The Supreme Court delivered several landmark rulings in 2025 dealing with everything from constitutional powers to public safety, social justice, and environmental protection. Here's a look at the 10 biggest Supreme Court decisions of 2025 that have left a lasting mark on governance, civil rights, and public policy.
1) Presidents, Governors Aren't Bound By Timelines To Approve Bills
In November, the Supreme Court clarified that the President and state Governors cannot be forced to follow strict timelines when approving Bills. A five-judge Constitution Bench emphasised that the actions of the President or Governors are not “justiciable”, meaning judicial review can only be invoked once a Bill becomes law. This ruling followed queries from President Droupadi Murmu after a two-judge bench's verdict in the Tamil Nadu Governor case had effectively imposed a deadline for clearing Bills passed by state legislatures.
2) Stray Dog Management Across Public Spaces
In November, the Supreme Court directed that stray dogs be removed from schools, hospitals, bus stands, sports complexes, and railway stations, and sent to designated shelters. The court emphasised that the animals should be sterilised and relocated in accordance with the Animal Birth Control Rules.
3) Green Firecrackers Allowed With Regulations
In October, the Supreme Court allowed the sale and use of green firecrackers in Delhi and neighbouring cities, easing the strict ban that had been in place due to severe winter pollution. The bench permitted green crackers from October 18 to 21 after years of a blanket prohibition that was often violated. Diwali fell on October 20, and the Court restricted fireworks to specific hours: 6 am to 7 am and 6 pm to 10 pm on those days.
4) Acquittal In Nithari Serial Killings Case
In a verdict in November, the Supreme Court acquitted Surendra Koli, the domestic help once called the “monster of Nithari,” ordering his immediate release. This ruling closed the nearly two-decade-old case, clearing both Koli and his employer, businessman Moninder Singh Pandher, of all criminal charges related to the notorious Nithari killings that occurred between 2005 and 2006 in Noida. The bench cited weak evidence and procedural lapses.
5) Upholding Dishonour Killing Convictions
In April, the Supreme Court upheld convictions in the Kannagi-Murugesan honour killing case. The Court said dishonour killings must be met with strict punishment, upholding the conviction of 11 individuals for the brutal murder of a young couple in Tamil Nadu in July 2003. The SC bench declined to interfere with the Madras High Court's June 2022 verdict, which had confirmed the convictions and sentences, including those of two police officers. The bench said that the victims, Murugesan and Kannagi, both in their early twenties, were poisoned in full view of a large gathering of villagers.
6) Reserved-Category Candidates And Recruitment Rules
The Supreme Court ruled in September that reserved-category candidates who avail of age relaxation under reservation cannot later be considered for unreserved (general) category vacancies if recruitment rules forbid it. The case involved SSC Constable (GD) recruitment, with an age limit of 18 to 23 years and a three-year relaxation for OBC candidates. The applicants, who applied as OBC and used the age relaxation, scored higher than the last selected general category candidate but lower than the last selected OBC candidate, making them ineligible. They approached the High Court, which allowed their claim to be considered for general category seats based on merit. The central government then appealed the decision in the Supreme Court.
7) Mandate On Women's Representation In Bar Councils
Earlier this month, the Supreme Court directed the Bar Council of India (BCI) to ensure 30% reservation for women in the upcoming State Bar Council elections, upholding the “constitutional ethos” of mandated representation. A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi was hearing two public interest petitions, highlighting the severe underrepresentation of women and other marginalised groups in Bar Council bodies nationwide.
8) Key Provisions Of Waqf Amendment Act Stayed
In September, the Supreme Court temporarily stayed key provisions of the Centre's Waqf laws, including requirements that donors be practicing Muslims for five years and the nomination of non-Muslims to federal and state Waqf boards. Another halted provision gave District Collectors sweeping powers to determine whether a property qualifies as a waqf, which the Court said would violate the separation of powers. The SC bench noted these provisions could lead to arbitrary exercise of power and paused them pending challenges to the constitutional validity of the amendments.
9) Minimum Three Years Of Legal Practice Required For Judicial Service Aspirants
In May, the Supreme Court ruled that fresh law graduates cannot appear for the judicial services examination, mandating a minimum of three years of legal practice for candidates applying to entry-level posts. The Chief Justice said appointing fresh graduates had created several challenges, as highlighted by multiple high courts, and emphasised that practical courtroom experience is essential to ensure judicial efficiency and competence.
10) Aravalli Hills Definition
In November, the Supreme Court delivered a landmark judgment on mining and environmental protection in the Aravalli Hills and Ranges. The court adopted a uniform definition recommended by a high-level MoEFCC committee, which said landforms rising 100 meters or more above the local terrain are classified as “Aravalli Hills,” while clusters of such hills within 500 meters of each other are “Aravalli Ranges.” The ruling also imposed a freeze on new mining leases until a comprehensive Management Plan for Sustainable Mining is prepared, highlighting the Aravallis' role in preventing desertification, recharging groundwater and acting as a barrier against dust storms from the Thar Desert.
