Courts Courts & regulators
Supreme Court hears stem cell and wetland petitions
This is a Record of Proceedings from the Supreme Court of India dated October 12, 2026, listing the parties, counsel, and interim applications in Writ Petitions (Civil) No. 304/2018, 230/2001, and 302/2020.
It matters to citizens as it documents the active litigation involving the Union of India and various petitioners regarding public interest matters, though the specific subject matter (e.g., stem cell therapy or wetlands) is not detailed in the provided text.
Who it concerns: The document concerns the Petitioner Anand Arya, the Respondent Union of India, and numerous interventionists/impleaded parties. It involves the Supreme Court of India (Coram: Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice Vipul M. Pancholi) and the extensive legal teams representing the parties.
What the document says
- The matters were called for hearing on October 12, 2026.
- The proceedings involve Writ Petition (Civil) No. 304/2018, W.P.(C) No. 230/2001 (PIL-W), and W.P.(C) No. 302/2020 (PIL-W).
- Multiple Interim Applications (IAs) are listed, including requests for appropriate orders/directions, exemption from filing office copies, intervention/impleadment, and modification of court orders.
- The document lists the names of numerous advocates, Additional Solicitors General (A.S.G.), and Advocate Generals appearing for the Petitioner and Respondent.
Also in the document
- The provided text is a procedural record listing parties and applications; it does not contain the specific orders, findings, or judgments issued by the Court.
- The title mentions 'Stem Cell Therapy and Wetland Conservation,' but the provided document text does not explicitly state these topics in the body of the record.
How this was written
An AI model running on our own computer read the government document and wrote this summary. No person has checked it.
✓ Figures checked. Every number in this summary was found in the document by an automated check.
That check compares numbers only. It cannot confirm that the wording says what the document says — so the original document is always the authority.
The original document
Government documents surfaced by the press
Government document · Ref. 894a76705a59754e
Read it here
Discussion
No one has discussed this document yet.