- Home
- /
- Top Stories
- /
- Supreme Court Weekly Round-Up: July...
Supreme Court Weekly Round-Up: July 31 To 6 August
Suraj Kumar
9 Aug 2023 9:55 AM IST
Judgment/OrdersUAPA - 'Watali' Precedent Won't Apply If Evidence Is Of Low Probative Value On Surface Level Analysis: Supreme CourtCase title: Vernon v. State of MaharashtraCitation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 575The Supreme Court’s decision to grant bail to Bhima Koregaon-accused and activists Vernon Gonsalves and Arun Ferreira appears to have carved out a crucial exception in an otherwise...
Judgment/Orders
Case title: Vernon v. State of Maharashtra
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 575
The Supreme Court’s decision to grant bail to Bhima Koregaon-accused and activists Vernon Gonsalves and Arun Ferreira appears to have carved out a crucial exception in an otherwise unyielding interpretation of the court’s bail-granting powers under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, which flows from the Zahood Ahmad Watali judgment.
In Vernon, the bench of Justices Aniruddha Bose and Sudhanshu Dhulia held that a plea for bail under Section 43D(5) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act would not pass muster of the prima facie test envisioned in Watali without “at least surface-analysis of the probative value of evidence” and if the court is not satisfied of the worth of the probative value of such evidence.
While Watali restricts a court from ‘weighing’ the evidence at the stage of adjudicating a bail application, Vernon (2023) has given birth to a new species of analysis – shallow enough to not run contrary to the precedent that holds the field, but deep enough to catch low-value evidence in its net, to be eventually disregarded.
Case details: Yogendra Prasad Singh (D) v. Ram Bachan Devi
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 582
The Supreme Court observed that the use of the expression 'ta khubzul badlain' in a sale deed by itself will not be determinative of the true nature of the transaction.
When there is a specific recital in the Sale Deed that the title and possession in the property has been passed to the seller, the same are very crucial which cannot be brushed aside, the bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Rajesh Bindal said.
Case Details: Md Asfak Alam v. State of Jharkhand & Anr.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 583
The Supreme Court of India on Monday reiterated the guidelines laid down by the top court for arrest under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and for other offences punishable by a maximum jail term of seven years in its 2014 Arnesh Kumar judgment.
Not only this, a bench of Justices S Ravindra Bhat and Aravind Kumar has also directed high courts and police chiefs to issue notifications and circulars in terms of the 2014 judgment to ensure strict compliance.
Case details: K Padmaja Rani v. State of Telangana
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 584
The Supreme Court observed that it is only when the conviction in a cheque case arise out of a single transaction, a concurrent sentence would be merited. But when there are several transactions, the judgment in V.K. Bansal v. State of Haryana (2013) 7 SCC 211 cannot be relied upon, the bench of Justices Hrishikesh Roy and Pankaj Mittal observed.
Case details: Nirmala Devi v. State of Himachal Pradesh
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 585
The Supreme Court altered the conviction of a woman accused of killing her husband from Section 302 IPC(murder) to Section 304 Part 1 IPC (culpable homicide not amounting to murder).
"The possibility of the accused causing the death of the deceased while being deprived of the power of self-control, due to the provocation on account of the deceased not agreeing to pay Rs.500/- to her daughter cannot be ruled out", the bench of Justices B R Gavai and J B Pardiwala observed. The Court held that the case falls under Exception 1 to Section 300 IPC (sudden and grave provocation).
The court also observed that the weapon used in the crime is a stick which was lying in the house, and that cannot be called a deadly weapon.
Case Title: State of Rajasthan v. Sharwan Kumar Kumawat
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 586
The Supreme Court on Tuesday set aside the order of the Rajasthan High Court that declared Rule 4 (10) and Rule 7(3) of the Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1986 as unconstitutional.
A division bench of Justice A.S. Bopanna and Justice M. M. Sundresh while setting aside the High Court order observed: “The High Court, in our considered view, has totally misconstrued the issues ignoring the fact that there is a delegation of power to the first appellant [State] which was rightly exercised as conferred under Section 15 of the 1957 Act [Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957].
Case title: Ashok Kumar v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 587
In the case of vehicle theft, the Supreme Court held that any violation of the condition of the insurance policy should be in the nature of a fundamental breach to deny the claimant insurance coverage. Here, the insurer had repudiated the claim by saying that the driver had left the vehicle unattended on the public road with the key on the ignition.
The Court held that even if there was some carelessness, it was not a fundamental breach of condition for totally denying the insurance claim altogether. Therefore, a claim up to 75% must be awarded on a nonstandard basis.
Supreme Court Grants Interim Bail To M Sivasankar For 2 Months On Medical Grounds
Case Title: M. Sivasankar v. UoI And Anr
Citation: SLP(Crl) No. 5590/2023
The Supreme Court on Wednesday granted interim bail to M Sivasankar, Former Principal Secretary to the Chief Minister of Kerala, for 2 Months on Medical Grounds.
Sivasankar had approached the Top Court seeking bail in a money laundering case in connection with the LIFE Mission corruption case on grounds of ill-health. LIFE (Livelihood, Inclusion and Financial Empowerment) Mission project is a housing project initiated by the Kerala Government for the homeless.
The interim bail was granted by a division bench of Justice A S Bopanna and Justice M M Sundresh, on the ground that he required surgery and post operative care. However, the Apex Court made it clear that he cannot visit any other place other than the hospital and his home, during the period of bail.
Case Title: In Re: Prajwala
Citation: SMW(CRL.) NO. 3/2015
The Supreme Court on Tuesday closed the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed for controlling the indiscriminate circulation of child pornography and videos of gang rape and rape through WhatsApp and other social media after the expert committee constituted by the Court for the matter, submitted its report on how it proposes to address the issue.
Case Title: Mahendra v. Rajesh Kumar Singh
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 588
The Supreme Court on Tuesday recently the State of Uttar Pradesh to pay a cost Rs.10,000/- to all four persons whose premature release directed by the Apex Court had been delayed by the state.
A division bench of Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Sanjay Karol imposed costs stating that there was no explanation from the authorities for the long delay in releasing the convicts.
IBC- NCLAT Can 'Recall' Its Judgment, Can't 'Review' Them: Supreme Court Affirms NCLAT Ruling
Case Title: Union Bank of India v Financial Creditors of M/s Amtek Auto Limited & Ors.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 589
The Supreme Court Bench comprising of Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia, while adjudicating an appeal filed in Union Bank of India v Financial Creditors of M/s Amtek Auto Limited & Ors., has upheld the ruling of National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”) five-member bench, wherein it was held that NCLAT is empowered to recall its judgment but not to review them. The Supreme Court has affirmed the NCLAT’s ruling and dismissed an appeal filed against the order.
Case Title: Yadaiah and Anr. v State of Telangana and others
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 590
The Supreme Court has held that only fundamental determinations of the Court are hit by res judicata in subsequent proceedings. If the Court makes any incidental, supplemental or non-essential observations, which are not fundamental but ‘collateral’ to the final determination, then those ‘collateral determinations’ would not be hit by res judicata.
The Bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice J.K. Maheshwari, while adjudicating an appeal filed in Yadaiah and Anr. v State of Telangana and Ors., has laid down a test to distinguish between ‘fundamental determination’ and ‘collateral determination’. The test is to see whether the concerned determination is so vital to the decision, that without it the decision cannot stand independently
Case title: Ashok Kumar v. New India Assurance Co Ltd
Case No: Civil Appeal No. 4758 OF 202
In a case relating to an insurance claim, the Supreme Court observed that a litigant should not be made to suffer because of a fault of the counsel. that only due to the fault of counsel, a party should not be made to suffer.
The court observed that “The said complaint was withdrawn by the advocate of the complainant on the pretext of the case being prolonged by the advocate of the Insurance Company, without having express instructions for withdrawal of the said complaint. However, for the fault of the advocate, the complainant cannot be made to suffer”.
Case details: Priya Pramod Gajbe v. State of Maharashtra
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 591
The Supreme Court observed that the 'affinity test' cannot be applied as a litmus test during scrutiny of caste claims.
"If an applicant is able to produce authentic and genuine documents of the per Constitution period showing that he belongs to a tribal community, there is no reason to discard his or her claim as prior to 1950, there were no reservations provided to the Tribes included in the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order", the bench of Justices observed.
"No Evidence": Supreme Court Acquits Two Men Accused In 26-Year-Old Rape Case
Case details: Avtar Singh v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 592
The Supreme Court acquitted two men accused in a rape case observing that there was no evidence brought on record to connect them with the offence.
Gian Singh was acquitted by the trial court noticing the stand of the prosecutrix that there was party faction in the village and both the parties belonged to different sections. The same reasoning will apply to the appellants as well for the reason that in the FIR, the stand taken by the prosecutrix is same in respect of all the accused, as far as the allegation of party faction is concerned", the bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Rajesh Bindal observed.
The bench observed that the acquittal of Gian Singh has "broken the chain of events and falsified the story projected by the prosecutrix".
The Supreme Court recently dismissed a petition filed by a judicial officer challenging the decision of the Punjab & Haryana High Court to deny him promotion as Additional District & Sessions Judge.
When the suitability of the petitioner for promotion is inter alia based on the quality of judgments, no fault can be found with the decision to decline promotion to the petitioner", the bench observed while dismissing the special leave petition.
Case citation: Rourkela Steel plant v. OPCB
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 593
The Supreme Court has refused to interfere with an order passed by the National Green Tribunal for relief and compensation for the victims of a toxic gas leak that happened in the Rourkela Steel Plant in 2021.
A bench comprising Justices S. Ravindra Bhatt and Justice Aravind kumar was hearing an appeal filed by the Rourkela Steel Plant. The Court didn’t interfere with the compensation award granted by NGT and directed the appellant to deposit the same within 8 weeks.
A pertinent question of law had arisen in this case- Whether NGT can exercise jurisdiction when the matter is covered under the ESI act? The Court opined that this issue merits consideration. But given the circumstances of the case, chose not to interfere with the compensation given and kept the question of law open for the future.
Case Title: Dinesh B.S V. State of Karnataka
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 594
The Supreme Court recently reiterated that a newspaper report is only hearsay evidence and it can only be treated as secondary evidence under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
A division bench of Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Justice Pankaj Mithal, while setting aside the sentence of life imprisonment awarded to two appellants accused of murder due to insufficient evidence, observed:
“….an extrajudicial confession cannot be given greater credibility only because it is published in a newspaper and is available to the public at large. It is well-established in law that newspaper reports can at best be treated as secondary evidence.”
Case details: State of Karnataka Lokayukta Police vs S. Subbegowda
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 595
The Supreme Court observed that the High Court cannot reverse the findings recorded by the Special Court in Corruption Cases on the validity of sanction, without recording any opinion as to how a failure of justice had in fact been occasioned to the accused
Motor Accident Claim Need Not Be Filed Before MACT Of Area Where Accident Occurred: Supreme Court
Case details: Pramod Sinha v. Suresh Singh Chauhan
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 596
The Supreme Court observed that it is not mandatory for the claimants to lodge an application for compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act before the MACT having jurisdiction over the area where the accident occurred.
“Claimants can approach the MACT within the local limits of whose jurisdiction they reside or carry on business or the defendant resides”, Justice Dipankar Datta noted while deciding a transfer petition
Case details: Dilip Kumar v. Brajraj Shrivastava
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 597
The Supreme Court observed that a Magistrate (who had opted to hold an inquiry himself under Section 202(1) CrPC) has to consider the statements of the complainant and his witnesses before dismissing the complaint under Section 203 CrPC.
The court, perusing the complaint, noted that eight witnesses were specifically named in the complaint and that the Magistrate has not recorded reasons for not recording the statements of other witnesses specifically cited in the complaint.
Case Details: Rahul Gandhi v. Purnesh Ishwarbhai Modi & Anr.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 598
A three-judge bench of Justices BR Gavai, PS Narasimha, and Sanjay Kumar of the Supreme Court on Friday stayed the conviction of Congress leader and former Member of Parliament (MP) Rahul Gandhi in the criminal defamation case over the "why all thieves have Modi surname" remark. With the stay of his conviction, Rahul Gandhi's disqualification as MP also now remains in abeyance.
“Particularly when the offense was non-cognizable, bailable, and compoundable, the least which was expected from the learned trial judge was to give reasons for imposing the maximum punishment. Though the learned appellate court and the High Court have spent voluminous pages in rejecting the applications, these aspects are not seen considered" the court observed.
Case details: Ketan Kantilal Seth v. State of Gujarat
Citation:2023 LiveLaw (SC) 599
The Supreme Court observed that 'applications' filed on the pretext of ‘clarification/addition’ while evading the recourse of review, ought not to be entertained and should be discouraged.
"Any alternation or addition to a judgment pronounced by Court can be made only to correct a clerical or arithmetical mistake or an error arising out of an accidental slip or omission", the bench of Justices Surya Kant and J K Maheshwari observed.
The court said that the power of Supreme Court under the Order XL Rule 3 of the Supreme Court Rules of 2013 is limited and can only be exercised sparingly with due caution while confining itself within the parameters as described only to correct clerical/arithmetical mistakes or otherwise to rectify the accidental slip or omission.
Case Title: E.S.I. Corporation V. M/S. Endocrinology and Immunology Lab, Civil Appeal No.3368 Of 2012
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 600
The Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed an appeal by the Employees' State Insurance (ESI) Corporation challenging a 2008 Kerala High Court order that had held that the provisions of The Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 will be applicable to a pathological laboratory from 2007 and not from 2002, by virtue of a 2007 government notification specifying that medical institutions would come under the Act.
Case details Wazir Khan vs State of Uttarakhand
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 601
The judge also presides to see that a guilty man does not escape, the Supreme Court noted while it upheld the conviction of a man accused of killing his wife.
"The law does not enjoin a duty on the prosecution to lead evidence of such character, which is almost impossible to be led, or at any rate, extremely difficult to be led. The duty on the prosecution is to lead such evidence, which it is capable of leading, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case", the bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra said.
Case details: Gulshan Bajwa vs Registrar, High Court of Delhi
Citation: Criminal Appeal No(s). 577/2007
The Supreme Court vacated a stay order in a 16-year-old criminal appeal as it pulled up the appellant's lawyer for seeking repeated adjournments. The bench noted that on more than a dozen occasions the cases were listed, it was either adjourned on the request of the appellant or on account of his absence. When the bench offered to provide legal assistance from the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee, he declined.
Case title: Kishore Balkrishna Nand v. State of Maharashtra
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 602
The Supreme Court quashed a defamation case against a man accused of making defamatory allegations in his complaint before Sub Divisional Magistrate.
“It is not defamation to prefer in good faith an accusation against any person to any of those who have lawful authority over that person with regard to the subject-matter of accusation”, the bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra noted.
Registration Of All BS-VI Diesel Compliant Vehicles Permissible In NCT Delhi: Supreme Court
Case Title: MC Mehta v. UOI
Citation: Writ Petition Civil No. 13029/1985
In a recent order, the Supreme Court has clarified that the registration of all BS VI Compliant diesel vehicles is allowed to be done in NCT Delhi, irrespective of their requirement for the G-20 summit.
Case title: Razia Khan v. State of MP
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 605
The Supreme Court granted the benefit of probation to a social worker who was convicted of assaulting a public servant and reduced her sentence to 1 month.
While deciding the limited question of sentence, the Court highlighted that the matter was over 30 years old where appellant was out on bail all these years. Now, she’s an old lady of 62 years. The court acknowledged that there was no scuffle as such and the appellant was only raising the concerns of laborers.
The court was cognizant that hurting a public servant is a serious offense where a 10-year jail term can be granted, But the court while considering all the factors in totality was of the view that leniency can be shown to the appellant.
'Trivial': Supreme Court Quashes 2014 Criminal Case Over Petty Office Altercation
Case title: Sunil Kumar v State of UP
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 606
The Supreme Court quashed a chargesheet filed against an executive engineer in connection with an office altercation with his peon long back in 2014. The court took into account the trivial nature of the allegations. The court observed that there was no progress in the trial pending before Chief Judicial Magistrate since 2015.
Case title: Union of India v. Jagdish Chandra Sethy
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 609
The Supreme Court recently held that the disciplinary authority under the Central Civil Service Rules is empowered to appoint a retired employee as an inquiry authority. It is not necessary that the inquiry officer should be a public servant.
Case Title: Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs v. Dr Mahindra Bhaskar Limaye
Citation: Review Petition In Civil Appeal No. 831 of 2023
The Supreme Court recently dismissed a review petition filed against its judgment that held that persons having a Bachelors degree and having a professional experience of at least 10 years in consumer affairs, law, public affairs, administration etc. should be treated as qualified for appointment as President and members of State Consumer Commissions and District Consumer Forums.
Case Title: P. Ravindranath v. P. Milany
Citation: Civil Appeal No(s).4724/2023
The Supreme Court on Friday stayed the order of the Madras High Court that declared the 2019 Lok Sabha election of P. Ravindranath, son of former Tamil Nadu CM O Paneerselvan and the sole Member of Parliament from the AIADMK party, null and void. The Apex Court has allowed him to continue as a Member of Parliament until further orders from the Court.
Case Details: Rana Kapoor v. Directorate of Enforcement & Anr.
Citation: Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 7700 of 2023
The Supreme Court of India on Friday refused to grant bail to Yes Bank founder Rana Kapoor in a money laundering case. He has been accused of receiving illegal gratification in exchange for sanctioning bad loans to high-profile borrowers. The Yes Bank co-promoter has been behind bars since March 2020.
"Normally, the period undergone is substantial. But, this is a case that rocked the entire banking system," Justice Khanna said right at the outset, "That's a fact." Was I not correct when I said his actions affected Yes Bank, he asked. "Did the Reserve Bank of India not have to step in to protect the investors?
Case Title: Suvendu Adhikari v. The State Of West Bengal
Citation: SLP(Crl) No. 8889/2023
The Supreme Court on Friday set aside the July 20 order order of the Calcutta High Court which had allowed the registration of FIR against BJP MLA Adhikari for allegedly making provocative remarks during the recently held West Bengal Panchayat elections. The Court further requested the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court to decide the plea seeking FIR against the West Bengal Leader of Opposition afresh after granting him an opportunity of hearing.
The Court also clarified that the High Court, in its fresh decision, should not be influenced by the previous orders passed by the HC on September 6, 2021 and December 8, 2022 as per which no FIRs could be registered against Adhikari
Supreme Court Dismisses PIL Challenging Appointment Of Arun Goel As Election Commissioner
Case Title: Association for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India And Ors.
Citation: WP(C) No. 436/2023
The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a Public Interest Litigation filed by Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) challenging the appointment of Arun Goel as a member of the Election Commission of India.
The division bench Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice SVN Bhatti noted that the Constitution Bench judgment that had recently directed reforms in the process of appointment of Election Commissioners, did not pass any orders against Goel's appointment though the files related to his appointment were perused. The two judge bench said that it would not be appropriate on its part to entertain the matter, when the matter has already been considered by the Constitution Bench in Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India.
Cases: Committee of Management Anjuman Intezemia Masajid Varanasi v. Rakhi Singh and others
Citation: SLP(C) No. 14853/2023, Diary No. 31345-2023
The Supreme Court on Friday refused to stop the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to carry out a survey of the Gyanvapi Mosque at Varanasi, except the 'wuzukhana' area where a 'shivling' was claimed to have been found last year. Taking on record an undertaking made on behalf of the ASI that no excavation will be done at the site and no damage will be caused to the structure, the Court allowed the survey to take place.
Accordingly, the Court disposed of a petition filed by Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Committee (which manages the Gyanvapi Mosque at Varanasi) challenging yesterday's Allahabad High Court order which permitted the ASI survey.
Actor Sexual Assault Case: Supreme Court Extends Time For Completion Of Trial
Case Title: P. GOPALKRISHNAN @ DILEEP v. THE STATE OF KERALA
Citation: MA in Crl.A. No. 1794/2019
The Supreme Court on Friday extended the time for the completion of the trial in the Kerala actor abduction and sexual assault case.
A division bench of Justice Aniruddha Bose and Justice Bela M. Trivedi granted an extension of time for the completion of trial while directing that the proceedings be completed as expeditiously as possible. The bench passed the order allowing an extension application filed by the trial judge seeking time till March 31, 2024
The Supreme Court recently stayed the order of the Delhi High Court which sentenced the son of a business tycoon to three months simple imprisonment for failing to pay maintenance to his former partner.
The Court also stayed the High Court's direction to issue a Look Out Circular against the appellant. A bench comprising Justices BR Gavai, CT Ravikumar and PV Sanjay Kumar passed the interim order while admitting the appeal filed against the order of the Delhi High Court.
Every Case of Improper Investigation Cannot Be Transferred to CBI: Supreme Court
Case Title: Kusumben Patel Varun Punia v. The State Of Uttarakhand And Ors
Citation: SLP(Crl) No. 5930/2023
The Supreme Court on Monday, while dismissing an SLP seeking transfer of investigation to CBI, orally observed, “every case of improper investigation cannot be transferred to CBI.”
Case Title: Nallathambi And Ors. v. State of Tamil Nadu And Anr.
Citation: WP(C) No. 213/2023
The Supreme Court, on Monday, refused to entertain a petition challenging the Tamil Nadu Government’s decision to construct a 134 ft tall ‘Pen Statue’ in memory of DMK leader M. Karunanidhi.
As a bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia expressed disinclination to entertain the matter, the petitioner chose to withdraw the petition to avail of other remedies.
Case Details: Central Bureau of Investigation v. DK Shivakumar
Citation: Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 5026-5030 of 2023
The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a petition filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) challenging the Karnataka High Court temporarily staying a probe by the central agency against Karnataka deputy chief minister DK Shivakumar in a corruption case arising out of allegations regarding disproportionate assets. The Court declined interference in view of the fact that the matter is pending before the High Court for final adjudication
NEWS UPDATES
Case Title: UGC v. Priya Varghese
Citation: SLP(C) No. 15816/2023
The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice on the appeal filed by the University Grants Commission (UGC) against the order of the Kerala High Court that allowed the appointment of Priya Varghese as Associate Professor at Kannur University, treating the period spent by her to pursue her PhD to be counted as teaching experience. Priya Varghese is the wife of K.K. Ragesh, private secretary to Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan.
Case Title: Manik Bhattacharya V. Anupam Pal & Ors.
Citation: Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No(S). 29780/2023
The Supreme Court on Thursday stayed two orders of the Calcutta High Court that had directed a fresh probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) against Trinamool Congress MLA Manik Bhattacharya, former director of the West Bengal Board of Primary Education, in connection with the teacher's appointment scam.
A Division Bench of Justice AS Bopanna and Justice PV Sanjay Kumar granted relief to Bhattacharya after the unlisted matter was taken up today following an urgent request made by the petitioner before the Chief Justice
Kuno Cheetah Deaths| Mortalities Troubling But Not ‘Unduly Alarming’: Centre To Supreme Court
Case Title: Centre for Environment Law WWF-I v. Union of India
Citation: Writ Petition (Civil) No. 337 of 1995
In the wake of recent deaths of Cheetahs translocated to Madhya Pradesh’s Kuno National Park from the African continent, the Centre has informed the Supreme Court that even though the mortalities among the introduced cheetah population are troubling, they are not ‘unduly alarming
“ the general scientific awareness is that being an integral part of the ecosystem, cheetahs in general have low survival rates, I,e around 50% in adults even in non-introduced populations. In the case of introduced population the survival rates are even much lower taking other variables into account which may lead to about 10% survival in cubs, and thus, mortalities though troubling and in need to redressal and curtailment are not unduly alarming.” the affidavit states.
Supreme Court To Hear Plea Regarding Gender Imbalance In Judge Advocate General's Recruitment
Case: Arshnoor Kaur and another v. Union of India
Citation: Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 772/2023
The Supreme Court on Friday issued notice on a writ petition which raised the grievance that lesser number of vacancies are earmarked for women in the posts of Judge Advocate General(JAG).
Case Title: Directorate of Enforcements vs Preeti Chandra
Citation: SLPR 7409/2023
The Supreme Court on Friday affirmed the Delhi High Court order which had granted bail to Preeti Chandra, the wife of Unitech promoter Sanjay Chandra, in a money laundering case probed by Enforcement Directorate. The bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra passed the order and directed Chandra to not leave the NCR region and report once every two weeks to the Investigating Officer.
Case Title: Union of India v. M Mohamed Abbas
Citation: SLP(Crl) No. 9384/2023
The Supreme Court on Friday stayed the order of the Madras High Court granting bail to Mohammad Abbas, a Madurai based lawyer who was arrested by the National Investigation Agency under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act for his alleged links with the banned Popular Front of India (PFI) organization.
A division bench of Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Sanjay Karol, today issued notice in the plea filed by the NIA challenging the High Court order and posted the matter to 12th September
Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing In Karnataka Muslim OBC Quota Case By 4 Weeks
Case Title: L Ghulam Rasool v. State of Karnataka & Ors.
Citation: Writ Petition (Civil) No. 435 of 2023
The Supreme Court on Friday adjourned the hearing of the petition challenging the Karnataka government’s order scrapping an almost three-decade-old four per cent reservation provided to Muslims in the Other Backward Classes (OBC) category in the state. The Karnataka Government had scrapped the 4% reservation and distributed the same equally among the Veerashaiva-Lingayats and Vokkaligas at 2% each.
The matter was listed before the division bench of Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice SVN Bhatti today. The request for adjournment was made by both the State of Karnataka and the petitioners. The matter has been listed after 4 weeks.
'Police Sensitisation Required': Supreme Court Calls For Enduring Solution To Hate Speeches
Case Details: Shaheen Abdullah v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: Interlocutory Application No. 149401 of 2023 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 940 of 2022
The Supreme Court on Friday issued a call to action to stakeholders to find an enduring solution to the problem of hate speech. Highlighting that the difficulty lay in implementing and executing the law on hate speech, Justice Sanjiv Khanna suggested appropriately sensitising the police forces to ensure that victims of hate speech could access meaningful remedies without having to come to the court. He said:
"Why don't you all sit down together and find a solution? One difficulty is...The definition of 'hate speech' is fairly complex...and how to understand 'hate speech' within the parameters of free speech. We have enough definitions in several judgments. That's one issue. But the main problem is not the definition, but the implementation and execution aspects. You will have to think about that. The police forces needed to be sensitised in order for these matters to be resolved."
Case: Government of NCT of Delhi vs Union of India
Citation: W.P.(C) No. 669/2023
The Supreme Court on Friday appointed former Delhi High Court judge, Justice Jayant Nath as the Chairperson of the Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission (DERC) on a pro-tem basis.
In the last hearing, the Supreme Court was informed that the Delhi Government and the Lieutenant Governor could not agree on a name for the appointment of Chairperson of the DERC. In view of this deadlock, the Supreme Court had said that it would appoint a person for the post as an ad-hoc measure till the issue is finally decided. The Court had made it clear that the appointment will be on a pro-tem basis, as in, it would act as an interim arrangement.
Case Details: Manish Sisodia v. Central Bureau of Investigation
Citation: Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 8167 of 2023
The Supreme Court on Friday adjourned till September 4 the bail applications to former deputy chief minister Manish Sisodia who is facing charges of money laundering and corruption for alleged irregularities in the framing and implementation of a now-scrapped liquor policy in the national capital. The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader has been in custody since February of this year and is being investigated by both the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Directorate of Enforcement (ED).
Case title: Admiral D.K. Joshi LT. Governor, Andaman & Nicobar Island v. Andaman Sarvajanik Nirman Vibagh Mazdoor Sangh
Citation: Civil Appeal Diary No. 31341/2023
The Supreme Court on Friday stayed the order passed by the Calcutta High Court's Port Blair Circuit Bench which suspended Keshav Chandra, the Chief Secretary of the Andaman & Nicobar Islands Administration, and fined Admiral D.K. Joshi, the Lt. Governor, a sum of Rs 5 lakh to be paid “from his own funds” for not implementing directions.
Case Title: Shah Faesal And Ors. v Union Of India And Anr.
Citation: W.P.(C) No. 1099/2019 PIL-W and connected matter
In today's proceedings, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal argued that Article 370 was no longer a 'temporary provision' and that it had assumed permanence post the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly of J&K.
The bench enquired why then would Article 370 be placed as a temporary provision under Part XXI of the Constitution, to which Sibal responded that the Constitution makers foresaw the formation of the Constituent Assembly of J&K, and it was understood that this Assembly would have the authority to determine the future course of Article 370.
Thus, in the event of the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly, whose recommendation was necessary to abrogate Article 370, the provision could not be revoked
Case Title: Shah Faesal And Ors. v Union Of India And Anr.
Citation: W.P.(C) No. 1099/2019 PIL-W and connected matters
In today's proceedings on the dilution of Article 370, Senior Advocate Kapil, appearing for NCP MP Mohammad Akbar Lone, argued that the Governor of the erstwhile State of Jammu and Kashmir and the Union Government acted in tandem to get rid of Article 370. He stated that the abrogation of the article was a purely political act carried de hors the Constitution.
Case Details-Rahul Gandhi v. Purnesh Ishwarbhai Modi & Anr.
Citation: Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 8644 of 2023
Congress leader and former MP Rahul Gandhi, in his latest affidavit filed in the Supreme Court in his plea to stay the conviction in the criminal defamation case, has asserted that there is no need for him to apologise for the "why all thieves share Modi surname" remark.
"The petitioner maintains and has always maintained that he is not guilty of offence and that the conviction is unsustainable and if he had to apologise and compound the offence, he would have done it much earlier", Gandhi said in response to the complainant calling him "arrogant" for not showing repentance and apologizing for the remark.
Shaheen Abdulla v. Union of India
Citation: WP Civil No. 940/2022
The Supreme Court on Wednesday urged the authorities to ensure that no violence or hate speeches take place in the protest marches being held by Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and Bajrang Dal in various parts of Delhi-National Capital Region today in the wake of the communal violence in Nuh and Gurugram in Haryana.
In a special sitting held at 2 PM to hear an urgent application filed to stop the VHP-Bajrang Dal rallies in Delhi-NCR, the Court asked the Delhi Police, and the Governments of Delhi, Uttar Pradesh and Haryana to ensure that no untoward incident takes place in the rallies. The Court also directed the authorities to video record the rallies in sensitive areas and preserve the footages.
Plea In Supreme Court To Stop VHP-Bajrang Dal Rallies In Delhi-NCR Following Nuh Communal Violence
Senior Advocate Chander Uday Singh told Justice Bose that twenty-seven marches have been announced by VHP-Bajrang Dal in various parts of the National Capital Region to protest against the happenings in Nuh. Justice Bose however expressed doubts regarding whether he has the authority to entertain the mentioning for the listing of the IA and asked Singh to get a confirmation regarding this.
Following this, Singh appeared before the CJI's bench, which was about to start the hearing in the Constitution Bench matter.
"There is a provision in the latest SoP, circulate an email. However urgent something is, once the mentioning is not available or mentioning is over, the email will be put up by the Registrar (Listing) and I pass immediate orders on listing. Just read the SoP. It has everything in in it.", CJI replied
‘ED Has No Vested Right to Seek Police Custody’: Mukul Rohatgi Argues in Senthil Balaji’s Case
Case Details: Megala v. The State
Citation: Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 8652-8653 of 2023
The Directorate of Enforcement (ED) has no vested right to take an accused into police custody, even within the first 15 days when the magistrate’s permission must be sought for that, Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi told the Supreme Court on Tuesday. He said:
“After the expiry of the initial 15 days, further remand during the period of investigation can only be in judicial custody. While in the first 15 days, custody may either be police or judicial, but after this period elapses, only one compartment will be available, which is that of judicial custody. But, even in the first 15-day period, there is no vested right to seek police custody. This, too, requires the magistrate’s permission.”
Should ED Be Granted Hearing Before Predicate Offence Is Quashed? Supreme Court To Consider
Case Title: ED v. India Bulls Housing Finance Limited
Citation: Diary No 26629/2022
Whether the Enforcement Directorate should be granted a hearing before a predicate offense is quashed? The Supreme Court is set to consider this issue.
The Court said that this issue raised by Additional Solicitor General SV Raju is "pertinent".
The bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Justice Dipankar Dutta was hearing a plea by ED against Bombay HC judgment which quashed the FIR against India Bulls Housing Finance Limited Company(respondent).
Manipur Violence: Supreme Court Mulls Forming Committee Comprising Former HC Judges
While hearing the batch of petitions concerning Manipur violence, the Supreme Court on Tuesday contemplated the formation of a committee consisting of former judges of the High Court to make an overall assessment of situation, rehabilitation, restoration of homes and to ensure that the pre-investigation processes relating to recording of statements go in the proper way.
During the hearings, Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud expressed concerns about the "lethargic" and "tardy" investigation conducted by the state police thus far.
Case Title: Dinganglung Gangmei vs Mutum Churamani Meetei and others
Citation: SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No.19206/2023
The Supreme Court on Tuesday slammed the investigation carried out by the Manipur police in relation to the ethnic violence as "lethargic" and went to the extent of saying that there is "absolute breakdown of law and order and machinery of the State".
The Court was aghast to note that FIRs were not registered for nearly three months after the occurrences and only a few arrests have been made so far in the 6000 FIRs registered over the violence. The Court directed the Manipur Director General of Police to be personally present before the Court on Monday (August 7) at 2 PM.
Case Title: Mayanglambam Bobby Meetei v. Union Of India And Ors.
Citation: Diary No. 23183-2023 PIL
On Monday(July 31), the Supreme Court declined to entertain a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) relating to Manipur observing that the petition was filed with an assumption that one particular community has to be held liable for the ethnic violence.
The bench, consisting of CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra, expressed reservations about the plea's broad nature and its assumption that a specific community was solely responsible for the violence in Manipur. The court suggested the petitioner to come back with a specific prayer. The PIL was accordingly withdrawn.
Case title: Medical Officers Association (Ayurveda) State Of Gujarat v. Union Of India
Citation: W.P.(C) No. 723/2023
Several petitions have been filed in the Supreme Court seeking recall/review of its judgment which held that Ayurved doctors are not entitled to equal pay as Allopathy doctors.
A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Dipankar Datta on Monday noted that the author of the judgment, Justice V Ramasubramanian, has retired and that the matter has to be listed before a bench which has Justice Pankaj Mithal, the other member of the bench which delivered judgment. Therefore, the matter was directed to be placed before the Chief Justice of India for appropriate orders regarding listing.
Case Title: Uddhav Thackeray v. Eknathrao Sambhaji Shinde And Anr.
Citation: SLP(C) No. 3997/2023
The Supreme Court on Tuesday orally remarked that it will list the petition filed by Uddhav Thackeray challenging the decision of the Election Commission of India (ECI) which recognized Eknath Shinde faction as the official Shiv Sena after the Constitution Bench concluded the hearings in the petitions challenging the dilution of Article 370 of the Constitution of India. The court also orally agreed to list the plea filed by the Shiv Sena (Uddhav Thackeray) party MP Sunil Prabhu seeking direction to the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly Speaker to expeditiously decide on the disqualification pleas pending against rebel Sena MLAs led by Eknath Shinde
Manipur Sexual Violence: Supreme Court Asks CBI To Refrain From Recording Statements Of Survivors
The Supreme Court on Tuesday restrained the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) from taking statements of the survivors of the Manipur sexual violence case which was recorded in a horrific video that went viral on social media.
A bench led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud orally told the Solicitor General to ask the CBI to wait since the Court is scheduled to hear at 2 PM today the cases related to Manipur. The Court is contemplating setting up a panel to record the statements of the survivors and is going to consider the plea for a Special Investigation Team.
In the batch of petitions concerning unprecedented sexual violence against women in Manipur amidst the ethnic clashes in the State, women centric citizens' network groups have filed intervention applications seeking for the formation of independent Special Investigation Team (SIT) to investigate the violence under the supervision of the Supreme Court.
WinG-India has also contended that there is a deliberate omission by the police to invoke Section 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code, which specifically defines the offence of rape during sectarian violence. Further, it is stated that the relevant sections of the SC/ST (POA) Act were also not invoked in the FIRs
Senior Advocate Indira Jaising, appearing for Moitra, highlighted the trauma that women have gone through and suggested that women, who have experience in dealing with victims of sexual violence amidst riots, be asked to interact with the victims. Jaising emphasized the importance of building confidence among rape victims, as they often hesitate to share their traumatic experiences.
She proposed the formation of a High Powered Committee consisting of women from civil societies who possess relevant experience in dealing with survivors.
The application adds– "The most shocking, is that after the graphic incident that occurred on May 4, even the chief minister has admitted that there are hundreds of such cases throughout the state. The CM has admitted that the incident occurred and that zero FIRs have been lodged.
Case Details: Bina Das @ Bina Halder v. Kakdwip Court Bar Association & Ors.
Citation: Dairy No. 21236 of 2023
The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice in a plea by a woman lawyer accusing a district bar association in West Bengal’s Kakdwip of arbitrarily terminating her membership and harassing her by, among other things, not allowing her to use the toilet and other facilities in the court premises.
Case Details: Govind Singh v. Jyotiraditya M Scindia & Ors
Citation: Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 15745 of 2023
Madhya Pradesh leader of opposition Govind Singh has withdrawn a petition filed in the Supreme Court over the validity of the election to the Rajya Sabha of union civil aviation minister Jyotiraditya M. Scindia. Earlier this month, the top court had dismissed another plea questioning the issues framed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court in a petition challenging Scindia’s election to the Parliament in 2020.
'Manipur Violence Is Of Unprecedented Magnitude': Supreme Court On 'What About Bengal' Argument
Case Title: X And Anr. v. The State Of Manipur And Anr
Citation: W.P.(Crl.) No. 327/2023
In the Manipur case hearing on Monday, the Supreme Court disapproved of an attempt made by an intervenor to draw equivalence with crimes against women happening in other parts of the country. The Court highlighted that the violence in Manipur are of an "unprecedented magnitude", happening in the middle of "communal and sectarian strife
Case Title: UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION V. PRIYA VARGHESE
Citation: SLP(C) No. 15816/2023
The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice on the petition filed by the University Grants Commission (UGC) against the order of the Kerala High Court that allowed the appointment of Priya Varghese as Associate Professor at Kannur University, treating the period spent by her to pursue her PhD to be counted as teaching experience. Priya Varghese is the wife of K.K. Ragesh, private secretary to Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan
Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, before proceeding with the usual court proceedings today, addressed the concerns raised by bar members regarding the delayed generation of diary numbers for matters which are e-filed. He announced that measures have been implemented to ensure the timely generation of diary numbers, reducing the process to 15 minutes from the time of matter filing. Furthermore, the CJI stated that the system was being further expedited to generate diary numbers immediately upon filing.
