JUDGMENTS OF THE WEEKSection 45(4) Of Income Tax Act Applicable To Cases Of Subsisting Partners Of A Partnership Transferring The Assets In Favour Of A Retiring Partner: Supreme CourtThe Commissioner of Income Tax v. M/s. Mansukh Dyeing and Printing Mills | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 991A Supreme Court bench comprising Justices M.R. Shah and M.M. Sundresh held that Section 45(4) of the Income Tax Act...
JUDGMENTS OF THE WEEK
The Commissioner of Income Tax v. M/s. Mansukh Dyeing and Printing Mills | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 991
A Supreme Court bench comprising Justices M.R. Shah and M.M. Sundresh held that Section 45(4) of the Income Tax Act was applicable to not only the cases of dissolution but also cases of subsisting partners of a partnership, transferring the assets in favour of a retiring partner.
Jai Karan Yadav vs State (NCT Of Delhi) | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 992 | CrA 2038 OF 2022
The Supreme Court set aside murder conviction of a man accused of killing his wife and modified it to conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC.
This is after the court found that the incident had occurred at the spur of the moment and the accused had taken immediate steps to shift his wife to the hospital.
Ramesh Chandra Gupta vs State of U P | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 993 | SLP(Crl.) 39 of 2022
The Supreme Court observed that the criminal proceedings can be quashed when the complaint on the basis of which FIR was registered does not disclose any act of the accused or their participation in the commission of crime.
In this case, an FIR was lodged against the accused and a charge sheet was filed under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506, 448, 387 IPC. They approached the Allahabad High Court seeking quashing of the FIR/Charge Sheet. As the High Court dismissed it, they approached the Apex Court.
Mukesh Kumar vs State of Bihar | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 995 | SLP(C) 8799/2020
The Supreme Court observed that it is the duty of Pharmacy Council and State Government to see that the hospitals/medical stores etc., are not run by the fake pharmacist and are run by the registered pharmacist only.
Running the hospitals/dispensaries in absence of any registered pharmacist and/or running such hospitals by fake pharmacist and even running the medical stores by fake pharmacist and without even any pharmacist will ultimately affect the health of the citizen, the bench of Justices MR Shah and MM Sundresh observed while it restored a Public Interest Litigation before the Patna High Court that raised this issue.
Sansera Engineering Limited vs Deputy Commissioner, Large Tax Payer Unit, Bengaluru | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 997 | CA 8717 OF 2022
The Supreme Court held that while making claim for rebate of duty under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, the period of limitation prescribed under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 shall have to be applied and applicable.
The bench of Justices MR Shah and MM Sundresh approved the view taken by the Bombay High Court in the case of Everest Flavours Ltd. v. Union of India, 2012 (282) ELT 481 and also overruled contrary decisions of Madras High Court, Allahabad High Court, Punjab & Haryana High Court and Rajasthan High Court.
Union of India vs Subrata Nath | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 998 | CA 7939-7940 OF 2022
The Supreme Court reiterated that the courts ought to refrain from interfering with findings of facts recorded in a departmental inquiry except in circumstances where such findings are patently perverse or grossly incompatible with the evidence on record, based on no evidence.
If principles of natural justice have been violated or the statutory regulations have not been adhered to or there are malafides attributable to the Disciplinary Authority, then the courts can certainly interfere, the bench of CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice Hima Kohli said.
Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Ltd. vs Dharminder Singh | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 999 | CA 8828 OF 2022
The Supreme Court observed that the cut-off date for acquiring the qualification advertised is the last date of application.
In this case, the Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Ltd. published advertisement on 17.07.2018 inviting application for a post. As per the advertisement, the essential qualification is metric pass and the desirable qualification is ITI diploma in wireman/Electrical trade obtained through Regular Course (not through distance education) from the institutions recognized by the Government of Himachal Pradesh or the National Trade Certificate of one year Broad Based Basic Training. The marks to be assigned for essential qualification are 60 per cent whereas the marks for desirable qualification are 25 per cent.
Istkar vs State of Uttar Pradesh | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 1000 | CrA 2034 of 2022
The Supreme Court observed that the provisions of Chapter VIII of the Code of Criminal Procedure are merely preventive in nature and are not to be used as a 'vehicle for punishment'.
The demand of excessive and arbitrary amount of security/bond is impermissible as it stultifies the spirit of Chapter VIII of the Code, the bench of Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Sudhanshu Dhulia said.
State of U.P. & Ors. vs. Virendra Kumar & Ors. | CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 66226623 OF 2022 | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 1001
The Supreme Court has reiterated and held that "where an enactment requires to do a certain thing in a certain way, the thing must be done in that way and in no other manner" in the judgment of State of U.P. & Ors. vs. Virendra Kumar & Ors.
A bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Abhay S. Oka and Vikram Nath have delivered the judgment which has been authored by Justice Abhay S. Oka.
Amar Chand vs. State of Himachal Pradesh | C. A. No. 2035/2022 arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 752/2019 | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 1002
The Supreme Court recently acquitted a person, who was sentenced to 10 years imprisonment and pay Rs 1 lakh fine for the offence of possessing charas. Granting him benefit of doubt due to the lacunae and gaps in the prosecution, a bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and JK Maheshwari set aside the conviction of the appellant under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
Existence Of An Alternate Remedy Cannot Exclude Writ Jurisdiction Of High Court : Supreme Court
Maharashtra State Board of Waqfs vs Shaikh Yusuf Bhai Chawla | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 1003 | CA 7812-7814 OF 2022
The Supreme Court reiterated that the existence of an alternate remedy by itself cannot exclude the writ jurisdiction of the High Court.
"A constitutional remedy cannot be barred or excluded as when the High Court exercises its power under Article 226, it cannot be a case of lack of inherent jurisdiction.", the bench of Justices KM Joseph and Hrishikesh Roy observed while considering Maharashtra state Waqf Board's appeal against the 2011 decision of the Bombay High Court where the High Court had quashed the constitution of the Maharashtra state Board of Waqfs. The court however partly allowed the appeal filed by the Board.
CBI v. Siby Mathew SLP(Crl) 4097/ 2022, CBI vs Jayaprakash | SLP(Crl) No. 8008-8010/2021 II-B | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 1005
The Supreme Court on Friday set aside the orders passed by the Kerala High Court in 2021 granting anticipatory bail of five former police and intelligence bureau officials in the case related to the alleged framing of ISRO scientist Nambi Narayanan in 1994 ISRO espionage case.
The Court remitted the bail applications back to the High Court and asked the High Court to decide the same as early as possible, at any rate within a period of four weeks. The Supreme Court also granted protection from arrest to the accused for a period of 5 weeks, subject to their cooperation with the investigation, as an interim arrangement till the High Court finally decides the matter.
Solomon Selvaraj vs Indrani Bhagawan Singh | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 1004 | CA 8885 OF 2022
The Supreme Court observed that an application to sue as indigent under Order XXXIII Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure can be rejected if it is found that the suit is barred by res judicata.
In this case, the plaintiffs filed an application to permit them to sue as indigent persons under Order 33 rule 1 CPC. The said application was dismissed by the Trial Court on the ground that the suit is vexatious, an abuse of process of law and the court and the suit is barred by res judicata. The Madras High Court upheld this order and thus the plaintiffs approached the Apex Court in appeal.
Pramod Singh Kirar vs State of Madhya Pradesh | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 1008 | CA 8934-8935 OF 2022
The Supreme Court directed appointment of a candidate whose candidature was rejected on the ground that he was tried for the offence under Section 498A IPC.
Pramod Singh Kirar applied for the post of Constable in the year 2013 and was found eligible to be appointed as Constable. In the verification form itself he declared that he was tried for the offence under Section 498A IPC earlier and was later acquitted in the said case. Later his candidature was rejected on the ground that he was involved in this criminal case.
NEWS OF THE WEEK
The Supreme Court Registry has said that though it is working towards achieving a self-reliant live streaming platform, however, at present it is constrained to rely on third-party apps due to technical and infrastructure constraints.
In response to a PIL filed by former RSS ideologue KN Govindacharya for live streaming court proceedings, Registrar of SC's Computer Cell HS Jaggi said, "Not only the Registry, but NIC as well, at present, does not have the sufficient technical and infrastructure wherewithal to host the live streaming completely on its own without third-party applications and solutions. The dependency on third-party applications to offer the live streaming services to a larger audience, therefore, is inevitable."
The Supreme Court today minced no words in expressing anguish towards Centre for sitting over proposals reiterated by the Collegium for appointment as judges.
Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul heading a division bench went on to wonder if the recommendations are being withheld on account of Government's discontent with the non-implementation of the National Judicial Appointments Commission.
Can a High Court, in exercise of its power under Section 482 CrPC, quash an order passed by the District Magistrate under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act? A Special Leave Petition raising this issue has been filed before the Supreme Court which has issued notice.
In this case, the Madras High Court allowed a petition filed under Section 482 CrPC challenging an orders passed by Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Egmore, Chennai under Section 14 SARFAESI Act (to assist secured creditor in taking possession of secured asset). The court agreed with the contention of the petitioner that this order was passed by the Magistrate without affording an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner.
The Supreme Court today expressed reservation about Law Minister's television interview where he criticized the Collegium system for appointment of judges.
During the hearing, Senior Advocate Vikas Singh, President of the Supreme Court Bar Association, brought to the attention of the bench the scathing comments made by the Law Minister that "never say that the government is sitting on the files, then don't send the files to the government, you appoint yourself, you run the show then".
The Supreme Court on Monday said that it expected the the Bar Council of India to suspend the licenses of the lawyers who have been striking in Odisha over a long-standing demand for a permanent bench of the Orissa High Court in the western part of the state, at Sambalpur. The Bench, comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Abhay S. Oka, also recommended that the Bar Council take "appropriate action" against the district bar associations whose members have been involved in the protests.
Centre Disrupts Judges' Seniority By Splitting Up Collegium Resolutions: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court today criticized the practice of Centre splitting up the Collegium Resolutions by approving some names from the recommendation and withholding other names.
While hearing a petition against delay in approval of Collegium recommendations by the Centre, Justice SK Kaul told Attorney General for India R Venkataramani,
"Sometimes when you appoint, you pick up some names from the list and not others. What you do is you effectively disrupt the seniority. When the Supreme Court collegium makes the recommendation, many factors are kept in mind."
In an affidavit filed before the Supreme Court, the Union Government said that it is "cognizant of the gravity and the seriousness" of the issue of forced religious conversions.
Responding to a PIL filed by BJP leader Ashwini Upadhyay seeking measures to control forced conversions, the Union said that, "the relief sought in the present petition would be taken up in all seriousness by the Union of India and appropriate steps shall be taken as the Central Government is cognizant of the matter."
In the plea pertaining to the Andhra-Pradesh Three Capitals row, the Supreme Court, on Monday, stays certain time-bound directions passed by the Andhra Pradesh High Court, including the one directing the State to construct and develop Amaravati capital city and capital region within six months time.
A Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha has issued notice to the Central Government and all states and Union Territories in a plea seeking free sanitary napkins to all adolescent girls in schools.
The petitioner, a social worker, had invoked the Supreme Court's jurisdiction under Article 32 in the matter. The petition also sought for separate girls' washrooms in all government, aided and residential schools along with cleaners for the same.
Rape Accused Has No Right To Demand In-Camera Hearing : Supreme Court Dismisses Tarun Tejpal's Plea
Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha on Monday, dismissed Journalist Tarun Tejpal's plea for in-camera hearing in rape case appeal.
Tejpal, co-founder and former Editor-in-Chief of Tehelka Magazine was accused of forcing himself on his junior colleague inside an elevator of the Grand Hyatt, Bambolim, Goa on November 7 and 8, 2013, during the magazine's official event - the THINK 13 festival. He was acquitted of all charges on May 21 by a fast track court in Mapusa, Goa. In her 527-page judgement, Special Judge Kshama Joshi had extensively commented on the woman's non-rape victim like behaviour and faulty investigation to grant Tejpal the benefit of the doubt. Thereafter, Tejpal had moved an application to Bombay High Court under Section 327 CrPC for conducting hearings through in-camera proceedings against his acquittal in a 2013 rape case. When the Bombay High Court rejected his application, he moved Supreme Court regarding the same.
Reiterating that the issue of forceful religious conversion is an 'important issue', the Supreme Court on Monday directed the Union Government to get information from all the States regarding the steps taken by them in this regard.
A bench comprising Justices MR Shah and CT Ravikumar was hearing a PIL filed by BJP leader Ashwini Upadhyay seeking steps on curbing forceful religious conversion by intimidation, threats or allurement through gifts and monetary benefits.
The Supreme Court on Monday said that it will direct the Kerala High Court to consider afresh the anticipatory bail pleas of five police and intelligence bureau officials in the case related to the alleged framing of ISRO scientist Nambi Narayanan in 1994 ISRO espionage case.
A Bench of Justices MR Shah and CT Ravikumar today reserved the judgement while hearing two petitions filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation challenging the grant of bail by the Kerala High Court.
The Supreme Court on Monday expressed concern regarding persons who have been granted bail but are not able to fill in the bail bonds or produce surety before the court which results in them not being able to get out of the prison.
A bench comprising of Justices A. S. Bopanna and S. Ravindra Bhat observed that, "This is a regular phenomenon where accused are given bail but they are not able to give bail bonds or local surety. It will be appropriate that the district legal service authority should devise some method".
The State of Maharashtra told the Supreme Court on Monday that only the unauthorised structures around the tomb of Afzal Khan in Satara were demolished and the tomb was left untouched.
Senior Advocate Neeraj Kishan Kaul, appearing for the State, invited the attention of the bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha to the report and the photographs submitted by the Deputy Conservator of Forests and District Collector, Satara, in pursuance of an earlier direction issued by the Court.
The State of Odisha is not large enough to merit the demand for the constitution of permanent benches outside Cuttack, the Supreme Court of India said on Monday. A Bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Abhay S. Oka was dealing with the problem of lawyers abstaining from work in several districts of Odisha over a long-standing demand for a permanent bench of the Orissa High Court in the western part of the state, at Sambalpur. While issuing a slew of directions to resolve the deadlock, including suspending the recalcitrant lawyers and taking strict action against the district bar associations to which they belonged, Justice Kaul also expressed concern over the intensifying demand for more permanent benches of the High Court.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday transferred the trial of murder of former AP Minister YS Vivekananda Reddy from Andhra Pradesh to Special CBI Court Hyderabad, noting that apprehensions raised by his wife and daughter regarding derailment of fair trial are reasonable.
A bench comprising Justice MR Shah and Justice MM Sundresh ordered the transfer on a petition filed by the daughter of Vivekananda Reddy, Suneetha Narreddy, who happens to be the cousin of Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister YS Jaganmohan Reddy. The widow of Vivekananda Reddy, who was brutally stabbed to death at his residence in Pulivendula, Kadapa district in March 2019, was a co-petitioner.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to entertain a petition filed by BJP leader and Advocate Ashwini Upadhyay seeking to double the number of judges in High Courts and trial courts. The matter was heard by a bench comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha.
At the very outset, CJI Chandrachud expressed that "populist measures" and "simplistic solutions" were unlikely to solve any issues.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday modified its status quo order on the felling of trees at Aarey region in Mumbai for the metro car shed project and allowed the Mumbai Metro Rail Corporation Ltd (MMRCL) to pursue its application before the Tree Authority seeking permission for the felling of 84 trees.
The criminal justice system of ours can itself be a punishment, remarked the Supreme Court in its order disposing a criminal appeal which was filed 13 years ago.
The bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Abhay S. Oka observed thus after it noted that an appeal arising out of framing of charges remained pending in the Supreme Court for 13 years.
Government Not Liable To Compensate For Deaths Due To COVID Vaccination : Centre Tells Supreme Court
The Government cannot be held liable to compensate for the deaths occurring due to the administration of COVID-19 vaccines, said the Central Government in an affidavit filed before the Supreme Court.
Responding to a petition filed by parents of two girls who died due to the adverse effects of Covishield vaccine, the Union Government submitted that : "The vaccines in use under the vaccination program are manufactured by third parties and have successfully undergone thorough regulatory review in India as well as other nations. In these facts, holding the State directly liable to provide compensation under the narrow scope of strict liability for extremely rare cases of death occurring due to Adverse Effects Following Immunisation from the use of vaccines may not be legally sustainable"
The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked why don't the children of Overseas Citizens of India (OCI), who are staying in India, apply for Indian citizenship after giving up their foreign citizenship.
The Court raised this query while hearing a batch of petitions challenging the Centre's 2021 notification as per which OCI students are entitled to apply only to NRI seats in NEET admissions.
As a matter of 'one more opportunity after the last opportunity', the Supreme Court, on Tuesday, gave four weeks' time to the Central Government to file a comprehensive counter affidavit in a plea seeking enforcement of fundamental duties as enshrined in Part IV-A of the Constitution.
While granting further time, the Court noted that on the last occasion, when the matter was taken up in July, 2022, it had granted 'last opportunity' to the Centre to file the affidavit.
The Supreme Court, on Tuesday, called upon all the State Governments to issue directions to the jail authorities to submit certain particulars of under trial prisoners who have been granted bail, but are still in prison as they were unable to meet bail conditions.
A 5 judge Constitutional bench headed by Justice KM Joseph and comprising Justices Ajay Rastogi, Aniruddha Bose, Hrishikesh Roy and CT Ravi Kumar, is hearing a batch of petitions challenging constitutionality of laws permitting Jalikattu, Kambala and bull-cart race in states like Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Maharashtra.
Representing the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals(PETA), Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra started his submissions, on Tuesday, by reading out from the Supreme Court's judgment in Animal Welfare Board of India v. A. Nagaraja And Ors. (2014) 7 SCC 547. He pointed that the amendments passed by the States cannot undo the factual findings made by the Supreme Court that events like jallikattu result in cruelty to animals.
The recommendations made by a court-appointed expert panel constituted to tackle the problem of the dissemination of child pornography and sexual assault videos have been accepted by the Centre in principle, but its implementation has left a lot to be desired, the Supreme Court of India was informed on Tuesday.
Advocate Rohin Bhatt, a queer lawyer practicing in the Supreme Court of India has written a letter to the Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud requesting to modify the appearance slips in the Supreme Court to include an additional column for mentioning people's pronouns. As per the letter which has been sent via an email, this would allow the correct usage of a person's pronouns in the Court's orders or judgements.
The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of the Supreme Court of India has refused to disclose information under the Right to Information (RTI) Act on the measures taken by the former Chief Justice of India JS Khehar with regards to a letter he received in 2017 alleging the amassing of disproportionate assets by former Supreme Court judge Justice Hemant Gupta.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday sought the stand of the Centre on a batch of petitions filed by students who were unable to complete clinical training in China due to COVID-19 travel restrictions and consequently, wanted to be accommodated within the Indian medical education architecture as an extraordinary, humanitarian measure. A Division Bench, comprising Justices B.R. Gavai and Vikram Nath, was informed by Senior Advocate S. Nagamuthu that despite a Bench led by Justice Hemant Gupta allowing repatriated Indian students of the batch 2015-20 to undergo clinical training in India and get provisionally registered, the states of Kerala and Tamil Nadu had refused to extend similar relief to students of the batch 2016-21 who were hit by the same travel curbs. He submitted, "This court has held that the order passed in the other batch would also be applicable to our case. Therefore, the students who joined the medical course in China in 2016 should be given the same benefits. Several state medical councils have complied. Only Kerala and Tamil Nadu have refused. This is when we are covered by two judgements of this court."
In an additional affidavit filed before the Supreme Court, the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) has submitted that the exclusion of Tamil refugees from Sri Lanka from the Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019 (CAA) makes it discriminatory.
Former IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt has approached the Supreme Court against the Gujarat High Court starting the regular hearing of his appeal filed against the conviction in a custodial death case, without awaiting the order of another petition filed by him in the Supreme Court seeking to adduce additional evidence in the appeal.
Bilkis Bano has approached the Supreme Court of India in a writ petition challenging the premature release of the 11 convicts sentenced to life for gang rape and murder during 2002 Gujarat Riots. Bano has also sought a review petition against the Supreme Court's judgment allowing the Gujarat Government to make a decision on the remission of the convicts.
Advocate Shobha Gupta, appearing for Bano, mentioned the petitions before Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud today morning. She expressed a doubt if the bench led by Justices Ajay Rastogi (who authored the previous judgment allowing Gujarat to decide the remission plea) would be able to hear the matter, as he is now in a Constitution Bench hearing.
Supreme Court Allows NMDC To Resume Diamond Mining In Panna
The Supreme Court on Wednesday allowed National Mineral Development Corporation to continue diamond mining activities in Panna, after noting that NMDC has got wildlife clearance and environmental clearance.
A bench comprising Justices BR Gavai and Vikram Nath passed the order allowing an application filed by the NMDC in the TN Godavarman Thirumalpad matter, in which the Court has been considering environmental issues since 1996.
Can There Be A 'Project Great Indian Bustard' Like 'Project Tiger'? Supreme Court Asks Centre
In relation to the protection of the Great Indian Bustard, a Supreme Court bench led by CJI DY Chandrachud asked the Attorney General for India R Venkatramani to take instructions from the Ministry of Forest and Environment on whether it was possible to have a 'Project Great Indian Bustard' in a manner similar to the 'Project Tiger'.
As the Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) is moving ahead with its plan of releasing a genetically modified herbicide-tolerant crop, christened "HT Mustard DMH-11", activists opposing this on Wednesday implored the Supreme Court of India to intervene urgently. A Division Bench comprising Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and B.V. Nagarathna was hearing a batch of petitions seeking a ban on the commercial cultivation of indigenously developed genetically modified mustard seeds which in October, received the imprimatur of the Environment Ministry. This is the first time a transgenic food crop is planned to be commercially cultivated in India.
1Km ESZ Rule Won't Apply To Tungareshwar Wildlife Sanctuary Near Mumbai : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Wednesday clarified that its order mandating 1 kilometer Eco-Sensitive Zone around protected forests will not apply to Tungareshwar Wildlife Sanctuary located near the suburbs of Mumbai.
A bench comprising Justices BR Gavai and Vikram Nath passed the order taking note of an earlier order passed on September 23 which exempted Sanjay Gandhi National Park and Thane Creek Flamingo Sanctuary from the 1-KM ESZ rule.
The Supreme Court, on Wednesday, commenced with the hearing of the plea, inter alia, challenging the delimitation exercise undertaken in the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir pursuant to the recent notifications.
A Bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and A.S. Oka heard submissions put forth by Senior Advocate, Mr. Ravi Shankar Jandhyala, representing the petitioners. The sheet anchor of the Senior Counsel's argument was that the delimitation exercise was in degradation of the scheme of the Constitution of India, especially Article 170(3) which had frozen delimitation till the first census after 2026.
Bilkis Bano has approached the Supreme Court of India in a writ petition challenging the premature release of the 11 convicts sentenced to life for gang rape and murder during 2002 Gujarat Riots. Bano has also sought a review petition against the Supreme Court's judgment allowing the Gujarat Government to make a decision on the remission of the convicts. This article details the grounds on which the petition has challenged the remission.
A 5 judge Constitutional bench headed by Justice KM Joseph and comprising Justices Ajay Rastogi, Aniruddha Bose, Hrishikesh Roy and CT Ravi Kumar, is hearing a batch of petitions challenging constitutionality of laws permitting Jalikattu, Kambala and bull-cart race in states like Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Maharashtra.
The hearing which took place on Wednesday (November 30) started with Justice Rastogi posing a question to Senior Advocate Mr. Shyam Divan who was about to continue his submissions. he asked, "This court has observed that Jallikattu is brutal. So, the form in which the practice exists is cruel, not the practice itself. The reason why I ask this question is because in 2014 when Nagaraj came, the form was different. Now there is an amendment and rules have been brought in and things have changed. Now, once the mechanism is put in place, anyone who is not following the rules is violating it. Penal action is embedded in the statute. Now you've presented reports. Even if those reports are taken at face value it's the execution that's the problem. So, is the rule bad or the manner in which it is being followed is bad? We have to test the scheme and not the ground reality."
The Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to entertain a plea filed by a physically challenged general quota candidate seeking admission in the Master of Medicine programme in a medical college in the State of West Bengal . The matter was heard by a bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice PS Narasimha and Justice JB Pardiwala.
1 KM ESZ Mandate For Forests | Supreme Court Says Ground Realities Have To Be Considered
Commenting about the practical difficulties in having a uniform mandate of 1 kilometer Eco Sensitive Zone for all protected forests across the country, the Supreme Court on Wednesday orally remarked that the ground realities have also to be taken into account.
A bench comprising Justices BR Gavai and Vikram Nath was hearing a batch of applications filed in the TN Godavarman Thirumalpad case, some of which sought exemption from the June 3 direction of the Supreme Court which mandated 1 KM ESZ for all protected forests.
'Don't waste your time gossiping in the Court canteen, in your free time, sit in Court and observe how other advocates are arguing', was the advice that Supreme Court judge Justice MR Shah passed on to a young advocate on Thursday.
Recalling his initial days in Court, Justice MR Shah said that he was often asked to sit in courts and observe how other advocates were arguing their cases.
"Sit in Court whenever you can, that's what I was taught when I was at the Bar in the beginning. Whenever you are free, sit in the courtroom. Learn, how others are arguing. What is liked by the Court… Correct?"
Anticipatory Bail Can't Be Set For A Limited Period, Supreme Court Says
While hearing an application seeking anticipatory bail, the Supreme Court of India on Thursday stated that it can't be set for a limited time frame.
"How can an anticipatory bail be limited to four weeks?!", asked a Bench of Justices MR Shah and Sudhanshu Dhulia.
The Bench was hearing an appeal filed by politician Monirul Islam challenging an order of the Calcutta High Court that had granted him anticipatory bail in 2021, limiting it to four weeks only.
On Thursday, the State Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana informed the Supreme Court, that the District Ludhiana the Bar Council election programme which is proposed to be conducted on 16th December, 2022 ought to be rescheduled in view of the fact that the State Bar Council is yet to finalise the voters' list.
The matter was mentioned by an applicant who had filed an application for stay of the elections before a Bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and A.S. Oka. The matter was taken on Board and notice was issued.
Is there a compelling reason for the environmental release of the genetically modified herbicide-tolerant mustard crop at this stage, and will such release have an irreversible adverse effect on the environment, the Supreme Court of India asked the Centre on Wednesday. A Division Bench comprising Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and B.V. Nagarathna was hearing a batch of petitions seeking a ban on the commercial cultivation of indigenously developed genetically modified mustard, christened "HT Mustard DMH-11", which in October, received the imprimatur of the Environment Ministry. This is the first time a transgenic food crop is planned to be commercially cultivated in India.
A 5 judge Constitutional bench headed by Justice KM Joseph and comprising Justices Ajay Rastogi, Aniruddha Bose, Hrishikesh Roy and CT Ravi Kumar, is hearing a batch of petitions challenging constitutionality of laws permitting Jalikattu, Kambala and bull-cart race in states like Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Maharashtra.
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal representing the State of Tamil Nadu started his submissions today. Before laying down the premise of his argument, Mr. Sibal said, "No gain saying that we live in an interdependent world. While we are dependent on animals, their preservation is also important for our own livelihood. There is a food chain that is necessary for survival of both animals and man. There are animals of two kinds wild and domesticated. In the present petition we are dealing with domesticated animals. The Act deals with both kinds of animals."
The Supreme Court, on Thursday, reserved judgment in the plea, inter alia, challenging the delimitation exercise undertaken in the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir pursuant to the recent notifications.
On Wednesday, the Bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and A.S. Oka had heard the submissions of Senior Advocate, Mr. Ravi Shankar Jandhyala, representing the petitioners. His primary challenge to the impugned notifications was on the touchstone of the scheme envisaged in Article 170(3) of the Constitution of India. He argued that the said provision had frozen delimitation till the first census after 2026. However, Justice Oka had highlighted that though the Senior Counsel had orally argued that the provisions of the Jammu And Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019 is in the teeth of the Constitution of India, the constitutional validity of the concerned provisions of the statute has not been challenged in the petition.
'Infructuous, Election Is In 3 Days': Supreme Court Dismisses Plea To Stay MCD Elections
The Supreme Court, on Friday, dismissed, the plea challenging order of the Delhi High Court refusing to stay the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) elections, which are scheduled to be held on December 4, as infructuous.
A matter was listed before a Bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and A.S. Oka. Justice Kaul noted, "The elections are on Sunday" and the Bench passed the order dismissing the plea.
Supreme Court Refuses To Entertain Plea To Waive Bar Council Enrolment Fees For Transgender Persons
The Supreme Court on Friday refused to entertain a petition seeking to direct the Bar Council of India to waive enrolment fees for transgender persons. The matter was heard by a bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha.
At the outset, the petitioner submitted that transgender persons belonged to the most marginalised community of the country and required assistance in form of fee waivers. However, the bench was not convinced with the same.
The Supreme Court on Friday refused to entertain a petition seeking the inclusion of Swami Chakrapani of Hindu Mahasabha in the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra, the trust constituted by the Government of India for the construction and management of Ram Mandir in Ayodhya. The matter was heard by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha.
At the very outset, the CJI remarked that there was no vested right that the petitioner had to be included in the Ayodhya Trust.
Supreme Court Asks Centre If Any Commission Has Been Formed To Examine OBC Reservation In Panchayats
The Supreme Court on Friday asked the Centre if any Commission has been formed to examine the issue relating to political representation of OBCs in Panchayats. The Court asked the Union's counsel to get instructions in a plea seeking a commission for this purpose. The matter was heard by a bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha.
The Supreme Court, on Friday, expressed displeasure for the usage of the term 'Mafia' by Malayalam newspaper, Mathrubhumi in one of its news articles as a naming attribute for a man who is in the business of lotteries.
"We cannot appreciate the use of the adjective."
A Bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and A.S. Oka were hearing a plea assailing the order of the Sikkim High Court refusing to quash the summons issued by a Gangtok magistrate against the managing editor, the managing director and other senior officials of a Malayalam newspaper Mathrubhumi in a defamation complaint case filed by Santiago Martin in 2020.
The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a Public Interest Litigation seeking to amend the provisions of the Indian Penal Code to prevent racial discrimination against North East Indians. The matter was heard by a bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha.
The petition moved by Jyoti Zongluju also sought for insertion of chapters on geography, history, demography, culture, and heritage of North East India. It further sought for directions to YouTube to ban or suspend accounts of users engaging in racial discrimination against North East Indians.
On Friday, Supreme Court judge Justice MR Shah said that it has become a "fashion" for retired judges to comment about earlier decisions taken by the collegium of which they were a part of.
"We don't want to comment on what former members (of the Supreme Court Collegium) say now. Nowadays, it has become a fashion to comment upon earlier decisions, when they were part of the Collegium. We don't want to say anything on that now", Justices MR Shah said.
Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha on Friday listed a matter concerning the salary of State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission members for December 8, 2022. The batch of pleas prayed that the salary of State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission members should be the same as District Judges.
One of the pleas, filed by a retired District Judge, also sought for an extension of the tenure of the members of the State Consumer Redressal Commissions. The retired judge in question had been appointed as a member of State Consumer Redressal Commission. He stated that the as per the new rules, the maximum age prescribed for a member was 65 years and the same shall be increased to 67 years.
Justice S.K. Kaul Expresses Displeasure At Multiple Mentioning Of Same Matters
On Friday, the Supreme Court Judge, Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul expressed displeasure that Counsels are taking recourse to 'multiple mentionings' to 'try their luck' to get their matters listed. He noted that the Counsels were mentioning the same matters before the concerned Bench; before the Registry and also before the Chief Justice of India till it is listed. He firmly stated that discipline in mentioning and listing matters have to be followed by the Counsels.
The Supreme Court on Friday allowed the Tamil Nadu government to reserve 50 per cent of super speciality seats available in the current academic year in government medical colleges for NEET-qualified in-service doctors in accordance with a 2020 government order, the validity of which is currently under challenge before the top court. The Bench, comprising Justices B.R. Gavai and Vikram Nath, directed the state government to expeditiously complete the process of allocating seats as per the order within a period of 15 days, and then immediately furnish information regarding the seats that remained vacant to the Union of India, so that the latter could fill the vacancies on the basis of the all-India merit list.
Supreme Court To Hear Bail Applications Of Godhra Train Burning Case Convicts On December 15
The Supreme Court on Friday (December 2) agreed to hear on December 15 the bail applications of 15 convicts in the 2002 Godhra train burning case. A bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha asked the State of Gujarat to specify the individual roles of the convicts, based on which their applications for bail can be considered. The bench also noted that all of them have undergone 17-18 years of sentence.
On Friday, the Supreme Court modified a Punjab & Haryana High Court order which restrained a Judicial member of the Debts Recovery Tribunal from passing adverse orders in pending matters. The High Court passed the order in a petition filed by DRT Bar Association, which alleged that the judicial member had been behaving rudely with lawyers. A Bench of Justices MR Shah and CT Ravikumar observed that such an order is unsustainable in law.