logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 SC 294 print Preview print Next print
Court : Supreme Court of India
Case No : Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 202 of 2026
Judges: THE HONOURABLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SURYA KANT, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JOYMALYA BAGCHI & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIPUL M. PANCHOLI
Parties : P.S. Subeesh Versus The Union of India & Another
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: M.S. Suvidutt, AOR, Deepika Singh, Disha Puri, Advocates. For the Respondents: Krishan Kumar, Sunita Arora, Rajesh Kumar, Shivam Bedi, Advocates, Vinay Chadda, AOR.
Date of Judgment : 25-02-2026
Head Note :-
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 20(2)(a)  -
Summary :-
1. Statutes / Acts / Rules Mentioned:
- Section 20(2)(a) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023

2. Catch Words:
- constitutional violation
- writ petition

3. Summary:
The Court examined the phrase “is or has been a Sessions Judge” in Section 20(2)(a) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. It held that the phrase does not contravene any constitutional provision. The challenge to this provision was deemed baseless and without legal merit. Consequently, the writ petition filed against the provision was rejected. Any pending applications related to the petition were ordered to be closed.

4. Conclusion:
Petition Dismissed
Judgment :-

1. We find no legal impediment or any constitutional violation in the expression “is or has been a Sessions Judge” contained in Section 20(2)(a) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.  The misconceived challenge on the premise that it violates any constitutional provision, thus, has no legal foundation.

2. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

3. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand closed.
 
  CDJLawJournal