Hate Speech Not Same As Wrong Assertions Or False Claims : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court today (November 14), while dismissing a PIL seeking guidelines to prevent 'provocative speech' by political leaders, observed that the offence of hate speech cannot be equated to the act of wrong assertions or false claims that one may make. The plea filed by Hindu Sena Samiti through its President Surjeet Singh Yadav stressed the need for guidelines to "prevent the growing menace of delivery of provoking public speech jeopardizing the sovereignty and endangering the...

High-Handedness By State: Supreme Court Sets Aside Order Removing Chhattisgarh Woman Sarpanch From Office

"You (State) want a Sarpanch to go with a begging bowl before the babu...some clerk who has been promoted as CEO", the Court remarked.

Article 14 Can't Be Invoked To Repeat Illegality Committed In Favour Of Someone : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has stated that a person cannot claim equal treatment based on an illegal benefit conferred to someone else. Article 14 of the Constitution cannot be used to perpetuate illegality, the Court said.A bench comprising Justices Abhay S Oka, Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Augustine George Masih made these observations while rejecting the claim for a compassionate appointment made by a person. The petitioner's father died when he was 7 years old in 1997 and applied for compassionate...

Compassionate Appointment Is Not A Vested Right : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has held that compassionate appointment is not a vested right which can be granted without any kind of scrutiny or undertaking a process of selection.The Court reiterated that compassionate appointment is always subject to proper and strict scrutiny of the various parameters.A bench comprising Justices Abhay S Oka, Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Augustine George Masih was deciding the appeal filed by a man whose claim for compassionate appointment on account of the death of his...

Officers Carrying Out Illegal Demolitions Liable To Restore Properties At Personal Cost & Pay Damages: Supreme Court

In the judgment containing directions against "bulldozer actions", the Supreme Court has warned that officials who carry out illegal demolitions in contravention of the judicial directions will be held liable to restore the properties at their personal cost in addition to pay damages.The Court also warned that the officials who violate the directions will be hauled up for contempt of court.The bench comprising Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan observed in the judgment :"It will also be...

'Lackadaisical Approach In Implementing Arms Act' : Supreme Court Forms Committee In Each State & UT To Curb Illegal Gun Menace

The Supreme Court recently constituted a Committee in each State as well as Union Territories after it found that the proliferation of factories, and workshops producing unlicensed arms, which are outside the regulatory framework, resulted in crimes against the Society as well as against the State. It also found that there is a "lackadaisical approach" in the implementation of the Arms Act,...

Power Of Attorney Holder, Who Was Vendee & Witnessed Execution, Can Give Evidence On Agreement To Sell : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court observed that when multiple plaintiffs are involved in an agreement to sell, a power of attorney holder (who is also a vendee and a plaintiff) may testify on behalf of another plaintiff on matters requiring his personal knowledge. The bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra reasoned that since the power of attorney, who is also a...

Executive Can't Become Judge, Pronounce Guilt Of Persons & Punish Them By Demolishing Their Properties : Supreme Court

Pronouncing judgment in the 'bulldozer matter', the Supreme Court today stated in unequivocal terms that the executive demolishing house of an accused without following due process of law would constitute an 'abuse of power'. If it takes such arbitrary action, the executive would be guilty of giving a go-by to principles of law and acting in a high-handed manner, which would have to be dealt...

Defer Demolitions By 15 Days, Personal Liability Of Officials For Violations: Read Supreme Court's Directions Against 'Bulldozer' Actions

The Supreme Court has invoked its extraordinary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to issue a slew of guidelines against "bulldozer actions" carried out by State authorities as a punitive action against persons accused/convicted in crimes."In order to allay the fears in the minds of the citizens with regard to arbitrary exercise of power by the officers/officials of the State, we...

'Bulldozer Reminds Of Lawlessness' : Supreme Court Says Properties Can't Be Demolished Merely Because Of Criminal Accusations/Convictions

The Court issued a set of directions to be followed by the authorities before demolishing properties.

Supreme Court Weekly Round-up: November 4, 2024 To November 10, 2024

Nominal IndexCitationsManish Kumar Rai v. Union of India & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 849Pintu Madanmohan Mondal v. State of West Bengal & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 850Union of India v. Ganpati Dealcom Pvt Ltd | R.P.(C) No. 359/2023 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 851International Seaport Dredging Pvt Ltd v. Kamarajar Port Limited, Civil Appeal No 12097 of 2024 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 852Anoop M. and others...

Not Every Plaintiff Must Prove Sale Agreement's Execution If Another Plaintiff Having Firsthand Knowledge Proves Execution : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court observed that not every plaintiff must prove the execution of a sale agreement if another plaintiff with knowledge of the transaction proves the execution. The bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra stated that a plaintiff's absence should not be viewed adversely, as testimony from another plaintiff present can substantively support the claims...