The court ruled that the payment of these demands shall be staggered in instalments over a period of 12 years, commencing from April 1, 2026
The Supreme Court specified that payment for tax demands, which can be retrospectively applied from April 2005, should be staggered in instalments over a 12-year period, beginning from April 1, 2026
Fresh public doubt necessitates Sebi to conclude its probe and declare findings: petitioner
The court, however, warned that both of them must comply with all future orders and not repeat their past conduct
TMC leader Abhishek Banerjee and his wife's plea challenged the ED summons in connection to a money laundering investigation related to an alleged school job recruitment scam in West Bengal
The legal principle 'Bail is rule, jail is an exception' is applicable to offences even under special statutes like the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, the Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled while granting bail to a man accused under the stringent anti-terror law. A bench of justices Abhay S Oka and Augustine George Masih said if courts start denying bail in deserving cases, it will be a violation of fundamental rights. "Allegations of the prosecution may be very serious, but it is court's duty to consider the case for bail in accordance with law. Bail is the rule and jail is the exception applies even to special statutes. If courts start denying bail in deserving cases, it will be a violation of rights guaranteed under Article 21," the bench said while pronouncing its judgement. The verdict came while releasing a man named Jalaluddin Khan on bail. Khan was booked under the stringent provisions of the UAPA and other sections of now defunct Indian Penal Code for renting out upper .
The Supreme Court on Tuesday extended the interim bail granted to Hyderabad-based businessman Abhishek Boinpally in a money laundering case related to the alleged Delhi excise policy scam. A bench of justices M M Sundresh and Aravind Kumar adjourned the matter for hearing on October 14 as Additional Solicitor General S V Raju was not available. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Boinpally, submitted that the petitioner was arrested in October 2022 and referred to AAP leader Manish Sisodia case while seeking bail for him. During the brief hearing, advocate Zoheb Hossain, appearing for the ED, told the court that Boinpally has been out on interim bail owing to the condition of his wife, who is suffering from various ailments, since March 6 and requested the court to hear the matter in the presence of ASG. The apex court then adjourned the matter as the ASG was not available while extending the interim relief. On March 20, the top court noted that the businessman has been in
Patanjali misleading ads case: The lawsuit accused yoga guru Ramdev of undermining public trust in allopathic treatments and promoting misinformation during the Covid-19 pandemic
The Supreme Court on Monday sought a response from the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on the bail plea of the Aam Aadmi Party's former communication in-charge Vijay Nair in a money laundering case related to the alleged Delhi excise policy scam. A bench of Justices Hrishikesh Roy and SVN Bhatti issued notice to the central agency and sought its response within four weeks. "It is submitted that the petitioner is in custody for nearly 2 years since he was arrested by the CBI and has been in continuous custody of the ED...Issue notice," the bench said. Senior advocates Abhishek Singhvi and Vikram Chaudhary, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that Nair has been in jail for almost two years. Referring to the Manish Sisodia case, they said there were 353 witnesses and the trial has not commenced till date. Nair, who was arrested on November 13, 2022, has challenged the trial court's July 29 order dismissing his default bail plea. Earlier, the high court had on July 3 last year refus
The Supreme Court scheduled the matter for another hearing in six weeks and ordered that the interim stay on the defamation proceedings remain in effect
The BRS leader's counsel contended that K Kavitha's health situation is similar to that of Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal and former Deputy CM Manish Sisodia, both of whom have been granted bail
The Supreme Court on Monday refused to entertain a fresh plea filed by some examinees challenging the government's decision to cancel the UGC-NET examination following alleged question paper leak, saying that entertaining it at this stage will create "chaos". A bench comprising Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra said the government is conducting the exam afresh on August 21 and the students, who are around nine lakh, must have some kind of "certainty now". "The Supreme Court stepping now will have a serious effect and there will be chaos all over," the CJI said while declining to entertain the plea filed by Praveen Dabas and others. The bench said the exam was held on June 18 and was cancelled a day after that. "Entertaining the plea at the present stage would only add to uncertainty and add to utter chaos," the CJI said, adding the Central government must be "doubly cautious after the NEET-UG fiasco and thus it was cancelled. Let this process g
The Supreme Court on Monday directed the police chiefs of both Punjab and Haryana to hold a meeting along with the SPs of adjoining Patiala and Ambala districts within one week for partial reopening of the highway at the Shambhu border, where protesting farmers have been camping since February 13. The court asked the Punjab government to persuade protesting farmers at the Shambhu border to remove tractors from the road, saying highways are not parking space. A bench of justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan also appreciated the Punjab and Haryana government for suggesting apolitical names for constituting a committee, which will hold meetings with the protesting farmers. The bench said partial opening of the road at Shambhu order is needed to facilitate movement of ambulances, essential services, senior citizens, women, girl students and the local commuters of adjoining areas. "We will pass a brief order on the terms of the panel to be constituted for talking to protesting farmers at
The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a plea by the ED challenging a Bombay High Court order, which directed the RBI to consider the compounding applications filed by NDTV in a case of alleged FEMA violation. A bench of Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih said no case for interference was made out. The high court, in its 2018 order, set aside objections raised to the compounding proceedings by the Enforcement Directorate (ED), which had earlier flagged the alleged Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) violations and issued showcause notices to NDTV. In November 2015, the ED issued showcause notices to the news organisation for allegedly flouting foreign exchange regulations while availing of overseas and foreign direct investment facilities to the tune of more than Rs 2,000 crore. In March 2016, NDTV filed an application with the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) for compounding of the contraventions alleged in the showcause notices. However, a year later, the RBI to
The Supreme Court on Monday deferred by six weeks hearing on a plea of Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal challenging a Delhi High Court order upholding the summons issued to him in a criminal defamation case for retweeting an allegedly defamatory video circulated by YouTuber Dhruv Rathee in 2018. A bench of justices Sanjiv Khanna, Sanjay Kumar and R Mahadevan posted the matter for hearing after six weeks after senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for Kejriwal, sought some more time to work out a settlement. "We express regret but some more time may be given (for settlement). Currently, too many things are going on in this man's life," Singhvi submitted. Advocate Raghav Awasthi, appearing for the complainant, submitted that time may be given (to Kejriwal) but it should not be unlimited and some negotiations have to take place. Singhvi submitted that although he (Kejriwal) expresses regret for the tweet but it cannot be on his (complainant's) terms. The bench posted the matter f
The high court had asked him to move the trial court for regular bail in the CBI case
The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear on Monday the bail plea of former Tamil Nadu minister V Senthil Balaji, who was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate last year in connection with a money laundering case. A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Augustine George Masih is scheduled to hear Balaji's plea challenging the February 28 order of the Madras High Court dismissing his second bail petition in the case. The high court, while dismissing the bail petition, said that if he is let out on bail in a case of this nature, it will send a wrong signal and it will be against larger public interest. It said the petitioner has suffered incarceration for more than eight months and therefore, it will be more appropriate to direct the special court to dispose of the case within a time frame. "Accordingly, there shall be a direction to the Principal Special Court, Chennai, to dispose of the case within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order," it had ...
The AAP on Sunday demanded that the Supreme Court take note of the allegations levelled by US short seller Hindenburg against SEBI chief Madhabi Puri Buch. Hindenburg Research has alleged that it suspects SEBI's unwillingness to act against Adani Group may be because Madhabi Puri had stakes in offshore funds linked to the conglomerate - an allegation that the SEBI head called "baseless" and an attempt of "character assassination". Addressing a press conference here, AAP Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Singh said the SEBI had told a Supreme Court panel that the investigation into the Adani group was "directionless". "SEBI chief and her husband's money was invested in shell companies. Why were these facts hidden from the Supreme Court? The apex Court should take note of the new developments and how facts were hidden," he said. The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) in October 2020 began a probe into the shareholding structure of Adani Group companies after red flags were raised over
Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal has accused the opposition of creating confusion among people over the Supreme Court "observation" on creamy layer among SCs and STs, and asserted that the Constitution given by B R Ambedkar has no provision of a creamy layer. In an interview to PTI Videos, he said the the BJP-led NDA government will follow Ambedkar's Constitution and will continue the reservation system for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes as provided in it. Meghwal noted that though the opposition is aware that the top court had only made an "observation" on creamy layer, it is trying to create confusion among people. On Saturday, Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge had said that the idea of denying reservation to SCs and STs on account of the creamy layer concept is "condemnable" He also said the government should have brought a legislation in Parliament to nullify the part of the recent Supreme Court judgement that talks about the issue. Meghwal underlined that the top cou
BSP chief Mayawati on Sunday said the Congress, which won Lok Sabha seats by promising to protect reservation, seems to be in favour of sub-classification within SCs and STs and is yet to raise its voice against the issue of exclusion of the creamy layer in these communities from the benefits of quota. On August 1, the Supreme Court held that states are constitutionally empowered to make sub-classifications within scheduled castes and scheduled tribes, and batted for the creamy layer be excluded from reservation. "The national president of the Congress (Mallikarjun Kharge) said before disclosing the party's stand on sub-classification of SCs and STs, his party will consult NGOs and lawyers and others. This makes it clear that Congress is in favour of sub-classification," Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) chief Mayawati said in a series of posts on X in Hindi. "The Congress has spoken in a vague manner about the creamy layer issue. Despite it having 99 MPs, no voice was raised in Parliament