What the legal press is reporting

DeepJudge, a Zurich-based enterprise search company, has introduced the Agent Handoff Protocol (AHP), an open protocol that enables users to move between different AI products while preserving the context of their work. This initiative aims to address the challenges faced by users who often switch between various AI systems to complete their tasks. Harvey has announced plans to implement the protocol in beta this month, while Thomson Reuters has expressed support for its integration into its CoCounsel for Legal product, with further details to follow. The AHP allows for the transfer of not just user data but also the broader context needed for ongoing tasks, such as objectives, supporting materials, and conversation history. This capability is designed to enhance legal workflows by allowing users to seamlessly continue their work without the need to re-upload materials or recreate prompts. DeepJudge's CTO, Yannic Kilcher, emphasized the importance of enabling users to utilize the best AI tools for their needs while maintaining their context during transitions.

On August 6, 2026, the Calcutta High Court quashed an adoption clearance granted by the West Bengal Child Welfare Committee (CWC) for an infant found abandoned in 2024. Justice Krishna Rao noted that the CWC had declared the child 'abandoned' without conducting a proper inquiry or providing the biological parents a chance to be heard. The court ordered the adoptive parents to return the child to the CWC by August 7, pending a fresh inquiry. The case began when a newborn was discovered injured in a drain, and after being rescued, both a man and a woman claimed to be the child's biological parents. A DNA test later confirmed their claims. Despite this, the CWC declared the child 'abandoned' in November 2024. The High Court found that the CWC had failed to conduct the mandatory inquiry under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, and had not assessed the parents' ability to care for the child adequately. The court noted that the CWC had relied on newspaper notices inviting claims and objections but had not issued notice to either biological parent, and it had ignored the DNA evidence confirming parentage.

The Delhi High Court recently imposed costs of ₹25,000 on a litigant, Mohammad Ahmad, for seeking the transfer of a case from the Karkardooma district court due to apprehension of bias from the presiding judge. Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar criticized the petitioner for making serious allegations against the judicial officer based solely on oral remarks made during court proceedings. The court stated that such allegations should not be made without material substance and emphasized that the oral observations of a judge do not equate to a determination of the issues at hand. The court dismissed the transfer petition, observing that it amounts to an abuse of the court process.

The Kerala High Court has overturned the Central government's refusal to renew the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010 (FCRA) registrations for two NGOs, the Kerala Social Service Forum and Save a Family Plan India. The court found insufficient evidence to support claims that the NGOs had financially supported protests against the Vizhinjam Port project. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas stated that even if financial support had been provided to peaceful protesters, it could not be deemed an undesirable purpose under the FCRA. The court emphasized that the right to protest is constitutionally protected, and administrative disapproval of dissent does not equate to a violation of the FCRA. The NGOs had their FCRA renewal applications rejected based on a report from a central security agency, which alleged that they funded the protests. However, the court noted that the report did not provide concrete evidence of such funding.

The Karnataka High Court has instructed the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) to provide CCTV footage from Kempegowda International Airport in Bengaluru, as requested by Kannada actress Ranya Rao, in connection with a gold smuggling case. This directive follows a plea from Rao, who claimed that the CISF had not complied with a previous court order regarding the preservation and furnishing of the footage. The footage in question covers the period from 4:30 PM on March 3, 2025, to 6:00 AM on March 4, 2025, documenting Rao's movements after disembarking from Emirates flight EK-566, including her passage through immigration and customs clearance. Additional Solicitor General Arvind Kamath clarified that there had been a misunderstanding regarding the extent of the footage to be provided, stating that the CISF would supply the preserved footage as per the court's directive. Rao was arrested on March 3, 2025, after allegedly being intercepted with 14.2 kg of gold valued at approximately ₹12.56 crore. She was subsequently granted default bail but remained in custody under COFEPOSA.

On August 12, 2026, the Supreme Court of India announced it would hear a plea concerning the disruption of essential services during protests and strikes. A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice V Mohana directed that this plea be tagged with another case regarding designated venues for protests, specifically concerning the use of Jantar Mantar in Delhi. The petition highlights that protests often lead to the disruption of essential services and complicate the movement of individuals, making it difficult to identify who is participating in the protests. The plea was filed in the context of recent student protests that began in June 2026, which were organized by the online collective Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) and culminated in a march towards Parliament on July 20, 2026. The existing case regarding Jantar Mantar argues that it is no longer a suitable venue for public protests due to safety and logistical issues. The Court had previously asked the Solicitor General to provide instructions on this matter during a hearing on August 3, 2026.

President Droupadi Murmu has granted assent to the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Act, 2026, which increases the sanctioned strength of Supreme Court judges from 34 to 38, including the Chief Justice of India. The legislation was notified in the Gazette of India on August 11, 2026, and will be deemed to have come into force on May 16, 2026, the date when the President promulgated the corresponding Ordinance. The Act repeals the Ordinance while protecting actions taken under it. The Bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha by Union Minister of State for Law and Justice Arjun Ram Meghwal on July 20, 2026, passed by the Lok Sabha on August 3, and returned by the Rajya Sabha on August 5. Chief Justice of India Surya Kant wrote to Prime Minister Narendra Modi on May 11, 2026, requesting an increase in the Court's sanctioned strength due to a growing inflow of cases. As of January 1, 2026, over 92,000 cases were pending before the Supreme Court, with the Court receiving 75,410 fresh matters in 2025 and disposing of a little over 65,000 cases. This is the first increase in the Supreme Court's sanctioned strength since 2019, when it was raised from 30 to 33 judges.

The Centre has presented its case before the Supreme Court, defending the constitutionality of a rule that requires private hospitals to charge within a government-determined range for medical procedures. This rule is part of the Clinical Establishments (Central Government) Rules, 2012. The government argued that this regulation aims to standardize charges across clinical establishments, thereby preventing excessive pricing and protecting patients from price gouging and arbitrary inflation. The Centre acknowledged that there has been a lack of consensus among states on the specific range of rates that should be applied, which has not yet been finalized.

The Allahabad High Court recently ordered an inquiry against several police officers in Ghaziabad, including the commissioner, for failing to file a First Information Report (FIR) concerning a complaint that disclosed the commission of digital rape, molestation, and other offenses. The case, titled Arpit Gupta v State of UP and 2 Others, highlights the court's stance that police cannot refuse to register an FIR based on the lack of evidence provided by the complainant, such as WhatsApp chats or call recordings.

Madhu Purnima Kishwar has filed a petition in the Punjab and Haryana High Court seeking to quash an FIR registered by the Chandigarh Police. The FIR was filed in April 2026 following a complaint from an advocate regarding a 14-second video clip shared by Kishwar, which allegedly misrepresented Prime Minister Narendra Modi receiving a face massage from a woman. The court, presided over by Justice Vikram Aggarwal, has directed the Chandigarh Administration to submit an affidavit addressing the claims made by Kishwar. Additionally, the court has requested that the parties discuss the maintainability of the quashing petition in light of a previous judgment in Kuldeep Singh v. State of Punjab & Ors., especially since Kishwar's anticipatory bail application had been dismissed earlier.

The Karnataka High Court orally stated that the Hindu Jagarana Vedike would be responsible for any untoward incidents during their proposed Akhanda Bharatha Sankalpa Dina event in Mysuru on August 14, which is intended to be a torchlight march commemorating historical events preceding India's Independence (Bar & Bench, 2026). Justice Suraj Govindaraj remarked that the organizers would face strict liability, meaning they would not be allowed to present any defense if incidents occurred. The court asked for the names of individuals who would be held accountable for the event (LiveLaw, 2026).

On August 11, 2026, the Supreme Court of India reinstated the acquittal of Ram Singh, who had been accused of raping a five-year-old girl. The Court criticized the Himachal Pradesh High Court for reversing the trial court's acquittal without adequately considering the medical and forensic evidence presented. The Supreme Court noted that the absence of blood on the victim's clothing and the lack of injuries on her body raised significant doubts about the prosecution's case. The bench, comprising Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice Atul S. Chandurkar, emphasized that the forensic evidence contradicted the prosecution's version of events, leading to the decision to restore the acquittal.

The National Law Institute University (NLIU), Bhopal has emerged as the winner of the first National Trial Advocacy Competition organized by National Law University Delhi (NLUD) in collaboration with Think India. The valedictory ceremony took place on August 9, 2026, at the Moot Court Hall of NLU Delhi. The University of Rajasthan was the runner-up in the competition. Maharashtra National Law University (MNLU), Nagpur received the award for Best Memorial, while Mansi Dadhich from the National Forensic Sciences University was honored as the Best Speaker. Delhi Chief Minister Rekha Gupta served as the chief guest at the event, where she discussed the importance of legal frameworks in governance and the responsibility of young legal professionals to contribute to societal welfare and national development. The ceremony included a report on the competition's structure and highlights, followed by the distribution of prizes and a vote of thanks from NLUD Registrar Prof. (Dr.) Risham Garg.

The Delhi High Court has ordered the takedown of obscene and pornographic content concerning actress Janhvi Kapoor. Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani emphasized the need for clarity regarding personality rights during the proceedings. However, the court refused to impose a ban on fan pages dedicated to Kapoor, suggesting that such pages do not infringe upon her rights.

On August 11, 2026, the Bombay High Court ruled that students of the Indian Law Society's (ILS) Law College who have faced attendance shortages will be allowed to appear for their semester-end examinations. This decision was made in the case of Aniruddha Gaurav Gursal and others versus the State of Maharashtra and others. The court clarified that the benefit of this ruling would extend to all affected students, including those who did not approach the court for relief. Furthermore, the court emphasized that the Supreme Court's previous judgment providing a one-time protection from detention due to low attendance applies to law students across all semesters, not just those in their final year, thereby allowing them to participate in any semester-end exams they may have missed due to attendance issues.

During a Supreme Court hearing on August 12, 2026, the Uddhav Thackeray faction of the Shiv Sena, represented by Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, contended that permitting the legislative wing of a political party to split and subsequently facilitate the formation of a new government would make a "mockery" of democracy. The case arises from a dispute regarding the recognition of the Eknath Shinde faction as the official Shiv Sena by the Election Commission of India (ECI), which granted it the use of the 'bow and arrow' symbol. The Supreme Court is examining whether a split in the legislature wing could subsequently percolate into the party's organization and primary membership. Justice Joymalya Bagchi noted that a split in the legislature party could lead to a larger division within the party's organization. The court is also considering whether the ECI can take into account developments after the initial claim of a split was made.

Relativity has announced the development of 'claiR', a conversational AI system designed for legal professionals. This system allows users to ask plain-language questions across their entire RelativityOne matter and receive answers with citations to the underlying record. Phil Saunders, CEO of Relativity, described claiR as a fundamentally new way for lawyers to access their most important legal data directly, rather than relying on technical teams to extract information. The AI operates on data already stored within RelativityOne, ensuring that sensitive information remains secure and is not transferred to separate environments. claiR is currently in a testing phase with three law firms: A&O Shearman, Foley & Lardner LLP, and K&L Gates. It is expected to be included in RelativityOne at no additional cost when it becomes generally available in 2027. The introduction of claiR follows Relativity's recent advancements in AI technology, including the aiR suite, which enhances various legal workflows.

The Telangana High Court recently declined to quash criminal proceedings against actors Rana Daggubati, D Venkatesh, and film producer D Suresh Babu, in a case concerning allegations of criminal trespass and unlawful dispossession. Justice N Tukaramji stated that the complaint filed by businessman K Nandukumar included prima facie allegations of criminal trespass, theft, criminal intimidation, and conspiracy. The court noted that the complaint and supporting materials warranted further inquiry and that disputed questions of fact could only be resolved through trial. The case arose from claims that the accused unlawfully entered Nandukumar's property, broke open doors, and forcibly removed his belongings, despite existing civil injunctions protecting his lease rights. The court emphasized that the existence of a parallel civil dispute does not preclude criminal prosecution when the allegations disclose essential elements of cognizable criminal offenses.

The Karnataka High Court recently quashed the appointment of Sadashiva Murthy as a Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) in the murder case of Father Daniel KJ, a Christian priest. The court found that the appointment was made at the request of the seminary, the complainant in the case, and that the seminary was covering the SPP's legal fees. Justice Suraj Govindaraj stated that the accused's apprehension of bias was reasonable, although the court did not question Murthy's integrity. The court emphasized that justice must not only be done but must also be seen to be done. It referenced a Supreme Court ruling which indicated that appointing an SPP at the specific request of a complainant could distort justice, particularly if the complainant is powerful and could use the legal system to victimise others. The court noted that the re-appointment of Murthy lacked documented reasons. This ruling follows a history of contested appointments of Murthy in this case, which began in 2014 and included a previous removal in 2020 due to objections from one of the accused.

UK mental health charity LawCare has confirmed that its database was compromised in a cyberattack on Beacon CRM, a software company that manages data for over a thousand charities, including LawCare. According to a statement from LawCare, hackers accessed the system using a compromised access key, and while Beacon's data were encrypted, it is believed that the hackers were able to decrypt them. Beacon's investigation, supported by external cybersecurity specialists, indicated that copies of database backups were likely downloaded by the unauthorized third party. LawCare noted that while sensitive financial information such as bank account numbers and card details were not stored in the system, the compromised data could still be exploited for phishing attempts. The charity has advised individuals who have interacted with it to remain vigilant against unexpected communications requesting personal information. LawCare has reported the incident to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), which has since closed the case. The charity reassured that to date, the compromised information has not been publicized or misused, and it is unaware of any resulting fraud or harm. The Charity Commission is monitoring the situation and has urged affected charities to file serious incident reports. Last year, LawCare assisted over 753 individuals, with a significant portion being women lawyers. This incident follows a previous cyberattack in May 2025 on the UK Legal Aid Agency, which compromised personal data dating back to 2007.