- Home
- /
- Top Stories
- /
- Supreme Court Weekly Round Up:...
Supreme Court Weekly Round Up: September 5 To September 11, 2022
Sohini Chowdhury
11 Sept 2022 7:43 PM IST
JudgmentsScheme For Appointing Heirs Of Employees On Their Retirement Is Unconstitutional : Supreme CourtCase Status: Ahmednagar Mahanagar Palika v. Ahmednagar Mahanagar Palika Kamgar Union 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 739The Supreme Court observed that appointment to the heirs of the employees on their retirement/ superannuation is violative of Articles 14 and 15 of Constitution of IndiaSection 239 CrPC...
Judgments
Scheme For Appointing Heirs Of Employees On Their Retirement Is Unconstitutional : Supreme Court
Case Status: Ahmednagar Mahanagar Palika v. Ahmednagar Mahanagar Palika Kamgar Union 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 739
The Supreme Court observed that appointment to the heirs of the employees on their retirement/ superannuation is violative of Articles 14 and 15 of Constitution of India
Case Status: State v. R. Soundirarasu 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 741
In a judgement delivered on Monday (5 September 2022), the Supreme Court explained the ambit and scope of exercise of power to discharge an accused under Sections 239 of Code of Criminal Procedure.
Case Status: Peacock Industries Ltd. v. Union of India 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 740
The Supreme Court observed that the value of the returned goods is to be considered for the purpose of determining the value for refund under Section 173 L of the Central Excise Act.
Case Status: State v. R. Soundirarasu 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 741
The Supreme Court observed that the term "known sources of income" in Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 would mean the sources known to the prosecution and not the sources known to the accused.
Case Status: K Paramasivam v. Karur Vysya Bank Ltd 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 742
The Supreme Court held that the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) can be initiated against the Corporate Guarantor without proceeding against the principal borrower.
Case Status: State Tax Officer (1) v. Rainbow Papers Limited 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 743
The Supreme Court held that a Resolution Plan which ignores the statutory demands payable to any State Government or a legal authority, altogether, is liable to be rejected.
Case Status: Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. vs Sudera Realty Private Limited | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 744
The Supreme Court observed that a tenant continuing in possession after the expiry of the lease is liable to pay mesne profits.
"While a tenant at sufferance cannot be forcibly dispossessed, that does not detract from the possession of the erstwhile tenant turning unlawful on the expiry of the lease.", the bench comprising Justices KM Joseph and PS Narasimha observed.
Case Status: Sahebrao Arjun Hon vs Raosaheb Kashinath Hon | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 745
The Supreme Court observed that the gravity of crime is the prime consideration for deciding what should be the appropriate punishment in a criminal case.
Case Status: Shiv Kumar vs State of Madhya Pradesh | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 746
The Supreme Court observed that, for conviction under Section 411 IPC, it must be established that the accused had knowledge that the property was stolen property.
Case Status: Babanrao Rajaram Pund vs Samarth Builders & Developers | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 747
The Supreme Court observed that an arbitration clause has to be given effect even if it does not expressly state that the decision of the arbitrator will be final and binding on the parties.
Case Status: G.N.R. Babu @ S.N. Babu vs Dr. B.C. Muthappa | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 748
The Supreme Court observed that while challenging ex parte decree by filing an appeal, the defendant (who had not filed application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC ) can argue that ex parte proceedings against him were unjustified.
Case Status: P Dharamaraj vs Shanmugam | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 749
The Supreme Court observed that the courts should be slow to excercise their jurisdiction to quash criminal proceedings on the basis of settlement, when the offences are capable of having an impact not merely on the complainant and the accused but also on others.
Case Status: S. Venkatesh vs Union of India | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 751
Nowadays, there is a tendency to make such allegations against the judicial Officers whenever the orders are passed against a litigant and the orders are not liked by the concerned litigant, remarked the Supreme Court in a recent order passed dismissing a transfer petition.
Case Status: S. Venkatesh vs Union of India | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 752
The Supreme Court dismissed a writ petition seeking direction to amend the Hindu Succession Act 1956 as recommended by the Law Commission of India in its 204th report.
The bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud and Hima Kohli noted that the petitioner (S. Venkatesh) is not an aggrieved person.
News Updates
The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to list on September 9 the cases related to stray dog menace in Kerala, after an urgent mentioning was made before the Chief Justice of India by Advocate VK Biju.
The lawyer highlighted the recent spike in stray dog bites in the state, and mentioned that a 12-year old girl is battling for life after being attacked by a rabid dog, despite taking an anti-rabies vaccine.
Supreme Court Issues Notice On Plea To Ban Political Parties Using Religious Names & Symbols
Case Status : Syed Wazeem Rizvi versus Election Commission of India WP(c) 908/2021
The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice on a writ petition which sought for ban of political parties which use names and symbols with religious connotations.
A bench comprising Justices MR Shah and Justice Krishna Murari was considering a PIL filed by Syed Wazeem Rizvi seeking to enforce the mandate of Section 29A, 123(3) and 123(3A) of the Representation of People's Act, 1951 (ROPA) which prohibits the luring of the voters on ground of their religion.
Medical Education : Supreme Court Issues Notice In Plea Challenging NMC Direction For Govt Fee In 50% Private Colleges & Deemed Universities Seats
Case Title: AHSI Association Of Health Sciences Institutes vs Union of India | W.P.(C) No. 682/2022 X
The Supreme Court of India on Monday issued notice in a petition challenging the validity of the National Medical Commission's (NMC) decision stipulating that the fee of 50% seats in Private Medical Colleges & Deemed Universities should be at par with the fee in the Government Medical Colleges in that State and Union Territory.
The Supreme Court on Monday extended the time for completion of trial in the Kerala actor sexual assault case. The Court said that the trial should be completed preferably within January 31, 2023.
A bench comprising Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and MM Sundresh passed the order considering the application filed by the trial judge. The bench directed all parties involved to cooperate for timely completion of trial. The bench has also directed the trial court to submit a status report on the progress in the case within 4 weeks.
Uniform Grounds For Divorce, Alimony : Supreme Court Seeks Centre's Response
Case Status: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay versus Union of India, WP(C) 869/2020
The Supreme Court of India on Monday asked the Union government to file a comprehensive report regarding its stand in a batch of Public Interest Litigations seeking uniformity in the personal laws regulating marriage divorce, maintenance and alimony for Indian citizens.
A Bench of Chief Justice of Indian UU Lalit and Justice Ravindra Bhat asked the petitioners to give details about identical petitions as well so that they can be taken up for consideration together.
PCPNDT Act : Supreme Court Asks Union Govt To Inform State Steps Taken For Enforcement
Case Title: Shobha Gupta & Anr v UOI & Ors | W.P.(C) No. 301/2022
The Supreme Court of India on Friday asked the Union Of India to inform the steps it has taken to direct appropriate authorities for initiation of punishment/ penalty for violations under the provisions of the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques Act, 1994 (PCPNDT Act) and related rules.
The PCPNDT Act was enacted with the intent to prohibit prenatal diagnostic techniques for determination of the sex of the foetus, leading to female feticide.
Case Status: Prabhakar Deshpande v. The Union of India & Ors. W.P.(C) No. 1376/2021
Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice U.U. Lalit and Justice Ravindra Bhat dismissed a Public Interest Litigation praying for the declaration of marital rape as a criminal offence on the ground that the issue was already under consideration in a separately instituted proceedings. While taking note of the fact that after the split verdict given by the Delhi High Court on the issue of Marital Rape, the instant batch of matters were being listed before the court on 12th September, the CJI stated that there was no need to multiply litigation.
Case Status: Archita And Ors. v. National Medical Commission And Ors. W.P.(C) No. 607/2022
The Supreme Court adjourned a batch of petitions filed seeking the relief of allowing nearly 20,000 Indian students who had to return from Ukraine due to Russian attack to complete their medical education in India, to 15th September. The matter was heard by the bench comprising Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia.
Case Status: Abhijeet Saraf v. UOI W.P.(C) No. 754/2021
The Supreme Court of India dismissed a petition praying the court to direct the Union of India to put out information regarding the extent of loss of territory or not thereof along the border of China. The matter was heard by a bench comprising Chief Justice U.U. Lalit and Justice Ravindra Bhat. Chief Justice U.U. Lalit was quick to note that the matter pertained to State's policy and was not something to be referred to the court.
Case Status: Fathima Bushra v. State of Karnataka W.P.(C) No. 95/2022
The Supreme Court heard a batch of petitions challenging the Karnataka High Court's judgment which upheld the ban on wearing hijab by Muslim girl students in some schools and colleges in the State. The matter was heard by the bench comprising Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia. Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde started the main arguments. His main point was that the Court should not go into the broader questions in the case, as it can be decided solely on the narrow point whether the State Government had the power under the Karnataka Education Act to prescribe the uniform. Additional Solicitor General, K.M. Nataraj, appearing for the State of Karnataka stated that the issue was very limited, and pertained to discipline in school alone. The bench decided to continue the hearing on 7th September at 2 PM.
Supreme Court Issues Notice On Plea Seeking Independent Mechanism To Appoint Election Commissioners
Case Status: Association for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India W.P.(C) No. 569/2021
The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice on a plea challenging the constitutional validity of the practice of Union of India and Election Commission of India in appointing the members of the Election Commission as being violative of Article 14, 324(2) and the basic features of the Constitution.
A bench comprising Justices Ajay Rastogi and B. V. Nagarathna was considering a petition filed by the NGO Association for Democratic Reforms. Advocate Prashant Bhushan appeared for the petitioner.
Case Status: Jaya Thakur v. UoI W.P.(C) No. 456/2022
The Supreme Court, on Monday, appointed Senior Advocate KV Viswanathan as an amicus curiae for assistance in deciding a batch of petitions challenging the extension given to the Director of the Directorate of Enforcement.
The petitions also challenge Central Vigilance Commission (Amendment) Act 2021which allows the extension of the term of the Director of the Enforcement of Directorate up to 5 years.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India UU Lalit and Justice S Ravindra Bhat posted the matter for disposal on September 19.
Case Status: National Federation of Indian Women v. Union of India W.P.(C) No. 1158/2021
The Supreme Court on Monday, while hearing a plea seeking to re-introduce the Women's Reservation Bill, 2008 before both the houses of the Parliament, noted that it is an important matter and directed the petitioner to serve notice to the Union of India.
Case Status: Ojaswa Pathak And Anr. v. Union of India And Ors. W.P.(C) No. 250/2019
The Central Government has today filed a Counter Affidavit opposing a plea filed in the Supreme Court challenging the constitutional validity of the Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, Section 22 of the Special Marriage Act and Order 21 Rule 22 and 23 of the Code of Civil Procedure which are provisions relating to the restitution of Conjugal Rights.
Supreme Court Seeks Centre's Response On Plea To Fill Up Central Vigilance Commission Vacancies
Case Status: Common Cause v. Union of India W.P.(C) No. 1244/2021
The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice on a plea seeking timely and transparent filling of long pending vacancies in the Central Vigilance Commission so as to ensure that the Commission can effectively discharge its duties as an 'integrity institution'.
A bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Abhay S. Oka was considering a petition filed by NGO Common Cause through Advocate Prashant Bhushan.
The Supreme Court on Monday adjourned a petition requesting to direct the Ministry of Urban Development to convert the entire land measuring 1.33 acres that was recently allotted to the Top Court, situated behind the petrol pump near ITO on the Ring Road, into chamber blocks for lawyers.
A Bench of Chief Justice of India UU Lalit and Justice Ravindra Bhat has posted the petition moved by the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) to next Monday.
The UP Government has told the Supreme Court that Kerala journalist Siddique Kappan, who is in custody since October 2020 in connection with the Hathras conspiracy case, has "deep links" with terror funding/ planning organizations like Popular Front of India and its student wing, Campus Front of India.
These organizations have allegedly been found to have connections with Al Qaeda linked organizations like IHH in Turkey.
Lakhimpur Kheri Case : Supreme Court Issues Notice On Bail Plea Of Ashish Mishra
The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued notice to the State of Uttar Pradesh in the petition filed by Ashish Mishra, the son of Union Minister Ajay Kumar Mishra, in the Lakhimpur Kheri violence case.
A bench comprising Justices Indira Banerjee and MM Sundresh was considering the petition filed by Mishra challenging the July 26 order of the Allahabad High Court which dismissed his regular bail application. The State has been asked to file its response by September 26.
Case Title : State of Haryana versus State of Punjab Original Suit No.6/1996
The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the Union Government to hold meetings between the States of Punjab and Haryana to resolve the dispute related to Sutlej-Yamuna Link Canal.
A bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Abhay S Oka and Vikram Nath was hearing an original suit filed by Haryana against Punjab in 1996.
Case Status: State of Orissa versus State of Andhra Pradesh Original Suit No.4/2007
The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the Union Government to hold talks between the States of Odisha, Andhra Pradesh and Chhattisgarh for the resolution of Polavaram dam and Godavari river water dispute.
Case Title: National Platform for the Rights of the Disabled versus Union of India| WP(c) 1343/2021
The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday suggested the Union Government to be sensitive while dealing with the applications filed by physically disabled persons who had cleared civil services exams to apply for Indian Police Service, Indian Railways Protection Force Service and Delhi, Daman & Diu, Dadra and Nagar Haveli, Andaman and Nicobar Islands and Lakshadweep Police Service.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday closed the contempt proceedings against the Secretary of the Ministry of Home Affairs, Ajay Bhalla IAS, in relation to the implementation of reservation in promotion in central services.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India UU Lalit and Justice S Ravindra Bhat closed the contempt proceedings at the request of Attorney General for India KK Venugopal, without expressing anything on the merits of the issue, which is left for future adjudication.
Supreme Court Dismisses Former IPS Officer Sanjiv Bhatt's Plea To Quash Criminal Case Against Him
Case Status: Sanjiv Bhatt v. State of Gujarat SLP (Crl) No. 7186/2022
The Supreme Court on Monday (September 5) dismissed an appeal filed by former IPS Sanjiv Bhatt assailing the order passed by the High Court of Gujarat by which the High Court had refused to quash a complaint filed against him.
Case Status: Jaya Thakur v. Union of India W.P.(C) No. 456/2022
From claiming that the petitioners are politically motivated to stating that the legislature's motive in enacting a law cannot be questioned, the Central government has filed a comprehensive counter affidavit supporting the extension of tenure given to the Director of the Directorate Enforcement (ED).
Case Status: Kush Kalra v. Union of India And Ors. WP(C) No. 701 of 2022
The Supreme Court issued notice in a plea seeking establishment of adequate Mental Healthcare Facilities in Prisons across the country. A Bench comprising Justices Abdul Nazeer and V. Ramasubramanian agreed to issue notice in the plea which also seeks direction to Union and State Governments to provide training and awareness to the prison staff and law enforcement authorities about Mental Health Act, 2017. Moreover it implores the Bench to direct that the concerned authorities ensure that medical examination reports of prisoners are prepared regarding the mental state of the arrested person at the time of admission in Hospital.
Case Status: Shrikanth v. State of Karnataka And Ors. SLP(Crl) No. 3290 of 2022
The Supreme Court, on Monday, directed ex- Member of Legislative Council (MLC) from Karnataka, Shrikanth, to surrender before the Trial Court within two weeks in connection with a criminal case, inter alia, registered for offences punishable under Section 3(1)(r) and Section 3(1)(s) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. a Bench comprising Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and Hima Kohli asked the Trial Court to consider the application seeking regular bail on the same day it is filed.
Case Status: Rashidul Jafar @ Chota v. State of U.P. And Anr. WP(Crl) No. 336 of 2019
In a batch of petitions challenging the 2021 amendment carried out by the Uttar Pradesh Government in the Standing Policy Regarding Premature Release of Life Convicts, 2018, the Supreme Court, on Tuesday, passed directions regarding premature release. The decision of the Bench comprising Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and Hima Kohli would have an impact on the consideration of the remission plea of about 512 convicts who are undergoing life imprisonment.
Case Status: Amazon.com NV Investment Holdings LLC v. Competition Commission of India And Ors. CA No. 4974 of 22
Amazon.com NV Investment Holdings LLC (Amazon) has approached the Supreme Court assailing the order of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), which rejected Amazon's challenge to the decision of Competition Commission of India (CCI) to keep the approval granted to the e-commerce giant's deal with Future Coupons in abeyance. In the impugned order passed on 13.06.2022, NCLAT had also upheld that direction of the CCI to Amazon to pay Rs. 200 Crores penalty under Section 43A of the Competition Act, 2002. The NCLAT has directed Amazon to deposit the penalty within 45 days and comply with the CCI order. A Bench comprising Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and M.M. Sundresh directed the Registry to list the matter next on 19.09.2022. The Counsels for the parties were asked to submit short notes of their submissions within a period of one week.
Case Status: PUCL v. Union of India MA 901/2021 in W.P.(Crl.) No. 199/2013
The Supreme Court asked the Union Government to get in touch with the Chief Secretaries of the States where FIRs under Section 66A of the Information Technology Act are continuing to be registered despite the provision being declared as unconstitutional by the Court in 2015. The Court asked the Union to impress upon such states to take "remedial measures as soon as possible". A bench comprising Chief Justice of India UU Lalit and Justice S Ravindra Bhat was hearing a writ petition filed by the NGO Peoples Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) which highlighted the issue of Section 66A IT Act being invoked despite the judgment in Shreya Singhal v. UOI (2015) 5 SCC 1.
Case Status: Janhit Abhiyan v. Union Of India with 32 connected matters | W.P.(C)NO.55/2019 and connected issues
In the hearings, at the outset, the CJI led bench made it clear that the court would hear any State which wished to advance submissions in the matter and enquired how much time would each party take to make submissions. After further discussion of the time required and the issues that were to be taken into consideration, CJI Lalit stated that the bench will complete hearings in 5 days.
Case Status: M/s Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Dnyanraj And Ors.
Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice U.U. Lalit and Justice Ravindra Bhat, on Monday, 5th September 2022, upheld the Bombay High Court's order directing Bajaj Allianz General Insurance to compensate, under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana, 3,57,287 farmers in the Osmanabad District of Maharashtra for post harvesting losses caused to Soya bean Crop in the Kharif Season 2020 on account of heavy rainfall.
Case Title : Venkateshwar Global School versus Justice For All SLP(C) 11264/2022
The Supreme Court on September 1 set aside the order of the Delhi High Court that private schools should fill up the backlog seats of the Economically Weaker Section (EWS) in the next five years in a phased manner.
Further, the Supreme Court also set aside the High Court direction that the 25% EWS category students shall be filled up on the basis of declared sanctioned strength at the entry level(Pre-school/Nursery/Pre-Primary/KG and class 1), irrespective of the actual number of students admitted in the General Category.
Case Status: Dr. M.Deivanayagam vs Union Of India | WP(C) 311/2020
The Supreme Court dismissed a writ petition seeking abolition of practice of Varnashrama principles of Laws of Manu.
The petition is thoroughly misconceived, the bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud and Hima Kohli observed.
Case Status: Aishat Shifa versus State of Karnataka SLP(c) 5236/2022
The Supreme Court, on Wednesday, continued hearing the batch of petitions challenging the Karnataka High Court's judgment which upheld the ban on wearing of Hijab by Muslim girl students in some schools and colleges in the State. The matter was heard by the bench comprising Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia.
Senior Advocate Devadatt Kamat appearing for the Petitioners argued that the Government Order is not "innocuous", as argued by the State, but violates students' fundamental rights under Article 19, 21 and 25 of the Constitution. He contended that the GO stated that prohibiting Hijab will not violate the right to practice religion and left the matter to be decided by the College Development Committees. "If the "mighty State" already says that, CDCs will have no other option but to ban hijab, he added.
Right To Dress Includes Right To Undress Too?Justice Hemant Gupta Asks In Hijab Case Hearing
The Supreme Court bench comprising Justice Hemant Guptaand Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia, on Wednesday, continued hearing the batch of petitions challenging the Karnataka High Court's judgment which upheld the ban on wearing of Hijab by Muslim girl students in some schools and colleges in the State. In today's hearings, on submissions of Senior Advocate Devadatt Kamat, appearing for the petitioner in the lead petition, Aishat Shifa v. State of Karnataka, Justice Hemant Gupta stated that his submission of freedom of expression including the freedom to dress and adding headscarf to uniform was "taking it to illogical ends". Justice Gupta then enquired if the right to dress would also include right to undressing.
On Wednesday, a Division Bench of the Supreme Court of India continued to hear the challenge against the decision of the Karnataka Government to ban headscarves or the hijab in government colleges. A batch of 23 petitions was filed in this connection, some of which were writ petitions filed directly before the Supreme Court, while others were appeals by special leave preferred against the judgement of the Karnataka High Court upholding the ban on the hijab. The Bench comprised Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia.
Case Title: Maruthupandi Vs The State, Represented By Inspector Of Police | SLP(Crl) 2782/2021
The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday observed that it has faced certain difficulties while considering the applicability of Protection Of Children From Sexual Offences, 2012 (POCSO) Act in cases where girls slightly below 18 years enters into physical intimacy with another adult.
The petition was preferred against an order of the Madras High Court in Maruthupandi v. State, holding that even if a minor girl falls in love and develops a consensual relationship with her partner, the provisions of POCSO Act will be attracted against the latter.
Case Status : Veenayak Shah vs Union of India – WP(C) 1246/2017
The Supreme Court on Wednesday adjourned a Petition filed by Advocate Veenayak Shah seeking direction to the respondents i.e., Union of India and Kendriya Vidhyalaya Sangathans to "discontinue any form of Prayer from the Morning Assembly or otherwise, in Kendraya Vidhalaya Sangathans and to promote Scientific learning among the students", for next month.
A bench comprising Justices Indira Banerjee, Surya Kant and M. M. Sundresh considered the writ petition filed by one Veenayak Shah in 2017.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday reserved its judgment on whether the view of five Judges can be overruled by a view of four Judges speaking for a Bench of 7 Judges; and also whether without amending the exemption provision/notification issued under a specific power, a general notification prescribing the rate of tax under different provisions relating to determination of tax liability under the Act can be deemed to have withdrawn the exemption merely because the exemption provision and charging provision are under the same Act and the same authority.
Delhi Govt v. LG: Supreme Court Constitution Bench To Tentatively Start Hearing On October 11
Case Status: Govt of NCT Delhi v. Union of India C.A. No. 2357/2017
A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court, on Wednesday, fixed October 11, 2022 as the tentative date for starting the hearing in the dispute between the Delhi Government and the Union Government regarding the control of administrative services in the national capital.
A 5-judge Bench comprising Justices D.Y. Chandrachud, M.R. Shah, Krishna Murari, Hima Kohli and P.S. Narasimha posted the matter on September 27 to fix the timeline for hearing.
Case Status: Subhash Desai v. Principal Secretary, Governor of Maharashtra And Ors. WP(C) No. 493/2022
A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court, on Wednesday, decided to hear on September 27 the interim application moved by the Uddhav Thackeray group to restrain the Election Commission of India from deciding the claim raised by Eknath Shinde group for recognition as the official Shiv Sena party.
A 5-judge Bench comprising Justices D.Y. Chandrachud, M.R. Shah, Krishna Murari, Hima Kohli and P.S. Narasimha was hearing a batch of petitions filed by members of both the groups challenging the various actions of Speaker/Deputy Speaker and the Governor in relation to the political developments in Maharashtra.
Case Status: Govt of NCT Delhi v. Union of India C.A. No. 2357/2017
The Supreme Court Constitution Bench led by Justice DY Chandrachud on Wednesday said that it will be a "green bench" and asked lawyers to not to bring any papers or physical documents. Justice Chandrachud also said that the officials of the Supreme Court registry and IT cell can offer training for lawyers on a Saturday for using technology to present arguments. A 5-judge bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud, MR Shah, Krishna Murari, Hima Kohli and PS Narasimha was hearing the issue related to the dispute between Delhi Government and the Union Government over control of administrative services in the national capital.
Case Status: Ashok Kumar Jain v. U.O.I W.P. (C) No.546/2000
In pleas challenging the constitutional validity of extending the political reservation granted to the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe communities in Lok Sabha and State Legislature beyond the original ten years contemplated by the Constitution, the Supreme Court, on Wednesday, has posted the matter for direction on 1st November, 2022. The matter was listed before the Constitution Bench comprising Justices D.Y. Chandrachud, M.R. Shah, Krishna Murari, Hima Kohli and P.S. Narasimha.
Case Status: Assam Sanmilita Mahasangha & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. W.P. (C) No.562/2012
The Supreme Court, on Wednesday, posted the hearing of the pleas challenging the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act inserted by way of an amendment in 1985 in furtherance of the Assam Accord on 1st November, 2022. A Constitution Bench comprising Justices D.Y. Chandrachud, M.R. Shah, Krishna Murari, Hima Kohli and P.S. Narasimhawill set out directions for scheduling the hearing dates on November 1.
NEET-AIQ EWS Quota : Supreme Court Adjourns Plea Challenging Rs 8 Lakh Annual Income Criteria
Case Status: Neil Aurelio Nunes & Ors v. Union of India and Ors WP(C) No. 961/2021
The Supreme Court was to hear today the petitions challenging the validity of Centre's Rs. 8 lakhs annual income upper limit criteria for seeking Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) reservation in the All India Quota for NEET admissions, on 7th September, 2022. However, it has now been adjourned.
Case Status: Mohammed Zubair v. State of U.P. And Ors. SLP(Crl) No. 6138/2022
The Supreme Court, on Wednesday, observed that a petition under Section 482 of the CrPC can be moved by Mohammed Zubair, Co-founder of Alt News before the Delhi High Court seeking quashing of case instituted against him initially at Sitapur, Uttar Pradesh and later transferred to Delhi, as per the directions of the Apex Court. At the request of Advocate, Ms. Vrinda Grover, appearing on behalf of Zubair, a Bench comprising Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and Hima Kohli recorded in the order that the quashing petition as and when filed before the Delhi High Court shall be considered without being influenced by the order of the Allahabad High Court dated 10.06.2022 refusing to quash the concerned FIR.
Case Title: Global Peace Initiative through its President v Union of India and Another| WP(C) 521/2021
How can a 14-year old minor girl sent to Myanmar border, especially when her parents who have sought asylum in Bangladesh want her back, the Supreme Court asked the Central Government while hearing a petition filed by an NGO seeking permission to provide foster care to the girl, a Rohingya refugee.
"To leave a minor girl at the border of Myanmar, is that an option? When somebody wants the girl back?", the Court asked the Centre.
Case Status: P. Dharmaraj vs Shanmugam and Ors. - SLP (Crl) 1354/2022
The Supreme Court today allowed an appeal challenging the order of the Madras High Court by which the High Court had quashed the proceedings against DMK MLA Senthil Balaji in relation to the allegations of recruitment scam while he was the Transport Minister in the AIADMK government between 2011 and 2015.
The bench comprising Justice S. Abdul Nazeer, Justice A. S. Bopanna and Justice V. Ramasubramanian set aside the order of the High Court and restored the Criminal Complaint filed against Balaji, who is at present the Electricity Minister in the DMK Government.
Case Status: Aishat Shifa versus State of Karnataka SLP(c) 5236/2022
The arguments were commenced by Senior Advocate Devadatt Kamat whose submissions pertained to Article 25 of the Indian Constitution, application of the Heckler's Veto in India, bonafide practice versus belligerent display of religion, difference between freedom of conscience and religion and; whether the Government Order was administratively sound.
Case Status: Aishat Shifa versus State of Karnataka SLP(c) 5236/2022
Advocate Pasha argued that the High Court had misinterpreted Islamic verses to hold that Hijab was not mandatory. He stated that even if Hijab was seen as a cultural practice, as per Article 29(1) of the Indian Constitution, even cultural practice was protected. He drew parallels between the Sikh practice of wearing turban to the Islamic practice of Hijab. However, Justice Gupta stated that Sikhism could not be compared with Islam.
Sikh Practices Well Ingrained In Indian Culture, Can't Compare With Hijab : Justice Hemant Gupta
While hearing the batch of petitions challenging the Karnataka High Court's judgment which upheld the ban on wearing hijab by Muslim girl students in some schools and colleges in the State, Justice Hemant Gupta orally remarked that hijab could not be compared with Sikhism as practices of Sikhism were "well engrained in the culture of the country."
Supreme Court Asks Centre To Frame Policy For Employment Of Transgender Persons
Case Status: Shanavi Ponnusamy v. Ministry of Civil Aviation And Anr. WP(C) No. 1033/2017
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and Hima Kohli, by way of an interim order, asked the Central Goverment in consultation with the National Council for Transgender Persons to devise appropriate policy framework in terms of which reasonable accommodation can be provided to transgender persons in seeking recourse to avenues of employment in all establishment covered by the provisions of the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019 (2019 Act), within a period of 3 months.
Case Status: Anup Majee v. CBI And Ors. SLP(Crl) No. 1620-21/2021
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and Hima Kohli, indicated that it would commence with the hearing of the challenge to the Calcutta High Court order, whereby it allowed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to investigate illegal mining and transportation of coal through Railways in West Bengal and other related cases without the State's consent from 18th October, 2022.
"Loan Defaulters Lifestyle Never Suffers; Play With Public Money": Supreme Court
Case Status: CPIL v. Housing and Urban Development Corporation & ors, CWP No. 573 of 2003
The Supreme Court of India on Thursday observed that it's not possible for the court to monitor how many loans are recovered while hearing a PIL which highlighted the issue of loans advanced to some companies without observing the law, by state-owned Housing and Urban Development Corporation (HUDCO).
A Bench comprising of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and Vikram Nath orally observed,
"The role of Court is to force the concerned Institution to perform their duties. We can't monitor into how many loans are recovered. That's not our job. How can we monitor a crime?"
EWS Quota Case : Supreme Court Constitution Bench To Hear 3 Issues Framed By Attorney General
Case Status: Janhit Abhiyan v. Union Of India W.P.(C) NO.55/2019
The Supreme Court Constitution Bench, comprising Chief Justice of India UU Lalit, Justices Dinesh Maheshwari, S Ravindra Bhat, Bela M Trivedi and JB Pardiwala on Thursday, took up the the cases challenging the constitutional validity of reservation for Economically Weaker Sections. The bench decided that it will be proceeding apropos the three issues suggested by the Attorney General of India. It noted that the suggestions made by the other counsels were in the nature of submissions advancing out of one of the propositions emerging from issues suggested by the AG.
Case Title Rajiv Shukla Vs Gold Rush Sales and Services Ltd and Anr. – CA 5928/2022
The Supreme Court has held that delivering a defective and old model car against a booking for a new car made by a customer who has paid full sale consideration is an "unfair trade practice". The Court added that such a practice amounts to "dishonesty on the part of the dealer" and "against morality and ethics".
Daughter Of Kashi Royal Family Head Moves Supreme Court Challenging Places Of Worship Act
Case Title: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay vs Union of India | WP 1246 OF 2020
The daughter of the Kashi Royal Family, Maharaja Kumari Krishna Priya has filed an intervention application challenging the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 (the Act) before the Supreme Court.
The IA has been filed as part of the petitions already filed before the Supreme Court challenging the Constitutional validity of Sections 2, 3 and 4 of the Act as they bar remedies against illegal encroachment on the places of worship and pilgrimages prior to August 15, 1947.
Case Status: State of Kerala vs M. R. Ajayan C.A 5947/2019
Amid the rising stray dog menace in Kerala, an animal rights forum has approached the Supreme Court opposing move for culling of dogs. Instead, the forum has given a set of alternate proposals which can held in resolving the issue.
The application for Intervention has been filed in an appeal which challenges the final judgment pronounced by the High Court of Kerala in which the Court had issued directions to the Local Authorities enabling them to exercise the powers under the provisions Animal Birth Control (Dogs) Rules, 2001 and the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960.
Case Status: State of Tamil Nadu And Ors. v. Junglee Games India Private Limited And Anr. SLP(C) No. 19981-19988/2021
The Supreme Court bench comprising Justice Aniruddha Bose and Justice Vikram Nath on Friday issued notice on the plea filed challenging the judgment of the High Court of Madras striking down the ban on online games such as rummy and poker.
The petition filed by the State of Tamil Nadu assails the judgment passed by the High Court of Madras on 3rd August of 2021 by which the High Court had struck down the Tamil Nadu Gaming and Police Laws (Amendment) Act of 2021. The Act had imposed a ban on games like rummy and poker played on the internet with real stakes
Case Status: Mahua Moitra vs State of Gujarat And Ors | W.P.(Crl.) No. 326/2022
The Supreme Court of India issued notice in petitions filed by TMC MP Mahua Moitra and others challenging the premature release of 11 convicts on remission by the Gujarat government in the Bilkis Bano case for gangrape and murder.
Before a Bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi and BV Nagarathna, Advocate Rishi Malhotra, appearing for one of the convicts submitted that the impleading petition was filed only yesterday.
Case Status: Animal Welfare Board of India v. People for Elimination of Stray Troubles and Ors. - CA No. 5988/2019
In the cases related to stray dog issue in Kerala, the Supreme Court on Friday called for a status report from the Justice Siri Jagan Commission- which was constituted by it in 2016 to deal with complaints relating to dog bites - and posted the matter on September 28 for hearing on interim relief.
A bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and JK Maheshwari was hearing a batch of appeals filed by the Animal Welfare Board of India and other parties against a 2015 judgment of the Kerala High Court which permitted capturing and destruction of stray dogs.
Member of Rajya Sabha and the Communist Party of India leader Binoy Viswam has filed an impleadment application opposing the writ petition filed by Rajya Sabha MP Dr. Subramaniam Swamy seeking to delete the words "Socialist" and "Secular" from the Preamble of the Indian Constitution.
Viswam's Application filed through Advocate Sriram Parakkat stated that Secularism and Socialism are inherent and basic features of the Constitution and that it is the intent of the plea filed by Swamy to have a free reign on Indian polity leaving behind secularism and socialism.
Case Title: AIDWA vs Union Of India, Hridaya Nest of Family Harmony vs UOI, Diary No. 16226/2022
The Supreme Court of India on Friday adjourned a batch of petitions filed against the split verdict passed by a Two-judge Bench of the Delhi High Court on the criminalisation of marital rape.
During the hearing, a Bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi and BV Nagarathna said that it would tag all similar matters together and hear on September 16.
Case Status: Anmol Shukla And Ors. v. Union of India And Ors. W.P.(C) No. 708/2022
The Supreme Court issued notice in pleas seeking directions to concerned authorities to frame and implement guidelines for assimilation of undergraduate medical students evacuated from Ukraine in Indian medical colleges in exercise of powers under the National Medical Commission Act, 2019.
Supreme Court Grants Bail To Journalist Siddique Kappan In Hathras Conspiracy Case
Case Status: Sidhique Kappan versus State of Uttar Pradesh SLP (Crl.) No.7844 of 2022
The Supreme Court bench comprising CJI Lalit and Justice Ravindra Bhat granted bail to Kerala journalist Siddique Kappan, who has been under the custody of UP Police since October 6, 2020 in connection with the Hathras Conspiracy case. The Court asked him to be in Delhi for next 6 weeks and allows him to go back to Kerala after that on conditions like he shall mark his presence with local police station every week and other conditions.
Supreme Court Issues Notice On Son's Plea To Allow Liver Donation For Father
Case Status: Parthsarathi Bajaj through Mother versus Health Secretary and others | WP (C) No. 763/2022
The Supreme Court issued notice on a writ petition filed by a minor boy seeking permission to donate liver to his critically ill father. The petition was urgently mentioned before the bench led by the Chief Justice of India today morning. Considering the urgency of the matter, the bench issued notice to the State of UP, even though the petition was yet to be formally numbered and listed, and posted the matter to next Monday. The bench noted that the legal issue arose as according to the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act 1994, an organ donor has to be a major.
Case Status: Akriti Agarwal & Anr vs Supreme Court & Anr
The Supreme Court, on Friday, dismissed a petition seeking an online RTI Portal for Supreme Court. The matter was heard by a bench comprising Chief Justice U.U. Lalit, Justices Ravindra Bhat and P.S. Narasimha. The PIL sought directions to the respondents including the Supreme Court through its Secretary-General, Supreme Court's E-committee and the National Informatics Centre to set up an online RTI Portal in a time-bound manner and argued that the Supreme Court of India, despite being a "public authority" under Section 2(h) of the Right to Information Act 2005, had not created such a portal since the enactment of the RTI Act.
Case Status: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India And Ors. W.P.(C) No. 1246/2020
The Supreme Court bench, comprising Chief Justice U.U. Lalit, Justice Ravindra Bhat and Justice P.S. Narasimha has listed a batch of petitions challenging the Constitutional validity of provisions of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act 1991 for October 11, 2022. The court has also directed the Union of India to file a response in two weeks. The petitions have been filed against the Act in as much as it bars remedies against illegal encroachment on the places of worship and pilgrimages prior to August 15, 1947.
Supreme Court Refuses To Entertain Plea Seeking Arrest Of Former BJP Spokesperson Nupur Sharma
Case Status: Abu Sohel v Nupur Sharma| Diary No 18477 of 2022
The Supreme Court, on Friday, refused to entertain a petition filed by a lawyer seeking to arrest former BJP Spokesperson Nupur Sharma for her alleged hate statement against the revered Prophet Mohammad on a television debate. The matter was heard by a bench comprising Chief Justice U.U. Lalit, Justice Ravindra Bhat and Justice P.S. Narasimha. When the bench expressed disinclination to entertain the plea under Article 32 seeking arrest, the counsel appearing for the petitioner highlighted the alternate prayer which seeks implementation of the directions in the Tehseen Ponnawalla judgment in relation to control of mob lynching.
Supreme Court Seeks Centre's Response On Protocol For Internet Shutdowns
Case Status: Software Freedom Law Centre, India v. State of Arunachal Pradesh And Ors. W.P.(C) No. 314/2022
The Court issued the notice on a petition filed by Software Freedom Law Centre challenging arbitrary internet shutdowns. The petitioner had cited internet shutdowns in States of Rajasthan and Assam which were imposed to prevent cheating in public examinations. Although the Union Government was not a party to the petition, the bench said that it will issue notice to the Union Government alone to ascertain the protocol and the compliance with respect to the same. The matter was heard by a bench comprising Chief Justice U.U. Lalit, Justice Ravindra Bhat and Justice P.S. Narasimha.
Case Status: Linet Nunes versus Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority and others CIVIL APPEAL Diary No(s). 28426/2022
The Supreme Court, on Friday, stayed the demolition of Goa's iconic Curlies Beach Restaurant's buildings in one particular survey number, subject to the condition that they will not undertake commercial operations till the next hearing date. The Court made it clear that if there are unauthorized constructions in land other than the specified survey number, they can certainly be demolished.
Case Title: Vishal Tiwari v. Union Of India And Ors. Diary No. 18852/2022
The Supreme Court, on Friday, refused to entertain a plea, which in essence assailed the Agnipath recruitment scheme for the armed forces.
A Bench comprising Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and Hima Kohli asked the petitioner, who is an advocate, not to re-agitate the issues, which are pending adjudication before the Delhi High Court.
Case: Raj Shri Agarwal@ Ram Shri Agarwal vs Sudheer Mohan | SLP(C) 14102/2022
Is a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India maintainable if alternative remedy of Civil Revision Petition under Section 115 of Code of Civil Procedure is available?
In this case, a petition under Article 227 was filed before the Allahabad High Court challenging a District Court's order rejecting the amendment application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC. The respondent objected to maintainability on the ground that the impugned order is revisable under Section 115 CPC. The High Court held that the decision on an application under Order 6 Rule 17 of C.P.C. would amount to a case decided and revision would lie. Relying on the Supreme Court judgment in Virudhunagar Hindu Nadargal Dharma Paribalana Sabai Vs. Tuticorin Educational Society(2019) 9 SCC 538, the High Court dismissed the petition observing that where there is availability of remedy under CPC, normally petition under Article 227 would not lie.
Every Death In Hospital Does Not Amount To Medical Negligence : Supreme Court
Case Status: Devakonda Surya Sesha Mani v. Care Hospital, Institute of Medical Sciences - CA 4596/2022 Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 753
The Supreme Court recently upheld an order passed by the National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission observing that, "every death in an institutionalized environment of a hospital does not necessarily amount to medical negligence on a hypothetical assumption of lack of due medical care."
The Supreme Court bench of Justice D. Y. Chandrachud, Justice A. S. Bopanna and Justice J. B. Pardiwala was hearing a civil appeal assailing a judgment and order passed by the NCDRC by which a complaint regarding alleged medical negligence and deficiency in service was dismissed on the ground that the case was not established conclusively.
Former IPS & IFS Officers Move Supreme Court Challenging Remission Of Bilkis Bano Case Convicts
A Public Interest Litigation has been filed in the Supreme Court against the remission granted to the 11 convicts in the Bilkis Bano case by a former woman police officer, a former woman Indian Foreign Service Officer, and a renowned academic with expertise on issues of public policy and governance.
The petition has been filed by Dr Meeran Chadha Borwankar(former IPS officer), Madhu Badhuri (former IFS officer), and activist Jagdeep Chokkar. A bench comprising Justices Ajay Rastogi and BV Nagarathna tagged the petition along with the earlier petitions regarding the issue. Advocate Vrinda Grover appeared for the petitioners.
Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind Moves Supreme Court Seeking Proper Enforcement Of Places Of Worship Act
A writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution has been moved in the Supreme Court which is in the nature of a Public Interest Litigation seeking orders from the Supreme Court for effective enforcement of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991.
The petition filed by the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind has submitted that Muslim Places of Worship are being made the subject matter of frivolous controversies which is in clear violation of the 1991 Act and despite there being a bar such proceedings are being permitted to proceed with interim orders altering the status quo which has been maintained for ages in the Muslim Places of Worship.
Case Title : Swarnakamal Saha versus Biplab Kumar Chowdhary and others | Diary No.25496/2022
The Supreme Court on Friday(September 9) stayed the proceedings in two PILs before the Calcutta High Court seeking probe into the assets of 19 leaders of the Trinamool Congress(TMC), including some current ministers in the West Bengal Government.
On August 8, a division bench of the Calcutta High Court had added the Directorate of Enforcement(ED) as a party in the PILs. Challenging the High Court order, TMC MLA Swarna Kamal Saha approached the Supreme Court.
