Without Contempt

Several opposition leaders are demanding contempt proceedings against Nishikant Dubey, saying his remarks have undermined the judiciary. But can a sitting MP be charged under the Act?

The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to entertain a plea alleging contempt of its order on demolition of properties by the authorities in Uttarakhand, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh. A bench of Justices B R Gavai, P K Mishra and K V Viswanathan said it was not inclined to entertain the plea filed by the petitioner who was not directly or indirectly related to the alleged act. "We don't want to open a pandora's box," said the bench, adding, "Let the persons who are affected by demolition come to the court". The petitioner's counsel alleged the authorities in Haridwar, Jaipur and Kanpur had demolished properties in contempt of the apex court's order which had said demolition would not be carried out without its permission. "The Supreme Court's order was categorical that without the leave of this court, no demolition would be carried out," the counsel said. He alleged in one of these cases, the property was demolished soon after an FIR was lodged. Additional Solicitor General K M Nata

Licences for 14 Ayurvedic products by Patanjali and Divya Pharmacy were suspended by the Uttarakhand government. However, on July 1, the state government revoked its suspension order

In a statement Wednesday, Attorney General Letitia James said Manhattan Judge Arthur Engoron's order was clear on Trump being in contempt of court

A September 29 one-line press release by the Sebi is significant for what it left out

In the Justice Karnan row, the judiciary can demonstrate that they will not flinch on accountability

Corruption in the scheme may have nothing to do with fake children being shown to siphon out money

Within Sebi, the chairman should hold an umbrella for both young and old employees

India has a robust culture of constitutional review by the higher judiciary

If demonetisation can be defended and achieved, so can reform in the justice delivery system and in the role of regulators

Falling in line without an attempt to stand up for principle within the framework of law is a trait of obedient regimes

Often, when laws are made in India, the merits of the objective sought to be achieved from them are conflated and projected as the legitimately anticipated outcome

Regulators often overstate the seriousness of the work they do to defend every measure adopted in regulations, however flawed

The abuse of law in the very making of law may sound deeply ironical. Yet, it is surprisingly common

One must consult the public when making law but law-making cannot be left to the masses

Enhancing powers without investment in capacity building to administer the powers leads to fall of the majesty of law

Consulting those governed by the law enables society to know the intent and purpose - it is only a consultation and not a vote

An informal guidance letter issued by Sebi to a listed commercial bank will put the regulator in a unique position - of holding a view that violative insider trading can take place even when the person trading has no access to inside information

It is odd to have a cap on tax rates as a feature of the Constitution, as demanded by the Congress on GST

Abolishing the FIPB is overdue. The project needs serious attention to detail but must be handled on a war footing