Polity and governanceThe Hindu, NationalGS2Must read
On Saturday, 10 October 2026, the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP), a youth-led movement, called a protest at Jantar Mantar in New Delhi. It demanded the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar over the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. Delhi Police refused permission. Gatherings of four or more persons were barred under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), the provision that replaced Section 144 of the old CrPC. Entry and exit at 45 Metro stations were shut until 10 pm, down from 57 first announced, after a Supreme Court direction on 9 October against a complete shutdown. Mobile internet was suspended within a 4 km radius of the Janpath and Kartavya Path crossing for 24 hours. PTI, quoting unnamed officials, put the number detained at nearly 7,000. Former Chief Ministers Arvind Kejriwal, Mamata Banerjee, Pinarayi Vijayan and Manik Sarkar were among those detained.
Prelims facts
- Article 19(1)(b) guarantees the right to assemble peaceably and without arms; Article 19(3) allows only reasonable restrictions in the interests of sovereignty and integrity of India or public order.
- Section 163 of the BNSS, which replaced Section 144 CrPC, lets a District Magistrate, Sub-Divisional Magistrate or empowered Executive Magistrate issue urgent orders, generally for up to two months.
- The OHCHR was created by UN General Assembly resolution 48/141 in December 1993; the current High Commissioner is Volker Türk.
- India's Geneva mission called the OHCHR's remarks on the 10 October detentions "misplaced" and "an unwarranted interference" in India's internal affairs.
- The Calcutta High Court (Justice Anuj Singh) held, in a ruling reported on 10 October 2026, that mere protest and slogan-shouting is not an unlawful common object under Section 141 IPC.
Read the full story, model answer and deep dive
Society, justice and ethicsThe Hindu, Tamil NaduGS1GS2Must read
A Division Bench of the Madras High Court, Justices C.V. Karthikeyan and R. Sakthivel, has held that no private educational institution or private employer in Tamil Nadu can mandatorily collect caste details from applicants. The order, reported on 10 October 2026, came in N. Vikraman v. State of Tamil Nadu (W.P.(MD) No. 17018 of 2026), a case filed at the Madurai Bench. The petitioner asked the State to stop private institutions and employers from making caste or community a compulsory column in application forms, except where a statute specifically requires it, and to frame anti-discrimination safeguards. He argued that a candidate had been penalised for leaving the caste column blank.
Prelims facts
- The Madras High Court (Justices C.V. Karthikeyan and R. Sakthivel) held that private educational institutions and private employers in Tamil Nadu cannot mandatorily collect caste details.
- G.O.Ms.No.205 of 31 July 2000 lets parents in Tamil Nadu write "No Caste" or "No Religion", or leave the columns blank, in school records.
- Article 15(1) bars the State from discriminating on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth; Article 17 abolishes untouchability.
- K.S. Puttaswamy (24 August 2017), decided by nine judges, held privacy to be an intrinsic part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21.
Read the full story, model answer and deep dive
Society, justice and ethicsThe Hindu, NationalGS2
On 10 October 2026, Chief Justice of India Surya Kant inaugurated a two-day National Annual Stakeholders' Consultation titled "Ten Years of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015: Progress, Challenges and Priorities for the Next Decade". It was organised at the Supreme Court by its Juvenile Justice Committee, chaired by Justice B.V. Nagarathna, with UNICEF. The CJI released an e-compendium of landmark judgments under the Act. He said the phrase "child in conflict with law" describes "a circumstance, not an identity", and that the answer to such cases is "restoration, not retribution". He closed with: "For ten years we have counted cases. For the next ten years let us also count the lives we have helped rebuild."
Prelims facts
- The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 replaced the Act of 2000; it passed the Lok Sabha on 7 May 2015 and the Rajya Sabha on 22 December 2015.
- A Juvenile Justice Board has a Metropolitan or Judicial Magistrate with at least three years' experience as Principal Magistrate and two social workers, at least one a woman.
- Children aged 16 to 18 accused of heinous offences can be sent to a Children's Court (a court under the Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005 or a POCSO Special Court, or else the Court of Session) after a preliminary assessment by the Board.
- Per the India Justice Report (November 2025), 55% of cases before Juvenile Justice Boards were pending and 111 of 470 responding Boards lacked a full bench.
- The 2021 amendment shifted the power to issue adoption orders from civil courts to District Magistrates.
Read the full story, model answer and deep dive
EconomyThe Hindu, BusinessGS3GS2
Commerce and Industry Minister Piyush Goyal said on 10 October 2026 that India's trade pact with the United States will be finalised keeping in mind changed circumstances since February. Speaking to members of the industry chamber PHDCCI in New Delhi, he said the pact was announced in February and "thodi paristhitiyan badli hain" (circumstances have changed somewhat). At the ET Startup Awards, he said: "We have concluded the deal. We have nothing more to add, to give or take. The fine print is being worked upon." He was responding to Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman's remark on 5 October that the talks had reached a "plateau". Goyal had met US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer earlier in October on the sidelines of the G20 trade ministers' meeting in Milwaukee. India's aim is to keep a tariff advantage over competing exporters in the US market.
Prelims facts
- The India-US joint statement of 7 February 2026 set a framework for an interim trade agreement with an 18% US reciprocal tariff on Indian goods.
- India and the US launched Bilateral Trade Agreement negotiations on 13 February 2025.
- On 20 February 2026, the US Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that IEEPA (1977) did not authorise broad reciprocal tariffs.
- The US then imposed a temporary 10% global tariff under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, for up to 150 days from 24 February 2026.
- On 10 October 2026, Goyal said the pact is concluded in substance but its legal fine print must reflect changed circumstances.
Read the full story, model answer and deep dive