Customs Duty - Undervaluation Must Be Proved By Evidence Of Prices Of Contemporaneous Imports; Else Benefit Of Doubt Goes To Importer: Supreme CourtCase Title: Commissioner of Customs (Imports), Mumbai v. M/s Ganpati OverseasCitation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 864The Supreme Court has recently highlighted that the transaction value (the price actually paid or payable for the goods) should be the...
Case Title: Commissioner of Customs (Imports), Mumbai v. M/s Ganpati Overseas
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 864
The Supreme Court has recently highlighted that the transaction value (the price actually paid or payable for the goods) should be the primary basis for customs valuation and that other valuation methods be invoked sequentially only when there is evidence to doubt the correctness of the declared transaction value.
Liberal Approach Be Taken Regarding Delay In Appeals Filed By State: Supreme Court
Case Title: Sheo Raj Singh (Deceased) Through Lrs. & Ors. V. Union Of India & Anr.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 865
The Supreme Court, recently (October 9), while deciding over a discretionary order of the High Court granting the prayer for condonation of delay observed that such an exercise of discretion does, at times, call for a liberal and justice-oriented approach by the Courts, where certain leeway could be provided to the State.
The Bench comprising Justices Bela M. Trivedi and Dipankar Datta reiterated the well-settled that “a court of appeal should not ordinarily interfere with the discretion exercised by the courts below”
Case Title: Rajesh Jain v. Ajay Singh
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 866
Reiterating the principles relating to the presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881, the Supreme Court reversed the acquittal of an accused in a case for cheque dishonor. A bench comprising Justices Aravind Kumar and SVN Bhatti observed that there was a "fundamental flaw" in the approach taken by both the Trial Court and the High Court.
It held "Once the presumption under Section 139 was given effect to, the Courts ought to have proceeded on the premise that the cheque was, indeed, issued in discharge of a debt/liability. The entire focus would then necessarily have to shift on the case set up by the accused, since the activation of the presumption has the effect of shifting the evidential burden on the accused. The nature of inquiry would then be to see whether the accused has discharged his onus of rebutting the presumption.
If he fails to do so, the Court can straightaway proceed to convict him, subject to satisfaction of the other ingredients of Section 138. If the Court finds that the evidential burden placed on the accused has been discharged, the complainant would be expected to prove the said fact independently, without taking aid of the presumption. The Court would then take an overall view based on the evidence on record and decide accordingly".
Case Title: M/s. Kewal Court Pvt. Ltd. V. The State of West Bengal
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 867
The Supreme Court on Tuesday referred the question of the construction, meaning and import of the term ‘vacant land’ contained in Section 2(q) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 to a larger bench.
The Ceiling Act was enacted to impose a ceiling on the acquisition of urban property. It imposed a ceiling on ‘vacant land’ in urban agglomeration. The acquisition of urban land in excess of the ceiling limit, and construction of buildings on such land is regulated under the Act. The intention of the Act was to prevent the concentration of urban land in the hands of a few individuals.
Case Title: Thyssen Krupp Industries India Private Limited & Ors v. Suresh Maruti Chougule
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 868
The Supreme Court has affirmed that an Advocate cannot claim the right of legal representation under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Agreeing with the view expressed in Paradip Port Trust, Paradip vs. Their Workmen (1977) 2 SCC 339, a three-judge bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, CT Ravikumar, and Sudhanshu Dhulia answered a reference against the judgment.
Case Title: Siby Thomas v. Somany Ceramics Ltd.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 869
In a judgment pronounced on October 11, the Supreme Court reiterated the principles relating to liability of a director of a company for the dishonour of a cheque issued by the company.
Referring to Section 141(a) of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881, the Court said, "only that person who, at the time the offence was committed, was in charge of and was responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company, as well as the company alone shall be deemed to be guilty of the offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished."
Case title: Chandra Pratap Singh v. State of MP
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 870
The Supreme Court recently examined a controversial conviction by the Madhya Pradesh High Court in a triple murder case that was based on a modified charge, noting the absence of the appellant's advocate during the hearing. The Court highlighted procedural errors and the failure to provide notice regarding the proposed alteration of the charge, which resulted in a breach of legal principles and caused significant prejudice to the appellant.
Case title: Chandra Pratap Singh v. State of MP
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 870
The Supreme Court recently revisited a critical distinction between "common intention" and "common object", which are mentioned in Sections 34 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) respectively. The Court relied on Chittarmal v. State of Rajasthan, which had previously addressed the conversion of charges from Section 302 read with Section 149 of IPC to Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC.
It was observed: “A clear distinction is made out between common intention and common object in that common intention denotes action in concert and necessarily postulates the existence of a prearranged plan implying a prior meeting of the minds, while common object does not necessarily require proof of prior meeting of minds or preconcert. Though there is a substantial difference between the two sections, they also to some extent overlap and it is a question to be determined on the facts of each case whether the charge under Section 149 overlaps the ground covered by Section 34. Thus, if several persons numbering five or more, do an act and intend to do it, both Section 34 and Section 149 may apply. If the common object does not necessarily involve a common intention, then the substitution of Section 34 for Section 149 might result in prejudice to the accused and ought not, therefore, to be permitted.”
Case Title: Sarvesh Mathur v. The Registrar General of Punjab and Haryana High Court
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 871
The Supreme Court, while mandating hybrid hearings in all High Courts across the country, expressed its concern over the absence of uniform Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) in High Courts, highlighting the need for a clear and consistent approach to electronic access for hearings.
Case Title Arun Muthuvel V. Union of India, Writ Petition (Civil) No.756/2022
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 872
The Supreme Court has observed that insisting that only the egg and the sperm of an intending couple can be used for gestational surrogacy is prima facie against Rule 14(a) of the Surrogacy (Regulation) Rules, 2022.
A new amendment introduced in March 2023 to Form 2 read with Rule 7 of the Surrogacy Rules specifies that donor eggs cannot be used for gestational surrogacy of an intending couple
Case Title: Dr. Nirmal Singh Panesar v. Mrs. Paramjit Kaur Panesar @ Ajinder Kaur Panesar, Civil Appeal No.2045 of 2011
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 873
The Supreme Court on Tuesday held that it can exercise its discretion under the inherent powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India for dissolving a marriage on the ground of ‘irretrievable breakdown of marriage’, even when one of the spouses opposes the dissolution of marriage. However, the Court said that such discretion must be exercised with great care and caution.
The Court also clarified that since the institution of marriage is considered to be a ‘pious’ and ‘spiritual’ union in Indian society, a strait-jacket formula for the grant of relief of divorce under Article 142 on the ground of ‘irretrievable breakdown of marriage’ may not be desirable
Accused Has No Right To Produce Any Material At The Time Of Framing Of Charge: Supreme Court
Case title: State of Gujarat v. Dilipsingh Kishorsinh Rao
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 874
The Supreme Court held that at the stage of framing charges, the accused does not have the right to produce any material or documents to contest the case. The Court further emphasized that at the charges stage, the trial court should base its decision solely on the chargesheet material provided by the prosecution, presuming the material to be true for the purpose of determining the existence of a prima facie case.
Case Title: State of Rajasthan v. Gautam s/o Mohanlal
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 875
The Supreme Court has observed that whenever a child is subjected to sexual assault, the State or the Legal Services Authorities should ensure that the child is provided with a facility of counselling by a trained child counsellor or child psychologist. Because, it will help the victim children to come out of the trauma, which will enable them to lead a better life in future.
The Court further stated that the State should ensure that the children who are the victims of the offence continue with their education.
Caste Or Religion Of Litigant Should Never Be Mentioned In Judgments: Supreme Court To All Courts
Case Title: State of Rajasthan v. Gautam s/o Mohanlal
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 875
The Supreme Court has deprecated the practice followed by certain Trial Courts and High Court of mentioning the caste or religion of a party in the cause-title of the judgment.
While deciding a criminal appeal arising from a child sex abuse case in Rajasthan, the Supreme Court was surprised to note from the cause-title of the judgments of the Trial Court and the High Court that the respondent’s caste has been mentioned. The Court further said that the same defect was carried forward in the Special Leave Petition as the description of the respondent–accused must have been copied from the cause title of the judgments of the Courts.
Case Title: Nabha Power Limited v Punjab State Power Corporation Limited
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 876
The Supreme Court has imposed a cost of Rs. 40 Lakhs and Rs.25 Lakjs on Punjab State Power Corporation Limited (Respondent) based on the actual computation of costs incurred by Nabha Power Limited and Talwandi Sabo Power Ltd (Appellants). The Supreme Court had previously adjudicated the contractual dispute between the Parties and had directed the Respondent certain amounts to the Appellants.
Instead of complying with the Court’s order, the Respondent continued instituting multiple litigations to evade its payment obligation. The Court observed that the issues at hand were already been adjudicated upon in the previous round of litigations. Accordingly, cost was imposed on the Respondent.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 877
The Supreme Court on Monday (09.10.2023) in an order allowing the medical termination of pregnancy of a married woman who is 26 weeks pregnant has highlighted the importance of family planning and taking adequate precautions.
It is however, important to note that on October 11th, while hearing the recall application filed by the Union against the said order, the bench of Justice Hima Kohli and Justice BV Nagarathna has referred the matter to a larger bench. The recall application was filed by the Union citing a subsequent medical report that said that the foetus has a high chance of survival.
Case Title: Commissioner of Income Tax v Jasjit Singh
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 878
The Supreme Court has rejected the argument of the Income Tax department that Section 153C of the Income Tax Act 1961 empowers the assessing officer to seek information from a third party regarding income tax returns of the period of six years preceding the date of the search of the assessee whose premises was originally searched.
A Bench comprising Justice S. Ravindra Bhat and Justice Aravind Kumar held that under Section 153C, a third party would only have to furnish income tax returns of preceding six years, starting from the date when the Assessing Officer assigns the third party’s documents to the concerned Assessing Officer and not from the date of the original search.
Case title: Divya v. Union of India| Vimlok Tiwari v. UPSC| Ved Prakash Singh v. UPSC
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 879
The Supreme Court on Monday (October 9) dismissed three writ petitions filed by certain civil service aspirants challenging the decision of the Union Public Service Commission to treat them as general category candidates for not submitting the certificates regarding Economically Weaker Section (EWS) category in the prescribed format before the prescribed cut off date for the 2022 Civil Service Examinations(CSE).
Case title: Divya v. Union of India| Vimlok Tiwari v. UPSC| Ved Prakash Singh v. UPSC
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 879
The Supreme Court emphasized that where there is an absence of any specific rule or prescription, the last day for fulfilling eligibility is the last date of submission of the application. The Court made the observation while refusing the benefit of Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) reservation to candidates of Civil Service Examination 2022 who did not upload the income and asset certificate in the prescribed form before the stipulated cut-off date.
Sterling Witness Should Be Of High Quality Whose Version Is Unassailable: Supreme Court
Case title: Naresh @ Nehru v. State of Haryana
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 880
The Supreme Court recently held that the evidence of an eye-witness should be of very sterling quality and caliber and it should not only instill confidence in the court to accept the same but it should also be a version of such nature that can be accepted at its face value.
The Court relied on Rai Sandeep @ Deepu alias Deepu V. State (NCT of Delhi) (2012) 8 SCC 21 which held: “the “sterling witness” should be of very high quality and caliber whose version should, therefore, be unassailable. The court considering the version of such witness should be in a position to accept it for its face value without any hesitation. What would be relevant is the truthfulness of the statement made by such a witness. It should be natural and consistent with the case of the prosecution of the accused. The witness should be in a position to withstand the cross-examination of any length and however strenuous it may be. It can even be stated that it should be akin to the test applied in the case of circumstantial evidence where there should not be any missing link in the chain of circumstances to hold the accused guilty of the offense alleged against him. Only if the version of such a witness qualifies the above test as well as all other such similar tests to be applied, can it be held that such a witness can be called a “sterling witness” whose version can be accepted by the court without any corroboration and based on which the guilty can be punished.
Case title: Naresh @ Nehru v. State of Haryana
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 880
The Supreme Court recently emphasized the importance of concrete evidence to establish the common object in cases involving Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). This provision deals with vicarious liability of members of an unlawful assembly.
"To convict a person under Section 149 IPC prosecution has to establish with the help of evidence that firstly, appellants shared a common object and were part of unlawful assembly and secondly, it had to prove that they were aware of the offences likely to be committed is to achieve the said common object," the Court said.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 881
Justice Nagarathna observed that an unwanted pregnancy, whether due to failure in family planning or due to sexual assault, has the same consequence. Since the lady is not willing to continue with the pregnancy, whether the foetus is viable or not is an irrelevant consideration.
"The pregnant lady is not interested in continuing with the pregnancy. In such a situation whether the child to be born is viable or if the child would be a healthy child are not relevant considerations. What is to be focused upon is, whether, the pregnant lady intends to give birth to a child or not," Justice Nagarathna said.
28 Years After Applying, Man To Get Job In Postal Dept At 50 Years Age Due To Supreme Court's Order
Case Title: Union Of India v. Uzair Imran & Ors
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 882
The Court held “Once a candidate is declared ineligible to participate in the selection process at the threshold and if he still wishes to participate in the process perceiving that his candidature has been arbitrarily rejected, it is for him to work out his remedy in accordance with law. However, if the candidature is not rejected at the threshold and the candidate is allowed to participate in the selection process and ultimately his name figures in the merit list though such a candidate has no indefeasible right to claim appointment, he does have a limited right of being accorded fair and non-discriminatory treatment.”
Delay & Laches Vital In Service Matters, Can Be Seen As Acquiescence: Supreme Court
Case Title: Bichitrananda Behera V. State Of Orissa And Others
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 883
The Supreme Court, while rejecting the belated service-related claim made by one Bichitrananda Behera pertaining to the post of Physical Education Trainer, held that ground of delay and laches in such cases amounts to acquiescence which means an implied and reluctant consent to an act.
Case Title: Commissioner, Customs Central Excise and Service Tax, Patna v. M/s Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Pvt Ltd; Union of India v.M/s Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Pvt Ltd
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 885
In an interesting judgment, the Supreme Court held that the Indian Institute of Technology and the National Institute of Technology will come under the Mega Service Tax Exemption Notification issued by the Department of Revenue in 2012(and amended and clarified by a subsequent notification issued in 2014).
"Going by the golden rule of interpretation that words should be read in their ordinary, natural, and grammatical meaning, the word “or” in clause 2(s) clearly appears to us to have been used to reflect the ordinary and normal sense, that is to denote an alternative, giving a choice; and, we cannot assign it a different meaning unless it leads to vagueness or makes clause 2(s) absolutely unworkable," the judgment stated.
Case title: MC Mehta v. Union of India
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 886
The Supreme Court has constituted a Judicial Committee with two retired judges to deal with the challenges to the orders passed by the Monitoring Committee in relation to sealing/desealing of properties in Delhi.
The members of the Committee are: 1) Justice Pradeep Nandrajog, retired Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court, and 2) Justice G.S. Sistani, retired Judge of the Delhi High Court.
Case Title: STATE OF U.P. & ANR v. EHSAN & ANR., CIVIL APPEAL NO.5721 OF 2023
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 887
A Division Bench of the Supreme Court, in its judgment dated October 13, 2023, opined that one of the compelling reasons for relegating the writ petitioner to an alternative remedy may arise where there is a serious dispute between the parties on a question of fact and materials/evidence(s) available on record are insufficient/inconclusive to enable the Court to come to a definite conclusion.
The Court reiterated that the existence of an alternative remedy is not an absolute bar on the exercise of writ jurisdiction.
Case Title: M/S. Dakshin Gujarat Vij Company Limited v. M/S. Gayatri Shakti Paper And Board Limited And Another, Etc.
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 888
The Supreme Court bench comprising Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice M.M. Sundresh, has held in cases where a Captive Generating Plant (CGP) has more than one user and fluctuating shareholding or any change in ownership, shareholding, or consumption occurs, the principle of “Weighted Average” should be applied to determine the proportional electricity consumption of each user, in terms of second proviso to Rule 3(1)(a) of Electricity Rules, 2005.
Case Title: Harvinder Singh @ Bachhu v. The State of Himachal Pradesh, Criminal Appeal Nos. 266-267 Of 2015
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 889
The Supreme Court in a judgment delivered on Friday (13.10.2023) held that just because a person is educated and said to be God-fearing, it cannot be said that the person has a positive reputation.
“A court of law cannot declare the reputation of a person based upon its own opinion merely because a person is educated and said to be God-fearing, that by itself will not create a positive reputation,” the Apex Court said
NDPS Act | If Samples Are Drawn Violating Section 52A, Trial Stands Vitiated: Supreme Court
Case Title: Yusuf @ Asif V. State, Criminal Appeal No.3191 Of 2023
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 890
The Supreme Court on Friday (13.10.2023), set aside the order of the High Court that had sentenced a man to 10 years’ imprisonment for being found in possession of commercial quantities of heroin. The Apex Court set aside the order on the ground that the NCB authorities failed to show that the seized contraband were drawn in the presence of a Magistrate and that the inventory of the seized contraband was duly certified by the Magistrate as mandated under Section 52A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
Principles Relating To Plea & Alibi & Delaying In Registering FIR: Supreme Court Explains
Case Title: KAMAL PRASAD & ORS v. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 891
It is worth mentioning, that the Court, in its judgment, has meticulously penned down several principles pertaining to the plea of alibi. These principles have been driven by various landmark decisions including Dhananjoy Chatterjee v. State of W.B., (1994) 2 SCC 220; and Vijay Pal v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) (2015) 4 SCC 749.
Case Title: We the Women of India v. Union of India
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 892
The Supreme Court has underlined that the State has the obligation to provide 'support persons' as per the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act 2023 to child victims of sexual offences and that the appointment of support persons cannot be made optional. The need for support persons should not be left to the discretion of the parents of the child victims, the Court stated.
Case title: UCO Bank v. M.B. Motwani(Dead) Thr LRs
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 893
The Supreme Court recently held that disciplinary proceedings are considered to begin only after the service of a chargesheet and not show cause notice as per the United Commercial Bank Officer, Employees (Discipline and Appeal) Regulations 1976.
The Court reiterated the principles laid in UCO Bank v. Rajender Lal Capoor (2007) 6 SCC 694(Rajender Lal Capoor -I), Rajendra Lal Capoor-II and finally approved by a 3-judge bench in Canara Bank v. D.R.P. Sundharam, (2016) 12 SCC 724 that the regulations(The United Commercial Bank Officer, Employees (Discipline and Appeal) Regulations, 1976) could be invoked only if disciplinary proceedings had been initiated before the employee's service came to an end. Disciplinary proceedings are considered to have begun only when the chargesheet is issued and not merely upon the issuing of a show-cause notice.
Case Title: Vishal Chelani and Others v. Debashis Nanda
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 894
The Supreme Court has held that homebuyers cannot be treated differently from other "financial creditors" under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) 2016 just because they have secured orders from the authority under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act 2016.
News Updates
Former Supreme Court judge Justice Rohinton Nariman delivered a lecture on "The Nuremberg and Tokyo Trials - The Rule of Law Vindicated", in Nagpur.
Without looking at the victor or the vanquished, arraign those who are responsible for war crimes. For it is only then that we can as human beings look forward to universal world peace that has thus far eluded us and probably will elude us in the near future”, Justice Nariman said.
He said Soli Sorabjee's tenure as a law officer was marked by his fierce independence. He said, “After his appointment, Soli said he was the Attorney General for the country and not the government.”
Justice Vishwanathan read out a letter from Nani Palkhivala in which he wrote- “I meant to write to you for an appointment as Attorney General but after reading your public statement, I would like to congratulate India on having you as the highest law officer of the government.”
Case Title: Greeshma @Sreekutty V. State of Kerala
Citation: Transfer Petition (Criminal) No. 757/2023
The Supreme Court on Friday (13.10.2023) dismissed the plea filed by the prime accused in the Sharon Murder case, Greeshma, seeking transfer of the trial from Neyyattinkara, Thiruvananthapuram in Kerala to Kanyakumari in Tamil Nadu.
While defending the transfer of a judicial member of the Armed Forces Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Attorney General for India R Venkataramani told the Supreme Court on Friday (October 13) that there is a "racket" conducting disability pension cases at the AFT.
The AG also questioned the genuineness of the petition filed by Armed Forces Tribunal Chandigarh Bar Association (AFTCBA) challenging the transfer of Justice Dharam Chand Chaudhary from Chandigarh Bench to the Calcutta Bench of the AFT
Case Title: Armed Forces Tribunal Bar Association Chandigarh v. Union of India
Citation: W.P.(C) No. 1121/2023
The Supreme Court today (13.10.2023) sought the response of the Union of India on a plea seeking to divest the control of the Armed Forces Tribunal from the Ministry of Defence. While the bench rejected the prayer challenging the transfer of Justice Chaudhary, it kept the prayer concerning control of the tribunal alive.
Case title: Kulwinder Singh v. State of Punjab
Citation: SLP(Crl) No. 12876/2023
The Court expressed its concern and voiced the need for essential changes in the rules and practices of criminal case proceedings.
"This Court is of the opinion, that appropriate changes in the rules of practice directions are necessary. This order be brought to the notice of the Secretary-General, Registrar Judicial for suitable action in this regard to enable that in future, all necessary and vital information is disclosed to save unnecessary wastage of time and avoid adjournments. This order shall also be brought to the notice of Chief Justice of India, it said.
NCLAT Bench Defied Supreme Court Order? Supreme Court Directs Enquiry By Chairperson
Case Title: Orbit Electricals Private Limited v. Deepak Kishan Chhabaria
Citation: Conmt. Pet (C) No.1195/2023 In C.A. No.6108/2023
The Supreme Court today (13.10.2023) directed for an inquiry to be conducted by the Chairperson of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) on allegations that a bench of the NCLAT had defied an order of the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court Dismisses Plea Seeking Law To Ban Screening For Nursery School Admissions In Delhi
Case Title: SOCIAL JURIST v. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI
Citation: SLP(C) No. 022296 - / 2023
The Supreme Court, on October 13, dismissed the appeal challenging the Delhi High Court’s order wherein the Court refused to pass any appropriate writ pertaining to expedite the finalization of Delhi School Education (Amendment) Bill, 2015, which prescribes for prohibition of screening procedure in the matter of admission of children at pre-primary level (nursery/pre-primary) in schools.
Case Details: Nara Chandrababu Naidu v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Anr
Citation: Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 12289 of 2023
Objecting to former Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu's plea for quashing of criminal proceedings in connection with a skill development scam in the state, the state police's crime investigation department (CID) cautioned the Supreme Court on Friday(October 13) against nipping the investigation at the bud at this stage. The state agency, in particular, emphasized the losses to the tune of hundreds of crores suffered by the public exchequer to highlight the seriousness of the allegations and the need for a probe.
Case Title: The Temple of Healing v. Union of India
Citation: WP(C) 1003/2021
The Supreme Court on Friday (13.10.2023), raised serious concerns over the delays in the adoption process and the potential impact on both aspiring parents and children in need of loving homes. The remarks came from a bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra during the hearing of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking the simplification of adoption procedures in the country, filed by "The Temple of Healing," a charitable trust.
Case Title: Sunil Prabhu v. The Speaker, Maharashtra State Legislative Assembly W.P.(C) No. 685/2023 + Jayant Patil Kumar v. The Speaker Maharashtra State Legislative Assembly W.P.(C) No. 1077/2023
The Supreme Court on Friday (October 13) criticised the Speaker of the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly for laying down a long schedule for hearing the disqualification petitions filed by the Uddhav Thackeray and Eknath Shinde factions of Shiv Sena against each other under the anti-defection law enshrined in the tenth schedule of the Constitution.
In the ongoing petition for medical termination of the pregnancy of a married woman who is 26 weeks pregnant, Supreme Court on Friday doubted the authenticity of the post partum psychosis precription provided by the petitioner to the court. The bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra granted liberty to AIIMS to conduct an independent evaluation of the mental and physical condition of the petitioner. It further directed the AIIMS medical board to examine if the medicines taken by the petitioner had any effect on the foetus.
Supreme Court To Hear Plea Seeking Guidelines For Seizure Of Electronic Devices On November 2
The Supreme Court on Friday(October 13) agreed to hear a Writ Petition seeking guidelines for the seizure of personal electronic devices by investigating agencies on November 2, 2023.
The matter was mentioned by Senior Advocate Nitya Ramakrishnan before the Bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia, and she requested for an early hearing.
Case title: Legislative Council, UP v. Sushil Kumar
Citation: SLP(C) No. 22746/2023
The Supreme Court on Friday (13th Oct) stayed the division bench judgment of the Allahabad High Court, which had directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to conduct a preliminary inquiry into the recruitment process of the staff of the Uttar Pradesh Legislative Council.
Case Details: State of West Bengal v. Sutapa Adhikari & Ors.
Citation: Diary No. 39867 of 2023
The Supreme Court on Friday(October 13) dismissed West Bengal government's plea against a Calcutta High Court order granting protection to relatives and associates of Leader of Opposition Suvendu Adhikari with respect to a police probe over alleged irregularities in contract works in Contai Municipality.
Case Title: Ashok Pandey v. Union Of India And Ors.
Citation: W.P.(C) No. 966/2023 PIL-W
In a strong expression of exasperation with frivolous Public Interest Litigations (PILs), the Supreme Court today (13.10.2023) imposed costs on a petitioner who had challenged the validity of the oath administered during the appointment of Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya as Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court. The petitioner claimed that the oath was defective as the Chief Justice did not use the word 'I' before stating his name
Case Details: Nara Chandrababu Naidu v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Anr.
Citation: Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 12289 of 2023
The Supreme Court on Friday issued notice on a plea by former Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Nara Chandrababu Naidu for anticipatory bail in the FiberNet scam in the case and directed the matter to be heard on Tuesday, October 17. After an apprehension was raised that the embattled legislator would be arrested in the meantime, the court also asked the State of Andhra Pradesh police to "stay its hand" till then.
Supreme Court Issues Notice On PIL To Regulate Live Broadcasting Of Medical Surgeries
Case Title: Rahil Chaudhary v. Union of India
Citation: W.P.(C) No. 1141/2023 PIL-W
The Supreme Court on Friday (13.10.2023), issued notice to the Centre and the National Medical Commission in a plea challenging the live demonstration of medical surgeries to trainee doctors, professionals, and medical conferences. The PIL was heard by a bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra.
When There Is An Oppressive State, The Hope Is In The Judiciary: Justice Dr. S Muralidhar
Former Chief Justice of Orissa High Court Dr. Justice S Muralidhar, while delivering a lecture on the 'Independence of the Judiciary’ at the Kerala High Court Auditorium on Thursday, highlighted the importance of the judiciary being a counter-majority organ of the State. He said that in a country like India, whenever there has been a strong executive, there has been a visibly weak judiciary.
“When there is an oppressive state, the hope is in the judiciary,” he said. Justice Muralidhar opined that the constitution protects both the strong and the weak, but more the weak. “It is the judiciary that can act as a check on excesses by the majority and protect the weak against the strong”, he said
Case Title: In Re Interplay Between Arbitration Agreements Under The Arbitration And Conciliation Act 1996 And The Indian Stamp Act 1899
Citation: Curative Pet(C) No. 44/2023 In R.P.(C) No. 704/2021 in C.A. No. 1599/2020
A seven-judge bench of the Supreme Court today reserved its judgment on the issue of whether an unstamped/insufficiently stamped arbitration agreement was unenforceable
The bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Justice Sanjiv Khanna, Justice B R Gavai, Justice Surya Kant, Justice JB Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra was hearing a curative against its 2020 ruling in Bhaskar Raju and Brothers and Anr V. s Dharmaratnakara Rai Bahadur Arcot Narainswamy Mudaliar Chattram & Other Charities and Ors.
I See A Great Future In Legal Profession In This Country: Justice Aniruddha Bose
To begin with the topic, Justice Bose stated that lawyers contribute to the great judgments but somehow the judges who write them get the name. He went on to say that at least, in our system, lot of reliance is placed on lawyers by the judges for arriving at a decision.
“We call it an adversarial system, that is between the two litigants but with lawyers it is a collaborative system.”
He added “Earlier, who were the litigants? The big landlords/ zamindars…. Today, even every estranged homemaker, evicted agricultural tenant, dismissed workmen can come with ease to the Supreme Court and find a helping hand from a lawyer. So, the composition of litigant has changed which speaks volumes of success of a system.”
Former Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Nara Chandrababu Naidu has approached the Supreme Court against an order of the Andhra Pradesh High Court denying him anticipatory bail in the state FiberNet scam in the state.
A bench comprising Justices Aniruddha Bose and Bela Trivedi will hear this matter today. The bench will also hear his petition to quash the FIR in the skill development scam case at 2 PM today.
Supreme Court Agrees To List Curative Petition Against Maratha Quota Verdict
The Supreme Court on Friday (October 13) said that it will list the curative petition against the Maratha quota verdict in the due course.
Senior Advocate Maninder Singh, appearing for the State of Maharashta, mentioned the matter before Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud for urgent listing. "We are processing the curative petition, we will list it," CJI DY Chandrachud said
The curative petition is filed against the judgment delivered by a 5-judge bench in May 2021 which struck down the Maharashtra legislation providing reservation for Maratha community in the Socially and Economically Backward Class.
Supreme Court Dismisses PIL Challenging Darwinian Theory Of Evolution
The Supreme Court on Friday (October 13) dismissed a PIL challenging the Darwinian theory of evolution and Einstien's equation (E=MC²)
A bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia observed in the order :
“The petitioner wants to prove that Darwinian theory of evolution and Einstein's equation are wrong and he wants a platform for the said purpose. If that is his belief, then he can propagate his own belief. This cannot be a writ petition under article 32 of the Indian Constitution, which has to deal with the issues of fundamental rights.”
Supreme Court Extends Nawab Malik's Bail On Medical Grounds By Three Months
The Supreme Court on Thursday (12.10.2023) extended the interim bail granted to former Maharashtra Minister and NCP MLA Nawab Malik on medical grounds in a money laundering case by three months. On August 11th, the Supreme Court had granted him interim bail on medical grounds for two months after being behind bars since February 2022.
Supreme Court Issues Notice On Plea To Regulate Advertisements By Corporate Hospitals
Case Title: Narayan Aniruddha Malpani v. National Medical Commission And Ors
Citation: Diary No. 34769-2023 PIL-W
The Supreme Court on October 10 issued notice on a writ petition which seeks directions to regulate advertisements by corporate hospital. The petitioner highlighted that while private medical practitioners are prohibited from advertising, such a restriction is not applicable to corporate hospitals
The Central Government on Thursday (October 12) objected to the Supreme Court giving priority hearing for the money bill issue, saying that matters should not be prioritised based on "political exigencies".
The bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Justice Sanjiv Khanna, Justice B R Gavai, Justice Surya Kant, Justice JB Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra was passing directions for the pre-hearing steps in various matters before 7-judge bench and 9-judge bench. Deciding to pass a common order for directions in all matters, the CJI remarked– "The idea is to get these matters ready for hearing. So we will pass a common order in all these matters in terms of the circular of 22nd August 2023. The compilation of documents, pleadings, precedents - that must be filed in three weeks and written submissions as well."
Case Title: Vijay Kumar Sharma V. National Commission For Minority Educational Institutions & Ors.
The petition filed in the Supreme Court in relation to the minority status of the Jamia Millia Islamia, a Central University in New Delhi, has been withdrawn.
The petition had been filed in the Apex Court against the order of the Delhi High Court that had deferred the hearing of the plea since a similar legal issue relating to the minority status of Aligarh Muslim University is pending before a 7-judge bench of the Supreme Court in Aligarh Muslim University v. Naresh Agarwal and Ors., Civil Appeal No. 2286/2006.
Case Title: Umar Khalid v. State of NCT of Delhi
Citation: Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 6857 of 2023
The Supreme Court on Wednesday cited paucity of time to adjourn the hearing of the bail application of former JNU scholar and activist Umar Khalid in connection with the Delhi riots larger conspiracy case. He has been behind bars for over three years, since September 2020, awaiting his trial under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act for his alleged involvement in the larger conspiracy surrounding the communal violence that broke out in February 2020 in the national capital
The Supreme Court on Thursday (12.10.2023) underlined the importance of balancing the rights of a woman to autonomy and choice with the rights of an unborn child. The three-judge bench of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra was hearing the plea for medical termination of the ongoing pregnancy of a married woman who is 26 weeks pregnant.
The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its verdict on a clutch of pleas against the decision of the Gujarat government to grant remission to 11 convicts sentenced to life imprisonment for multiple murders and gang rapes, including that of Bilkis Bano, during the 2002 communal riots in Gujarat. Last year, on Independence Day, the life convicts were allowed to walk free, sparking widespread controversy.
Case Title: Mohammad Abdullah Azam Khan v. State of Uttar Pradesh
Citation: Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 5216 of 2023
The Supreme Court on Wednesday(October 11) refused to restrain a trial court from passing an order of conviction against Samajwadi Party leader Abdullah Azam Khan in a forgery case.
A bench of Justices MM Sundresh and Prashant Kumar Mishra was hearing Khan’s special leave petition challenging an April 2023 order of the Allahabad High Court refusing to stay his conviction in a 15-year-old case that led to his disqualification from the Uttar Pradesh legislative assembly in February.
Supreme Court Bench Split On Abortion Of 26-Week Pregnancy Of Married Woman, Refers To Larger Bench
The Supreme Court on Wednesday (October 11), while hearing the recall application filed by the Union against the Court's order allowing medical termination of a 26-week pregnancy of a married woman, referred the matter to a larger bench.
While Justice Hima Kohli said that her "judicial conscience" does not allow her to permit the termination of pregnancy in the light of the latest medical report about the possibility of the survival of the foetus, Justice BV Nagarathna said she found no reason to interfere with the "well reasoned order" passed by the Court initially on October 9. In view of disagreement, the matter has been referred to larger bench for consideration.
The Supreme Court has signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with IIT Madras for collaborating on using Artificial Intelligence (AI) and emerging technologies for transcription tools, summarization of page transcript, translation Tool, exclusive streaming platform for court trials, process automation and large languages models. The move comes after CJI DY Chandrachud's visit to IIT Madras in July this year.
Bilkis Bano's lawyer told the Supreme Court on Wednesday that her rapists were treated with 'kid gloves' and favoured by the Gujarat government despite the gruesome and barbaric nature of the crime they committed.
A bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan was hearing a clutch of pleas against the decision of the Gujarat government to grant remission to the 11 convicts who had been sentenced to life imprisonment for multiple murders and violent sexual assault during the 2002 communal riots in Gujarat
Supreme Court To Hear Godhra Train Carnage Case Appeals In March 2024
Case Title: Abdul Raheman Dhantiya @ Kankatto @ Jamburo v. State of Gujarat
Citation: Criminal Appeal Nos. 522-526 of 2018
The Supreme Court on Wednesday (October 11) posted a batch of appeals relating to the 2002 Godhra train carnage case for hearing in the second week of March 2024. The case includes the appeals filed by convicts and also the appeals filed by the State against certain acquittals. The State has also filed appeals challenging the High Court commuting the death penalty of eleven persons to life sentence.
Case Title: Secondary Teachers and Employees Association & Anr. Etc. v. State of West Bengal
Citation: Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 18894-18918 of 2023
The Supreme Court on Monday (October 9) stayed the retrospective application of Section 10C of the West Bengal School Service Commission Act, 1997, which was introduced by way of an amendment in 2017 and enables the transfer of a teacher from one school to another at the state government’s behest.
Case Title: Yuvraj V. State of Rajasthan
Citation: Petition for Special Leave To Appeal (Crl.) No. 12659/2023
The Supreme Court is set to consider the question of whether an Anticipatory Bail filed under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 by a juvenile in conflict with the law as the per Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 is maintainable.
Case title: Directorate of Revenue Intelligence v. Adani Enterprises
Case : SLP(Crl) No.-010683 / 2019
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (10 Oct) directed that the case of Directorate of Revenue Intelligence(DRI) v. Adani Enterprises Ltd would be heard along with the case of Senior Intelligence Officer v. Sanjay Agarwal where 2 questions framed earlier by the Supreme Court have relevance in the present case.
Those 2 questions are as follows-
- Whether the Customs/DRI Officers are police officers and, therefore, are required to register FIR in respect of an offense under Sections 133 to 135 respectively of the Customs Act, 1962?
- Whether the provisions of Sections 154 to 157 respectively and 173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 would apply in respect of the proceedings under the Customs Act, 1962, in view of Section 4(2) of the Code
Case Title: M.C. Mehta v. Union of India and Ors
Citation: W.P.(C) No. 13029/1985
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (October 10) called upon the Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM) to inform the Court about the steps taken concerning air pollution in and around the National Capital.
Case title: M/S AD BUREAU ADVERTISING PVT. LTD. vs. LATHA RAJANIKANTH, SLP(Crl) No. 009818 - / 2022, LATHA RAJANIKANTH v. STATE OF KARNATAKA SLP(Crl) 8327/2022
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (October 10) restored a cheating case against Tamil superstar Rajinikanth's wife Latha on a complaint filed by a Chennai-based advertising company in relation to the alleged non-payment of dues for the promotion works for the 2014 film "Kochadaiiyaan". The Court however granted Latha Rajinikanth to file an application before the Trial Court seeking discharge from the case
Case Title: Varun Thakur Vs. High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
Citation: Diary No. 32303 - 2023
The Supreme Court on (October 10) heard an appeal challenging the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s order wherein a Suo Motu case was taken up by the Court in the wake of a strike by the lawyers in the State against a scheme for disposing of pending cases.
In the impugned order, the High Court directed “If any lawyer deliberately avoids to attend the court, it shall be presumed that there is disobedience of this order and he will be faced with serious consequences including initiation of proceedings for contempt of court under the Contempt of Courts Act.”
Supreme Court judge Justice BV Nagarathna on Wednesday admonished the Union Government for orally mentioning before the Chief Justice of India an application to recall an order passed by a bench comprising Justices Hima Kohli and Justice BV Nagarathna.
Justice Nagarathna said that she was ‘disturbed and concerned’ by the action of the Union approaching the Chief Justice for interference of an order passed by another bench without filing an application for the same. Justice Nagarathna expressed her concern that if such a precedent is set there will be a breakdown of the system of the court.
The Supreme Court collegium has recommended the transfer Acting Chief Justice of Manipur High Court MV Muralidaran to the Calcutta High Court. The original recommendation was made earlier this week.
In a resolution signed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, and Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai, and Surya Kant, the collegium has said that this decision has been made for "better administration of justice" after consulting with the chief justice of the Calcutta High Court as well as Supreme Court judge conversant with the affairs of the Manipur High Court
The Supreme Court has asked the State of Gujarat to explain the time span taken to decide applications filed by prisoners seeking remission. The Court further asked the State to inform the number of petitions pending in High Courts and Supreme Court seeking premature release.
Supreme Court Issues Notice On Plea Against Alleged Illegal Detention Of Rohingya Refugees
Case Title: PRIYALI SUR v. UNION OF INDIA
Citation: W.P.(C) No. 1060/2023
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (October 10) issued notice in a Writ Petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to be issued to the Union of India for releasing Rohingya refugees who have allegedly been illegally and arbitrarily detained in jails and detention centres across the country.
Supreme Court Issues Notice on Surendra Gadling's Bail Plea in 2016 Gadchiroli Arson Case
Case Details: Surendra Pundalik Gadling v. State of Maharashtra
Citation: Diary No. 35852 of 2023
The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued notice on the bail plea of Dalit rights activist and advocate Surendra Gadling in the 2016 Gadchiroli Arson Case. The Nagpur-based lawyer is also among the 16 accused in the Bhima Koregaon case and is currently lodged in Navi Mumbai's Taloja prison.
AAP Leader Raghav Chadha Moves Supreme Court Challenging Suspension From Rajya Sabha
Aam Aaadmi Party(AAP) MP Raghav Chadha has approached the Supreme Court challenging his suspension from the Rajya Sabha. Chaddha, a Rajya Sabha member from Punjab, was suspended from the upper house on August 11 for allegedly obstructing the house proceedings. The suspension is to continue the duration of the pendency of Privileges Committee proceedings against him.
In a writ petition filed against the Rajya Sabha Secretariat, the AAP leader has challenged the "indefinite suspension" as illegal and arbitrary.
In a turn of events, the Supreme Court today asked All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) to defer the medical termination of pregnancy for a 26-week pregnant married woman, who was permitted to proceed with the medical termination of her pregnancy just yesterday. Upon apprehension raised by the doctors at AIIMS that the foetus would have a viable chance of being born, the Union of India sought recall of the Supreme Court order which had permitted the medical termination of the pregnancy.
A bench led by CJI DY Chandrachud noting that the "AIIMS doctors are in a very serious dilemma", stated that a bench would be constituted tomorrow to hear Union's recall application.
Case Details: Central Bureau of Investigation v. Chanda Kochhar
Citation: Diary No. 13670 of 2023
The Supreme Court on Tuesday questioned whether a plea by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) challenging a January order by the Bombay High Court granting two weeks' bail to former ICICI Bank CEO and MD Chanda Kochhar in the ICICI Bank-Videocon loan fraud case has become infructuous now. After Additional Solicitor-General SV Raju pointed out that bail had been continuing since January despite the period prescribed, the court asked why the central agency was not objecting to its continuance before the high court.
Case Details: Nara Chandrababu Naidu v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Anr.
Citation: Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 12289 of 2023
The Supreme Court on Tuesday, while hearing former Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu's plea, asked the Andhra Pradesh Crime Investigation Department (AP CID) whether the order of a special court remanding the legislator to custody would be valid even if the offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act do not survive or are dropped on grounds of non-compliance with the prior sanction provision(Section 17A).
Case title: State of Rajasthan v. Union of India
Citation: ORIGINAL SUIT No. 3/2020
In a significant legal development, the Supreme Court highlighted the issues for consideration in an original suit filed under Article 131 of the Constitution by the State of Rajasthan alleging discrimination in the treatment of the Chief Minister's Relief Fund for COVID-19 (CM Relief Fund) as compared to the Prime Minister's Citizen Assistance and Relief in Emergency Situation Fund (PM CARES Fund) in the context of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) activities.
Case Title: Jayant Patil v. Speaker, Maharashtra Legislative Assembly
Citation: WP(c) No. 1077/2023
The Supreme Court on Monday (October 9) listed the petition filed by Nationalist Congress Party (Sharad Pawar faction) seeking a direction to the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly Speaker to expeditiously decide their petitions seeking disqualification of Ajit Pawar and seven other MLAs under the anti-defection law on October 13, 2023.
Case Title: Wildlife Rescue And Rehabilitation Centre And Ors. v. Union Of India
Citation: W.P.(C) No. 743/2014 PIL-W
While dealing with an Intervention Application (IA) in a petition concerning captive elephants in the State of Kerala on Tuesday, the Supreme Court orally remarked that certain issues were best dealt with High Courts as the High Courts were more aware of local conditions of a State.
Further, the Supreme Court bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra added that the Apex Court could not be rendered dysfunctional by micro managing all issues across the country.
Supreme Court To Hear Challenge Against Electoral Bonds Scheme On October 31
Case Title: Association for Democratic Reforms And Anr. v. UoI
Citation: WP(C) No. 333/2015
The Supreme Court will hear the batch of petitions challenging the Electoral Bonds scheme on October 31, 2023. A bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra heard the preliminary issues today. The petitioners have decided to not argue on the scheme being passed as a money bill as of now since the issue pertaining to money bills is yet to be decided by a seven judge bench in Rojer Mathew vs. South Indian Bank Ltd.
Case Title: Tarunabh Khaitan V Union of India
Citation: WP(C) No. 1074/2023
The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice to the Central Government in a petition filed by Constitutional scholar and Public Law Chair at the London School of Economics, Professor Tarunabh Khaitan, challenging the constitutionality of the provisions of the Citizenship Act, 1955 that automatically terminates Indian citizenship upon acquisition of another citizenship.
Case Title: Centre For Public Interest Litigation v. Union Of India
Citation: W.P.(C) No. 1373/2018 PIL-W
The Supreme Court will hear a PIL, on November 20, challenging the constitutionality of the some of the latest amendments in the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (Act) on the ground that they violate fundamental rights guaranteed under the Article 14 (Equality before law) and 21 (Protection of life and personal liberty) of the Indian Constitution. The mentioned amendments were brought out by The Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018.
The Supreme Court on Monday (09.10.2023) allowed the medical termination of pregnancy of a married woman who is 26 weeks pregnant. The petitioner, who is a mother of two children, told the Apex Court she is suffering post-partum depression and that she is not in a position to raise a third child, emotionally, financially and mentally. The Court was also informed that she has been undergoing psychiatric treatment for a year.
Case Title: Hyderabad Cricket Association v. Chairman Cricket Club
Citation: SLP(C) No. 6779/2021
Former Indian cricket captain Mohammed Azharuddin filed an application in the Supreme Court challenging the removal of his name from the Hyderabad Cricket Association (HCA) voters’ list by Single Member Committee (constituted by the Apex Court for the elections of the HCA).
However, the Court did not pass any order in favour of Azharuddin today and adjourned the matter till October 31. The HCA elections are scheduled to be held on October 20.
Case Title: Central Bureau Of Investigation v. The State Of West Bengal
Citation: Diary No. 35059-2023
A Division Bench of the Supreme Court issued notice in an appeal filed by the CBI against the Calcutta High Court’s order transferring the investigation of the alleged suicide of Lalan Sheikh, the prime accused in Bogtui Carnage Case, to a Special Investigation Team (SIT) headed by Dr. Pranav Kumar, an IPS Officer. Sheikh died in December 2022 while he was in CBI custody allegedly due to suicide.
Case Title: Advocates Association Bengaluru v. Barun Mitra And Anr.
Citation: Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 867 of 2021 in Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 2419 of 2019
The Supreme Court on Monday revealed that almost all of the 70 recommendations made by various high court collegiums had been forwarded by the Centre after the court's last rebuke.
A bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia was hearing a petition filed by the Advocates Association of Bengaluru seeking contempt action against the Union Ministry of Law and Justice for not adhering to the timeline set by the Court in a 2021 judgment for clearing collegium proposals
Case Title: Nipun Cherian V. Honb’le High Court of Kerala
The Supreme Court on Monday (09.10.2023) while considering the plea of Nipun Cherian, the President of political party 'V4 Kochi', against the order of the division bench of the Kerala High Court that sentenced him to four months imprisonment in a suo motu contempt proceeding initiated by it, for his statements against a sitting judge of the High Court, sought the response of the High Court of Kerala and directed the relevant additional details to be brought on record
Case Title: Anil Kumar v. Election Commission Of India
Citation: SLP(C) No. 21693/2023
The Supreme Court today refused to entertain a petition challenging the “First Level Check" of Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) and Voter Verified Paper Trails (VVPATs) conducted by the Election Commission of India in July this yer at eleven district offices in Delhi for their use in the 2024 Lok Sabha polls.
While hearing former Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu's plea, the Supreme Court on Monday (October 9) asked if the Court can adopt an interpretation of Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 which will defeat the objectives of the Act.
Section 17A, inserted after the 2018 amendment made to the PC Act in July 2018, mandates that prior sanction from the competent authority must be obtained before launching an investigation against a public servant. Naidu is challenging his arrest in connection with the skill development scam case on the ground that the Andhra Pradesh Crime Investigation Department (AP-CID) has not obtained the sanction of the Governor before adding him as the 37th accused in the case.
Supreme Court Closes All Cases Pending In High Courts Against 'Adipurush' Movie
Case title: SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD vs. KULDEEP TIWARI
Citation: T.P.(C) No. 1802-1809/2023
The Supreme Court on Monday(October 9) put a closure to all cases pending in different High Courts against the movie "Adipurush".
Hearing a transfer petition filed by the producer of the film seeking to transfer to the Top Court the cases from different High Courts, the Court ordered to put a closure to all such pending proceedings. The Court in no uncertain terms opined that “All these matters must closed now”.
Case Title: Kishan Chand Jain v. Union Of India And Ors.
Citation: W.P.(C) No. 360/2021 PIL-W
In a step towards utilising technology to ensure access to justice, the Supreme Court today directed all State Information Commissions (SICs) to provide for hybrid mode of hearing for complaints and appeals. The bench also directed the SICs to ensure that e-filing is streamlined for all litigants.
Appointment Of Manipur High Court Chief Justice Will Be Notified Soon : Centre Tells Supreme Court
Two weeks after the Supreme Court expressed concerns over the central government's delay in notifying Delhi High Court judge Siddharth Mridul's elevation as the chief justice of the Manipur High Court, the Centre has assured the court that his file has been 'cleared' and the notification will be issued shortly.
Case Title: Mohammed Faizal V U.T Administration of Lakshadweep
Citation: SLP(Crl) No. 12819/2023
The Supreme Court on Monday (09.10.2023) stayed the recent order of the Kerala High Court passed on October 3rd, refusing to suspend the conviction of disqualified Lakshadweep MP Mohammed Faizal, of the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP),in a case of attempt to murder.
Case Details: Swami Ram Dev v. Union of India & Ors
Citation: Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 265 of 2021
The Supreme Court on Monday(October 9) issued notice on yoga guru and Patanjali Ayurved founder Ram Dev's plea for protection against coercive action in criminal proceedings initiated against him for his alleged remarks questioning the efficacy of modern medicines like remdesivir and fabiflu and linking them with COVID-19 deaths.
The Supreme Court on Monday(October 9) directed the Chairperson of the Principal Bench of the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) to file in a sealed cover, a report to the Registrar General of Supreme Court, indicating the circumstances under which he had passed an order of transfer of Justice DC Chaudhary from the regional bench of AFT in Chandigarh to regional bench of AFT in Calcutta.