SC Bars a Murder Accused From All Inheritance Routes

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.

Here’s what happened this week.

---

Supreme Court Highlights

Murder Accused Cannot Inherit, Real Owner Cannot Reclaim Benami Property by Will

Manjula v. D.A. Srinivas [2026 INSC 465] Bench: Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan

The Supreme Court delivered a composite judgment with two practice-shaping holdings.

Limb one — Section 25, Hindu Succession Act: The Court held that the disqualification of a person who commits or abets the murder of another from inheriting that person’s property applies to both intestate and testamentary succession, and operates even while the trial is pending — actual conviction is not a condition precedent. The provision “imposes a civil consequence against a wrongdoer,” and the bar may be examined on a preponderance of probabilities standard, independent of the criminal proof threshold. The bar rests on Section 25 read with the broader principles of “justice, fair play and equity.”

Limb two — Benami Transactions: The Court held that a person claiming to be the “real owner” of a benami property cannot enforce ownership through a will executed by the benamidar. Wills, family settlements, oral understandings, fiduciary claims, and succession proceedings cannot be used to do indirectly what the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 forbids directly. The Bench observed that “clever drafting” cannot create an “illusory cause of action” to validate transactions prohibited by statute, and that courts must “pierce the veil” of such drafting.

Why it matters: Civil and criminal lawyers handling estates, succession suits, and contested wills should align their pleadings: pending criminal trials in murder cases now have an immediate civil-law consequence on inheritance, and the disqualification needs to be raised at the succession stage, not deferred. Real-property practitioners should re-examine pending suits for declaration based on benamidar-executed wills — the Court has signalled aggressive pleading-stage scrutiny.

---

CJI Bench Mandates Exclusive NIA Courts on a Caseload Formula

Bench: CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi — May 8, 2026

Acting on a long-running petition concerning the disposal of UAPA and other NIA trials, the Supreme Court directed States to set up dedicated exclusive special courts on a defined formula:

• At least one exclusive NIA court for every 10–15 pending trials within a High Court’s jurisdiction;
• Two courts where pendency exceeds 15;
• Three courts where pendency exceeds 25.

The Bench directed that NIA courts must deal exclusively with UAPA and related trials, and that presiding officers cannot be entrusted with other case types — to enable day-to-day trial schedules. Presiding judges retain discretion over listing, but must aim to conclude at least one trial per month. The Centre will fund roughly Rs 1 crore per court per year for running costs and infrastructure. The matter is listed for further hearing in July.

Why it matters: Defence counsel handling pending UAPA matters can expect re-listing under the new infrastructure, and States that have under-resourced their special-court capacity face direct judicial scrutiny in July. Anticipate calendar movement on long-stalled trials and a tightening of bail-pendency arguments that depended on inactivity at the trial stage.

---

Sabarimala Reference: Bench Turns to Parsi & Dawoodi Bohra Excommunication

Bench: CJI Surya Kant, Justices B.V. Nagarathna, M.M. Sundresh, Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Aravind Kumar, Augustine George Masih, Prasanna B. Varale, R. Mahadevan, and Joymalya Bagchi — May 5–7, 2026 (Days 11–13)

The nine-judge Constitution Bench, having concluded oral arguments on the Sabarimala temple-entry questions in late April, took up the tagged matters on excommunication practices this week. Days 11 and 12 focused on the practice of excommunicating Parsi women who marry outside the community; Day 13 moved into Dawoodi Bohra excommunication. The Bench observed that the Parsi excommunication practice “appears to be discriminatory.”

The Bench is also re-examining how the Court should treat decades-old PILs framing personal-law challenges, and the legitimacy of bodies that file such PILs without standing inside the religious community.

Why it matters: The reference’s reach is now visibly broader than Sabarimala. Counsel in any pending personal-law / denominational-autonomy matter should treat the eventual judgment as restating the entire Articles 25–26 framework, not just the temple-entry questions.

---

RTE Act, Section 12(1)(c): SC Puts Thirteen States/UTs on Notice

May 8, 2026

The Supreme Court asked ten States and three Union Territories to demonstrate implementation of Section 12(1)(c) of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 — the provision requiring private unaided non-minority schools to reserve 25% of seats for children from economically and socially weaker sections. The Court warned that on failure to demonstrate faithful implementation, Principal Secretaries (Education) of the named States/UTs may be summoned.

The Court flagged familiar implementation failures: online-only application processes that ignore digital illiteracy, language barriers, lack of helpdesks, opaque seat availability, and absent grievance redressal forums.

Why it matters: Education-law practitioners and counsel for State education departments should anticipate compliance affidavits and possible coercive directions. School operators in the named jurisdictions should expect tightened audit of admission processes for the next academic cycle.

---

Other Notable SC Orders This Week

• Illegal mining — Rajasthan — The State admitted inaction on long-pending complaints after the Court flagged repeated non-compliance with earlier directions.
• Delhi heritage monuments — The Court expressed concern about leasing of protected heritage sites to private parties; sought a ministry response.
• Police recruitment fraud — A police officer was found to have joined two State police forces under different identities; the Court ordered an inquiry.
• Sabarimala IYLA standing — “Are you the nation’s chief priest?” — Bench questioned the Indian Young Lawyers Association’s standing in the original PIL.
• NCLT delays — administrative track — The April 29 suo motu matter has been placed before the CJI for assignment to an appropriate Bench; no listing this week.

---

Insolvency & Corporate

NCLT Suo Motu — Awaiting Bench Assignment

The April 29 suo motu order taken on NCLT pendency (recording 383 pending resolution-plan applications and delays of up to 738 days) was directed to be placed before the CJI for assignment. No listing or interim direction this week. Counsel tracking the matter should monitor the next Friday’s listing for the assignment.

Templates Reminder

The IBC (Amendment) 2026 in-force changes — three-month NCLAT disposal mandate, expanded resolution-plan definition, revised dissenting-financial-creditor entitlement — remain operative. With the suo motu pressure on tribunal capacity, expect tighter scrutiny of CIRP timelines from the appellate side as well.

---

Politics & Public Law

Kerala Assembly Election: UDF Landslide

The Kerala Assembly results were declared on May 4. The Congress-led United Democratic Front secured 102 of 140 seats — its largest mandate since 1977 — with the Left Democratic Front reduced to 35 seats and the BJP-led NDA winning 3 seats (Nemom, Kazhakoottam, Chathannoor) for its first ever Assembly presence in the State.

Why it matters for practitioners: The change in government will shape several pending legislative and regulatory matters in which Kerala-government positions are recorded — including FCRA-amendment timelines, contested ordinance challenges, and State-level appointments and notifications likely to be re-examined by the incoming administration.

---

What We’re Watching Next Week

• Sabarimala reference — Hearings continue on Dawoodi Bohra excommunication; verdict on the Sabarimala questions remains reserved
• NCLT suo motu — Listing and Bench assignment by the CJI
• NIA courts directive — State compliance affidavits in the lead-up to the July hearing
• RTE Section 12(1)(c) — Compliance demonstrations from the named ten States and three UTs
• Kerala — Government-formation timeline; new Cabinet composition

---

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