Supreme Court Judgments Forest Department Cannot Itself Impose Damages Invoking Section 33 Wildlife Protection Act: Supreme Court Case Details: State of Uttar Pradesh vs Anand Engineering College 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 626 | SLP(C) 10084-85/2022 The Supreme Court observed that a forest department cannot impose damages under Section 33 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972. For that...
Supreme Court Judgments
Case Details: State of Uttar Pradesh vs Anand Engineering College 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 626 | SLP(C) 10084-85/2022
The Supreme Court observed that a forest department cannot impose damages under Section 33 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972. For that the authority has to initiate appropriate proceedings before the appropriate court/forum to determine/ascertain the damages, the bench comprising Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna observed.
Case Status: NCV Aishwarya vs AS Saravana Karthik Sha | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 627 | CA 4894 of 2022
The Supreme Court observed that generally it is the wife's convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
"In matrimonial matters, wherever Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer, the Courts have to take into consideration the economic soundness of both the parties, the social strata of the spouses and their behavioural pattern, their standard of life prior to the marriage and subsequent thereto and the circumstances of both the parties in eking out their livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are seeking their sustenance to life", the bench comprising Justices S. Abdul Nazeer and JK Maheshwari observed.
Case Title : Union of India vs. M/s Filco Trade Centre Pvt. Ltd. and Anr.
Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 628
In a relief to several assessees who missed the statutory deadline, the Supreme Court has directed the Goods and Services Tax Network (GSTN) to allow a 2-month additional window from September 1, 2022 to October 31, 2022 for claiming Transitional Credit. TRAN-1 and TRAN-forms were brought to allow assessees to carry forward pre-GST credits to the GST system. As per the GST Rules, such claims had to be filed within 90 days from the date when the GST Act came into force (July 1, 2017). Different High Courts passed directions for extending the time line, against which the GST department approached the Supreme Court.
Case Title : Mohammed Zubair vs State of NCT of Delhi and others| 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 629
The Supreme Court on Monday uploaded the judgment in the Mohammed Zubair case, with some important reminders to the police agencies against the use of power of arrest as a "punitive tool". A bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud and AS Bopanna had last week granted bail to Zubair in all the 6 FIRs registered by the Uttar Pradesh police in different districts over his tweets and clubbed those cases with the Delhi FIR. The Court had only released the operative portion of the order on July 20 to enable the early release of the petitioner and the complete judgment was uploaded today evening. From the facts of the case, the bench concluded that the criminal justice system was "relentlessly employed against" the fact-checking journalist and that he was trapped in a "vicious cycle of the criminal process". The Court stated in the judgment that the power of arrest is not unbridled and had also categorically refused to impose a bail condition that Zubair should not post tweets.
No Wrong In Disqualifying Candidate For Not Using Prescribed Language In OMR Sheet : Supreme Court
Case Title: Union of India vs Mahendra Singh | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 630 | CA 4807 OF 2022 | 25 July 2022
The Supreme Court upheld rejection of candidature of a candidate who used different language in the application form than the OMR sheet. Since the advertisement contemplated the manner of filling up of the application form and also the attempting of the answer sheets, it has to be done in the manner so prescribed, the bench comprising Justices Hemant Gupta and Vikram Nath observed.
Ghulam Hassan Beigh vs Mohammad Maqbool Magrey | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 631 | SLP(Crl) 4599 OF 2021
The Supreme Court observed that a trial court could not discharge the accused from murder charges merely relying on Post mortem report indicating cause of death as "cardio respiratory failure".
"The post mortem report, by itself, does not constitute substantive evidence. The doctor's statement in court is alone the substantive evidence", the bench comprising Justices AM Khanwilkar, Abhay S Oka and JB Pardiwala observed.
Case Title : All India Haj Umrah Tour Organizer Association Mumbai vs Union of India
Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 632
The Supreme Court on Thursday dismissed a batch of petitions filed by various private tour operators seeking exemption from the Goods and Services Tax for the Haj and Umrah services offered by them to pilgrims travelling to Saudi Arabia.
A bench of Justices A. M. Khanwilkar, A. S. Oka and C. T. Ravikumar pronounced the judgment. Justice Oka, who read out the operative protion of the judgment, said "we have dismissed the petitions on both the grounds of exemption and discrimination". Justice Oka said that the argument raised by the petitioners regarding extra territorial application of GST for services given outside India is kept open, as it is pending consideration before another bench.
Case Title: Vijay Madanlal Choudhary vs Union of India | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 633 | SLP (Crl) 4634 OF 2014 | 27 July 2022
The Supreme Court, on Wednesday, upheld the provisions of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 which relate to the power of arrest, attachment and search and seizure conferred on the Enforcement Directorate.
The Court upheld the constitutionality of the provisions of Sections 5, 8(4), 15, 17 and 19 of the PMLA, which relate to the powers of ED's power of arrest, attachment, search and seizure. The Court also upheld the reverse burden of proof under Section 24 of the Act and said that it has "reasonable nexus" with the objects of the Act.
The Court also upheld the "twin-conditions" for bail in Section 45 of the PMLA Act and said that the Parliament was competent to amend the said provision in 2018 even after the Supreme Court's judgment in the Nikesh Tharachand Shah case (which had struck down the twin conditions). The bench said that the Parliament is competent to amend Section 45 in the present form to cure the defects pointed out in the Supreme Court judgment.
Also Read: Summary Of Supreme Court's PMLA Judgement- Vijay Madanlal Choudhary Vs Union of India
Case Title: R.D. Jain and Co. vs Capital First Ltd. 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 634 | CA 175 OF 2022
The Supreme Court held that the District Magistrate, Chief Metropolitan Magistrate is not a persona designata for the purposes of Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act.
Thus, the expression "District Magistrate" and the "Chief Metropolitan Magistrate" as appearing in Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act shall deem to mean and include Additional District Magistrate and Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate for the purposes of Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, the bench comprising Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna observed while upholding the Bombay High Court judgment.
The court therefore overruled the contrary view taken in some judgments of the High Courts of Gujarat, Calcutta and Kerala.
Also Read: Addl. CMM Not Subordinate To CMM In Exercise Of Judicial Powers: Supreme Court
Case Title: All India Judges Association vs Union of India & Ors
Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 635
Emphasizing on the need to revise the pay structure for the judicial officers, the Supreme Court on Wednesday ordered for implementation of the enhanced pay scale as recommended by the Second National Judicial Pay Commission with effect from January 1, 2016.
The bench of Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justices Krishna Murari and Hima Kohli also directed the Center and the States to pay the arrears to the officers in 3 instalments - 25% in 3 months, another 25% in next 3 months and balance by June 30, 2023.
The Top Court also observed that it was imperative for revision of pay structure immediately since judicial officers were not covered by the Pay Commission constituted by the State and centre.
Case Title: Imtiaz Ahmad v State of Uttar Pradesh| 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 636
Expressing concerns at the lack of proper judicial infrastructure in many states, the Supreme Court on Tuesday directed the Law Secretaries of all State Governments to file affidavits relating to budget allocation and utilization.
A bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud and Surya Kant has sought the following information from Law Secretaries of all States :
- The extent of funds which have been made available to state on centrally sponsored schemes
- Amount disbursed by the state government for the state and District judiciary
- Amount which remains to be provided to the state and district judiciary and were diverted to other projects
- Details of utilization certificate from the financial year 2017-18 to 2021-22.
The Court also directed the Registrar Generals of all High Courts to respond within 4 weeks to the note submitted by the Amicus Curiae regarding the infrastructure and strength of Judges in each of the respective States or the Union Territories.
Case Name: State of Karnataka vs BR Muralidhar | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 637 | CA 1966 OF 2013
The Supreme Court set aside a Karnataka High Court judgment which held the Section 20 of the Karnataka Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1973 as unconstitutional.
The bench comprising Justices AM Khanwilkar and Sanjiv Khanna observed that the High Court dealt with this issue in a cryptic manner without analyzing all relevant aspects needed to be considered by a Constitutional Court.
"There is a presumption about the constitutionality of the law made by the Parliament/State Legislature.", the bench observed.
Mother Can Give Surname Of Second Husband To Child After Death Of Biological Father : Supreme Court
Case Title: Akella Lalita vs Sri Konda Hanumantha Rao | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 638 | CA 6325-6326 OF 2015
The Supreme Court has observed that a mother who remarries after the death of the biological father can decide the surname of the child and include it in her new family.
The bench comprising Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Krishna Murari set aside an Andhra Pradesh High Court judgment which directed a mother to change the surname of her child and also to show the name of her new husband in records only as 'step father'.
Also Read: A Relief For Which No Prayer Or Pleading Was Made Should Not Be Granted : Supreme Court
All Kerala Distributors Association vs State of Kerala | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 639 | CA 4502 OF 2009
The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of Sections 4(7), 4(8) and 15 of Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1976 and Section 8A of the Kerala Motor Transport Workers' Welfare Fund Act, 1985.
Dismissing the appeals against the Kerala High Court judgment, the bench of Justices AM Khanwilkar, Abhay S. Oka and CT Ravikumar observed that these provisions are in no way in conflict with the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
"The State enactments do not create any new liability or obligation in relation to the permit issued under the 1988 Act (Central legislation), but it provides for dispensation to ensure timely collection of the welfare fund contribution as well as vehicle tax payable by the same vehicle owner/permit-holder", the bench observed.
Case Details: Kanchan Kumari vs State of Bihar | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 640 | CrA 1031 OF 2022
The Supreme Court reiterated that a peremptory direction affecting a third party cannot be issued in an anticipatory bail order. Very recently, in another case, the Apex Court had held that it is not open for High Courts to implead third parties in exercise of powers under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Case Title: Hemant Kumar Verma vs Employee State Insurance Corporation| W.P.(C) No. 444/2022| 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 641
The Supreme Court of India on Friday held that Junior Resident Doctors serving in Employee State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) run hospitals as part of their bond period cannot claim 50% in-service quota for Post Graduate courses at par with Insurance Medical Officers. The Bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and AS Bopanna was hearing a petition seeking to declare all junior resident doctors to be eligible for the in-service quota for doctors of the ESIC for the purpose of inclusion for reservation in PG courses. Another direction which was sought was to extend the 50% quota in-service doctors reservation of PG courses to the junior resident doctors as well.
Case Title: Daxaben vs State of Gujarat | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 642 | SLP (Crl.) No.1132-1155 of 2022
The Supreme Court observed that an FIR under Section 306 IPC (abetment of suicide) cannot be quashed under Section 482 CrPC on the basis of settlement. The bench comprising Justices Indira Banerjee and V. Ramasubramanian observed that 'abetment of suicide' also falls in the category of heinous and serious offences and are to be treated as crime against society and not against the individual alone. "Heinous or serious crimes, which are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society cannot be quashed on the basis of a compromise between the offender and the complainant and/or the victim", the bench observed.
Case Title: Rohith Thammana Gowda vs State of Karnataka | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 643
The Supreme Court observed that the question of 'what is the wish/desire' of the child is different and distinct from the question 'what would be the best interest of the child'.
"The question 'what is the wish/desire of the child' can be ascertained through interaction, but then, the question as to 'what would be the best interest of the child' is a matter to be decided by the court taking into account all the relevant circumstances", the bench comprising Justices AM Khanwilkar and CT Ravikumar observed.
The Supreme Court dismissed a petition filed by a mother seeking review of its Judgment commuting the death sentence awarded to a man convicted for the rape and murder of her four-year-old daughter.
The court said that the commutation of sentence of death to that of life imprisonment was done by it after bestowing attention to the relevant factors.
The bench comprising Justices Uday Umesh Lalit, S. Ravindra Bhat and Bela M. Trivedi also refused to entertain a review petition filed in this matter by an organization namely Bharatiya Stree Shakti.
Supreme Court Updates
Uddhav Thackeray-led faction of Shivsena has now moved the Supreme Court, against the proceedings initiated by the Election Commission of India on request made by the Eknath Sinde-led faction for recognition as the 'real' Shivsena and their claim over the party's election symbol - the bow and arrow. The application has been filed in the writ petition filed by Subhash Desai, the General Secretary of Shiv Sena. The present application seeks the Apex Court's indulgence to implead the Election Commission of India (ECI) as a necessary party in the writ petition, which, inter alia, challenges the decision of Maharashtra Governor to invite Eknath Shinde to be the Chief Minister of Maharashtra.
The Supreme Court, on Monday, agreed to hear the challenge to the order of the Kerala High Court, which, inter alia, set aside conviction and sentence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for Jayachandran, alleged to be leader of the unlawful assembly involved in the Paul Muthoot George murder case. Hearing brief submission made by Advocate, Mr. Kuriakose Varghese a Bench comprising Justices S.A. Nazeer and J.K. Maheswari granted leave. It observed that the matter needs to be examined in some detail.
The Supreme Court on Monday refused to entertain the Public Interest Litigation filed by Congress General Secretary and Spokesperson Randeep Singh Surjewala challenging the provisions of Election Laws (Amendment) Act 2021 which allows the linking of voter cards with Aadhaar numbers.
A bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud and AS Bopanna asked the petitioner to move the High Court raising the challenge.
"Why don't you move the Delhi High Court?", the bench asked the counsel for the petitioner when the matter was taken.
The Supreme Court, on Monday, asked the members of the Bar to make representation to the three-member Committee constituted to oversee the allotment of lawyers' chambers at the Supreme Court premises, with their grievance regarding the allotment on twin-sharing basis entailing division of chambers. The Court also turned down the prayer made by the petitioners to defer the allotment till the Committee takes a decision on the representation.
The Supreme Court today declined to entertain a petition seeking relaxation of dress code for lawyers during the summer season. As an alternative, a Bench of Justices Indira Banerjee and V Ramasubramanian asked the petitioner to approach the Bar Council of India (BCI) regarding his grievance.
Supreme Court Issues Notice In Plea Seeking To Conduct Delimitation In 4 North Eastern States
The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice in a petition seeking directions to the Election Commission of India ("ECI") to conduct delimitation exercise in the 4 North Eastern states (Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur and Nagaland) as per the Representation of People's Act, 1950. The bench of Justices KM Joseph and Hrishikesh Roy while seeking response from Centre, Ministry of Law and Justice and Chief Election Commissioner also granted the petitioners liberty to serve the standing counsel of the north eastern states.
The Supreme Court, on Monday, dismissed a plea assailing the direction of the Delhi High Court to form a District Judge-led Committee to monitor the condition of women at Adhyatmik Vidyalaya, alleged to have been housed in "animal like" condition. The said spiritual ashram situated in Rohini is led by absconding self-styled godman Virendra Dev Dixit. Refusing to interfere with the decision of the Delhi High Court, a Bench comprising Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and A.S. Bopanna asked the Counsel for the petitioner-Ashram to raise all contentions before the High Court where the matter is pending as on date.
The Supreme Court of India on Monday sought the response of the Central and the State governments in a plea seeking to enforce the fundamental rights of persons trafficked into bonded labour. A Division Bench of Justices S Indira Banerjee and V Ramasubramanian issued notice in the matter today.
The Supreme Court on Monday refused to entertain a plea seeking directions to the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) to conduct performance audit as well as financial audit of the funds allocated to the Delhi Government for implementation of pollution controlling activities. The petition claimed that the Government has diverted public funds allocated under the 'National Clean Air Programme' to meet expenditure for advertisement, publicity and self-promotion. A Bench comprising Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and A.S. Bopanna asked the Counsel appearing for the petitioner to approach the Delhi High Court with their grievance.
While hearing a case which raises an issue as to whether every charitable trust established by someone professing Islam is necessarily a waqf, the Supreme Court on Monday clarified that it would only decide the contours of the Bombay Public Trust Act 1950 and Waqf Act, 1995. A bench comprising Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justices Krishna Murari and Hima Kohli, while adjourning the matter to August 10, in their order noted that both the Attorney General for India, appearing for the Maharashtra State Waqf Board and Mr.Harish Salve, appearing for the petitioners, agreed for a decision on the contours of the Bombay Public Charitable Trust and Waqf Act 1995, without going on the facts of each case.
On Monday, the University Grants Commission (UGC) informed the Supreme Court that it has finalised the Accessibility Guidelines and Standards for Higher Educational Institutions and Universities, which is to ensure access for persons with disabilities in certain educational institutions. It added that the Guidelines have been circulated to the concerned institutions for the purpose of implementation. A Bench comprising Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and A.S. Bopanna asked the UGC to ensure that the guidelines are monitored and periodical steps are taken for the progress of its implementation.
The Supreme Court on Monday directed the Registry to list the petitions seeking to declare virtual court hearing as a fundamental right before the bench headed by Justice DY Chandrachud.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday agreed to list on August 1 the application filed by Uddhav Thackeray-led faction of Shivsena against the proceedings initiated by the Election Commission of India on request made by the Eknath Shinde-led faction for their recognition as the 'real' Shivsena and their claim over the party's election symbol - the bow and arrow.
A bench led by the Chief Justice of India agreed to tag the application along with other petitions filed in relation to the Shiv Sena crisis, which are listed on August 1.
A plea has been filed in the Supreme Court seeking for permanent hearing of cases pending in Allahabad High Court pertaining to Western UP through hybrid mode. Preferred by Advocate Anas Chaudhary, the writ petition had also sought for establishing dedicated filing counter and virtual hearing set up in District and sessions court of Western UP for hearing cases through hybrid mode in Allahabad High Court. It has been argued in the petition that absence of permanent bench in Western UP is denial of access of justice to people of Western UP and both lawyers and litigants find it difficult to travel more than 700 kms.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the Central Government to take a stand on the need to control the announcement of freebies by political parties during election campaigns. The Court asked why the Centre is hesitating to take a stand on this issue. Terming it a "serious" issue, the Court also asked the Centre to consider whether the suggestions of the Finance Commission can be sought for solutions.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday adjourned an application filed by Senior Advocate Indira Jaising challenging the process adopted by certain High Courts to confer senior designations through the process of secret voting of the full court to September 2, 2022.
In connection with the filling up of vacancies in consumer commissions, the Supreme Court on Tuesday, noting that the provisions of Rule 6(4) of the consumer protection rules 2020 require that the process of appointments shall be initiated by the state governments atleast six months before the vacancy arises, observed that this is a statutory rule which is required to be followed by all the states, that it is putting all states to notice that they must follow this rule strictly by initiating the process six months in advance as it is known when a vacancy arises.
Kerala Govt Approaches Supreme Court Seeking To Restore UAPA Charges Against Alleged Maoist
The State of Kerala has approached Supreme Court against Kerala High Court's order of discharging alleged Maoist leader Roopesh accused of charges under Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and sedition under Section 124A (sedition) of the Indian Penal Code. The High Court bench of Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice C. Jayachandran had discharged Roopesh, who allegedly along with members of the banned Maoist organization distributed pamphlets containing "seditious writings" in tribal colonies in Wayanad district, on the ground of irregularities in the order granting sanction for prosecution.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday posted the petitions challenging the validity of criteria of Rupees 8 Lakhs annual income limit as the upper limit for seeking Economically Weaker Sections(EWS) reservation in the All India Quota for NEET admissions for August 2, 2022.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday adjourned the petition filed by former IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt seeking suspension of sentence in the 1990 custodial death case, after the bench was told that the Advocate on Record has been changed. During the hearing today, Advocate Farrukh Rasheed sought for an adjournment in the matter as another counsel has been engaged in the matter. He informed the Bench that he had already given his no objection to engage the new counsel. The division bench comprising Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna expressed unhappiness with the request for adjournment and orally said that several adjournments have been sought in the matter.
Supreme Court Bench Led By Justice Chandrachud To Hear Plea Against Aarey Tree Felling
The Chief Justice of India on Wednesday directed the listing of the petition challenging the cutting of trees in Aarey in Mumbai before a bench led by Justice Chandrachud. The matter was mentioned before the CJI for urgent listing by Senior Advocate Anita Shenoy who said that cutting of trees has been going on since July 25.
In a case of a 82 year old covid patient who went missing from a hospital, the Supreme Court on Wednesday directed the State of UP to conduct an investigation and submit the report within 2 months.
The direction was issued by the bench of Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justices Krishna Murari and Hima Kohli while considering SLP assailing Allahabad High Court's order to produce the man before the Court on May 6 failing which the state officers were to remain personally present before the Court.
The Supreme Court, on Thursday, came down heavily on the Maharashtra State Election Commission, as it was apprised that the State Election Commission has proposed to announce 'fresh election programme' for the 367 local bodies for which the election process had already been notified.
The Supreme Court put on hold the arbitration proceedings initiated by the former Indian cricket team captain Mahendra Singh Dhoni against the Amrapali group of companies. A bench comprising Justices UU Lalit and Bela M Trivedi, handling the issues related to the real estate properties of Amrapali group which was put under a Court receiver in 2019, passed the order take note of the difficulties expressed by Senior Advocate R Venkataramani, the Receiver, in representing the group in the arbitration proceeedings.
The Uddhav Thackeray group of the Shiv Sena has approached the Supreme Court challenging the decision of the Lok Sabha Speaker, Om Birla in approving MP Rahul Shewale of the Eknath Shinde group as the party's floor leader. The petitioners are aggrieved with the Speakers' decision to illegally, arbitrarily and unilaterally remove them as the Shiv Sena's Leader as well as the Chief Whip (respectively) in the Lok Sabha.
The Supreme Court, on Thursday, directed the Karnataka Government to publish the ward-wise reservation list for the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP- Greater Bengaluru Municipal Corporation) within a period of one week from today, so that the Karnataka State Election Commission can take steps towards constitution of local bodies within a reasonable period of time, in accordance with applicable law.
While hearing petitions pertaining to the constitution of the All India Football Federation (AIFF), the Supreme Court on Thursday orally informed that it would look into the issues such as the electoral roll and the manner of elections of the All India body on August 3, 2022.
"This is because the FIFA requires a democratically elected body of AIFF to oversee the FIFA U-17 Women's World Cup", a Division Bench composing of Justices DY Chandrachud and Surya Kant observed.
"Give Us A Break, There's A Limit To Targeting Judges": Justice DY Chandrachud
Supreme Court judge Justice DY Chandrachud on Thursday slammed the trend of levelling personal attacks against judges. On Thursday, an Advocate mentioned a petition highlighting violence against the Christian community and therefore, sought urgent listing of the same. Hearing this, Justice Chandrachud observed that he had come across a certain news article indicating that the supreme court is delaying the hearing in the said matter.
The Supreme Court on Thursday adjourned the case related to ongoing family dispute between businessman Lalit Modi, his mother Bina Modi and his siblings for August 1, 2022. The bench of Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justices Krishna Murari and Hima Kohli asked the parties to come up with a solution to solve the dispute.
"Last time we appointed arbitrators but you could not decide... Both sides should be fair, you can't take an advantage or the other parties cannot take advantage. Please come up with solutions," the CJI said.
Parity Of High Court Judges' Pension : Supreme Court Constitutes Special Bench To Hear
The Supreme Court on Thursday constituted a special bench consisting Justice SK Kaul, Justice V Ramasubramanian and Justice SR Bhat to consider the issues related to the parity between pension drawn by High Court judges who are elevated from the bar and service.
The bench was constituted by the bench of Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justices Krishna Murari and Hima Kohli while hearing an application in a plea by All India Judges Association for constitution of All India Judicial Commission for reviewing the service conditions of the judges of the district judiciary.
The Supreme Court on Friday directed the Nagaland State Election Commission to complete the elections of the local bodies and declare the results by the end of January, 2023.
Highlighting this, a Division Bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and MM Sundresh ordered,
"We clearly put to them that the election process has to be completed and the results declared before the end of January, 2023. Accordingly, the schedule has to be worked out."
The Supreme Court on Friday asked the Madras High Court to take a fresh decision on former Chief Minister O Paneerselvam(OPS)'s challenge to the general council meet of the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) within 3 weeks.
The Court also asked OPS and former Chief Minister EK Palaniswamy (EPS), who was elected as the interim general secretary of the AIADMK in its general council meeting held on July 11, to maintain status quo by not passing any further resolutions.
While granting bail to an Odisha MLA accused in a road rage case, the Supreme Court restrained him from addressing any public rally for an year.The bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and Vikram Nath also restrained him from visiting his Constituency (Chilika) for a period of one year without taking permission from the District Collector.
The Supreme Court on Friday passed an order allowing 15 IIT aspirants, who faced technical difficulties during the first session of the ITT JEE-Mains 2022 exam held in June 2022, to attend the additional session of the exam held by the National Testing Agency tomorrow (July 30).
The Supreme Court on Friday took exception to a judge sentencing a convict to death in a POCSO case in a trial completed within 4 days and sentencing another POCSO convict to life in a trial completed in a single day. A bench comprising Justices UU Lalit and S Ravindra Bhat was considering a writ petition filed by a suspended Additional Sessions Judge from Bihar who alleged that the disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him by the High Court for deciding POCSO cases within days. The judge had awarded life sentence to a man in a POCSO case in a trial completed within a day; in another case of child rape, the judge had sentenced a man to death after completing trial within 4 days. The bench issued notice on the writ petition and sought the documents related to the matter from the Patna High Court.
The Supreme Court, on Friday, issued notice in a plea seeking constitution of Bar Council in Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh. Supriya Pandit, a Jammu based lawyer had approached the Apex Court in this regard. A Bench comprising Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and J.B. Pardiwala issued a notice to the concerned authorities.
Actor Assault Case: Dileep Moves Supreme Court Seeking Completion Of Trial Within Time Limit
Actor Dileep has approached Supreme Court seeking resumption of trial pending before the Trial Court in the actor assault case. Contending that serious prejudice would be caused if the trial is delayed, the actor in the plea, along with requesting the Top Court to fix a time limit, has also urged for directing the trial court to not use the further investigation report dated July 22, 2022 for re-investigation or fresh investigation. He also seeks a direction to prohibit the recalling of witnesses for further examination.
The Supreme Court, on Friday, refused to entertain a plea filed under Article 32 of the Constitution by members of the Mohijit Samudaya of the Tapagachh denomination of the Shwetambar Murtipujak Jain religion seeking to enforce the Places of Worship(Special Provisions) Act 1991 against the alleged conversion of places of worship by another segment of the same denomination.
The Supreme Court, on Friday, refused to entertain petitions challenging constitutional validity of various provisions of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act 1991, but granted liberty to file intervention application in similar matters pending before it. Appearing before a Bench comprising Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and J.B. Pardiwala, on behalf of one of the petitioner, Senior Advocate, Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi requested that the present petitions be tagged with the matters involving similar challenge, pending before the Apex Court. Considering that, if the petitions are admitted and tagged, it would open floodgates for others to approach the Court with similar challenges, the Bench thought it would be appropriate that the petitioners herein intervene in the pendings matters.
The State government of Rajasthan has filed a special leave petition before the Supreme Court challenging a Rajasthan High Court judgment which granted parole to a murder convict for 15 days to engage in conjugal relations with his wife.
The inquiry commission headed by former Supreme Court judge Justice (Retd) B S Chauhan to probe into the encounter of gangster Vikas Dubey recommended initiation of disciplinary proceedings against the erring public servants for loss of records of cases relating to Vikas Dubey, gangster who was killed in an encounter by the UP Police in 2020. The recommendations which have been made in the report have been categorised into heads such as police reforms, transfer/posting, CrPC, other legal reforms, Government Advocates/ Public Prosecutors, Service of Summons, handcuffing, missing file pertaining to criminal cases of Vikas Dubey.