- Home
- /
- Top Stories
- /
- Supreme Court Weekly Round Up: July...
Supreme Court Weekly Round Up: July 17 To July 23, 2022
Shruti Kakkar
25 July 2022 9:05 AM IST
Supreme Court Judgements Opportunity Of Hearing Not Required To Be Afforded To Army Officers Before Suspending Them Pending Court Of Inquiry : Supreme Court Case Stat: Col. Vineet Raman Sharda vs Union of India | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 606 The Supreme Court observed that opportunity of hearing is not required to be afforded to army officers before suspending them pending the Court...
Supreme Court Judgements
Case Stat: Col. Vineet Raman Sharda vs Union of India | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 606
The Supreme Court observed that opportunity of hearing is not required to be afforded to army officers before suspending them pending the Court of Inquiry. Even under Regulation 349 also, there is no requirement of such a procedure to be followed, the bench of Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna observed.
Case Title: Asha Rani Gupta v Sir Vineet Kumar| Civil Appeal 4682 of 2022| 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 607
The Supreme Court has observed that a defendant cannot enjoy the property during pendency of suit without depositing the amount of rent/damages by merely denying the relationship of landlord- tenant/lessor-lessee.
Case Title: Abhishek Singh Chauhan vs Union of India | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 608 | WP (Crl) 40/2022
The Supreme Court, in a recent order, directed State-wise clubbing of the FIRs filed against an accused in different states. We are of the opinion that multiplicity of the proceedings will not be in the larger public interest, the bench comprising Justices AM Khanwilkar and JB Pardiwala observed.
Case Title: Ajmal vs State of Kerala 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 609
In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court reiterated its views regarding considerations relevant for determining a culpable homicide amounting to murder and distinguishing it from the culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
Case Title: Indresh Kumar vs State of Uttar Pradesh | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 610
The Supreme Court observed that statements made under Section 161 of Code of Criminal Procedure are relevant in considering the prima facie case against an accused in an application for grant of bail in case of grave offence. "Ex facie, the allegations are grave, and it cannot be said that there are no materials on record at all", the bench comprising Justices Indira Banerjee and V. Ramasubramanian said while setting aside an order of Allahabad High Court that granted bail to a man accused of rape and murder of eleven year old girl.
Case Title : Union of India vs Ex Naik Ram Singh | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 611 | CA 9654 OF 2014
Personnel are not eligible for disability pension if there is not even a causal connection between the Military service and injuries. Unless the disability is attributable to or aggravated by military service and is more than 20%, the entitlement to disability pension does not arise, the bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and MM Sundresh observed.
Case Title: R.M. Sundaram @ Meenakshisundaram vs Sri Kayarohanasamy And Neelayadhakshi Amman Temple | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 612
The Supreme Court observed that the dedication of a property as a religious endowment does not require an express dedication or document, and can be inferred from the circumstances. Extinction of private character of a property can be inferred from the circumstances and facts on record, including sufficient length of time, which shows user permitted for religious or public purposes, the bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi and Sanjiv Khanna observed thus while holding that Adipooram Thiruvabaranam comprising of the 26 items of jewellery, some of which are embedded with diamonds and precious stones, belongs to the deity Sri Neelayadhakshi Amman of the Sri Kayarohanasamy and Neelayadhakshi Amman Temple.
Case Title: Ravi Sharma v GNCTD| Criminal Appeal 410/2015| 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 613
The Supreme Court recently restored the acquittal of an accused in a murder case, after finding fault with the High Court for reversing the trial court's order.
"The law presumes double presumption in favour of the accused after a due adjudication by the trial Court. We do believe that the High Court could have been slower in reversing the order of acquittal rendered by the Court of First Instance", the Supreme Court observed.
"While dealing with an appeal against acquittal by invoking Section 378 of the Cr.PC, the Appellate Court has to consider whether the Trial Court's view can be termed as a possible one, particularly when evidence on record has been analyzed", the Court added referring to precedents.
Case Title: Narcotics Control Bureau vs Mohit Aggarwal | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 613 | CrA 1001-1002 OF 2022
The Supreme Court observed that the expression "reasonable grounds" used in Section 37(1)(b) under NDPS Act would mean credible, plausible grounds for the Court to believe that the accused person is not guilty of the alleged offence. The court also said that, under Section 37 NDPS Act, bail cannot be granted merely on the ground that nothing was found from the possession of the accused.
Case Status: Talli Gram Panchayat vs Union of India | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 614 | CA 383-384 of 2022
The Supreme Court observed that single member benches of National Green Tribunal (NGT) cannot be constituted. The proviso to Section 4(4)(c) NGT Act mandates that there shall be at least one expert member on the Bench, the bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud and AS Bopanna observed. The court added that a delegated legislation must be in conformity with the enactment of the legislature which authorises its making.
Case Status: Indian Oil Corporation Limited vs NCC Limited | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 616 | CA 341 OF 2022
The Supreme Court held that, at the stage of deciding application for appointment of arbitrator, a Court can consider whether the dispute falls within the excepted clause. The court observed that the question of jurisdiction and non-Âarbitrability can be considered by a Court at the stage of deciding an application under Section 11 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act if the facts are very clear and glaring.
Case Status: SS Engineers vs Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 617 | CA 4583 OF 2022
The Supreme Court observed that application of the Operational Creditor for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) must be dismissed, if the debt is disputed. It is not the object of the IBC that CIRP should be initiated to penalize solvent companies for non-payment of disputed dues claimed by an operational creditor, the bench of Justices Indira Banerjee and V. Ramasubramanian observed. The bench also remarked that the adjudicating authority under IBC i.e. NCLT is not a 'debt collection forum' and the objective of IBC is not to penalize solvent companies for non-payment of disputed dues claimed by an operational creditor.
Case Status: X vs Y | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 618
The Supreme Court, in an order passed recently, called upon its Registry to examine the plea of a litigant based on 'right to be forgotten' and 'right of eraser'. "We thus, call upon the Registry of the Supreme Court to examine the issue and to work out how the name of both the petitioner and respondent No.1 along with address details can be masked so that they do not appear visible for any search engine", the bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and MM Sundresh observed.
Case Name: Union of India And Ors. v. Ex Sep. R. Munusamy| Civil Appeal No. 6536 of 2021| 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 619
The Supreme Court, on Tuesday, noted in order to be eligible for disability pension under Rule 14 of the Entitlement Rules for Casualty Pensionary Awards, 1982, it is not sufficient to demonstrate that the ailment or disability of a soldier had arisen in service. It ought to be also established that the conditions of military service determined or contributed to the onset of the disease and that the conditions were due to the circumstances of duty in military service.
While rejecting grant of benefit of Section 14(b) and 14(c) to the soldier (respondent) who was discharged not on medical, but administrative grounds, a Bench comprising Justices Indira Banerjee and V. Ramasubramanian noted that to establish the reason for disability or ailment reliance has to be placed on expert medical opinion based on an in depth study of the cause and nature of an ailment/disability including the symptoms; the conditions of service to which the soldier was exposed; and the connection between the cause/aggravation of the ailment/disability and the conditions and/or requirements of service.
Case Status: Narinder Singh vs Divesh Bhutani | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 620
The Supreme Court held that prior permission of the Central Government is required to allow any change of user of forest or deemed forest land. The bench comprising Justices AM Khanwilkar, Abhay S. Oka and CT Ravikumar held that the lands covered by the special orders issued under Section 4 of Punjab Land Preservation Act,1900, have all the trappings of forest lands within the meaning of Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. Therefore, the State Government or competent authority cannot permit its use for non-forest activities without the prior approval of the Central Government with effect from 25th October 1980, the bench held. The court thus directed all the concerned authorities to take action to remove the remaining illegal structures standing on land covered by the special orders and used for non-forest activities on the said lands erected after 25th October 1980, without prior approval of the Central Government, and further to restore status quo ante including to undertake reforestation/afforestation programmes in right earnest.
Case Title : X vs The Principal Secretary, Health & Family Welfare Department | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 621
"Denying an unmarried woman the right to a safe abortion violates her personal autonomy and freedom", observed the Supreme Court on Thursday while allowing an unmarried woman to seek abortion of her pregnancy of a term of 24 weeks which arose out of a consensual relationship.
Case Details: State of Haryana vs Samarth Kumar | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 622 | CrA 1005-1006 OF 2022
The Supreme Court observed that an accused under NDPS Act may be able to take advantage of the Tofan Singh judgment at the time of arguing the regular bail application or at the time of final hearing after conclusion of the trial. To grant anticipatory bail in a case of this nature is not really warranted, the bench comprising Justices Indira Banerjee and V. Ramasubramanian observed while setting aside an order granting anticipatory bail to an accused under NDPS Act.
Case Title: The Khasgi (Devi Ahilyabai Holkar Charities) Trust, Indore & Anr. v Vipin Dhanaitkar & Ors.| SLP (CIVIL) No. 12133 of 2020] 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 623
The Supreme Court on Thursday set aside the direction issued by Madhya Pradesh High Court for an investigation by the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) against the trustees of the Khasgi (Devi Ahilyabai Holkar Charities) Trust of Indore over alleged misappropriation of government properties. However, the Court held that the Madhya Pradesh Public Trusts Act 1951 will apply to the Khasgi trust and directed the trustees to get the Khasgi Trust registered under the Public Trusts Act by making the necessary application within a period of one month from today. The trust is created in relation to certain properties of the erstwhile princely state of Indore. The trust deed was executed in 1962 between Maharani Usha Devi of Indore, the daughter and successor of Yashwantrao Holkar( the Maharaja of Indore at the time of joining India) and the nominee of the President of India. In 2020, the Madhya Pradesh High Court ordered an EOW probe into alleged illegal sale of the Khasgi properties, observing that government properties vested with the state were alienated.
There Cannot Be Two Arbitration Proceedings With Respect To Same Contract/Transaction: Supreme Court
Case Title: M/S TANTIA CONSTRUCTIONS LIMITED v. UNION OF INDIA| 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 624
Observing that it is of the "firm opinion that there cannot be two arbitration proceedings with respect to the same contract/transaction", the Supreme Court stated that when a dispute has earlier been referred to arbitration and an award was passed on the claims made, then it is "rightful" to refuse to refer to arbitration- in exercise of Section 11(6) of the 1996 Arbitration Act- a fresh arbitration proceeding sought to be initiated with respect to some further claims.
Supreme Court Updates
The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to list on July 21 a plea to allow the worship of Shivling stated to be found in the premises of the Gyanvapi mosque during its survey. Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain mentioned the writ petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India before the Chief Justice of India for listing the matter on July 21. The counsel said that the petition filed by the Anjuman Intezemia Masjid Committee (which manages the Gyanvapi mosque at Varanasi) challenging the commission survey ordered by the Varanasi Civil Court for the mosque is also listed on July 21. The CJI agreed to list the matter on July 21 along with the Masjid committee's matter, which is listed before a bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud, Surya Kant and PS Narasimha .
The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to list the petition preferred by 14 Shiv Sena MLAs of the Uddhav Thackeray challenging the initiation of "illegal" disqualification proceedings against them under the Tenth Schedule along with the other petitions related to Maharashtra's political crisis that are slated to be heard on July 20.
The Supreme Court on Monday stayed the directions passed by a single bench of the Karnataka High Court against the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) such as the calling for closure reports filed so far and service records of the officers.
The bench of CJI NV Ramanna, Justices Krishna Murari and Hima Kohli said that the judge while hearing the bail petition of one accused made "irrelevant observations" and went beyond the scope of the bail application.
Supreme Court Agrees To Hear Plea Challenging Muslim Divorce Through 'Talaq- E- Hasan' On July 22
The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to list on July 22 the writ petition challenging the practice of divorce through the Muslim personal law practice of Talaq-E-Hasan, as per which a man can divorce his wife by pronouncing "talaq" once a month for three months.
The Supreme Court on Monday said that a clear and concrete case indicating that Hindus are being denied minority status in certain states needs to be shown for the Court to entertain a plea seeking minority tag for Hindus in states were they are numerically less.
A bench of Justices UU Lalit, Ravindra Bhat and Sudhanshu Dhulia orally observed,
"If there is a concrete case that Hindus are denied minority status in Mizoram or Kashmir, we can consider...... Unless and until we get a concrete situation, we can't deal with this"
The Supreme Court on Monday directed the Uttar Pradesh Police to not take any precipitative action against fact checker Mohammed Zubair in connection with the 5 FIRs registered against him in Lakhimpur Kheri, Muzaffarnagar, Ghaziabad and two at Hathras districts over his tweets till July 20.
Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple: Supreme Court Extends Time For Special Audit Till August 31
The Supreme Court on Monday extended time till August 31, 2022 for completion of the special audit of 25 years for the iconic Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple at Thiruvananthapuram, which was ordered by the Court in 2020.
A Bench comprising Justices UU Lalit, Ravindra Bhat and Sudhanshu Dhulia granted the extension after applications were filed by the Administrative Committee and the Advisory Committee of the Temple seeking additional time to complete the special audit.
The Supreme Court, on Monday, issued notice in a plea challenging the constitutional validity of Section 33 and Section 70 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951; provisions which permit candidates to contest elections for Parliament and State Assemblies from two constituencies.
The Supreme Court, on Monday, directed all State Governments to see to it that the ex-gratia compensation payable to the kins/family members of the persons who have lost their lives to COVID-19, as per the earlier orders and judgment of the Apex Court, be disbursed without any delay.
Following Supreme Court's criticism, the State of Andhra Pradesh on Monday agreed to revert the amount of Rs 1100 crores -which was diverted from the State Disaster Relief Fund (SDRF) to the personal deposit (PD) account of the Agriculture Commissioner - to the SDRF within a period of two weeks.
The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to list on July 25 a case which raises an issue as to whether every charitable trust established by someone professing Islam is necessarily a waqf.
The Special Leave Petitions which assailed Bombay High Court's dated September 22, 2011 was listed before the bench of Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justices Krishna Murari and Hima Kohli.
The Supreme Court, on Monday, refused to entertain plea seeking directions to make it compulsory for politicians to declare their assets after their term of election as well, failing which they may be disqualified to contest any further election.
Should An Application For Withdrawal Of Suit Be Followed By A Court Order? Supreme Court To Consider
The Supreme Court issued notice in a Special Leave Petition raising the issue whether an application for withdrawal of suit should be followed by an order of the court?
In this case, the Jharkhand High Court had set aside an order of the Trial Court which allowed an application to withdraw a partition suit, on the ground that the order of such withdrawal was passed on an application filed by plaintiff, after his death.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected an oral plea made by the father of the student who died by suicide in Kallakurichi in Tamil Nadu to stay the re-postmortem of the body which is to be held today as per the direction of the Madras High Court.
The father has approached the Supreme Court seeking to include a doctor of his choice in the panel constituted by the High Court for re-postmortem of the girl's body. The High Court had rejected the said prayer of the father.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday transferred the writ petitions filed before it challenging the Agnipath recruitment scheme for the armed forces to the Delhi High Court, where similar petitions are already pending.
A bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud, Surya Kant and AS Bopanna passed the order in three writ petitions filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. Two of the petitions were public interest litigation and the other one was a writ petition filed by a group of persons shortlisted for airman selection in the Indian Air Force who plead that the recruitment process which commenced in previous years should be completed regardless of the Agnipath scheme.
A 25 year old unmarried woman seeking termination of her pregnancy of nearly 24 weeks which had arisen out of a consensual relationship has approached Supreme Court against Delhi High Court's order of refusing to grant her the said relief.
The Special Leave Petition was mentioned before the bench of Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justices Krishna Murari and Hima Kohli.
Supreme Court Posts Varavara Rao's Bail Plea For Final Hearing On August 10; Interim Bail Extended
The Supreme Court on Tuesday posted the regular bail plea of Telugu poet and Bhima Koregaon – Elgar Parishad accused P Varavara Rao on medical grounds for final hearing on August 10.
While doing so, a Bench comprising Justices UU Lalit, Ravindra Bhat and Sudhanshu Dhulia also formally issued notice, seeking the response of the National Investigation Authority.
"Considering the nature of controversy of the matter, the matter shall be disposed of in the next occasion. Since we had not issued notice earlier, issue notice, returnable on August 10, 2022."
In an interim relief to former BJP Spokesperson Nupur Sharma, the Supreme Court on Tuesday directed that no coercive steps be taken against her in the multiple FIRs registered in several states over her remarks on Prophet Mohammed during a television channel debate on May 26.
The Court said that the same relief will cover any future FIR or complaint which may be registered or entertained against her with respect to the same telecast.
The Supreme Court, on Tuesday, stayed the operation of the order of the Delhi High Court, which had asked Delhi Government to make every endeavour to ensure that private schools fill up the backlog of unfilled seats for Economic Weaker Section (EWS) category students in the next five years.
The Supreme Court, on Tuesday, refused to entertain pleas seeking the Court's indulgence in issuing directions to Rajasthan, Bihar and Madhya Pradesh High Courts to conduct their respective Judicial examinations in such a manner, that they do not coincide.
The Supreme Court, on Tuesday, asked the Union Government why should the Court not pass orders directing the recovery proceedings in all matters before the FEMA Appellate Tribunal to be stood over till the time it starts functioning. A Bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M.M. Sundresh noted that earlier it had posed the same query to Mr. Vikramjit Banerjee, Additional Solicitor General appearing in the matter. It asked the ASG to respond on the next date of hearing (2nd Aug, 2022).
The Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed a special leave petition moved by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) seeking further police custody remand of Abu Baker and three other persons accused of conspiracy behind the 1993 Bombay Blasts.
A Bench of Justices UU Lalit, Ravindra Bhat and Sudhanshu Dhulia dismissed the matter.
Supreme Court Expresses Concerns At Centre's Delay In Appointing APTEL Chairperson
The Supreme Court on Tuesday expressed concerns at the post of Chairperson of the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL) lying vacant. Chief Justice of India NV Ramana asked Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj to take instructions from Central Government regarding the appointment of APTEL Chairperson.
"When are they filling the vacancies of Chairman? You get instructions as to why they are keeping the files for so many months?," the CJI said. The remark was made by the Top Judge while ASG KM Nataraj had sought urgent listing of a civil appeal filed by Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd against an order dated March 22, 2022 passed by APTEL.
Supreme Court Stays Karnataka HC Judgment Which Allowed Trial Of Husband For Marital Rape
The Supreme Court on Tuesday stayed the judgment of the Karnataka High Court which allowed the trial of a husband for the offence of rape alleged by his wife. A bench comprising Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justice Krishna Murari and Justice Hima Kohli passed an order of ad-interim stay of the High Court's judgment dated March 23, 2022, till the next posting date. The bench also stayed the trial proceedings in the Sessions Court based on the FIR lodged by the wife against her husband.
A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court on Wednesday observed that the issues arising in the petitions filed in relation to the Shiv Sena rift may have to be referred to a larger bench. A bench comprising Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justice Krishna Murari and Justice Hima Kohli was hearing six petitions filed by petitioners belonging to Eknath Shinde and Uddhav Thackeray factions of Shiv Sena party in relation to disqualification proceedings, election of Speaker, recognition of party whip and floor test for Shinde Government in the Maharashtra assembly.
CJI NV Ramana orally remarked during the hearing that important constitutional issues arise in the cases which may require adjudication by a larger bench.
" Some of the issues, I strongly feel, may require a larger bench...Some of the issues are important constitutional issues which should be settled", the CJI said.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday ordered the release of fact-checker Mohammed Zubair, co-founder of AltNews, on interim bail in all UP Police FIRs. A bench led by Justice DY Chandrachud observed that the existence of power of arrest must be pursued sparingly by the Police. The Court has directed the Tihar jail authorities to ensure that he is released before 6 pm today, subject to furnishing bail bonds.
The bench was of the view that there is "no justification" to keep Zubair in continued custody any further and subject him to diverse proceedings when the gravamen of allegations arises from the Tweets which forms part of investigation by Delhi Police, in which case he has already been granted bail. The bench observed,
" Essentially, the gravamen of the FIRs pertain to the tweets. Having regard to the fact that the petitioner has been subjected to comprehensive investigation by the Delhi police, we find no reason for his deprivation of personal liberty to persis."
The Supreme Court also refused to impose a bail condition that he should not tweet again.
"We can't say that he won't tweet again. It is like telling a lawyer that you should not argue. How can we tell a journalist that he will not write?...If there is any tweets against law, he will be answerable. How can be pass any anticipatory order that someone will not speak...", Justice Chandrachud told the Additional Advocate General of UP.
The Court has further ordered disbanding of the SIT formed by UP Police for investigation of FIRs against Zubair. It has clubbed of all the FIRs and said that the case should be handled by one investigating authority, i.e. Special Cell of Delhi Police.
While granting interim bail to fact checker Mohammed Zubair in all FIRs registered by the Uttar Pradesh Police over his tweets, the Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to impose a bail condition that he should not tweet. The Court turned down a request made by the Additional Advocate General of Uttar Pradesh for such a condition.
"It is like telling a lawyer that you should not argue. How can we tell a journalist that he will not write or utter a word?", Justice Chandrachud told UP AAG Garima Prashad.
The Supreme Court, on Wednesday, allowed OBC reservation in the upcoming local body elections in Maharashtra as per the recommendations of the commission appointed by the State Government. The Court directed the Maharashtra Election Commission (SEC) to notify the election programme with respect to the local bodies wherein it is yet to be notified, within a period of two weeks.
The Supreme Court, on Wednesday, disposed of the petitions seeking direction to regulate online media and OTT content as infructuous. The transfer petition in the batch seeking directions to regulate intermediates, along with the main Writ Petition before the concerned High Court were also disposed of. Considering that new IT Rules, namely, Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 (IT Rules 2021) and Cable Television Networks (Amendment) Rules, 2021 have come into force, a Bench comprising Justices A.M. Khanwilkar, A.S. Oka and J.B. Pardiwala noted that nothing further survives in the pleas. However, liberty was granted to the petitioners to challenge the validity of the provisions of the new Rules so enacted.
The Supreme Court, on Wednesday, rejected a petition filed by the Maharashtra Government(while Uddhav Thackeary was the Chief Minister) seeking review of the Apex Court's order transferring the investigation in 5 FIRs against former Mumbai Police Commissioner, Param Bir Singh to the Central Bureau of Investigation. The review petition was filed on May 17, 2022. A Bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M.M. Sundresh, after perusing the relevant material, concluded that the order under review 'does not suffer from any error warranting its reconsideration'.
The Supreme Court has stayed criminal proceedings against Indian Army Officers accused of killing civilians in Nagaland taking note of the fact that mandatory previous sanction as required under Section 6 of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 has not been obtained. On December 4, 2021, they allegedly fired at a pickup truck carrying eight miners in eastern Nagaland's Oting village. Later, FIRs under Sections 302, 307, 326, 201, 34 with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) were lodged in connection with this incident. Following this incident, the Nagaland Assembly, in a special session held, "unanimously resolved" to demand the Government of India to repeal Armed Forces Special Powers Act, 1958 from the North East, specifically from Nagaland.
While hearing a plea filed by the State of Tamil Nadu seeking urgent directions to restrain the Cauvery Water Management Authority (CWMA) from deliberating the proposed construction of reservoir at Mekedatu across the inter-state river Cauvery by the State of Karnataka, the Supreme Court, on Wednesday, adjourned the matter till 26th July, 2022 asking the Secretary of the Cauvery Water Management Authority to be present before it. In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 6A of the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956, the Central Government notified the Cauvery Water Management Scheme, 2018 inter alia, constituting the 'Cauvery Water Management Authority' to give effect to the decision of the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal (Tribunal) as modified by the Supreme Court vide order, dated 16t.02.2018.
Haryana DSP Murder : Supreme Court Urged To Call For Action Taken Report From State Govt
The murder of a Haryana Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) by mowing him down with a dumper truck while he was inspecting illegal mining was mentioned before the Supreme Court on Thursday. Senior Advocate ADN Rao, who has been appointed as an amicus curiae by the Supreme Court in the cases related to illegal mining in Aravalli hills, mentioned the matter before a bench led by Justice AM Khanwilkar, which is monitoring the mining operations in the region. The amicus curiae requested the bench to call for an action taken report from the State Government on the illegal mining in the region. The bench agreed to consider the request.
When a plea regarding the allotment of chambers for Supreme Court lawyers was mentioned for urgent listing, Chief Justice of India NV Ramana said that the lawyers in Delhi should consider themselves fortunate to get chambers as nowhere else lawyers are given chambers.
The CJI also recalled his days as a lawyer and said "we used to stand under trees, you are fortunate to get chambers".
The Supreme Court on Thursday passed an ad-interim order to allow an unmarried woman to abort her pregnancy of 24-weeks arising out of a live-in relationship, subject to a medical board constituted by the AIIMS Delhi concluding that the foetus can be aborted without risk to the life of the woman.
A bench led by Justices DY Chandrachud observed that the Delhi High Court took an "unduly restrictive" view of the provisions of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Rules while declining the woman interim relief.
Noting that after the 2021 amendment, the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act uses the word "partner" instead of "husband" in the explanation to Section 3, the Court said that this shows the legislative intent to cover "unmarried woman" under the Act.
In the Gyanvapi mosque case, the Supreme Court on Thursday said that it will await the decision of the Varanasi District Court on the application filed by the Anjuman Intezemia Masjid Committee (which manages the Gyanvapi mosque) questioning the maintainability of the suit filed by Hindu plaintiffs.
Accordingly, the bench adjourned the Special Leave Petition filed by the Masjid Committee challenging the Civil Court's orders for commission survey of the mosque to the first week of October.
The Court also refuses to entertain two Writ Petitions which were filed seeking right to worship the "shivling" stated to be found in the mosque during the survey and seeking its carbon dating and GPS survey. The petitions were withdrawn with liberty to pursue other remedies available under law, after the Court said that such issues have to be raised in the suit itself.
Supreme Court Appoints Senior Adv Maninder Singh As Amicus Curiae In BCCI Case
The Supreme Court on Thursday appointed Senior Advocate and former Additional Solicitor General Maninder Singh as amicus curiae in the case relating to the administration of Board of Control of Cricket in India(BCCI). The bench of Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justices Krishna Murari and Hima Kohli appointed Senior Advocate Maninder Singh as the earlier amicus in the matter, Senior Advocate PS Narasimha, has been elevated as a Supreme Court judge.
The Supreme Court on Thursday granted liberty to the father of the student who allegedly died by suicide in Kallakurichi, Tamil Nadu, to withdraw a plea seeking inclusion of a doctor of his choice in the panel of doctors constituted for the re-postmortem of the body. A Division Bench of Justices BR Gavai and P Narasimha also granted liberty to the petitioner to move a fresh application before the Madras High Court. The girl had died on a private school premises over alleged mistreatment by the authorities. This was followed by a violent protest in the area.
ED Moves Supreme Court To Transfer Trial Of Gold Smuggling Case From Kerala To Karnataka
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has filed a petition in the Supreme Court seeking to transfer the trial in the gold smuggling case from Kerala to Karnataka. The transfer is sought for the money laundering case in relation to the smuggling of gold through diplomatic channels. The agency says that "free and fair trial" of the case is not possible in Kerala due to the close nexus between the accused and top officials and functionaries in the Kerala Government. The case under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) is at present before the Special PMLA Court at Ernakulam and the ED seeks its transfer to Special Court for PMLA cases in Karnataka. The agency has said in its petition that the four accused persons in the case are highly influential and have close nexus with the top officials in the Kerala Government. One among the accused is M Sivasankar, an IAS officer of Kerala cadre who was the Principal Secretary to the Chief Minister of Kerala.
In a batch of petitions, inter alia, seeking directions to prevent/curb hate speech, the Supreme Court, on Wednesday, asked the Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, to compile information regarding preventive, corrective and remedial measures taken by the State Government, so far, in compliance with its earlier judgments. The compilation, in the form of a booklet, has been asked to be placed before the Court within a period of six weeks.
In the case related to the constitution of the All India Football Federation(AIFF), the Supreme Court on Thursday orally remarked that it will not get into the commercial aspects of sport contracts, which are to be handled by a democratically elected body. The Court made this remark in response to the concerns expressed by the Football Sports Development Ltd(FSDL) about terms related to a pre-existing contract for running the Indian Super League(ISL).
The Supreme Court, on Thursday, in an application seeking compliance with its judgment regarding problems and miseries of migrant labourers indicated that modalities have to be worked out by the Central and State Governments to ensure that migrant workers are provided ration at any cost. A Bench comprising Justices M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna said that they would pass orders with appropriate directions, which would include directions regarding provision of dry ration as well as directions to expedite the process of registration of the migrant workers on the e-shram portal.
Can a High Court, while maintaining murder conviction, reduce the life sentence to that already undergone, by giving the benefit of right to private defence? The Supreme Court might examine this issue in a special leave petition filed by the State of Madhya Pradesh against a Madhya Pradesh High Court judgment.
Supreme Court To Hear Plea Challenging GST On Disability Equipments
A writ petition filed challenging the levy of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) on disability equipments was mentioned before the Supreme Court on Friday. The writ petition Nipun Malhotra versus Union of India was filed in 2017. The counsel mentioned before a bench led by Justice DY Chandrachud that in 2020, the Court had granted the petitioner liberty to move a representation before the GST Council seeking waiver of GST on disability equipments. However, the levy is not abolished.
The Supreme Court on Friday issued notice in plea assailing Maharashtra Government's decision of making it mandatory for all shops and establishments in the state to display signboards in Marathi written in the Devanagri script. The SLP preferred by Federation of Retail Traders Welfare Association against Bombay High Court's order of upholding State Government's decision was listed before the bench of Justices KM Joseph and Hrishikesh Roy.
The Supreme Court on Friday issued notice on a special leave petition filed by the State of Tripura challenging an interim order passed by the Tripura High Court which directed the state government to enhance the salary of the staff of the High Court as per the recommendations of the 6th Central Pay Commission with effect from January 1, 2006.
In the order passed in December 2021, the High Court also directed the State to pay the salary arrears as well in three monthly instalments starting from January 2022. Later, the High Court initiated suo motu contempt proceedings against the State Government for not implementing the directions.
The Supreme Court on Friday quashed the proceedings in the PIL pending before Tripura High Court challenging security cover given to billionaire businessman Mukesh Ambani & his family in Mumbai. The bench of Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justices Krishna Murari and Hima Kohli also directed the Government of India to continue giving the security cover to the family. Questioning the locus of the petitioner who filed the PIL before the High Court, the bench also opined that there was no need for the High Court to entertain the PIL since the family was paying cost of security provided by the Government.
The Supreme Court on Friday issued notice in plea by former Karnataka Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa against Karnataka High Court's order of refusing to quash FIR registered under Prevention of Corruption Act for allegedly denotifying parcels of land and allotting it to entrepreneurs during his tenure as the Deputy Chief Minister of the state, between February 2006 and October 2007.
The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a petition seeking to raise the smoking age to 21 years and to ban the sale of loose cigarettes. A Bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia came down heavily on the Petitioner during the hearing today.
Criticising the "new trend" of High Courts passing irrelevant observations and orders while considering bail applications, the Supreme Court set aside a bail condition imposed by the Allahabad High Court to seal the premises of Mohammad Ali Jauhar University at Rampur while granting bail to Samajwadi Party leader Azam Khan.
The Supreme Court of India on Friday held that Junior Resident Doctors serving in Employee State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) run hospitals as part of their bond period cannot claim 50% in-service quota for Post Graduate courses at par with Insurance Medical Officers. The Bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and AS Bopanna was hearing a petition seeking to declare all junior resident doctors to be eligible for the in-service quota for doctors of the ESIC for the purpose of inclusion for reservation in PG courses. Another direction which was sought was to extend the 50% quota in-service doctors reservation of PG courses to the junior resident doctors as well.
Two lawyers have moved the Supreme Court against the lion sculpture installed on the top of the new Parliament building under construction as part of the Central Vista Project, alleging that "visible changes: have been made in the approved design of the official emblem. As per the petition filed by two Advocates-on-Record, Mr. Aldanish Rein and Mr. Ramesh Kumar Mishra, the new emblem violates the description and design of State emblem in Schedule of the State Emblem of India (Prohibition of Improper Use) Act, 2005.
ITAT Appointments : Supreme Court Asks Centre To Produce Files Submitted Before SCSC With New Inputs
The Supreme Court on Friday sought from the Central Government the files produced before the Search-cum-Selection Committee(SCSC) with new inputs in relation to certain persons considered for appointment as members of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal(ITAT). The bench comprising Justice Chandrachud and Justice AS Bopanna was considering a contempt petition filed by the Advocate Association Bengaluru in 2021 against the then Secretary of the Department of Legal Affairs alleging that the Centre had violated Supreme Court directions by not appointing the names cleared by the SCSC.
The Supreme Court on Friday directed the State of Uttar Pradesh to take action on the recommendations made in the report submitted by a three-member inquiry commission headed by former Supreme Court judge Justice (Retd) B S Chauhan to probe into the encounter of gangster Vikas Dubey. For ensuring the availability of the report in the public domain, the bench of Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justices Krishna Murari and Hima Kohli also directed it to be uploaded on the Supreme Court website.
'Daughters Are Not A Liability; Read Article 14': Justice DY Chandrachud
Many laws and judgments have been passed time and again, iterating the rights of women. But as shocking as it may sound, it may not necessarily change the mindset of many, even in 2022. One such remark was made by an advocate yesterday before the Supreme Court. A Division Bench comprising of Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice AS Bopanna was hearing a plea seeking maintenance by a daughter, Lathika* (petitioner no.2) from her estranged father, Rao* (respondent), after her mother's demise. During the hearing of the matter, Rao's advocate said, "She is a liability".
"Daughters are not a liability", Justice Chandrachud was quick to retort while adding that the advocate should have a good look at Article 14 of the Indian Constitution.
The Supreme Court recently issued notice in s Special Leave Petition assailing Patna High Court's order allowing three elected persons who were disqualified by the State Election Commission for having more than two children to continue to participate as members of Panchayat.
The bench of Justices SK Kaul and MM Sundresh stayed High Court's judgment and said,
"In the meantime, the operation of the impugned judgment is stayed but the elected persons will continue to participate as members of the Panchayat."
