[Sabarimala Reference] Nine Judge Bench Hearing -Live-Updates From Supreme Court

Indira Jaising states that she must also be heard because she is representing the only two women in the case. Rajeev Dhawan says that he supports Nariman’s line of arguments; a question which was asked by the CJ.

CJI - Your last argument is that inherent powers cannot be used. We will consider this.

While reading out from his submissions, Nariman states that review is guided by a set of principles. It is not by way of appeal. Only when an opinion sought by the Executive, there is a reference; review is for a specific reason, a reference is for a question of law.

Order 40 Rule 1, which is different from Order 47. Whatever the nature of the proceeding, the nature of review cannot be equated to that of a reference.

He refers to a judgement with regard to the definition of a review. “The power of review is not an inherent power.”

Nariman states that the court only moves ahead when a case comes before it; there’s no movement of its own.

Nariman states that the court only moves ahead when a case comes before it; there’s no movement of its own.

Nariman refers to another judgement regarding Kerala Education Bill with a full court, rendered in a Presidential Reference. Case talked about advisory opinions.

Nariman : “The concrete case was the review. You may put forward your opinion, I’m not objecting to it. I’m objecting to the adjourning of the case.”

F S Nariman : In every review, outside material which has nothing to do with the errors in the case, cannot come in. There’s a whole line of cases for this.