Judgments/OrdersMere Non-Cooperation To ED Summons Not A Ground For Arrest Under PMLA; ED Can't Expect Admission Of Guilt From Person Summoned: Supreme CourtCase Title: Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India, Basant Bansal v. Union of India Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 844; 2023INSC866In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court has ruled that a person cannot be arrested by the Directorate of...
Judgments/Orders
Case Title: Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India, Basant Bansal v. Union of India
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 844; 2023INSC866
In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court has ruled that a person cannot be arrested by the Directorate of Enforcement for mere non-cooperation in response to a summons issued under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act 2002.
"Mere non-cooperation of a witness in response to the summons issued under Section 50 of the Act of 2002 would not be enough to render him/her liable to be arrested under Section 19", held a bench comprising Justices AS Bopanna and PV Sanjay Kumar
Why ED Must Furnish Grounds Of Arrest To Accused In Writing? Supreme Court Explains
Case Title : Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India, Basant Bansal v. Union of India
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 844; 2023INSC866
In a landmark judgment in the case Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India, the Supreme Court has held that the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) must furnish the reasons for arrest to the accused in writing.
While holding so, the bench comprising Justices AS Bopanna and PV Sanjay Kumar, noted that Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, which gives the power to officers of ED to arrest any person guilty of a money laundering offense, uses the expression that the accused shall be ‘informed of the grounds of such arrest’. The Section did not specify how the grounds of arrest should be informed. This aspect was not dealt with in the recent Vijay Madanlal Choudhary and Senthil Balaji cases.
Case Title : Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India, Basant Bansal v. Union of India
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 844
In a significant judgment pronounced on Tuesday (October 3), the Supreme Court held that the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) should furnish the grounds of arrest to the accused in writing at the time of arrest.
"We hold that it would be necessary, henceforth, that a copy of written grounds of arrest is furnished to the arrested person as a matter of course and without exception." pronounced a bench comprising Justices AS Bopanna and Sanjay Kumar while setting aside the arrest of Pankaj Bansal and Basant Bansal in the money laundering case against the real estate group M3M
Case Title: Aditya Khaitan & Ors. V. IL and FS Financial Services Limited
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 845
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (03.10.2023) set aside an order of the Calcutta High Court that had refused to take on record a written submission on the ground of delay. The Apex Court held that the benefit of the series of orders passed by the Supreme Court in In Re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, extending the period of limitation in light of the Covid-19 pandemic, would enure to the benefit of the appellants who had challenged the High Court order. The Court clarified that the order passed by it on 08.03.2021 expanded the protection to litigants by making it applicable to the period up to which delay can be condoned and not just to the period of limitation.
Case Title: Union Bank of India V. Rajat Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. & Ors
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 846
The Supreme Court on Wednesday (04.10.2023) held that the inherent powers of the Supreme Court under Article 142 of the Constitution of India though wide in its amplitude, cannot be exercised to supplant the substantive law applicable to the case or to the cause under consideration of the court.
“It cannot be gainsaid that the court in exercise of powers under Article 142 cannot ignore any substantive statutory provision dealing with the subject. The plenary powers of the Supreme Court under Article 142 are inherent in nature and are complementary to those powers which are specifically conferred on the court by various statutes. These powers though are of a very wide amplitude to do complete justice between the parties, cannot be used to supplant the substantive law applicable to the case or to the cause under consideration of the court,” a bench of Justice Aniruddha Bose and Justice Bela M Trivedi observed.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 847
In a matrimonial dispute related to a child's custody, the Supreme Court recently modified a condition imposed by the Family Court requiring the father to meet the child in the premises of the Court.
Case Title : Sanjana Kumari v. Vijay Kumar
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 848
The Supreme Court observed that a Hindu marriage can be dissolved through a customary divorce deed, provided the existence of such a customary right is established.
This is by virtue of Section 29(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955, which states the none of the provisions of the Act will affect any right recognised by custom or conferred by any special enactment to obtain the dissolution of a Hindu marriage.
State Govt Has Power To Impose Permit Fee On Erection Of Mobile Towers: Supreme Court
Case Title: BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED & ANR. V. THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 849
The Supreme Court has held that a State Government has the competence to impose permit fee on the erection of mobile towers. The Court rejected the argument that State cannot realise permit fee on mobile towers in the absence of a Parliamentary law empowering it to do so.
The Court upheld a judgment of the Chhattisgarh High Court which held that the Chhattisgarh Government had the competence to issue the Circulars as well as the Rules for the purpose of realising one time permit fee while granting sanction for erection of a mobile tower in the area under jurisdiction of the Municipal Corporations/Municipalities/Gram Panchayats. e.
Case Title: State Bank of India & Ors v. P Zandenga
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 850
The Supreme Court recently ruled that an acquittal in connected criminal proceedings does not entail any benefit in the surviving proceedings and thus does not automatically result in a corresponding discharge in disciplinary proceedings pending against an employee.
Case title: South Eastern Coalfields Ltd v. State of MP
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 851, 2023INSC865
The Supreme Court recently upheld the power of Municipal Councils to levy terminal tax within the limits of Scheduled Areas, dismissing an appeal brought by a coal mining company challenging the imposition of such taxes in Madhya Pradesh.
The Court emphasized that Paragraph 5(1) of the Fifth Schedule grants the Governor the power to direct either that the parliamentary or state laws would not apply to Scheduled Areas or it’ll apply only with certain exceptions and modifications. The Court found that no such notification was issued by the governor. Therefore, the municipal council could levy tax as empowered under the state’s legislation.
Case Title: NS Balaji v. The Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal and others
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 853
The Supreme Court has observed that a Karta of a Hindu Undivided Family(HUF) has the right to sell/dispose of/alienate a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) property, even if a minor of the family has an undivided interest.
The reason is that a HUF is capable of acting through its Karta or an adult member of the family in the management of the HUF property, explained the Court. Reference was made to the judgment in Sri Narayan Bal v. Sridhar Sutar (1996) 8 SCC 54.
Case Title: GRIDCO Ltd. V. Western Electricity Supply Company, Civil Appeal No.414 of 2007
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 855
The Supreme Court recently criticised the Orissa Electricity Regulatory Commission (OERC) for challenging the orders of the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL) correcting the Commission’s own order. Reminding the Commission that it was bound by the APTEL's order, the Supreme Court questioned the propriety of the Commission's appeal.
Case Title: Ranjan Kumar Chadha v. State of Himachal Pradesh
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 856; 2023INSC878
In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court has summarized the principles related to Section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, which prescribes the conditions under which a search of persons shall be conducted.
S. 50 NDPS Act Not Applicable To Recovery From Bag Carried By A Person: Supreme Court
Case Title: Ranjan Kumar Chadha v. State of Himachal Pradesh
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 856
The Supreme Court recently reiterated that the conditions for personal search as specified in Section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act are applicable only for the search of the physical body of the person and not for the search of any bag carried by the person.
At the same time, the Court acknowledged that confining the applicability of Section 50 NDPS Act only to the physical body and excluding a bag carried by a person can defeat the purpose of the provision, which is to provide a safeguard against abuse of powers by the investigating agency during a search operation
Case Title: Ajeet Gurjar v. The State Of Madhya Pradesh, Criminal Appeal No.3023 of 2023
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 857
The Supreme Court recently held that compliance with Section 19(1) subclause (i) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 which requires the Children’s Court to hold an inquiry as to whether the alleged offender is to be tried as a child or an adult is not a mere formality.
In this regard, the Court also said that the use of the word 'may' used in Clause (ii) of sub-section 1 of Section 19, will have to be read as 'shall'.
Case title: Sunil Kumar v. Lala Saurabh Verma
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 858
The Supreme Court recently held that Section 9(1)(b) of the SC/ST Act grants State Governments the power to delegate the authority to arrest, investigate, and prosecute offenders. This delegation of power, as emphasized by the Court, is a vital aspect of the Act and should not be curtailed by any rules framed under Section 23 of the SC/ST Act.
Case Title: M/S. MEHTA JEWELLERS v. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD
Citation. : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 859
Recently, the Supreme Court, while hearing an appeal, noted that the claim arising out of an insurance policy cannot be repudiated on the basis of a term, mentioned in the policy, which itself is ambiguous.
A Division Bench, comprising Justices Hima Kohli and P.S. Narasimha, observed that the insurance policy itself does not define the word “locked safe” nor does it define what should be the standard make of the “locked safe”. It elucidated:
Case Title: M/S Iveco Magirus Brandschutztechnik Gmbh V. Nirmal Kishore Bhartiya & Anr
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC)860
The Supreme Court on Thursday (05.10.2023) held that a Magistrate can dismiss a defamation complaint by applying the exceptions under section 499 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 even before even summoning the accused.
“..nothing prevents the Magistrate upon application of judicial mind to accord the benefit of such Exception to prevent a frivolous complaint from triggering an unnecessary trial. Since initiation of prosecution is a serious matter, we are minded to say that it would be the duty of the Magistrate to prevent false and frivolous complaints eating up precious judicial time. If the complaint warrants dismissal, the Magistrate is statutorily mandated to record his brief reasons. On the contrary, if from such materials a prima facie satisfaction is reached upon application of judicial mind of an “offence” having been committed and there being sufficient ground for proceeding, the Magistrate is under no other fetter from issuing process,” a bench of Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Bela M Trivedi observed
Principles Of Applying Section 106 Of Evidence Act: Supreme Court Explains
Case title: Balvir Singh v. State of Uttarakhand
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 861
The Supreme Court recently held that Section 106 of the Evidence Act does not inherently impose a burden on the accused but comes into play when the accused fails to provide any explanation regarding facts that should be within their knowledge, facts that could support theories compatible with their innocence.
The Court observed, “We consider the true rule to be that Section 106 does not cast any burden upon an accused in a criminal trial, but that, where the accused throws no light at all upon the facts which ought to be especially within his knowledge, and which could support any theory of hypothesis compatible with his innocence, the Court can also consider his failure to adduce any explanation, in consonance with the principle laid in Deonandan Mishra’s case.”
Case title: Balvir Singh v. State of Uttarakhand
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 861
The Supreme Court recently upheld the conviction of a husband in a case related to the murder of his wife and domestic cruelty against her. It reiterated the crucial role that courts play in ensuring justice, especially in cases involving crimes against women
Justice Pardiwala, who authored the judgment noted “The role of courts in such circumstances assumes greater importance, and it is expected that the courts would deal with such cases in a more realistic manner and not allow the criminals to escape on account of procedural technicalities, perfunctory investigation or insignificant lacunas in the evidence as otherwise the criminals would receive encouragement and the victims of crime would be totally discouraged by the crime going unpunished. The courts are expected to be sensitive in cases involving crime against women.”
Will Can't Be Presumed To Be Valid Merely Because It Is Registered: Supreme Court
Case Title: Dhani Ram (died) through LRs. & others V. Shiv Singh, Civil Appeal No. 8172 of 2009
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 862
The Supreme Court on Friday (06.10.2023) held that mere registration would not sanctify a document by attaching to it an irrebuttable presumption of genuineness.
A bench of Justice C.T. Ravikumar and Justice Sanjay Kumar agreeing with the view of the Trial Court and affirming the order of the High Court said:
“…the Trial Court rightly opined that mere registration of the Will would not be sufficient to prove its validity, as its lawful execution necessarily had to be proved in accordance with Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (for brevity, ‘the Evidence Act’), and Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (for brevity, ‘the Succession Act’)
News Updates
Supreme Court Issues Notice In PIL Seeking For Free Treatment For Children With Muscular Dystrophy
Case Title: Ratnesh Kumar Jigyasu And Ors. v. Union Of India And Ors.
Citation: W.P.(C) No. 1012/2023 PIL-W
The Supreme Court on Friday (06.10.2023) issued a notice in a petition seeking to commence a national program for the treatment of children with muscular dystrophy. The petition further sought for the formulation of a standard policy for issuing unique ID cards to patients of muscular dystrophy to enable them to get free treatment at any government or private hospital.
At a conclave organized by the online news portal, 'The South First' at Bengaluru, a member in the audience asked Justice Muralidhar about the perception that his order in the Delhi riots case cost him the elevation to the Supreme Court
Justice Muralidhar replied: "So, what is that upset the government, I am as clueless as you are, if at all they were upset. I only have this to say. It does not matter, because many did people feel that it was the right thing to do. In fact, it was. I was later told that many lives were saved with that intervention by the Court," Justice Muralidhar said.
Case Details: Tehseen S Poonawalla v. Union of India
Citation: Writ Petition (Civil) No. 754 of 2016
Alleging governmental inaction despite the Tehseen Poonawalla ruling, Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves on Friday urged the Supreme Court to direct state governments to upload compliance data, including those pertaining to the appointment of nodal officers, on their official websites. While deferring the hearing on the request, the court observed that the counter-affidavits filed by some of the states demonstrated an 'active effort' on their part.
Supreme Court Dismisses Plea Seeking Upper Age Limit Relaxation For J&K Civil Judge Examination
Case Title: Mridulla Kirti and others v. High Court of J&K and Ladakh
Citation: SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s).41379/2023
The Supreme Court on Friday (October 6) dismissed a petition seeking relaxation of the upper age limit of 35 years for the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Judge(Junior Division) Examination 2023/
Challenges To India's Bail System: Justice Akil Kureshi and Senior Advocate Rebecca John Discuss
Former Chief Justice of Rajasthan High Court Justice Akhil Kureshi, speaking at a panel discussion titled ‘Untangling Bail Cases,’ said that there are two main challenges to bail cases: a. limited resources b. systematic flaws.
While discussing these challenges, Justice Kureshi also spoke about the ways to improve. “We need better and more judges, good legal aid support, prosecutors in sufficient number,” he stated.
Will Constitute 7-Judge Bench Soon To Hear Money Bills Issue, Says CJI DY Chandrachud
Today, the Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud orally remarked that he would soon be constituting a seven-judge bench to hear the constitutional issue regarding money bills. The remark was made when Senior Advocate Menaka Guruswamy, appearing before a bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra raised the issue and stated–
"This is about the money bills. The specific challenge is to the PMLA. A seven-judge bench was to be constituted."
Case Details: Ek Soch Ek Paryas v. Union of India
Citation: Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 16942 of 2023
The Supreme Court on Friday adjourned the hearing of a batch of pleas challenging the constitutionality of the caste-based survey conducted by the Bihar government till January 2024. Notably, the court refused to pass any order of stay or status quo to restrain the State from acting on the caste survey data.
"We cannot stop state government or any government from taking a decision," a bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and SVN Bhatti orally observed today.
Case title: Bhattulal Jain v. Union of India
Citation: W.P.(C) No. 1044/2023
The Supreme Court on Friday (October 6) issued notice on a writ petition challenging the cash assistance offers announced by the Chief Ministers of Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan as 'election freebies'.
The bench issued a notice to the Union of India, the States of Rajasthan, and Madhya Pradesh, and the Election Commission of India and posted the matter after four weeks
Case Title: Sarvesh Mathur v. The Registrar General of Punjab and Haryana High Court| Citation: W.P.(Crl.) No. 351/2023
The Supreme Court on Friday (06.10.2023) directed all High Courts to ensure that no member of the bar is denied access to video conferencing facilities or hearing through hybrid facility. The Apex Court has given all High Courts two weeks' time to comply with its order.
"After the lapse of two weeks from this order, no High Court shall deny access to video conference facility or hearing through hybrid facility to any member of the bar." the Court ordered
In relation to the defamation case filed by Professor Amrita Singh against 'The Wire', the Jawaharlal Nehru University(JNU) informed the Supreme Court on Friday (October 6) that it has not received any dossier which was allegedly prepared by Professor Singh describing the University as a "den of organised sex racket".
Case Details: State of West Bengal v. Dr. Sanat Kumar Ghosh & Ors.
Citation: Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 17403 of 2023
The Supreme Court on Friday(October 6) stayed the additional financial emoluments of the interim vice-chancellors appointed to state-run universities by West Bengal Governor CV Anand Bose during the pendency of a plea by the state government challenging earlier appointments made by him. Noting the increasing friction between the Mamata Banerjee-led government and Governor Bose over the issue of the vice-chancellor appointments, the court also stressed the need for reconciliation "in the interest of educational institutions and the future careers of lakhs of students"
Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud expressed happiness at the trend of more women getting appointed in district judiciary across the country. Before starting the court proceedings today, CJI said that he has a happy news to announce. Referring to 75 newly recruited civil judges of Maharashtra, who were present in Court No.1 today, CJI said :
"We wish to share a happy news. We have a batch of 75 judges of junior division from Maharashtra. Out of a batch of 75 young judges 42 are women. Of 5 direct recruits - 2 are women."
During the hearing presided over by a bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and SVN Bhatti. The bench was considering two petitions filed by Sisodia, challenging the decisions of the Delhi High Court, which had previously denied him bail in connection with the investigations being conducted by the CBI and the ED.
Regarding allegations under the PMLA Act, Justice Khanna stated–
"Manish Sisodia is not involved in all this. Vijay Nair is there but Manish Sisodia is not in this part. How will you bring him under money laundering act? The money is not going to him. In case it is a company with whom he is involved, then we have vicarious liability. Otherwise the prosecution falters. Money laundering is entirely a different offence...We have to show that he is in possession of that property. You will have to go to the exact wording of the section and show how will you bring him in."
A constitution bench of the Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its verdict on whether members of parliament and legislative assemblies could claim immunity under Articles 105(2) and 194(2) of the Constitution for receiving a bribe in contemplation of a vote or speech in the legislature.
A seven-judge bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, and Justices AS Bopanna, MM Sundresh, PS Narasimha, JB Pardiwala, Sanjay Kumar, and Manoj Misra is considering the correctness of the 1998 PV Narasimha Rao judgment that was referred last month to a larger bench of seven judges.
Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, judge of the Supreme Court, participated in the 12th International Legal Forum of the Asia-Pacific Region on Thursday (October 5). The topic of the forum was, "Balance of Protection of National Interests and Rights of Participants of International Economic Relations".
In his address, Justice Kaul said that the judiciary should exercise restraint in interfering with awards passed by adjudicatory bodies under the Bilateral Investment Treaties. He said that usually, bilateral agreements provide for disputes to be resolved through arbitration. There have also been proposals to set up an investment court. Regardless of which method is adopted, Justice Kaul said, dispute resolution must become seamless to give investors the confidence they need to make investments uninhibitedly.
Case Title: Md Imran Ahmad and others v. Union of India and others
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 854
The Central Government has informed the Supreme Court that reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and Other Backward Classes will be given in temporary appointments which are to last for 45 days or more. It further said that instructions have been issued to all Ministries and Departments to strictly implement this reservation in temporary posts.
In A Historic First, Supreme Court Appoints Sign Language Interpreter For Deaf Lawyer
The Supreme Court on Friday appointed a sign language interpreter for deaf lawyer Sarah Sunny. Historically, the Supreme Court has never appointed an interpreter at its own expense.
"We have an interpreter today for Sarah. In fact, we are thinking that for the constitution bench hearings, we will have an interpreter so that everyone can follow", Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud said. The interpreter was seen in the virtual hearing window along with Advocate Sarah Sunny.
The Supreme Court on Thursday (October 5) clarified that the question raised by it yesterday during the bail hearing of Manish Sisodia regarding the 'political party', which is alleged to be beneficiary, not being made an accused in the Delhi liquor policy scam case, was not meant to implicate anyone.
The Supreme Court on Thursday (05.10.2023) while considering a plea for medical termination of pregnancy of a married woman who is beyond 24 weeks pregnant, orally remarked that if such a plea is allowed it will open the doors of the Supreme Court to parents who get ‘cold feet’ in the last minute.
Case Title: Mohammed Faizal V U.T Administration of Lakshadweep
Disqualified Lakshadweep MP Mohammed Faizal, belonging to the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP), has approached the Supreme Court against the order of the Kerala High Court refusing to suspend his conviction in a case of attempt to murder passed on 3rd October. The Kerala High Court, however, had suspended his sentence of imprisonment.
Case Title: Somya Sanjay And Ors. v. National Law University Tripura Agartala And Ors.
Citation: WP(C) No. 41/2023
The Supreme Court recently asked the Consortium of the National Law Universities if the NLUs could accommodate students who had applied for admission in the National Law University Tripura for the academic year 2023-24.
The Court noted with dismay that the NLU Tripura could not commence its operations for the academic year 2022-23 due to a lack of facilities and teachers and all the 90 students who had been admission were given a refund of the fees. It described this state of affairs "unsatisfactory situation"
Case title: Mah.Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan Samiti V. The State Of Maharashtra & Ors., Citation: Civil Appeal No(S). 2502/2022
A two-judge bench of the Supreme Court on Tuesday (October 3) expressed doubts about the proposition that it can decide caste claims as a fact-finding Court. The Court was pondering on the further course of action in a batch of appeals raising the question of caste claims (Mah. Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan Samiti v. The State of Maharashtra and ors). In this matter, the Full Bench of the Apex Court recently held that an ‘affinity test’ is not an essential part of determining the correctness of a Caste/Tribe claim.
Case Details: Manish Sisodia v. Central Bureau of Investigation
Citation: Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 8167 of 2023
The Supreme Court on Wednesday (04.09.2023,) while hearing the plea of Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader and former Delhi Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia against the cases registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) over the alleged Delhi liquor policy scam, asked why the political party, which is alleged to be a beneficiary, is not made an accused in the case under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.
Case Title: Mathews J. Nedumpara And Ors. v. UoI And Ors.
Citation: WP(C) No. 320/2023
The Supreme Court on Wednesday (October 4) reserved its judgment in a plea challenging the system of designating advocates as “senior” under Sections 16 and 23(5) of the Advocates Act, 1961 (Act).
The petition was moved by Advocate, Mathews J. Nedumpara, who argued that such designation has created a class of advocates with special rights and the same has been seen as reserved only for the kith and kin of judges and senior advocates, politicians, ministers etc., resulting in the legal industry being “monopolized”.
In the wake of a series of raids by the Delhi police into the residences of journalists and writers associated with 'Newsclick', the Press Club of India and several other media organizations have written to the Chief Justice of India, DY Chandrachud asking the judiciary to step in and put an end to the repressive use of investigating agencies against the media. They have sought for guidelines from the judiciary on police seizures of the electronic devices of journalists.
Case Title: State of Haryana Department of Irrigation The Secretary v. State of Punjab
Citation: Original Suit No. 6/1996
A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court, while resuming its hearing in relation to the Sutlej-Yamuna Link (SYL) canal dispute, came down heavily on the Punjab Government for not finding a solution to complete the construction of the canal. It further directed the Union of India to survey the portion of the land of Punjab allocated for the project and suggested finding an estimate for the extent of construction carried out by the Punjab Government.
A constitution bench of the Supreme Court on Wednesday questioned whether immunity should be granted to legislators accused of corruption, merely on an apprehension that the absence of such immunity could be misused by the executive to target political opposition
Case Title: MOOSA @ TADA MOOSA @ MOOSA MOHIDEEN AND ANR v. Versus THE STATE REP. BY THE AD.S.P.SIT CBCID
Citation: Crl. A. No. 1205-1208/2011
The Supreme Court on Wednesday (October 4) denied bail to the life convicts involved in the Coimbatore serial bomb blast case, and refused to grant any relief.
The present matter, which revolved around the 1998 Coimbatore serial bomb blasts in which 58 people were killed and over 200 others injured, was heard by a bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sudhanshu Dhulia, and C.T. Ravikumar.
Case Details: Committee of Management Trust Shahi Masjid Idgah v. Bhagwan Shrikrishna Virajman & Ors.
Citation: Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 14275 of 2023
The Supreme Court on Monday issued a firm reminder to the Allahabad High Court's registry to send requisite information and documents regarding the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Eidgah Mosque dispute, which is currently being heard by the high court. The mosque committee's lawyer also told the court that the filing of the suits praying for various reliefs with respect to the land dispute was a recent occurrence motivated by 'outsiders', even though different religious communities have lived in the region in communal harmony for the last 50 years
Case Title: Ajay Gautam V. Versus Delhi State Advisory Board For Animal Welfare And Anr., Citation: SLP(C) No. 16576/2023
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (October 3) refused to entertain a petition seeking directions to be issued to Delhi State Advisory Board for Animal Welfare to ensure that no cattle markets are held in Delhi without obtaining prior permission of the competent authorities as per law on the occasion of Bakra-eid. Apart from this, petitioner sought for direction to strictly implement and enforce provisions of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Regulation of Livestock Markets) Rules, 2017.
Supreme Court Dismisses Hindu Personal Law Board's Plea To Declare 'Ram Setu' As National Monument
Case Title: Hindu Personal Law Board Through Its President Ashok Pandey Petitioner-In-Person Versus Union Of India And Ors, Diary No. 12741-2023
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (October 3) dismissed a plea seeking the construction of a wall at the Ram Setu site ‘in the sea’ for a few meters/kilometers so that everyone can have its its ‘Darshan’.
Case title: Bambhaniya Sagar Vasharambhai v. Union Of India W.P.(C) No. 856/2023, Gaurav v. Union of India SLP C 18017/2023
The Supreme Court today ruled in favor of a candidate with cerebral palsy, declaring him eligible for reservation under the Persons with Disabilities (PwD) Act, 2016 for admission in the MBBS course. The candidate was declared eligible by the expert board of AIIMS constituted pursuant to the directions issued by the Court earlier on 22nd September 2023.
The Court observed, “By cryptic and unreasoned opinion, the board rejected his claim that he should be considered as PwD and thus entitled to reservation. This court by its order dated 22nd September, 2023 was of the opinion that the expert report was insufficient and that it didn't contain any reasons why the appellant could not be considered disabled. Pursuant to the directions, the board again met and furnished reasons on 27th Sep and considered him eligible. The expert opinion has not been disputed by the respondent. The appellant is declared to be entitled to be eligible- treated as PWD and consequently his application has to be considered in such terms, on its merits, and processed accordingly.
Case Title: Directorate of Enforcement V Raman Bhuraria
Citation: Diary No.- 23447 - 2023
The Supreme Court on Tuesday orally remarked that imposing a bail condition requiring an accused to drop his Google pin location from his mobile phone to the Investigation Officer concerned throughout the period of his bail, is prima facie violative of his right to privacy
Case title: Shahin Ahmad v. State of UP
Citation: SLP(C) No. 014027 - / 2023
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (3rd Oct) ordered that the Child Welfare Committee shall consider the issue of release of the minor sons of slain gangster-politician Atiq Ahmad afresh in light of the report prepared by the support person which indicated that they don’t wish to stay in the childcare institution.
Case Title: Greeshma @Sreekutty V. State of Kerala
The prime accused in the Sharon Murder case, Greeshma has approached the Supreme Court seeking transfer of trial from Neyyattinkara, Thiruvananthapuram in Kerala to Kanyakumari in Tamil Nadu. Sharon Raj was allegedly poisoned by his girlfriend Greeshma to weasel out of their romantic relationship. Her mother and maternal uncle are also arrayed as co-accused for allegedly abetting the crime and for destroying the evidence.
Case Title: Supriyo v. Union of India
Citation: Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1011 of 2022
The Supreme Court is soon to deliver its judgment on the batch of petitions seeking legal recognition for queer marriages in India. A bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Justice S Ravindra Bhat, Justice Hima Kohli and Justice PS Narasimha had started hearing the matter on April 18 and reserved judgement in the matter on May 11, 2023. With Justice Bhat set to retire on October 20, 2023, the judgement on marriage equality is expected to come out soon.
Case title- Vishal Tiwari v. Union of India| Aisha Noori v. Union of India
Citation: W.P. Crl. 177/2023| W.P. Crl. 280/2023
The PIL petitioner who approached the Supreme Court seeking independent investigation into the police encounter killings in Uttar Pradesh has refuted the statements made by the State in its status report.
Advocate Vishal Tiwari, the petitioner, in his rejoinder said, "Encounter killings are often celebrated as achievements by state police officials, further encouraging arbitrary and unconstitutional actions. This is evident in the out-of-turn promotions and gallantry awards granted to officers involved in such killings."
On October 2, 2023, the Supreme Court, along with the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), celebrated Gandhi Jayanti and Lal Bahadur Shastri Jayanti at New Delhi. The occasion was marked by a cleanliness drive and the garlanding of Mahatma Gandhi's statue and photograph of Lal Bahadur Shastri in the Supreme Court compound.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (October 3) imposed a cost of Rupees 3 Lakhs on sacked IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt while dismissing the petitions filed by him alleging bias and unfairness against the presiding judge who is holding the trial in the alleged drug planting case against him.
Case Details: Nara Chandrababu Naidu v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Anr.
Citation: Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 12289 of 2023
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (October 3) posted to next Monday (October 9) the petition filed by former Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Nara Chandrababu Naidu seeking to quash the FIR in connection with the skill development scam case.
The Court asked the State to produce the entire compilation of documents filed before the High Court and listed the matter for 09.10.2023.
Case Title: Union of India v. M Mohamed Abbas
Citation: SLP(Crl) No. 9384/2023
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (03.10.2023) upheld the order of the Madras High Court granting bail to Mohammad Abbas, a Madurai based lawyer who was arrested by the National Investigation Agency under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act for his alleged links with the banned Popular Front of India (PFI) organization.