Supreme Court Constitution Bench Judgments Of 2021

Review Petitions Challenging Aadhaar Verdict Dismissed

[ Case: Beghar Foundation vs Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) Citation: LL 2021 SC 30 ]

The Supreme Court, by 4:1 majority, has dismissed a batch of review petitions challenging the judgment of the Constitution Bench in Aadhaar case [Puttaswamy (Aadhaar-5J.) v Union of India]. While Justices AM Khanwilkar, Ashok Bhushan, S. Abdul Nazeer and BR Gavai observed that no case for review of judgment, Justice DY Chandrachud expressed his dissent. The review petitions were not heard in open court, but 'by circulation'.

It is a constitutional error to hold at this stage that no ground exists to review the judgment, Justice DY Chandrachud remarked in his dissent against dismissal of review petitions challenging Aadhaar verdict.The judge said that if these review petitions are to be dismissed and the larger bench reference in Rojer Mathew were to disagree with the analysis of the majority opinion in Puttaswamy (Aadhaar-5J.),' it would have serious consequences – not just for judicial discipline, but also for the ends of justice'.

Also Read: The Puzzling Dismissal Of Aadhaar Review Despite Pendency Of Larger Bench Reference On Money Bill Issue

Section 138 NI Act - Magistrates Should Record Reasons Before Converting Summary Trial To Summons Trial: Supreme Court

[Case: In Re Expeditious Trial Of Cases Under Section 138 of N.I Act; Citation: LL 2021 SC 217]

A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court comprising of then CJI SA Bobde, Justices L Nageswara Rao, BR Gavai, AS Bopanna and S Ravindra Bhat directed that Magistrates have to record reasons before converting trial of complaints under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act from summary trial to summons trial in exercise of power under the second proviso to Section 143 of the Act.

The court noted that such conversion from summary trial to summons trial is being done mechanically without reasons being recorded and the same is contributing to the delay in disposal of the cases. The bench issued the following directives:

1. The High Courts are requested to issue practice directions to the Magistrates to record reasons before converting trial of complaints under Section 138 of the Act from summary trial to summons trial.
2. Inquiry shall be conducted on receipt of complaints under Section 138 of the Act to arrive at sufficient grounds to proceed against the accused, when such accused resides beyond the territorial jurisdiction of the court.
3. For the conduct of inquiry under Section 202 of the Code,evidence of witnesses on behalf of the complainant shall be permitted to be taken on affidavit. In suitable cases, the Magistrate can restrict the inquiry to examination of documents without insisting for examination of witnesses
4. We recommend that suitable amendments be made to the Act for provision of one trial against a person for multiple offences under Section 138 of the Act committed within a period of 12 months, notwithstanding the restriction in Section 219 of the Code.
5. The High Courts are requested to issue practice directions to the Trial Courts to treat service of summons in one complaint under Section 138 forming part of a transaction,as deemed service in respect of all the complaints filed before the same court relating to dishonour of cheques issued as part of the said transaction.
6. Judgments of the Court in Adalat Prasad v Rooplal Jindal and others (2004) 7 SCC 338 and Subramanium Sethuraman v State of Maharashtra (2004) 13 SCC 324 have interpreted the law correctly and we reiterate that there is no inherent power of Trial Courts to review or recall the issue of summons.This does not affect the power of the Trial Court under Section 322 of the Code to revisit the order of issue of process in case it is brought to the court's notice that it lacks jurisdiction to try the complaint.
7. Section 258 of the Code is not applicable to complaints under Section 138 of the Act and findings to the contrary in Meters and Instruments Private Ltd and Another v Kanchan Mehta and others (2018) 1 SCC 560 do not lay down correct law. To conclusively deal with this aspect, amendment to the Act empowering the Trial Courts to reconsider/recall summons in respect of complaints under Section 138 shall be considered by the Committee constituted the Court on 10.03.2021

Maratha Quota Struck Down

[Case: Dr Jaishree Laxmanrao Patil v. Chief Minister; Citation: LL 2021 SC 243]

Thereafter, the Centre introduced the amendment bill before the Parliament 'to adequately clarify that the State Government and Union territories are empowered to prepare and maintain their own State List/ Union territory List of SEBCs and that the amendment is required to maintain the federal structure of this country. The Constitution (One hundredth and twenty-seventh amendment) Bill 2021 was passed by the Parliament on 11th August, 2021. Later, the Constitution (One Hundred and Fifth Amendment) Act, 2021 came into force from 15th August, 2021.