Supreme Court Examines Challenge to the Central Armed Police Forces (General Administration) Act, 2026

A special bench of the Supreme Court is hearing a petition by more than 800 serving officers of the five Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) – CRPF, BSF, CISF, ITBP and SSB. The petition argues that the Central Armed Police Forces (General Administration) Act, 2026 (the “CAPF Act”) seeks to nullify the Court’s May 23 2025 judgment ordering a progressive reduction of Indian Police Service (IPS) deputations to senior CAPF posts. The government maintains that the Act does not override the judgment and is a permissible exercise of Parliament’s legislative competence.

Hindustan TimesThePrintCentre says CAPF Act does not overrule Supreme Court IPS deputation order Hindustan Times

The May 23 2025 decision required the Centre to reduce IPS deputations to the five CAPFs up to the rank of Inspector General (IG). Parliament passed the CAPF Act in April 2026, and it came into force on October 8 2026.

ThePrint

• The Act prescribes 50 % of IG posts, a minimum of 67 % of ADG posts, and 100 % of SDG and DG posts to be filled by IPS officers.

Hindustan Times

• The government notes that 47 of 607 sanctioned Deputy Inspector General (DIG) posts and 64 of 140 IG posts are currently held by IPS officers.

ThePrint

• The five forces together have 607 DIG-level and 140 IG-level sanctioned posts.

ThePrint

• A joint affidavit from the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Department of Personnel and Training and the CRPF states that the CAPF Act does not re-enact any provision struck down by the Court and that it came into force on October 8.

Hindustan Times

• The affidavit argues that IPS officers are integral to the internal-security architecture, bringing experience from state administrations, counter-insurgency, border districts and intelligence agencies, and that their deputation facilitates coordination between the Centre and states.

Hindustan Times

• The government emphasizes that legislative competence allows Parliament to set recruitment rules and cadre composition, and that a law can render a judicial direction ineffective by altering the factual basis of that direction.

Hindustan Times

• Petitioners claim IPS officers “occupy most senior posts,” while the government cites specific figures (47 of 607 DIG, 64 of 140 IG) to dispute that claim.

Hindustan Times

• No independent study is cited by either side, leaving the factual basis of the quotas unresolved.

Hindustan Times

The Supreme Court’s special bench will continue to examine the arguments of both parties and is expected to rule on whether the CAPF Act validly alters the legal foundation of the May 2025 judgment or violates constitutional guarantees of equality for CAPF cadre officers. Further submissions on the pending cadre-review process are anticipated.

Hindustan Times