Article 21 Right, and the State Can’t Plead Excuses

Bench: Justices A.S. Gadkari and Kamal Khata, Bombay High Court — June 22, 2026

Hearing a batch of PILs on malnutrition deaths and water scarcity in the tribal Melghat and Dharni belt of Amravati district, a division bench of the Bombay High Court on June 22 came down hard on the Maharashtra government, holding that access to clean and potable water is a fundamental right under Article 21 and directing the State to produce an immediately implementable supply scheme. The bench took serious note of reports that 13 people had died and 86 were hospitalised in Dharni in 2025 after consuming contaminated water.

Even after 75 years of independence, people must approach courts for drinking water.

Unpersuaded by the State’s assertion that tankers were supplying the affected villages, the Court later in the week directed the petitioners to verify the claim on the ground in 22 Melghat villages.

Why it matters: A firm reaffirmation that potable water is justiciable under Article 21, and that a “progressive State” cannot meet a documented public-health failure with paper assurances. For public-law practitioners running welfare and environmental PILs, the order is a useful illustration of a court refusing to take compliance affidavits at face value and ordering independent ground verification instead.

---

Other Notable High Court Orders

• Allahabad HC declines an urgent hearing of the Ram Mandir donation PILs (June 22) — A Lucknow vacation bench of Justices Pankaj Bhatia and Amitabh Kumar Rai refused out-of-turn listing of two PILs seeking a CBI probe and CAG audit into alleged misuse of Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust donations, observing there was no immediate urgency since the State had already constituted an SIT. The Court ordered no probe or audit; the petitions remain pending in the ordinary course.
• Karnataka HC: producer undertakes not to release the film BOSS until June 30 (June 25) — In Darshan’s appeal over the Kannada film alleged to resemble the Renukaswamy murder case, the producer’s senior counsel gave an oral undertaking before Justice Pradeep Singh Yerur not to release the film until June 30, when the matter was posted for further hearing.
• Bombay HC restores Suneel Darshan’s arbitration appeal against Sunny Deol, with costs (June 25) — The Court revived the producer’s decade-old monetary dispute appeal against a 2015 dismissal, imposing ₹15,000 costs.

Supreme Court Highlights

SC Trims a Forgery Sentence, Reaffirming Proportionality in Sentencing

Bench: Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and N.V. Anjaria — June 23, 2026

In one of the few substantive vacation-bench judgments of the week, the Supreme Court on June 23 upheld a conviction under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC for using a forged land-rights document to furnish surety in a 2014 bail proceeding, but reduced the five-year sentence to the roughly two years already undergone (Israfil @ Pappu @ Naimuddin Khan v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2026 INSC 654 / 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 639). The bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and N.V. Anjaria treated the long passage of time without re-offending, the decade of litigation, the absence of antecedents and the lack of any permanent harm as mitigating factors.

The long lapse of time without any material indicating repetition of similar criminal conduct is also a relevant consideration while moulding sentence.

Why it matters: A clean, citable authority on sentence-moulding for defence counsel handling old document-forgery, surety and minor economic-offence matters. It reinforces proportionality as an independent sentencing consideration — distinct from the question of conviction — and gives practitioners a Supreme Court line to deploy where a convict has long since been at liberty without further offence.

Other Notable SC Orders This Week

• Plea on cancelled Gulf board exams disposed after a fresh CBSE policy (June 22) — A vacation bench of Justices S.V.N. Bhatti and Vipul M. Pancholi disposed of a Class XII private candidate’s petition over CBSE’s cancellation of board exams in West Asia, recording the national assessment policy the Centre notified on June 21 and holding the grievance substantially addressed.

Regulatory Watch

RBI Reopens and Widens the Credit-Derivatives Market

Reserve Bank of India — June 25, 2026

On June 25, the Reserve Bank issued the Master Direction – Reserve Bank of India (Credit Derivatives) Directions, 2026, with immediate effect, superseding the 2022 framework that had limited the market to single-name credit default swaps (CDS) on corporate bonds. The new Directions materially widen the product suite: CDS on credit indices, Total Return Swaps (TRS) on corporate bonds, and futures on credit indices traded on recognised exchanges. They also expand the pool of eligible market-makers to bring in NBFCs in the Upper and Middle Layers (including housing finance companies) alongside scheduled commercial banks, standalone primary dealers and the all-India financial institutions, and remove the old restriction that tied participation to an underlying credit exposure — resident non-retail users may now buy and sell protection without a purpose restriction, while non-residents and retail users remain confined to hedging. Exchange-traded credit products will need prior RBI approval, with SEBI to prescribe the operational guidelines.

Why it matters: This is a significant deepening of India’s corporate-bond and credit-risk markets, opening new hedging and structuring tools to banks, NBFCs and bond-market participants and creating a joint RBI–SEBI workstream for exchange-traded credit products. Treasury, derivatives and NBFC counsel should re-paper their CDS/TRS documentation against the new Master Direction and reassess which entities now qualify as market-makers and users.

---

RBI Clears 732 Dead FEMA Circulars Off the Books

Reserve Bank of India — June 24, 2026

In a substantial housekeeping exercise, the Reserve Bank on June 24 withdrew 732 inoperative circulars issued under FEMA since June 2000 (A.P. (DIR Series) Circular No. 18), spanning external commercial borrowings, FDI, the Liberalised Remittance Scheme, NRI deposits, KYC/AML and Exim Bank lines of credit, and issued a companion circular rationalising FEMA returns and reporting by discontinuing several legacy filings. Authorised Persons must stop relying on the withdrawn circulars; the operative obligations now flow only from the surviving Master Directions and regulations.

Why it matters: For FEMA and cross-border practitioners, this is a reference-base reset. Compliance manuals, account-opening checklists and reporting workflows that cite the now-withdrawn circulars need to be re-mapped to the surviving Master Directions — and the discontinued returns dropped from filing calendars — to avoid relying on instruments the regulator has formally retired.

Other Notable Regulatory Moves

• SEBI lightens certification for sales and non-core staff (June 24) — A circular splits the certification requirement for Persons Associated with Investment Advice: staff doing only sales and non-core work may clear a single lighter NISM exam (Series XXV-B) instead of the two-exam adviser set, an ease-of-doing-business measure for RIAs and distribution-heavy intermediaries.
• RBI clarifies the FCNR(B) swap window (June 23) — Follow-up FAQs confirmed that the special swap facility covers only principal (not interest), that hedged FCNR(B) positions sit outside banks’ net-open-position limits, and that banks may lend to non-residents and issue standby letters of credit against such deposits — operational comfort for treasuries mobilising NRI dollars before the September 30 sunset.
• CCI clears Honda’s move to control of Astemo (June 23) — The Competition Commission approved Honda’s acquisition of a further 21% in auto-components maker Astemo from Hitachi, taking Honda to 61% and making Astemo a consolidated subsidiary.

Insolvency & Corporate

Anil Ambani’s Personal-Insolvency Appeal Reaches the NCLAT — Without Early Relief

Bench: Justice Mohd Faiz Alam Khan and Barun Mitra, NCLAT — June 24, 2026

Anil Ambani’s appeal against the June 11 order of the NCLT Mumbai admitting personal-guarantor insolvency proceedings at the instance of the State Bank of India came up before the NCLAT on June 24. A bench of Justice Mohd Faiz Alam Khan (Judicial) and Barun Mitra (Technical) adjourned the matter to July 10 at the request of Ambani’s counsel — but granted no interim relief, so the NCLT’s admission, and the moratorium that took effect with it, continue to operate. SBI’s claim rests on a default of about ₹853.25 crore on personal guarantees Ambani executed for facilities to Reliance Communications and Reliance Infratel.

Why it matters: The closely watched personal-guarantor insolvency against Anil Ambani is not stayed — the appeal bought a date, not a reprieve, and the resolution professional’s process and the moratorium roll on in the meantime. For lenders and personal guarantors alike, it is a live illustration that an NCLAT appeal does not automatically freeze a Part III admission; July 10 is the date to watch for any merits engagement with whether the guarantee survived the RCOM resolution.

---

NCLAT Stays Vikram Solar’s Insolvency on a Full-Claim Deposit

Bench: Justice Mohd Faiz Alam Khan and Barun Mitra, NCLAT — June 26, 2026

On June 26, the NCLAT stayed the operation of the NCLT Kolkata order admitting Vikram Solar Ltd to insolvency on an operational creditor’s petition, and directed the company to deposit a demand draft of ₹91.98 lakh — the admitted operational debt — with the Pay and Accounts Officer of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs pending the next hearing (Sameer Nagpal v. Isitva Steels Pvt Ltd, Company Appeal (AT)(Ins) 1087/2026). Isitva Steels had alleged a default of around ₹9.44 crore from a subcontract for civil works on a solar project; the matter was listed again for June 29.

Why it matters: A textbook illustration of the NCLAT’s settle-and-secure approach to operational-creditor admissions — a stay of the CIRP conditioned on depositing the admitted amount, which keeps the corporate debtor out of insolvency while protecting the creditor. For listed companies facing Section 9 admissions over modest, disputed dues, the route is to move fast in appeal and put the admitted sum on the table.

Other Notable Insolvency Orders

• NCLT Jaipur: a resolution plan doesn’t auto-delete ROC charge entries (June 22) — In the Modern Syntex (India) matter, the tribunal held that IBC approval of a resolution plan extinguishes claims but does not, by itself, wipe pre-CIRP charge entries from the MCA register; resolution applicants must still follow the Companies Act satisfaction-of-charge procedure to clear them.

What We’re Watching Next Week

• Telangana SIR forms and the SIR rollout — The Telangana High Court’s Telugu-only enumeration-form challenge is back on June 29, even as the first citizenship-referral lists under the May ADR v. ECI deadline come due across the revision states.
• Anil Ambani’s personal insolvency — The NCLAT hears the SBI personal-guarantor appeal on July 10; the Bombay HC’s Black Money Act challenge remains pending separately.
• Vikram Solar and the operational-creditor appeals — Listed before the NCLAT again on June 29.
• NEET-UG 2026 — The bundle of challenges to the cancellation, the leak-batch identification and the computer-based-test demand awaits Justice Narasimha’s bench once the Court resumes regular sittings on July 13.
• Khalid, Imam and the UAPA timeline cases — Fresh trial-court bail pleas are listed for July 4, with the AIIMS contempt appearance set for July 7 and the parked larger-bench references expected to move only after July 13.

That’s all for this week. If a colleague would find this useful, forward them this page — or better yet, ask them to subscribe.