The Supreme Court has been informed that 14 of the total 28 chief ministers face serious criminal charges, while more than 4,000 cases are pending against MPs and MLAs across the country. The disclosure came in a report submitted to the apex court on Monday by senior advocate Vijay Hansaria, amicus curiae in a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking the expeditious disposal of criminal cases against lawmakers.&nbsp;The PIL was filed by BJP leader and lawyer Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/don-t-beg-pakistan-strictly-warns-its-umrah-pilgrims-tells-them-to-fully-comply-with-saudi-laws-1786991746961">‘Don’t beg,’ Pakistan strictly warns its Umrah pilgrims, tells them to fully comply with Saudi laws</a><h2>Which CM faces most charges?</h2>&nbsp;The report reveals that Telangana CM Revanth Reddy has the highest number of 89 charges against him. West Bengal CM Suvendu Adhikari is the next with 29 pending cases against him.Karnataka CM D K Shivakumar and Andhra Pradesh CM N Chandrababu Naidu both have 19 cases each, while Kerala CM V D Sathesan has 18 cases pending against him.&nbsp;Jharkhand CM Hemant Soren has 5 pending cases, Maharashtra CM Devendra Fadnavis and Himachal CM Sukhvinder Singh have 4 each, TN CM C Joseph Vijay and Bihar CM Samrat Choudhary have 2 cases each, while four CM, including P S Tamang (Sikkim), Bhagwant Mann (Punjab), Mohan Charan Majhi (Odisha) and Bhajan Lal Sharma (Rajasthan) have one case each.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/vande-mataram-row-which-section-of-the-new-law-can-put-sonia-gandhi-in-the-dock-1786971951028">Vande Mataram row: Which section of the new law can put Sonia Gandhi in the dock</a>&nbsp;The report clarifies that figure of 4,192 is based on information received from High Courts and their websites, while adding that the Allahabad High Court did not submit a report, and its figure of 1,171 cases is from its website as of February 2024.&nbsp;&nbsp;<h2>Rajya Sabha and Lok Sabha MPs also facing cases</h2>&nbsp;The report also reveals that 251 of the 543 Lok Sabha members and 75 of the 233 Rajya Sabha members also face criminal cases.&nbsp;In total, around 4,192 cases are pending against sitting MPs and MLAs, of which 519 have been pending for more than a decade, while investigations have not yet begun in 700 cases, of which 360 are stuck for more than three years without the chargesheet even being filed.&nbsp;<h2>95% of MPs from Kerala face charges</h2>&nbsp;The affidavit discloses that 95% of the MPs from Kerala face charges, which is the highest in the country.Kerala is followed by Telangana with 82% of its MPs facing serious charges. Then comes Odisha with 76%.Haryana and Chhattisgarh have the lowest tallies, with both having a single MP each facing charges.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/supreme-court-rejects-trump-s-renewed-appeal-to-block-e-jean-carroll-award-1786975184644">Supreme Court rejects Trump’s renewed appeal to block E. Jean Carroll award</a><h2>58% MLAs in Bengal, 57% in Keralam facing cases</h2>&nbsp;Among MLAs facing serious cases, West Bengal leads at 58%, with Kerala being a close second at 57%, and Andhra Pradesh at 56%, followed by Telangana (49%) and Odisha (45%).&nbsp;After the revelations, the amicus has pleaded with the apex court to designate special courts to expeditiously hold trials in these cases against both sitting and former lawmakers.&nbsp;He has also asked the Supreme Court to direct the jurisdictional High Courts in these cases to actively monitor the progress of these trials.

The amicus pleaded with the apex court to designate special courts to expeditiously hold trials in these cases against both sitting and former lawmakers. He also asked the Supreme Court to direct the jurisdictional High Courts to actively monitor the progress of these trials.

The Supreme Court has been informed that 14 of the total 28 chief ministers face serious criminal charges, while more than 4,000 cases are pending against MPs and MLAs across the country. The disclosure came in a report submitted to the apex court on Monday by senior advocate Vijay Hansaria, amicus curiae in a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking the expeditious disposal of criminal cases against lawmakers. The PIL was filed by BJP leader and lawyer Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay. Also Read: ‘Don’t beg,’ Pakistan strictly warns its Umrah pilgrims, tells them to fully comply with Saudi laws Which CM faces most charges? The report reveals that Telangana CM Revanth Reddy has the highest number of 89 charges against him. West Bengal CM Suvendu Adhikari is the next with 29 pending cases against him. Karnataka CM D K Shivakumar and Andhra Pradesh CM N Chandrababu Naidu both have 19 cases each, while Kerala CM V D Sathesan has 18 cases pending against him. Jharkhand CM Hemant Soren has 5 pending cases, Maharashtra CM Devendra Fadnavis and Himachal CM Sukhvinder Singh have 4 each, TN CM C Joseph Vijay and Bihar CM Samrat Choudhary have 2 cases each, while four CM, including P S Tamang (Sikkim), Bhagwant Mann (Punjab), Mohan Charan Majhi (Odisha) and Bhajan Lal Sharma (Rajasthan) have one case each. Also Read: Vande Mataram row: Which section of the new law can put Sonia Gandhi in the dock The report clarifies that figure of 4,192 is based on information received from High Courts and their websites, while adding that the Allahabad High Court did not submit a report, and its figure of 1,171 cases is from its website as of February 2024. Rajya Sabha and Lok Sabha MPs also facing cases The report also reveals that 251 of the 543 Lok Sabha members and 75 of the 233 Rajya Sabha members also face criminal cases. In total, around 4,192 cases are pending against sitting MPs and MLAs, of which 519 have been pending for more than a decade, while investigations have not yet begun in 700 cases, of which 360 are stuck for more than three years without the chargesheet even being filed. 95% of MPs from Kerala face charges The affidavit discloses that 95% of the MPs from Kerala face charges, which is the highest in the country. Kerala is followed by Telangana with 82% of its MPs facing serious charges. Then comes Odisha with 76%. Haryana and Chhattisgarh have the lowest tallies, with both having a single MP each facing charges. Also Read: Supreme Court rejects Trump’s renewed appeal to block E. Jean Carroll award 58% MLAs in Bengal, 57% in Keralam facing cases Among MLAs facing serious cases, West Bengal leads at 58%, with Kerala being a close second at 57%, and Andhra Pradesh at 56%, followed by Telangana (49%) and Odisha (45%). After the revelations, the amicus has pleaded with the apex court to designate special courts to expeditiously hold trials in these cases against both sitting and former lawmakers. He has also asked the Supreme Court to direct the jurisdictional High Courts in these cases to actively monitor the progress of these trials.

The amicus pleaded with the apex court to designate special courts to expeditiously hold trials in these cases against both sitting and former lawmakers. He also asked the Supreme Court to direct the jurisdictional High Courts to actively monitor the progress of these trials.

14 of 28 CMs face serious criminal charges; 4,192 cases pending against MPs and MLAs, Supreme Court told

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday issued notice on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking coercive action against Regulated Entities (REs), Non-Banking Financial Companies (NBFCs) and Lending Service Providers (LSPs operating digital lending applications), allegedly found to be in breach of the Reserve Bank of India's Digital Lending Guidelines.&nbsp;A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia sought responses from the Union Government, the RBI, Google LLC and Apple India Private Limited on the issues raised in the petition. The PIL raises serious concerns regarding alleged violations of borrowers' fundamental right to privacy and to data protection by several NBFC-backed Digital Lending Applications (DLAs) operating in India.&nbsp;The petitioner Himakshi Bharghav contends that, despite the RBI's binding Digital Lending Guidelines issued on May 8, 2025, multiple platforms continue to access prohibited mobile phone resources, such as contact lists and call logs; collect excessive personal and device-level data; and employ coercive, blanket consent mechanisms.&nbsp;According to the plea, the petitioner, a public-spirited student, approached the High Court in public interest to safeguard the privacy and data rights of digital borrowers across the country, particularly students, first-time borrowers, gig workers and economically vulnerable sections.&nbsp;The RBI's revised guidelines, the petition notes, expressly prohibit DLAs from accessing telephony functions and sensitive phone data, allowing only limited, one-time access to features such as the camera, microphone, or location, strictly for onboarding and KYC purposes, subject to explicit consent. The petition alleges that these safeguards are being routinely flouted.&nbsp;The plea further states that upon examining digital lending applications available on major app platforms, several NBFC-backed apps, including Slice, Branch, Navi, Home Credit, Simpl, Dhani, Refyne, ZestMoney, FreePay and LendingPlate, were found to allegedly continue accessing borrowers' contacts and call logs and collecting data far beyond what is necessary for legitimate lending purposes.&nbsp;Such practices, it is argued, render consent involuntary because users are compelled to accept broad, non-negotiable privacy policies to access credit. The PIL also points out that a detailed complaint, supported by documentary evidence, was submitted to the RBI on November 18, 2025, identifying specific violations of the Digital Lending Guidelines. Despite this, the petition claims that no effective enforcement action or public response has been taken, thereby allowing the impugned applications to continue operating on major app platforms.&nbsp;Placing reliance on the Supreme Court's landmark ruling in K.S. Puttaswamy (Privacy-9J.) v. Union of India, the petitioner contends that the alleged data collection practices violate Article 21 of the Constitution and fail the proportionality test, having no reasonable nexus with legitimate objectives such as KYC or credit assessment. It is argued that the RBI's alleged inaction amounts to a failure to discharge its statutory and constitutional duties and results in unequal protection under Article 14.&nbsp;Terming the injury as widespread, continuous and incapable of individual redress, the petitioner has urged the Delhi High Court to exercise its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 and issue appropriate directions to curb ongoing privacy violations by digital lending platforms and ensure effective enforcement of the RBI's Digital Lending Guidelines in the larger public interest.&nbsp;Disclaimer: This story has been published from a news agency feed with minimal edits to adhere to WION's style guide. The headline may have been changed to better reflect the content of the story or to make it more suitable for WION audience.

The PIL raises serious concerns regarding alleged violations of borrowers' fundamental right to privacy and to data protection by several NBFC-backed Digital Lending Applications (DLAs) operating in India.

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday issued notice on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking coercive action against Regulated Entities (REs), Non-Banking Financial Companies (NBFCs) and Lending Service Providers (LSPs operating digital lending applications), allegedly found to be in breach of the Reserve Bank of India's Digital Lending Guidelines. A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia sought responses from the Union Government, the RBI, Google LLC and Apple India Private Limited on the issues raised in the petition. The PIL raises serious concerns regarding alleged violations of borrowers' fundamental right to privacy and to data protection by several NBFC-backed Digital Lending Applications (DLAs) operating in India. The petitioner Himakshi Bharghav contends that, despite the RBI's binding Digital Lending Guidelines issued on May 8, 2025, multiple platforms continue to access prohibited mobile phone resources, such as contact lists and call logs; collect excessive personal and device-level data; and employ coercive, blanket consent mechanisms. According to the plea, the petitioner, a public-spirited student, approached the High Court in public interest to safeguard the privacy and data rights of digital borrowers across the country, particularly students, first-time borrowers, gig workers and economically vulnerable sections. The RBI's revised guidelines, the petition notes, expressly prohibit DLAs from accessing telephony functions and sensitive phone data, allowing only limited, one-time access to features such as the camera, microphone, or location, strictly for onboarding and KYC purposes, subject to explicit consent. The petition alleges that these safeguards are being routinely flouted. The plea further states that upon examining digital lending applications available on major app platforms, several NBFC-backed apps, including Slice, Branch, Navi, Home Credit, Simpl, Dhani, Refyne, ZestMoney, FreePay and LendingPlate, were found to allegedly continue accessing borrowers' contacts and call logs and collecting data far beyond what is necessary for legitimate lending purposes. Such practices, it is argued, render consent involuntary because users are compelled to accept broad, non-negotiable privacy policies to access credit. The PIL also points out that a detailed complaint, supported by documentary evidence, was submitted to the RBI on November 18, 2025, identifying specific violations of the Digital Lending Guidelines. Despite this, the petition claims that no effective enforcement action or public response has been taken, thereby allowing the impugned applications to continue operating on major app platforms. Placing reliance on the Supreme Court's landmark ruling in K.S. Puttaswamy (Privacy-9J.) v. Union of India, the petitioner contends that the alleged data collection practices violate Article 21 of the Constitution and fail the proportionality test, having no reasonable nexus with legitimate objectives such as KYC or credit assessment. It is argued that the RBI's alleged inaction amounts to a failure to discharge its statutory and constitutional duties and results in unequal protection under Article 14. Terming the injury as widespread, continuous and incapable of individual redress, the petitioner has urged the Delhi High Court to exercise its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 and issue appropriate directions to curb ongoing privacy violations by digital lending platforms and ensure effective enforcement of the RBI's Digital Lending Guidelines in the larger public interest. Disclaimer: This story has been published from a news agency feed with minimal edits to adhere to WION's style guide. The headline may have been changed to better reflect the content of the story or to make it more suitable for WION audience.

The PIL raises serious concerns regarding alleged violations of borrowers' fundamental right to privacy and to data protection by several NBFC-backed Digital Lending Applications (DLAs) operating in India.

Delhi High Court issues notice on PIL over data privacy violations by digital lending apps

A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed on Tuesday (Oct 7, 2025) in the Supreme Court seeking a CBI probe into the deaths of children in Madhya Pradesh, allegedly caused by the consumption of cough syrup. The PIL, filed by a lawyer, also seeks an investigation supervised by a retired Supreme Court judge into the manufacture, regulation, testing and distribution of contaminated cough syrups, according to a report in news agency ANI.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">A PIL has been filed before Supreme Court seeking CBI investigation into the death of children in Madhya Pradesh after allegedly consuming cough syrup. The PIL filed by a lawyer seeks a retired Supreme Court judge-monitored probe and inquiry into the manufacture, regulation,… <a href="https://t.co/tRQSqdNdLR">pic.twitter.com/tRQSqdNdLR</a>&mdash; ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1975431906398212576?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 7, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<h3>Which states ban Coldrif cough syrup?</h3>This comes days after several children from different states of India died allegedly after consuming cough syrup containing diethylene glycol (DEG), which is an industrial solvent that is highly toxic in nature, even if a small amount of it is ingested.&nbsp;Following the death, this cough syrup was banned in Punjab, Tamil Nadu and Kerala, along Madhya Pradesh. Meanwhile, a public alert was issued in Telangana regarding Coldrif cough syrup, as per several media reports.<h3>What is Coldrif cough syrup, and why is it in the news?</h3>The Union Health Ministry stated that samples of Coldrif cough syrup, manufactured by Sresan Pharma in Tamil Nadu, contained diethylene glycol (DEG). This toxic industrial chemical is harmful even in small quantities. "The samples are found to contain DEG beyond the permissible limit," the ministry statement said.&nbsp;Officials reported that samples of the drug detected 48.6 per cent diethylene glycol in the syrup, which is a highly toxic substance. The Drug Testing Laboratory in Tamil Nadu's Chennai, declared "Not of Standard Quality", which was confirmed by the state Directorate of Drug Control after a sample of the syrup, tested by the government drug analyst.&nbsp;In 2022, the World Health Organisation (WHO) linked cough syrups produced by another Indian company to the deaths of 70 children in The Gambia. The following year, the WHO issued another warning after Uzbekistan reported at least 18 child deaths linked to India-made cough syrups.

PIL was filed after several children from different states of India died allegedly after consuming cough syrup containing diethylene glycol (DEG), which is an industrial solvent that is highly toxic in nature, even if a small amount of it is ingested.

A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed on Tuesday (Oct 7, 2025) in the Supreme Court seeking a CBI probe into the deaths of children in Madhya Pradesh, allegedly caused by the consumption of cough syrup. The PIL, filed by a lawyer, also seeks an investigation supervised by a retired Supreme Court judge into the manufacture, regulation, testing and distribution of contaminated cough syrups, according to a report in news agency ANI.

PIL was filed after several children from different states of India died allegedly after consuming cough syrup containing diethylene glycol (DEG), which is an industrial solvent that is highly toxic in nature, even if a small amount of it is ingested.

Cough syrup deaths: THESE states have banned Coldrif syrup after several children die; PIL filed to seek CBI probe

The Supreme Court on Tuesday sought a response from the Centre on a plea seeking directions to issue specific guidelines to ensure students with disabilities participate equally with others in online classes.

A bench comprising Justices A M Khanwilkar, Sanjiv Khanna and J K Maheshwari issued notice to the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment and Department of Higher Education on a PIL filed by Javed Abidi Foundation.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/indias-third-covid-wave-may-peak-between-oct-nov-intensity-to-be-less-than-second-wave-scientist-409500" hreflang="en">India’s third COVID wave may peak between Oct-Nov, intensity to be less than second wave: Scientist</a>

The top court also directed the petitioner to place on record all applications to government authorities and their responses and allowed the petitioner to carry out amendment in the petition within two weeks from today.

The foundation has sought guidelines for all States, UTs and academic institutions so as to ensure that students with disabilities participate equally with others in online classes.

The PIL has also sought protection and enforcement of the fundamental right to equality and right to life of students with disabilities with regard to the conduct of online classes and examinations by educational institutions during the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/coronavirus">COVID-19 pandemic</a>.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/india-could-soon-be-exporting-covid-vaccines-again-as-production-jumps-409337" hreflang="en">India could soon be exporting Covid vaccines again as production jumps</a>

"The universities, colleges are conducting online classes during the pandemic without considering the various challenges faced by students with disabilities and meeting their access needs and without providing reasonable accommodations to them. Students with disabilities are in a deplorable state with no access to lectures, study materials or assistance for those students who need individualized support," the plea said.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday sought a response from the Centre on a plea seeking directions to issue specific guidelines to ensure students with disabilities participate equally with others in online classes.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday sought a response from the Centre on a plea seeking directions to issue specific guidelines to ensure students with disabilities participate equally with others in online classes. A bench comprising Justices A M Khanwilkar, Sanjiv Khanna and J K Maheshwari issued notice to the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment and Department of Higher Education on a PIL filed by Javed Abidi Foundation. Also read | India’s third COVID wave may peak between Oct-Nov, intensity to be less than second wave: Scientist The top court also directed the petitioner to place on record all applications to government authorities and their responses and allowed the petitioner to carry out amendment in the petition within two weeks from today. The foundation has sought guidelines for all States, UTs and academic institutions so as to ensure that students with disabilities participate equally with others in online classes. The PIL has also sought protection and enforcement of the fundamental right to equality and right to life of students with disabilities with regard to the conduct of online classes and examinations by educational institutions during the COVID-19 pandemic. Also read | India could soon be exporting Covid vaccines again as production jumps "The universities, colleges are conducting online classes during the pandemic without considering the various challenges faced by students with disabilities and meeting their access needs and without providing reasonable accommodations to them. Students with disabilities are in a deplorable state with no access to lectures, study materials or assistance for those students who need individualized support," the plea said.

SC seeks response from Centre on PIL regarding students with disabilities and online classes

The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the Centre to look into public interest litigation (<a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/bharat-delhi-high-court-dismisses-pil-against-salman-khans-film-223922">PIL</a>) against Reserve Bank of India's (<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/rbi-official-steal-money-rs-90-lakh-caught-red-handed-30090">RBI</a>) decision to exchange Rs 30 crores worth of banknotes which were defaced by separatist groups in Kashmir in 2013.

A Bench headed by Chief Justice of India, <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/justice-sharad-arvind-bobde-47th-chief-justice-of-india-who-advocates-use-of-artificial-intelligence-in-courts-262959">Sharad Arvind Bobde</a>, has asked the Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, to reply within two weeks as "it is a matter of national importance."

The plea filed by one Satish Bhardwaj has called for the Central Bureau of Investigation (<a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions/cbi-vs-cbi-cleaning-the-rot-within-176144">CBI</a>) investigation against RBI for allowing notes to be exchanged. Bhardwaj has alleged that he had moved RBI and CBI for action into the matter in 2013 itself but did not get any response.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the Centre to look into public interest litigation (PIL) against Reserve Bank of India's (RBI) decision to exchange Rs 30 crores worth of banknotes which were defaced by separatist groups in Kashmir in 2013.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the Centre to look into public interest litigation (PIL) against Reserve Bank of India's (RBI) decision to exchange Rs 30 crores worth of banknotes which were defaced by separatist groups in Kashmir in 2013. A Bench headed by Chief Justice of India, Sharad Arvind Bobde, has asked the Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, to reply within two weeks as "it is a matter of national importance." The plea filed by one Satish Bhardwaj has called for the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) investigation against RBI for allowing notes to be exchanged. Bhardwaj has alleged that he had moved RBI and CBI for action into the matter in 2013 itself but did not get any response.

Supreme Court asks Centre to look into PIL against RBI's decision on banknotes defaced by separatists in Kashmir

The Supreme Court on Friday adjourned for three months public interest litigation (PIL) seeking direction to allow non-resident Indians to vote through postal or e-ballots during elections in India.

A Bench of Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justice Deepak Gupta adjourned the case after the advocate appearing for the petitioner sought adjournment on the ground that Bill to allow NRIs to vote is likely to be passed in the ongoing session of Parliament.

The court was hearing a batch of petitions filed by Nagender Chindam, chairman of London-based Pravasi Bharat organisation, and other NRIs including Shamsheer V P.

The petitions stated that 114 countries, including 20 Asian nations, have adopted external voting, which could be held by setting up polling booths at diplomatic missions or through postal, proxy or electronic voting.

The Supreme Court on Friday adjourned for three months public interest litigation (PIL) seeking direction to allow non-resident Indians to vote through postal or e-ballots during elections in India.

The Supreme Court on Friday adjourned for three months public interest litigation (PIL) seeking direction to allow non-resident Indians to vote through postal or e-ballots during elections in India. A Bench of Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justice Deepak Gupta adjourned the case after the advocate appearing for the petitioner sought adjournment on the ground that Bill to allow NRIs to vote is likely to be passed in the ongoing session of Parliament. The court was hearing a batch of petitions filed by Nagender Chindam, chairman of London-based Pravasi Bharat organisation, and other NRIs including Shamsheer V P. The petitions stated that 114 countries, including 20 Asian nations, have adopted external voting, which could be held by setting up polling booths at diplomatic missions or through postal, proxy or electronic voting.

Supreme Court adjourns PIL on direction to allow NRIs to vote through postal, e-ballots