Welcome to the Supreme Court Monthly Digest, your comprehensive guide to the latest developments and landmark judgments from the apex court of India. Brought to you by Live Law, this digest aims to unravel the legal intricacies and provide insightful analysis of the Supreme Court's decisions, shaping the legal landscape of the nation. Through this digest, we aim to promote...
Welcome to the Supreme Court Monthly Digest, your comprehensive guide to the latest developments and landmark judgments from the apex court of India. Brought to you by Live Law, this digest aims to unravel the legal intricacies and provide insightful analysis of the Supreme Court's decisions, shaping the legal landscape of the nation. Through this digest, we aim to promote transparency, accessibility, and informed discourse on the judiciary's role in upholding justice and safeguarding the rights of individuals.
Judgements/Orders
[Case Title: Balu Sudam Khalde And Another Versus The State Of Maharashtra | Criminal Appeal No. 1910 Of 2010]
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 279
The Supreme Court held that the suggestion made by the defence counsel to a witness in the cross-examination, if found to be incriminating, would definitely bind the accused. And, the accused can’t get away stating that his counsel had no implied authority to make suggestions in the nature of admissions against his client.
For Res Judicata To Apply, Previous Suit Should Have Been Decided On Merits : Supreme Court Explains Principles
[Case Title: Prem Kishore & Ors. v. Brahm Prakash & Ors.]
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 266
In a notable judgment explaining the principles of res judiciata, the Supreme Court has held that an order closing the proceedings in a case cannot be construed as a final decision on merits so as to bar a subsequent suit.
HC Order Reducing Sentence in Motor Accident Case Quashed, SC Says, ‘Undue Sympathy Unsustainable When Aim of IPC is to Punish Offenders’
[Case Title : State of Punjab v. Dil Bahadur | Criminal Appeal No. 844 of 2023]
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 267
“The Indian Penal Code is punitive and deterrent, with its principal aim and object being punishing offenders for committing offences under the act,” said the Supreme Court while reversing a decision by the Punjab and Haryana High Court to lessen a sentence imposed on a man convicted in a motor accident case, of rash driving and causing death due to negligence.
Supreme Court Lifts Telecast Ban On MediaOne, Says State Using Plea Of 'National Security' To Deny Citizens' Rights
[Case Title : Madhyamam Broadcasting Ltd vs Union of India and others]
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 269
In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled against the telecast ban imposed by the Union Government on Malayalam news channel MediaOne.
Power To Transfer Cases To Be Used Sparingly; May Cast Unnecessary Aspersions On State Judiciary & Prosecution Agency: Supreme Court
[Case Title: Afjal Ali Sha @ Abjal Shaukat Vs State of West Bengal & Ors |Transfer Petition (Criminal) No. 409 OF 2021]
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 268
While considering a plea seeking transfer of a criminal trial, the Supreme Court recently reiterated the conditions pre-requisite for a transfer.
[Order 17 Rule 3 CPC] Suit Can Be Decided On Merit If There Is Some Material, Though It May Not Be Strictly "Evidence" : Supreme Court
[Case Title: Prem Kishore And Ors. v. Brahm Prakash And Ors. | Civil Appeal No. 1948 of 2013]
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 266
The Supreme Court held that the Court can decide a suit on merit under Order 17 Rule 3 Code of Civil Procedure if there is some material for deciding on merit, even though the material may not be technically interpreted as evidence.
[Case Title: M/S Next Education India Pvt. Ltd. v M/S K12 Techno Services Pvt. Ltd.]
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 270
The Supreme Court Bench comprising of Justice M.R. Shah and Justice C.T. Ravikumar while adjudicating an appeal filed in M/S Next Education India Pvt. Ltd. v M/S K12 Techno Services Pvt. Ltd., has held that when a petition under Section 9 of IBC is filed based on several invoices and some of the invoices are time barred, then NCLT must consider the remaining invoices which are within limitation and whether they cross the minimum threshold of Rs. 1 Crore
'No Equality In Matter Of Illegality' : Supreme Court Denies Relief To School Teacher Dismissed For Degree Through Distance Education
[Case Title: Sunil Kumar Soni Versus State Of Rajasthan And Ors | Special Leave To Appeal (C) No(S). 27633/2017]
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 271
Denying relief to a school teacher who was dismissed from service as his Bachelor degree was secured through distance education, the Supreme Court has once again stated that there can’t be equality in a matter of illegality.
2015 Amendment To Section 153C Of Income Tax Act Will Apply To Searches Conducted Prior To Date Of Amendment : Supreme Court
[Case Title : Income Tax Officer vs Vikram Sujitkumar Bhatia and 114 connected cases]
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 274
In a significant judgment on taxation law, the Supreme Court held that the amendment brought to Section 153C of the Income Tax Act 1961 by the Finance Act 2015 will retrospectively apply to searches conducted prior to the date of the amendment, i.e, 01.06.2015.
'Officer Without Authority Took Action' : Supreme Court Sets Aside Conviction For 'Black' Sale Of LPG Cylinder In 1995
[Case Title: Avtar Singh & Anr Versus State Of Punjab | Criminal Appeal No. 1711 Of 2011]
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 272
The Supreme Court recently set aside an order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court which had upheld a Trial Court order convicting persons who had involved in the sale of ‘black’ gas cylinders in a 1995 case.
Judicial Officers' Pay Hike | Supreme Court Dismisses Review Petitions Of Centre & States Against Direction To Implement Commission Recommendations
[Case Title: Union of India v. All India Judges Association]
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 273
The Supreme Court upheld its order dated 27th July, 2022 directing for implementation of the enhanced pay scale for judicial officers as per the recommendation of the Second National Judicial Pay Commission (SNJPC).
Settlement Deed In A Partition Suit Must Include Written Consent Of All Parties; Consent Decree Among Only Some Parties Not Maintainable : Supreme Court
[Case Title: Prasanta Kumar Sahoo & Ors. v Charulata Sahu & Ors.]
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 262
The Supreme Court Bench comprising of Justice A.S. Bopanna and Justice J.B. Pardiwala, while adjudicating an appeal filed in Prasanta Kumar Sahoo & Ors. v Charulata Sahu & Ors., has held that in a suit for partition of joint property, a decree by consent amongst only some of the parties cannot be maintained
Issuance Of Corporate Guarantee On Behalf Of Group Companies Without Consideration Is Not A Taxable Service: Supreme Court
[Case Title: Commissioner Of CGST And Central Excise Versus M/S Edelweiss Financial Services Ltd.]
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 281
The Supreme Court has held that the issuance of a corporate guarantee on behalf of group companies without consideration is not a taxable service.
[Case Title: The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s. Paville Projects Pvt Ltd]
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 282
The Supreme Court has held that the Commissioner of Income Tax can exercise revision powers under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act over the orders of the Assessing Officer which cause prejudice to the interest of the revenue.
[Case Title: G. Nagaraj v. BP Mruthunjayanna| Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 311]
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices AS Oka and Rajesh Bindal observed that a plaint cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC merely because there are some inconsistent averments in the plaint.
[Case Title: Shivappa v. Chief Engineer | Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 312]
The State or its instrumentalities cannot be permitted to adopt an attitude of pick and choose, the Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices BR Gavai and Aravind Kumar remarked while allowing an appeal in a land acquisition matter
[Case Title: National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Harsolia Motors And Ors.| Citation: 2023 LiveLaw SC 313]
In a notable verdict, the Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices Ajay Rastogi and CT Ravikumar held that an enterprise is not excluded from the definition of "consumer" under the Consumer Protection Act 1986 merely because it is a consumer enterprise. A commercial enterprise can raise consumer disputes under the Act in relation to any goods purchased or services availed which are not for commercial purposes. To decide whether it is for "commercial purpose" it has to be seen if the goods or the services had a close and direct nexus with the profit generating activity.
[Case Title: Soundarajan v. State | Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 314]
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices AS Oka and Rajesh Bindal observed that Trial Courts and the Public Prosecutors should be vigilant in the matter of framing of charges.
[Case Title: Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam And Ors. v. Renew Wind Energy (Rajkot) Private Limited And Ors.| Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 315]
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, S Ravindra Bhat, and MM Sundresh pulled up the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL) for ‘casually’ rendering findings of coercion, or fraud, without proper pleadings or proof, or without probing into evidence.
[Case Title: State of Rajasthan v. Asharam @ Ashumal| Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 316]
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and MM Sundresh allowed the Special Leave Appeal filed by the State of Rajasthan challenging the Rajasthan High Court’s order to summon IPS Officer Ajay Pal Lamba for recording his evidence as a court witness in connection with Asaram's appeal challenging his conviction by lower Court in a minor's rape case.
[Case Title:Yedala Subba Rao And Anr. v. Union of India| Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 317]
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices AS Oka and Rajesh Bindal granted bail to two accused persons allegedly belonging to CPI (Maoist) in the 2018 murder case of two leaders of Telugu Desam Party (TDP) on the ground that they were in custody for more than four years and charges have not been framed yet.
[Case Title: Surendra Singh v. State of Rajasthan And Anr.| Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 318]
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices MR Shah and CT Ravikumar observed that the Section 149 (Unlawful assembly) of the Indian Penal Code will be attracted even if the specifically named five or more persons are facing trial separately.
[Case Title: State of Gujarat And Anr. v. M/s Saw Pipes Ltd.| Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 319]
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna ruled that the penalty and interest leviable under Sections 45(6) and 47(4A) of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969, respectively, are statutory and mandatory in nature and there is no discretion vested in the Commissioner/Assessing Officer to levy or not to levy the penalty and interest other than as prescribed.
Supreme Court Deprecates High Courts Entertaining Writ Petitions In SARFAESI Matters; Frowns Upon Borrowers Approaching HCs To Consider Offers To Banks
[Case Title: M/s. South Indian Bank Ltd. And Ors. v. Naveen Mathew Philip And Anr.| 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 320]
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and MM Sundresh deprecated the interference of the High Courts in commercial matters, more particularly pertaining to the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (“SARFAESI Act, 2002”).
[Case Title: Security Printing And Minting Corporation of India Ltd. And Ors. Etc v. Vijay D. Kasbe And Ors. Etc.| Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 321]
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices V. Ramasubramanian and Pankaj Mithal held that government employees cannot claim double overtime allowance as per the Factories Act, if the service rules do not provide for it.
[Case Title: Fedrick Cutinha v. State of Karnataka| Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 326]
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices V. Ramasubramanian and Pankaj Mithal set aside the conviction and order of sentence imposed on two accused persons, passed by Karnataka High Court in a murder case, on the ground that the accused persons were not given an opportunity to be heard on the quantum of sentence as prescribed under Section 235(2) of CrPC.
[Case Title: Gaddipati Divija And Anr. v. Pathuri Samrajyam And Ors.| Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 327]
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices Krishna Murari and Sanjay Karol held that when specific performance of the terms of the contract has not been done, the question of time being the essence of contract does not arise.
Transfer Pricing | High Courts Not Precluded From Scrutinising ITAT’s Determination Of Arm’s Length Price : Supreme Court
[Case Title: SAP Labs India Private Limited v. Income Tax Officer, Circle 6, Bangalore| Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 328]
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices MR Shah and M.M. Sundresh ruled that the High Court is not precluded from considering the determination of the arm’s length price determined by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), in exercise of its powers under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
DISCOMS To Pay ‘Change In Law’ Compensation For All Additional Charges Levied By State Instrumentalities To Power Generating Companies: Supreme Court
[Case Title: GMR Warora Energy Limited v. Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) And Ors.| Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 329]
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices BR Gavai and Vikram Nath lamented the practice of Distribution Companies (DISCOMS) and power generating companies pursuing endless litigation challenging the concurrent findings arrived at by the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) and the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL).
[Case Title: Isolators and Isolators Through Its Proprietor Mrs. Sandhya Mishra v. Madhya Pradesh Madhya Kshetra Vidyut Vitran Co. Ltd. & Anr.| Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 330]
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Sanjay Kumar reiterated the requirement of a specific show-cause notice while quashing and setting aside the debarment and penalty order issued by the Madhya Pradesh Power Distribution Company (DISCOM) against a tenderee who was awarded a contract for supply of transformers by the DISCOM.
[Case Title: State of Uttarakhand v. Umesh Kumar Sharma And Ors.| Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 335]
The Supreme Court bench comprising Justices MR Shah and CT Ravikumar observed that police need not file closure reports in cases where criminal proceedings or FIR have been quashed by the High Court.
[Case Title: The Rajasthan Industrial Development and Investment Corporation Ltd. v M/s. Arfat Petrochemicals Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.| Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 337]
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Vikram Nath held that when the Cabinet constitutes a committee and the latter’s actions are validated by the Minister and the rest of the Council, then it cannot be claimed that Rules of Business have not been followed by the State Government in the course of its decision-making process.
[Case Title : Siju Kurian v State of Karnataka| Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 338]
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Aravind Kumar held that a confessional statement, which is otherwise admissible in evidence as per Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, will not become solely because it was recorded not in the mother tongue of the accused.
[Case Title: Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. v. Adani Power (Mundra) Ltd.| Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 339]
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices B.R. Gavai and Vikram Nath pronounced Judgment in the matter between Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited & Anr. (“Haryana Discoms”) and Adani Power (Mundra) Ltd. (“Adani Power”) wherein it has been held that “Inter Plant Transfer” (“IPT”) of coal qualifies as a Change in Law Event in terms of the Power Purchase Agreements (“PPA”) executed between the parties.
[Case Title: Gwalior Development Authority And Anr. v. Bhanu Pratap Singh| Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 340]
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices Ajay Rastogi and Bela M. Trivedi held that when a lease deed is executed after compulsory registration under Section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908, it is nowhere open to be altered or amended even by the High Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution.
[Case Title: Charan Singh @ Charanjit Singh v. State of Uttarakhand| Citation: 2023 LiveLaw SC 341]
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices AS Oka and Rajesh Bindal held that mere death of a wife under unnatural circumstances, in a matrimonial home, within seven years of marriage is not sufficient to convict the husband for dowry death.
[Case Title: Seethamal And Anr. v. Narayanasamy And Ors.| Citation: 2023 LiveLaw SC 342]
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices AS Bopanna and Hima Kohli has made it clear that a first appeal and a second appeal arising out of two proceedings cannot be clubbed and disposed of by a common judgment even though the parties are essentially the same and the property in dispute is common.
[Case Title: M/s. N.N. Global Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. v. M/s. Indo Unique Flame Ltd. And Ors.| Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 343]
A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court comprising Justices K.M. Joseph, Ajay Rastogi, Aniruddha Bose, Hrishikesh Roy and C.T. Ravikumar answered the reference, which pertains to the issue - whether the arbitration clause in a contract, which is required to be registered and stamped, but is not registered and stamped, is valid and enforceable.
[Case Title: The Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur v. Prakash Chand Lunia (D) Thr. Lrs. And Anr.| Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 348]
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices MR Shah and MM Sundresh set aside the Rajasthan High Court’s order of allowing the loss claimed by the assessee on account of confiscation of silver bars by the Customs department, as ‘business loss’ under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Conviction Cannot Be Upheld In The Absence Of The Records Of The Trial Court: Supreme Court
[Case Title: Jitendra Kumar Rode v. Union of India| Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 349]
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices Krishna Murari and Sanjay Karol set aside the judgment of the Allahabad High Court which upheld the conviction of a person under Prevention of Corruption Act, on the ground that High Court shall not decide an appeal without calling for the records of the case from the Trial Court.
[Case Title: State of Gujarat And Ors. Etc. v. Dr. P.A. Bhatt And Ors. Etc.| 2023 LiveLaw SC 350]
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices V. Ramasubramanian and Pankaj Mithal held that Allopathy doctors and doctors of indigenous medicine cannot be said to be performing equal work so as to be entitled to equal pay.
[Case Title: In Re: T. N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India & Ors.| Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 351]
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices B. R. Gavai, Vikram Nath and Sanjay Karol modified its order dated June 3, 2022 to the extent that directions in the said order mandating a 1 km Eco-Sensitive Zone (ESZ) around protected forests would not be applicable to the ESZs in respect of which a draft and final notification has been issued by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF & CC) and in respect of the proposals which have been received by the Ministry.
Irretrievably Broken Down Marriage Can Be Dissolved On Ground Of 'Cruelty' : Supreme Court
[Case Title: Shri Rakesh Raman v. Smt. Kavita| Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 353]
In a notable judgment, the Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and JB Pardiwala held that irretrievable breakdown of marriage can be read as the ground of "cruelty" under Section 13 (1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act for the dissolution of marriage.
Ganja Seeds Not Banned Contraband Under NDPS Act : Supreme Court
[Case Title: Hasubhai Kamabhai Thakor v. State of Gujarat| Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 354]
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices Hrishikesh Roy and Manoj Misra granted bail to a man accused of supplying Ganja seeds on the ground that the definition of "ganja" under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 does not include ganja seeds.
[Case Title: The Sub Registrar, Amudalavalasa And Anr. v. M/s Dankuni Steels Ltd. And Ors.| Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 357]
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices K.M. Joseph and Hrishikesh Roy held that the registration authorities are empowered under the proviso to Section 27 of the Indian Stamps Act, 1899, as inserted by the Andhra Pradesh Amending Act, 1988, to inspect the property, which is the subject matter of the instrument, make necessary enquiries and satisfy itself that the provisions of Section 27, which requires that all facts affecting the levy of Stamp Duty are fully and truly set forth in instrument, are complied with.
[Case Title: Sukhbir Singh Badal v. Balwant Singh Khera And Ors.| Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 359]
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices MR Shah and CT Ravikumar quashed the criminal proceedings pending against Shiromani Akali Dal chief Sukhbir Singh Badal, his father and five-time former Punjab Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal, and party senior vice-president Daljit Singh Cheema in an alleged forgery case over the political party’s dual constitutions.
News Updates
Revised Scheme For Engaging Law Clerks In Supreme Court Increases Law Clerks' Remuneration To Rs. 80,000/- Per Month
The scheme for engaging Law Clerk-cum-Research Associates on a short-term contractual assignment in the Supreme Court of India has been revised. As per the revised scheme, Law Clerks will now be paid a consolidated remuneration of Rs. 80,000/- per month for the assignment term.
Union Govt The Appropriate Party To Respond To Plea Seeking 5 Year Bar On Legislators Violating Anti-Defection Law : ECI Tells Supreme Court
The Election Commission of India (ECI) filed its response before the Supreme Court in a plea seeking disqualification of Members of Legislative Assembly and Parliament from standing for election for five years upon having violated Article 191(1)(e) and Tenth Schedule of the Constitution of India.
Lawyers Free To Appear Online In View Of Rising COVID Cases : CJI DY Chandrachud
"We saw newspaper reports on rising COVID cases. Lawyers can use hybrid mode. If you choose to appear online, we will hear you. The hybrid mode is on and I see many lawyers who are appearing online. So please feel free to", CJI Chandrachud said.
"Politicians Can't Claim Higher Immunity" : Supreme Court Refuses To Entertain Plea Of 14 Opposition Parties Against 'Misuse' Of CBI & ED
The Supreme Court refused to entertain a petition filed by fourteen political parties alleging that central investigating agencies such as the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) are being weaponised by the Union Government to clamp down on dissent by arresting opposition leaders.
Supreme Court Requests Delhi HC To Decide Plea To Allow Namaz In A Mosque Outside Qutub Enclave 'As Soon As Possible'
The Supreme Court refused to entertain a plea seeking permission to perform namaz in a mosque, which is situated inside the Qutub Minar complex, but outside the Qutub enclave. However, considering that the issue is already before the Delhi High Court, the Apex Court requested it to consider the petition expeditiously.
Supreme Court Stays Notification Cancelling Nagaland Local Body Polls; Issues Contempt Notice To State, SEC
The Supreme Court issued notice in a contempt plea alleging non-compliance of the order of the Apex Court directing the State Government and the Nagaland State Election Commission to hold local body election in Nagaland. Notice was issued to both the State Government and the State Election Commission. The Court directed them to file their response within a week’s time.
Supreme Court Refuses To Entertain Another Challenge Against Renaming Aurangabad As Bombay HC Is Hearing Similar Plea
The Supreme Court of India refused to entertain a petition challenging the Maharashtra government’s decision to rename Aurangabad city as ‘Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar’ as a similar matter is pending before the Bombay High Court.
Supreme Court Asks Allahabad HC To Take Up Abdullah Azam Khan’s Plea To Stay Conviction On "Highest Priority"
The Supreme Court asked the Allahabad High Court to hear the application moved by the recently disqualified MLA Abdullah Azam Khan seeking a stay on conviction in a 15-year-old case. The Court said that Khan's application be "accorded with the highest priority and be disposed of".
Supreme Court Judge Raises Concerns About Inconsistency In Views Of Benches, Indiscipline Of AoRs
Supreme Court judge Justice BR Gavai expressed concerns about the inconsistency in the views made by different benches of the Supreme Court. He noted that there are seventeen benches in the Supreme Court and that benches often take inconsistent views on the same subject.
As Okhla Waste-to-Energy Plant Operator Says Expansion Plan Will Take 18 Months, Supreme Court Refuses To Entertain Stay Plea
The Supreme Court observed that it is not necessary to consider at the present stage an application to stay the proposed expansion of the Okhla Waste-to-Energy (WTE) plant in Delhi from 23 MW to 40 MW. This is in view of the statement made by the plant operator that it will take at least 18 months to complete.
"Very Unfortunate That High Court Has Misunderstood Our Order" : Supreme Court Expresses Displeasure At Manipur HC
The Supreme Court expressed displeasure at the Manipur High Court for not complying with its February judgment (where the top court had required the case for promotion of an employee of the High Court to be considered on the basis of 2 years' ACRs), and for instead proceeding to convene fresh DPC to consider the case of other selected candidates also.
‘He Should Be More Responsible’: Supreme Court Asks BJP Leader Prashant Umrao To Apologize For Tweet On Bihari Migrants In TN, Grants Interim Relief
The Supreme Court expressed displeasure at Uttar Pradesh Bharatiya Janata Party spokesperson Prashant Umrao for sharing wrong information on Twitter regarding alleged attacks against Bihari workers in Tamil Nadu. Observing that Patel should be more responsible, especially as a lawyer, the Court asked him to tender an apology for spreading misinformation.
Chargesheet Filed In Hate Speech Case Over Hindu Yuva Vahini Event, Delhi Police Tells Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Thursday disposed of the contempt petition filed by activist Tushar Gandhi against the Delhi Police for its alleged inaction in the hate speech case over the Hindu Yuva Vahini event organised under the leadership of Sudarshan News TV editor Suresh Chavhanke in Delhi in December 2021.
PIL Seeking Mechanism To Inform Legal Heirs About Unclaimed Deposits In Dormant Accounts : Supreme Court Seeks Finance Ministry's Response
The Supreme Court granted time to the Ministry of Finance to file its counter affidavit in a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking a mechanism to inform legal heirs about the unclaimed deposits lying in dormant accounts.
The Supreme Court bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala refused to entertain the petition filed by Suvendu Adhikari, Leader of the Opposition (LoP) in the West Bengal Assembly seeking to re-assess the figures of SCs and STs ahead of the West Bengal Panchayat Polls.
Follow Draft Constitution Framed By Justice LN Rao Pending Its Finalisation: Supreme Court Tells Indian Olympic Association
The Supreme Court orally reminded the Indian Olympic Association (IOA) that it was obligated to comply with a draft constitution framed under the supervision of the top court and the International Olympic Committee (IOC), pending its finalisation.
Amendments To CrPC & IPC Under Active Consideration: Attorney General Tells Supreme Court
The Union Government informed the Apex Court that the Centre was actively considering amendments to the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala was hearing a plea challenging Section 64 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the ground that the said section discriminated against women by treating female members of a family incapable of accepting summons on behalf of the person summoned.
Gyanvapi Mosque Case| Masjid Committee Seeks Urgent Listing In View Of Ramzan; Supreme Court Lists On April 14
The Supreme Court listed the pleas concerning the Gyanvapi Mosque dispute on 14th April 2023. The development took place when Senior Advocate Huzefa Ahmadi mentioned the matter before a bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala.
The Supreme Court agreed to hear on April 10 the petition filed by Youtuber Manish Kashyap, challenging multiple FIRs lodged against him for allegedly spreading disinformation concerning violence against Bihari migrant workers in Tamil Nadu.
The Supreme Court of India disposed of a public interest litigation (PIL) petition alleging illegal and forced hysterectomies in the states of Bihar, Chhattisgarh, and Rajasthan, with a direction to all states and union territories to implement the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (MoHFW) guidelines on hysterectomies within three months.
The Delhi Commission for Protection of Child Rights (DCPCR) has filed an intervention application in the pleas seeking legal recognition of same-sex marriage in India. The said pleas are listed before a Constitution bench of the Supreme Court on April 18, 2023.
“Technology Must Be Used For Good Purposes”: Supreme Court Says While Hearing Youtuber’s Plea Against Cancellation Of Bail
“Technology must be used for good purposes”, the Supreme Court orally observed on Thursday while hearing a Youtuber Sattai Duraimurugan’s plea against a Madras High Court’s order cancelling his bail last year.
E- Monitoring For Road Safety | Supreme Court Informed About MoRTH Plan To Standardise Guidelines For Uniformity Across Nation
In a plea before the Supreme Court seeking electronic monitoring of roads to ensure safety and prevention of accidents, the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways of India (MoRTH) has indicated that it will undertake the exercise of standardisation and bring detailed guidelines to integrate software and hardware with e-vahan/e-challan to ensure uniformity across India.
'Set Your House In Order' : Supreme Court Warns Defence Ministry After Women Army Officers Allege Discrimination in Promotions [Read Full Courtroom Exchange]
The Supreme Court of India pulled up the defence ministry over allegations of unfairness and discrimination in rank promotion for women army officers who were granted permanent commission following its landmark Babita Puniya decision.
DRT Presiding Officer Moves Supreme Court Against Adverse Observations Of P&H High Court
The Presiding Officer of DRT-II Chandigarh has moved the Supreme Court against the adverse observations made by the Punjab and Haryana High Court that is alleged to have grave consequences impacting his performance of legal duties.
The Union of India, in a second counter affidavit filed before a Constitituon Bench of the Supreme Court comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli, and PS Narasimha, has again opposed the petitions which seek legal recognition for same-sex marriage in India, stating those seeking marriage equality merely represent "urban elitist views for the purpose of social acceptance" and that the popular will of people is that marriage be recognised solely amongst heterosexual individuals.
A PIL plea has been moved before the Supreme Court seeking constitution of an independent expert committee under the chairmanship of a retired SC Judge to inquire into the killing of Atique Ahmed and his brother Ashraf by 3 assailants while they were in police custody.
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices PS Narasimha and JB Pardiwala dismissed the petition filed by the Kerala Government against the directions issued by the Kerala High Court to relocate the rogue elephant named 'Arikomban' from Munnar-Chinnakanal area to Parambikulam tiger reserve area.
The Supreme Court judge Justice KM Joseph recused from hearing a plea filed by Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) challenging the appointment of Arun Goel as a member of the Election Commission of India. The matter was listed before a bench comprising Justices KM Joseph and BV Nagarathna.
Supreme Court Stays Order Of Calcutta HC Directing CBI & ED To Question TMC's Abhishek Banerjee
The Supreme Court Bench CJI DY Chandrachud, Justices PS Narasimha, and JB Pardiwala directed a stay on all actions against TMC national general secretary Abhishek Banerjee in pursuance of the directions passed by Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay of the Calcutta High Court through an order which had directed the CBI and the ED to question Banerjee for the Primary Teachers' Recruitment Scam case.
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices KM Joseph and BV Nagarathna issued notice on a petition filed by Communist Party of India (Marxist) leader Brinda Karat seeking registration of FIR against BJP leaders Anurag Thakur and Parvesh Verma for allegedly delivering hate speeches in 2020.
The Supreme Court Bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justices PS Narasimha, and JB Pardiwala took suo motu cognisance of a letter written to Chief Justice DY Chandrachud by former employees of the Goa bench of the Bombay High Court concerning the lack of pensionary benefits provided to them despite the lapse of 3-7 years of retirement.
Supreme Court Issues Notice On Delhi Govt's Challenge Against LG Changing Proposal Concerning Teachers’ Training in Finland
The Supreme Court Bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justices PS Narasimha, and JB Pardiwala issued notice in Delhi Government's plea challenging the changes made by the Lieutenant Governor (LG) in the Delhi Government's proposal to send school teachers to Finland for training.
Advocates’ Strikes: Supreme Court Proposes To Constitute Grievance Redressal Committees Consisting Of CJ Of Every HC With 4 Senior Judges
Regarding the constitution of grievances redressal committees to avert the situation of lawyers having to resort to strikes to raise their problems, the Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices MR Shah and Ahsanuddin Amanullah proposed to constitute such committees consisting of the Chief Justice of every High Court along with four senior judges.
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices SK Kaul and Aravind Kumar asked the Centre to place on record its stand regarding whether the constitutional scheme of one-third reservation for women in municipal and town council elections can be violated by the Nagaland Government by repealing the Nagaland Municipal Act 2001. It asked the Union Government to file its stand within a period of two weeks.
In contempt proceedings against lawyers who had indulged in vandalism in court premises during their strike demanding formation of new benches of the Orissa High Court, the Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices SK Kaul and Aravind Kumar granted last opportunity to the lawyers who have not filed their affidavits to do so within a period of three weeks.
In a matter seeking to streamline integration of all stages in government revenue litigation through technology, the Supreme Court Bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justices PS Narasimha, and JB Pardiwala directed the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal to ensure that appeals were filed only in e-filing mode and not the physical mode.
‘Same-Sex Marriage Against Indian Concept Of Marriage’: Akhil Bharatiya Sant Samiti Opposes Marriage Equality Pleas In Supreme Court
Ahead of a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli, and PS Narasimha starting to hear a batch of petitions seeking the recognition of same-sex marriage, the Akhil Bharatiya Sant Samiti opposed the pleas before the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices V. Ramasubramanian and Pankaj Mithal confirmed "in all aspects" the Gauhati High Court’s decision to set aside trial court's order discharging activist-turned-politician Akhil Gogoi in connection with offences under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.
On the first day of the hearings in the batch of petitions seeking legal recognition for same-sex marriage in India, the primary arguments raised before the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli, and PS Narasimha, pertained to marriage being a way to help assimilate queer individuals in the society better and end stigma against them.
The Central government filed a fresh affidavit before the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli, and PS Narasimha, urging it to make all the State governments and Union Territories party to the petitions seeking recognition of same-sex marriage.
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices Ajay Rastogi and Ahsanuddin Amanullah required the UoI to file its response on the 2021 plea contending that the pending wages of workers under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005 (MNREGA) are piling up along with negative balances in funds of most of the states.
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices MR Shah and CT Ravikumar set aside an order of the Bombay High Court acquitting former Delhi University professor and activist GN Saibaba as well as others over their alleged Maoist links and remanded the matter back to the high court to be considered afresh by a different bench.
While hearing the batch of petitions seeking legal recognition for same sex marriages in India, the Supreme Court Constitution Bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli, and PS Narasimha faced with a conundrum as to which partner would be aged 18 years and who would be 21 years old as per the provisions of the Special Marriage Act.
The Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli, and PS Narasimha remarked that Central Government cannot dub homosexuality and the idea of same-sex marriage as an "urban elitist" concept, especially in the absence of any data to back this claim.
Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Examination Notified To Be Conducted In June
The Supreme Court has announced that the next Advocates-on-Record examination will be held in New Delhi on June 12, 13, 14, and 15.
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices M.R. Shah and Sanjay Karol referred the issue of constitutional validity of GST on lease/rent payments to be decided after the disposal of the matter already pending before the Constitution Bench of 9 Judges.
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices MR Shah and Ahsanuddin Amanullah directed state governments to grant ration cards to migrant or unorganized workers who do not have them but are registered on the Centre's e-Shram portal, within three months.
In A Historic First, Lawyer With Visual Impairment Clears Supreme Court's Advocate-on-Record Exam
In a historic first, N Visakamurthy, an advocate and a person with a visual impairment, has successfully cleared the December 2022 Advocates-on-Record (AoR) Examination conducted by the Supreme Court.
In the marriage equality case before the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli, and PS Narasimha some petitioners have challenged the provisions of the Special Marriage Act 1954 which require parties intending marriage to give advance notice of 30 days, which will be published in the Registrar's office inviting public objections as violative of fundamental rights to privacy and decisional autonomy.
While hearing the marriage equality petitions Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, responded to a commonly raised concern over the suitability of same-sex couples to adopt and raise children.
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices KM Joseph, BV Nagarathna and Aravind Kumar ruled in favour of the ex IPS officer Amod Kumar Kanth in connection with a case pertaining to the Uphaar fire tragedy which happened in 1996. The Court has set aside the Magistrate’s order taking cognisance of a complaint against Kanth, who allegedly did not take action against “extra seats” in the Uphaar theatre hall which had blocked the emergency exit at the right-hand side of the balcony, resultantly killing over 50 people.
'We Are Not Here To Generate Revenue For Lawyers' : CJI DY Chandrachud
"We are not here to generate revenue for lawyers", Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud said while rejecting the request of a lawyer to add the name of a senior counsel in the appearances in a case.
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha refused to entertain a writ petition filed by Nupur Sharma and Rahul Roushan, the editor and founder of online portal "OpIndia", challenging the FIR registered by the Tamil Nadu Police for allegedly spreading fake news about attacks on Biharis in the southern state.
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Chief Justice of DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha issued notice to the State of Tamil Nadu on a plea by YouTuber Manish Kashyap seeking to quash his detention under the National Security Act over allegations of spreading fake news about the attacks on Biharis in the southern state.
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha granted bail to eight life convicts in the 2002 Godhra train carnage case in Gujarat, while refusing to consider the application of four others in view of their roles in the violence.
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices SK Kaul and Ahsanuddin Amanullah was irked by a petition, inter alia, seeking directions to declare that the Bombay Public Security Measures (Delhi Amendment) Act, 1948 is ultra vires to the Constitution of India and its application in the Mahatma Gandhi Assassination case ( Rex v. Nathuram Godse And Ors), resulted in a mistrial.
In a notable judgment, the Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices KM Joseph and S, Ravindra Bhat held that in cases where the offences are so heinous that death sentence is warranted, the prosecution must produce before the trial court all materials which are relevant to assess the mitigating circumstances favouring the accused. The Court clarified that this exercise must be carried out even in cases where the accused might eventually not be imposed the death sentence.
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices BR Gavai and Vikram Nath expressed concerns over the vacancies in super speciality medical in India, and the failure of the concerned authorities to fill the vacancies.
The Bar Council of India has resolved to request the Supreme Court to leave the issue of same-sex marriage to legislative process for wide spread consultation, saying that the matter is "highly sensitive" and having "social, religious and cultural connotations" and hence required wide spread consultations.
Days After Firing in Delhi’s Saket Court, Bar Council of India Requests Union Govt for Effective Law for Lawyers’ Protection
Amid rising concerns over the safety of lawyers, the Bar Council of India has passed a resolution requesting the Union Government to frame an effective law for “the protection of lives, interests, and privilege of advocates and their families”. This development comes days after yet another shooting inside a court complex, this time in Delhi’s Saket district court.
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices MR Shah and CT Ravikumar closed the contempt proceedings against the founder of the Indian Premier League, Lalit Modi in relation to his social media posts against the India judiciary.
Supreme Court Issues Notice On Women Wrestlers' Plea Alleging Sexual Harassment By WFI President
The Supreme Court Bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha issued notice on the petition moved by top women wrestlers of the country, seeking registration of a FIR against BJP MP and Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) president Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh over alleged sexual harassment.
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices KM Joseph and BV Nagarathna adjourned till May 9, the hearing in a petition challenging the Karnataka government’s decision to scrap an almost three-decade-old four per cent reservation provided to Muslims in the Other Backward Classes (OBC) category in the state.
The Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud reminded the petitioners seeking legal recognition of queer marriages in India that Parliament is empowered to legislate on the subject of marriage and divorce and therefore inquired as to the scope of interference by the Supreme Court in such matters.
Senior Advocate Saurabh Kirpal argued before the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court comprising the Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, S Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli and PS Narasimha, prevention of queer marriages in India by not granting them legal recognition may lead to lavender marriages between a man and woman— where either or both the spouse are homosexual.
Supreme Court Stays Madras HC Order Setting Aside Ban On Chewing Tobacco In Tamil Nadu
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices KM Joseph and BV Nagarathna stayed the operative part of the Madras High Court’s order setting aside a notification issued by the Tamil Nadu State Commissioner of Food Safety imposing a ban on sale of Gutka, Pan Masala, flavoured or scented food products or chewable food products that contain tobacco or nicotine.
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices Krishna Murari and CT Ravikumar held that without completing an investigation of a case, a chargesheet or prosecution complaint can't be filed by an Investigating Agency only to deprive an accused of his right to default bail under Section 167 of CrPC.
The Centre in its affidavit filed in response to the petitions challenging the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act 2019 has stated that the despite the ruling of the Supreme Court declaring the practice of Triple Talaq unconstitutional, reports show that this practice of divorce continues to exist.
Advocate Arundhati Katju, while addressing the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court comprising the Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, S Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli and PS Narasimha in the petitioners seeking legal recognition for queer marriages in India, asked the Top Court to issue a positive declaration that marriage solemnised under Special Marriage Act and parties to such marriage will be entitled to all rights & obligations, notwithstanding gender identity & sexual orientation.
A plea has been moved in the Supreme Court challenging the restoration of Lakshadweep MP Mohammed Faizal Khan's Lok Sabha Membership. His membership was restored last month in view of the Kerala High Court suspending his conviction, on January 25, 2023, in an attempt to murder case.
While hearing the petitioners seeking legal recognition for queer marriages in India, the Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud expressed his reservation over US Supreme Court's controversial decision in Dobbs v. X which held that there is no constitutional right to abortion.
The Union of India urged the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court comprising the Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, S Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli and PS Narasimha to leave the question of granting members of the LGBTQIA+ community an equal right to marry, and subsequently, regulating such marriage, to the wisdom of the legislature.
The Union of India argued against the ‘reading in’ of gender neutrality in the provisions of the Special Marriage Act, 1954 on the ground that the legislature had ‘consciously’ intended for it to be an act recognising only heterosexual unions.
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justice KM Joseph, Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Ashanuddin Amanullah refused to entertain self-styled godman Swami Shraddhanand’s plea to be released on temporary parole. The 82 year old, Swami Shraddhanand alias Murali Manohar Mishra who has been in prison for almost 30 years now, is currently undergoing life imprisonment for the murder of his wife Shakereh Khaleeli - the granddaughter of Dewan of Mysore, Sir Mirza Ismail.
While hearing the marriage equality pleas the Constitution bench of the Supreme Court comprising the CJI DY Chandrachud, Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, S Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli, and PS Narasimha orally asked the Union Government if it was willing to grant social welfare benefits to same-sex couples, without conferring such relationships legal recognition.
The Union Government’s affidavit filed before the Supreme Court in a plea seeking enforcement of rights of persons with disabilities by constituting District Level Committees for each district to implement the Right of Persons with Disabilities Act 2016 [“2016 Act”], discloses that some State Governments/Union Territories are yet to formulate rules under Section 101 of the 2016 Act. The affidavit also indicates that some of the States Government/UTs have still not constituted District Level Committee under Section 72 of the 2016 Act.
While hearing the marriage equality petitions the CJI DY Chandrachud orally remarked that Indian culture was "extraordinarily inclusive" and it was due to the impact of the British Victorian morality that Indians had to foresake their cultural ethos and become exclusionary of queer individuals.
The Supreme Court released a list of over 10,000 judgments from January 1, 2014 to March 31, 2023 with proposed neutral citations to facilitate crowdsourced checking, so that any missing or incorrect items can be addressed with the help of legal professionals and publishers.
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices KM Joseph, BV Nagarathna and Ahsanuddin Amanullah allowed the Ansal Brothers, who were convicted for negligence in the Uphaar Fire Tragedy case, to move an application before the concerned trial court for de-sealing of the theatre hall and get back its custody.
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justice AS Oka and Justice Rajesh Bindal recently rapped the State of Uttar Pradesh for not complying with the Court’s earlier order which directed to consider and pass orders on the application of a convict seeking permanent remission.
In a significant development, the Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices KM Joseph and Justice BV Nagarathna extended the application of its October 2022 order (which directed the Delhi, Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand Police to take suo motu action against hate speech cases) to all States and Union Territories. So now, all States/UTs are enjoined to take suo motu action to register FIR against hate speeches, without waiting for any formal complaint.
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices S Ravindra Bhat and Dipankar Datta sought a "comprehensive affidavit" from the Uttar Pradesh government on the steps taken to enquire into the killings of gangster-politician Atique Ahmed and his brother Ashraf Ahmed which took place on April 15 at Prayagraj when they were being taken to a hospital for medical check up in police custody. The bench has also sought information on the inquiry into the encounter killings of the other accused in the Umesh Pal murder case, including Atique Ahmed's son Asad.
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha directed the Chief Justice of Calcutta High Court to reassign the matter concerning the Primary Teachers' Recruitment Scam in West Bengal to another judge. Till now, the matter was being dealt by Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay of the Calcutta High Court who had directed the CBI and the ED to question TMC national general secretary Abhishek Banerjee.
In a significant development, the Supreme Court Bar Association has taken exception to the Bar Council of India opposing the hearing of the same-sex marriage case in the Supreme Court.
Opposing a plea for clubbing of first information reports (FIR) lodged against YouTuber Manish Kashyap over spreading fake news about attacks against Bihari migrants in Tamil Nadu, the Tamil Nadu government has told the Supreme Court that he cannot “seek the shelter of the umbrella of constitutional rights” after disturbing public order and national integrity.
In a plea pertaining to the Bihar Government’s decision to conduct a caste-based census in the State, the Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices MR Shah and JB Pardiwala granted the petitioner, Youth for Equality, liberty to file an application seeking interim relief and asked the Patna High Court to consider, decide and dispose of the interim application at the earliest, preferably within a period of 3 days of filing of the application and mentioning of the same before the Chief Justice of the High Court.
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices KM Joseph and BV Nagarathna directed human rights activist Gautam Navlakha, an accused in the Bhima Koregaon case, to deposit Rs 8 lakhs to meet the expenses of surveillance and costs as indicated in its order dated 10th November, 2022.
The Supreme Court Bench comprising the CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha refused to entertain the plea filed by former Chhattisgarh Principal Secretary Aman Singh and his wife Yasmin Singh seeking the transfer of all disproportionate assets cases against them to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
Supreme Court Dismisses Plea To Restore Concession In Railway Tickets For Senior Citizens
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Ahsanuddin Amanullah rejected a plea seeking the restoration of concession in Railway ticket prices for senior citizens.
In a special sitting held at 8 PM today, the Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices AS Bopanna and Hima Kohli stayed an unusual order passed by Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay of the Calcutta High Court earlier today, directing the top court's secretary general to provide him with the translation of a controversial media interview that was placed before a bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud in the morning.
At the medical bail hearing of Kapil Wadhawan, the former Chief Managing Director of Dewan Housing Finance Limited (DHFL) and main accused in the Yes Bank-DHFL scam, the Additional Solicitor General, SV Raji, as an aside, informed the Supreme Court, that the Union Government is contemplated filing a petition to review the recent judgment of the Apex Court wherein it was held that filing incomplete charge sheet without completing investigation would not extinguish the right of the accused to get default bail.
The Supreme Court Bench comprising the CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha stayed the Calcutta High Court order which had directed the transfer of investigation of the matter pertaining to alleged irregularities in the recruitment of teaching and non-teaching staff at West Bengal government schools, to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices AS Bopanna and Hima Kohli extended the interim protection granted to Bharatiya Janata Party MLA Hardik Patel in a seven-year-old criminal case lodged against him over violent clashes during the 2015 Patidar quota stir in Gujarat.
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices MR Shah and JB Pardiwala strongly deprecated the conduct of the Gujarat Government in notifying the promotions of the District Judges when an issue pertaining to the promotion was sub-judice before the Supreme Court.