- Home
- /
- Top Stories
- /
- Supreme Court Weekly Round-Up...
Supreme Court Weekly Round-Up (15th- 20th January, 2024)
Gyanvi Khanna
21 Jan 2024 9:37 AM IST
With another week gone at the Supreme Court of India, Live Law is back with its Supreme Court Weekly Digest, dedicated to keeping our readers abreast of the most recent legal developments in the country's apex court. This digest aims to inform you about the latest judgments, orders, and Public Interest Litigations (PILs) filed in the Supreme Court during the past week, providing a...
With another week gone at the Supreme Court of India, Live Law is back with its Supreme Court Weekly Digest, dedicated to keeping our readers abreast of the most recent legal developments in the country's apex court. This digest aims to inform you about the latest judgments, orders, and Public Interest Litigations (PILs) filed in the Supreme Court during the past week, providing a succinct overview.
Orders/ judgments
Supreme Court Issues Notice In Plea To Cancel Bail Of Accused In Gauri Lankesh Murder Case
Case Title: Kavitha Lankesh v. The State of Karnataka & Anr, Special Leave Petition (Criminal) Diary No(s). 52512/2023
Coram: Justices Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma
The Supreme Court has issued a notice in a plea challenging the grant of bail to an accused in journalist Gauri Lankesh's murder case.
The petition, moved by Lankesh's younger sister, Kavita Lankesh, seeks cancellation of the bail granted to Mohan Nayak, who is alleged to have been a part of the conspiracy to murder.
Case Title: Committee of Management, Trust Shahi Masjid Idgah v. Bhagwan Shri Krishna Virajman & Ors., Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 481 of 2024
Coram: Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta
The Supreme Court stayed the implementation of the Allahabad High Court order appointing a Commissioner to inspect the Shahi Eidgah mosque at Mathura in the Krishna Janmabhoomi case.
A bench passed the interim order while issuing notice on a special leave petition filed by the mosque committee against a December 14 order of the Allahabad High Court by which it had allowed an application for the appointment of a court commissioner to inspect the mosque.
The Supreme Court referred to a larger bench a plea by former Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu for quashing of a first information report (FIR) in the skill development scam case.
The judges delivered two separate judgments. Justice Bose held that previous sanction within the meaning of Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (added by 2018 amendment) would have to be obtained after the provision became operational, failing which, an inquiry, inquiry, or investigation against a public servant under the PC Act shall be illegal.
Case Title: S. CYRIL ALEXANDER vs. STATE REPRESENTED BY DR. V.K. PALANI., Diary No.- 49498 - 2023
Coram: Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan
The Supreme Court dismissed a petition seeking criminal action against Tamil actor Dhanush and the producers and distributors of the 2014 movie 'Vela Illa Pattadhari" under Section 5 of the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act 2003(COTPA) for allegedly publishing posters of the film showing the lead actor smoking a cigarette.
The Apex Court had agreed with the view taken by the High Court that The producers and the distributors in the present case are engaged in movie business and are not engaged in the business of cigarettes or other tobacco products.
Supreme Court Stays Unveiling Of Shri Jagatguru Shivarathri Rajendra Mahaswamiji Statue In Mysuru
Case Title: Subramanya v. The State of Karnataka, Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 928/2024
Coram: Justices BR Gavai, Prashant Kumar Mishra and Sandeep Mehta
In a plea filed against the erection of the statue of former Suttur Seer Late Shri Jagatguru Shivarathri Rajendra Mahaswamiji at Gun House Circle, Mysuru, the Supreme Court on January 12 granted interim relief in favor of petitioner-Subramanya, staying the unveiling of the statue.
The Court prima facie found that the erection of the statue in a public place was contrary to the court's earlier order dated January 18, 2013 in Union of India v. State of Gujarat.
Be Gentle In Dealing With Advocates, Don't Take Up Cudgels With Bar: Supreme Court To DRT Judge
Case Title: M.M. DHONCHAK vs. DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL BAR ASSOCIATION SLP(C) No. 027317 - / 2023
Coram: Chief Justice of India, DY Chandrachud, Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court dismissed a Special Leave Petition filed by the presiding officer of the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT), Chandigarh bench, against the adverse remarks and directions passed against him by the Punjab and Haryana High Court on a writ petition filed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal Advocates Association.
While refusing to interfere in the matter, CJI verbally observed that it was important for the petitioner to be kind and sensitive towards the circumstances of the lawyers and not take up 'cudgels' against the bar association.
Case Title: KISHAN CHAND JAIN vs. UNION OF INDIA W.P.(C) No. 000015 - / 2024
Coram: Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court issued a notice in a Writ Petition seeking directions to the Union Government to prepare a DNA Index to help identify dead bodies. The bench was apprised of the fact that each year, 40,000 dead bodies are found, which go unidentified and unclaimed.
Supreme Court Refuses To Cancel Bail Of Augusta Westland Scam Accused-Turned-Approver Rajeev Saxena
Case Title: CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION vs. RAJIV SAXENA SLP(Crl) No. 000723 / 2024
Coram: Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court refused to cancel the bail granted to the accused-turned-approver Rajeev Saxena in the VVIP Augusta Westland Chopper Scam. The CBI was granted the liberty to move an application before the Trial Court for the same.
The bench refused to interfere and dismissed the application for cancellation bail, although liberty was granted to CBI to move an application before the Trial Court.
Case Title: SHARAD KUMAR AWASTHI vs. FAREED MAHFOOZ KIDWAI SLP(C) No. 000941 - / 2024
Coram: Chief Justice of India, DY Chandrachud, and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court issued notice in a Special Leave Petition filed by Bharatiya Janata Party's(BJP) member Sharad Kumar Awasthi challenging the order of the Allahabad High Court, which dismissed Awasthi's election petition in an application under Order 7 Rule 11 moved by Samajwadi Party's (SP) Fareed Mahfooz Kidwai.
Case Title: Shaheen Abdullah v. Union of India & Ors., Writ Petition (Civil) No. 940 of 2022
Coram: Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta
Coram: Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta
Setting a 25-year-old woman detained by her parents at liberty, the Supreme Court today (January 17) expressed anguish at the callous approach shown by the Karnataka High Court in the matter. Despite the woman stating that she wished to return to Dubai from where her parents had taken her, the High Court did not set her at liberty with immediate effect and rather postponed the matter indefinitely.
The Bench observed that the matter had been adjourned by the High Court on 14 occasions and thereafter postponed for 2025, exhibiting "a total lack of sensitivity" on the part of the court, that too in a habeas corpus matter.
Case Title: SHADAKSHARI v. STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 42
Coram: Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan
The Supreme Court, while deciding a criminal appeal, held that the prior sanction for prosecution as per Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is not required to prosecute a public servant for the act of creating fake documents as the alleged acts do not form a part of his official duty.
Supreme Court Issues Notice On Plea Challenging Validity Of Section 3G Of National Highways Act
Case Title: B.D. Vivek v. Union of India, Writ Petition Civil No. 1364 of 2023
Coram: Justices B.V. Nagrathna and Ujjal Bhuyan
The Supreme Court has issued notice on a writ petition challenging the Constitutional Validity of Section 3G of the National Highways Act, 1956. The writ petition questions the legality of Section 3G(5) of the Act. This section mandates arbitration to resolve disputes over the compensation amount payable to landowners when their land is acquired. The arbitration is to be conducted by an arbitrator appointed by the Central Government.
Supreme Court Asks CEC To Examine Issues Related To Mining In Aravali Hills
Case Title: IN RE: T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPAD vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS., Diary No.- 2997 – 1995
Coram: Justices B.R Gavai and Sandeep Mehta
The Supreme Court, prima facie, opined that if the State of Rajasthan believes that the mining activities in the Aravali Range pose a threat to the environment, the State can also prevent mining activities in the Aravalli Range.
Apart from this, for the issue of whether the classification of Aravali Hills and Ranges regarding the mining permit needs to be continued, the Court requested the CEC to examine the same.
Case Title: Sadaf Imran v. UPPSC. W.P.(C) No. 581/2023
Coram: Justices JK Maheshwari and Sudhanshu Dhulia.
The Supreme Court set aside a decision of the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission (UPPSC) to reject the application of a candidate for the Judicial Service (Junior Division) Examination and directed the UPPSC to declare the results of the petitioner.
Case Title: O Panneerselvam v. All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam & Ors., Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 24812-24814 of 2023
Coram: Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta.
In a major setback to former chief minister O Panneerselvam and other members who were expelled from All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK), the Supreme Court refused to stay the general council resolutions that led to their removal.
The expelled leaders, Panneerselvam, R Vaithilingam, and others, approached the Supreme Court challenging the Madras High Court's dismissal of their appeals seeking relief against the council's resolution.
Case Title: UP Congress Committee (I) V. State of UP., SLP(C) No. 828/2024
Coram: Justices Surya Kant and K. V. Viswanathan
The Supreme Court directed that the recovery of Rs 2.66 crore from the Uttar Pradesh Congress Committee (UPCC) towards the dues to the Uttar Pradesh State Transport Corporation(UPSRTC) will remain stayed subject to the condition of the UPCC depositing Rs 1 crore within four weeks. Pertinently, the dues were for using the buses and taxis of the UPSRTC for its political purposes between 1981 and 89, the period during which the Congress party was in power in the State.
LIFE Mission Case : Supreme Court Makes M Sivasankar's Interim Bail Absolute On Medical Grounds
Case Title: M Sivasankar v. Union of India and Anr., SLP(Crl) No. 5590/2023
Coram: Justices MM Sundresh and SVN Bhatti
Without going into the merits of the case, the Supreme Court today granted bail on medical grounds to M Sivasankar, former Principal Secretary to Chief Minister of Kerala, who was arrested in connection with the LIFE Mission money laundering case.
Case Title: Neeraj Salodkar v. Bar Council of India & Ors., Writ Petition (Civil) No. 698 of 2022
Coram: Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta
In a significant development, the Supreme Court issued directives to state bar councils, compelling them to submit status reports regarding compliance with Rule 26 of Schedule III to the Rules of Legal Education, 2008.
Rule 26 mandates state bar councils to prepare a district-wise roster of such senior counsel and obligates the Bar Council of India to publish and circulate this list for the benefit of law students seeking internships.
Case Title: The State of Assam and others v. Binod Kumar and others., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 46
Coram: Justices Aniruddha Bose and Sanjay Kumar
The Supreme Court refused to interfere with the Gauhati High Court's ruling that Rule 63(iii) of the Assam Police Manual was invalid being in direct conflict with Section 14(2) of the Assam Police Act, 2007 (Act).
Case Title: Edappadi K Palanisamy v. KC Palanisamy, SLP(Crl) No.466/2024
Coram: Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta
In a relief to All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) leader Edappadi K Palaniswami (EPS), the Supreme Court today stayed a Madras High Court order which restored the criminal defamation proceedings initiated against him by expelled AIADMK leader KC Palanisamy (KCP).
E-Rickshaws To Be Provided In Matheran Only For Present Hand Cart Pullers: Supreme Court
Case Title: IN RE : T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPAD vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS., Diary No.- 2997 – 1995
Coram: Justices B.R Gavai and Sandeep Mehta
The Supreme Court has clarified that E-Rickshaws, if permitted, in the city of Matheran would be only for present hand cart pullers. This was to compensate them on account of their loss of employment. The Court further clarified that there should also be a restriction on the number of E-rickshaws permitted in Matheran.
Children From Void Marriage Can't Be Denied Share In Their Parent's Property : Supreme Court
Case Title: RAJA GOUNDER AND OTHERS VERSUS M. SENGODAN AND OTHERS., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 48
Coram: Justices MM Sundresh and SVN Bhatti
The Supreme Court held that the children born out of a void and voidable marriage shall be considered as legitimate children and be treated as an extended family of the common ancestor for the purpose of deciding a valid share in the property of the common ancestor.
Reversing the findings of the High Court, the Bench noted that once the common ancestor has admittedly considered the children born of void and voidable marriage as his legitimate children, then such children would be entitled to the same share as the successors in the property of the common ancestor as that of children born out of a valid marriage.
News Updates
Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray) approached the Supreme Court challenging the decision of the Maharashtra Speaker to recognize Eknath Shinde group as the real Shiv Sena and refusing to disqualify the members of Shinde faction for defection as per the tenth schedule of the Constitution.
It was on January 10 that Speaker Rahul Narwekar pronounced the verdict rejecting the petitions filed by Uddhav faction seeking to disqualify Eknath Shinde and his supporting MLAs. The Speaker also dismissed the disqualification petitions filed by Shinde faction against Uddhav group.
Case Title: Institute of the Fransican Missionaries of Mary and others v. Union of India SLP(C) No. 10456/2019 and connected cases.
Coram: Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court has listed for final hearing a batch of appeals filed by Catholic congregations challenging the judgments of Madras and Kerala High Court which held that Tax Deduction at Source
Case Title: Dr.Kavita Kamboj v. High Court of Punjab and Haryana and others Diary No(s).508/2024
Coram: Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
Stressing that there should be proper methods which will ensure that good people are there in the judiciary, the CJI expressed prima facie approval of the Punjab and Haryana High Court's mandate that judicial officers should secure a minimum of 50% marks in the interview for promotion as District Judges.
The Bench was hearing a set of special leave petitions filed against the order passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court last month directing the Haryana Government to accept the recommendations of the High Court on appointing 13 judicial officers as additional district and session judges.
Supreme Court To Hear Next Month Plea To Implement Women's Reservation Before Lok Sabha Polls
Case Title: Jaya Thakur v. Union of India & Anr., Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1181 of 2023
Coram: Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta
The Supreme Court adjourned until February a plea to implement the Constitution (One Hundred and Sixth Amendment) Act, 2023, which proposes introducing women's reservation in the Lok Sabha, the upper houses of the state legislatures, and the Delhi legislative assembly. Although the constitutional amendment was signed into law by President Droupadi Murmu in September, the act will not be implemented until a delimitation exercise is conducted following the next census.
Case Title: Anun Dhawan and others versus Union of India and others, WP(c) No.1103/2019
Coram: Justices Bela M Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal
The Supreme Court reserved judgment on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition, which sought to formulate a community kitchen policy to avoid starvation deaths. At first, the Bench was not convinced to keep the petition alive. However, after much persuasion from the petitioner's counsel, the Court granted a week's time to file an updated convenience compilation and reserved judgment.
Case Title: M/S. BAJAJ ALLIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD. v. RAMBHA DEVI & ORS., Civil Appeal No(s).841/2018
Coram: Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice Hrishikesh Roy, Justice PS Narasimha, Justice Pankaj Mithal, and Justice Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court adjourned till April the Constitution Bench hearing of the reference on the issue whether a person holding a driving licence in respect of a “light motor vehicle”, could on the strength of that licence, be entitled to drive a “transport vehicle of light motor vehicle class” having unladen weight not exceeding 7500 kg, gave time to the Union to crystalise the matter in terms of policy framework.
Earlier, the Court had asked the Union Government to evaluate the issue and consider amendments to the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 so that the there is no adverse impact on the livelihood of millions of transport vehicle drivers. Attorney General for India R Venkataramani informed the Court today that deliberations were going on with the State Governments regarding the possible policy changes.
Coram: Justices BV Nagarathna and Sanjay Karol
Taking serious note of the gross delay of over four years on the part of the Income Tax Department in filing statutory appeals before the High Court, the Supreme Court has called for an affidavit from the concerned officer to explain the inquiry made and action taken regarding the delay.
281 lawyers have written to Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud objecting to the Supreme Court's decision to discontinue until further orders the practice of circulating adjournment letters or slips one day before a matter is listed.
The lawyers who have written to the chief justice argue that the elimination of the existing procedure during the interregnum would have 'serious consequences' for both the bar and the bench.
Supreme Court Reserves Verdict On AAP Leader Satyendar Jain's Bail Plea In Money Laundering Case
Case Title: Satyendar Kumar Jain v. Directorate of Enforcement | Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 6561 of 2023
Coram: Justices Bela M Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal
After four days of hearing, the Supreme Court reserved its verdict on Aam Aadmi Party leader and PMLA-accused Satyendar Jain's bail plea. Jain was arrested by the central agency in May 2022 on charges of money laundering. He, along with others, were accused of laundering money through three companies during 2010-12 and 2015-16.
The Supreme Court directed the bail plea of activist and Bhima Koregaon-accused Jyoti Jagtap to be tagged with co-accused Shoma Kanti Sen's appeal and heard together.
Coram: Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court refused to hold the elections of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) Multi-State Cooperative Group-Housing Society Ltd, scheduled to take place on January 18, 2024.
The Bar Council of India Chairperson Manan Kumar Mishra has written to the Chief Justice of India, Justice DY Chandrachud, to grant a holiday for all courts across the country on the occasion of the inauguration of Ram Mandir in Ayodhya on January 22, acknowledging its “cultural and national significance.”
Coram: CJI DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court expressed its dissatisfaction over the nature of the apology tendered by the lawyer who had been held in custody for his objectionable remarks against the Trial Court and High Court Judges during one of his pleadings.
The issue arose when the petitioner, a 60-year-old lawyer, made caustic remarks against the trial judge in the pleadings in an appeal filed against the conviction in a criminal case. Although the High Court warned him, he said that he was standing by the remarks.
Case Title: Bilkis Yakub Rasool v. Union of India & Ors. | Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 491 of 2022
Coram: Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan
The Supreme Court dismissed the applications filed by all the eleven Bilkis Bano case convicts seeking further time to surrender before jail authorities. The Court said that the reasons cited by the convicts seeking extension of time to surrender lacked merits. The convicts will have to surrender before the jail authorities by January 21, the original deadline set by the Court as per its January 8 judgment, which set aside their premature release.
Case Title: ASHOK PANDEY vs. THE SPEAKER OF LOK SABHA., Diary No.- 36627 - 2023
Coram: Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta
The Supreme Court dismissed a petition challenging the restoration of Congress leader Rahul Gandhi's Lok Sabha membership, which was suspended following his conviction in a criminal defamation case over the 'Modi-thieves' remark.
Supreme Court Designates 56 Advocates As Senior Advocates, 11 Among Them Women
The Supreme Court designated 56 advocates as senior advocates. Eleven out of them are women. It is after 5 years that the Supreme Court is conferring senior designations. Last time, in March 2019, 37 advocates, including 6 women, were conferred with senior designations.
Supreme Court Collegium Recommends Elevation Of Karnataka HC CJ Justice PB Varale As SC Judge
The Supreme Court Collegium has recommended the elevation of Justice Prasanna B Varale, Chief Justice of Karnataka High Court, as a Judge of the Supreme Court. While recommending Justice Varale's name, the Collegium has taken into consideration the fact that among the High Court Judges he is the senior-most Judge belonging to a Scheduled Caste and the only Chief Justice belonging to a Scheduled Caste among the Chief Justices of High Courts across the country.
Morbi Bridge Collapse : Supreme Court Rejects Victims' Plea To Set Aside Bail Of Oreva Manager
Case Title: Tragedy Victim Association Morbi v. Dineshkumar Mansukhrai Dave and Anr., SLP (Crl) No. 866/2024
Coram: Justices MM Sundresh and SVN Bhatti
Dismissing a challenge to the grant of bail to Morbi Bridge Collapse accused Dineshkumar Dave, the Supreme Court today observed that investigation against the Oreva manager was complete and incarceration could not be indefinitely continued. The Bench remarked that though Dave was claimed to be a Manager in Oreva, he was earning a “small price”.
Case Title: Sarvesh Mathur v. The Registrar General of Punjab and Haryana High Court., W.P.(Crl.) No. 351/2023
Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud remarked that High Courts must allow lawyers to access virtual hearings throughout the court proceedings, without restricting such access only to the particular item of the lawyer. CJI made this remark while hearing a batch of petitions which seek directions to ensure that all High Courts and Tribunals allow virtual access.
The President of India has approved the appointment of Advocate Pranav Shailesh Trivedi as a Judge of the Gujarat High Court.
CASE TITLE: MK Ranjitsinh And Ors. v. Union of India And Ors. WP(C) No. 838/2019
Coram: Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court sought the views of the Union Government on striking a balance between the need to protect the Great Indian Bustard, an endangered bird, and India's international commitments toward lowering the carbon footprint through solar energy. The bench sought updated status reports from the Union and States of Rajasthan and Gujarat on the measures taken to prevent the deaths of the Bustards due to the collision with overhead transmission wires installed at solar panel projects.
Supreme Court Seeks Union's Stand Regarding Cryptocurrency
Case Title: GANESH SHIV KUMAR SAGAR vs. UNION OF INDIA., Diary No.- 1116 – 2023
Coram: Surya Kant and K.V. Vishwanathan
The Supreme Court (on January 19) has asked the Union to present its stance with reference to the matters of cryptocurrency arising in different States
Supreme Court Reprimands Registry For Not Listing Case Violating Judicial Order
Case Title: Commander N Rajesh Kumar v. Union of India & Ors., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 49
Coram: Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan
The Supreme Court expressed displeasure at members of the Registry staff for violating a judicial order regarding the listing of the matters on the Regular list. The Bench noted that on November 22, 2023, the subject matters were directed to be listed on December 07, 2023 (Thursday). However, they came to be listed on December 08, when Senior Advocate DN Goburdhun pointed out that the cases ought to have been listed a day prior.
