Top court's unanimous verdict overrules 1998 P V Narasimha Rao judgment
The Supreme Court on Monday restored Donald Trump to 2024 presidential primary ballots, rejecting state attempts to hold the Republican former president accountable for the Capitol riot. The justices ruled a day before the Super Tuesday primaries that states, without action from Congress first, cannot invoke a post-Civil War constitutional provision to keep presidential candidates from appearing on ballots. The outcome ends efforts in Colorado, Illinois, Maine and elsewhere to kick Trump, the front-runner for his party's nomination, off the ballot because of his attempts to undo his loss in the 2020 election to Democrat Joe Biden, culminating in the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol. Trump's case was the first at the Supreme Court dealing with a provision of the 14th Amendment that was adopted after the Civil War to prevent former officeholders who engaged in insurrection from holding office again. Colorado's Supreme Court, in a first-of-its-kind ruling, had decided that the .
Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman on Monday defended restoration of Hindu places of worship saying they are being done in all fairness and backed by proof, and not an attempt to emotionalise anything. The construction of the three-storeyed Ram temple in Ayodhya is underway after the Supreme Court verdict came in favour of the temple in 2019. Earlier in January, Prime Minister Narendra Modi performed the 'Pran Pratishtha' of Ram Lalla idol as per prescribed rituals. "We need the right kind of storytelling, highlighting it and wherever necessary... so that the civilizational attempt to restore (temples) is done with fairness...we are not trying to emotionalise anything...emotion we have inside, but proof with which we go to the court should stand out for itself," Sitharaman said at a book release event here. Releasing a book titled 'Waiting for Shiva Unearthing the Truth of Kashi Gyan Vapi' written by Vikram Sampath, she said documentation has been an inherent part of the Hindu wa
The Supreme Court on Monday granted the Aam Aadmi Party time till June 15, 2024 to vacate its offices at Rouse Avenue here after noting that the land was allotted to the Delhi High Court for expanding judicial infrastructure. A bench of Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra asked AAP to approach Land And Development Office for allotment of land for its offices. "We would request the L&DO to process the application and communicate its decision within a period of four weeks," the bench said, adding AAP has no lawful right to continue on the land. Senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for the city's ruling party, submitted that AAP is one of the six national parties in the country. "They are telling us as a national party we get nothing. I'm given Badarpur, while everyone else is in better places," Singhvi said. "In view of the impending general elections, we gant time until June 15, 2024 to vacate the premises so that land allotted to expand
Issues related to farmers' protest are "serious", the Supreme Court said on Monday and asked a litigant to desist from filing petitions based only on newspaper reports for publicity. A bench of Justices Surya Kant and KV Viswanathan, allowed petitioner Agnostos Theos, the Managing Director of the Sikh Chamber of Commerce, to withdraw his plea that alleged violation of the rights of the "peacefully protesting" farmers by the Centre and some states. A request for withdrawal of the plea was made at the very start of the hearing by a counsel for Theos who said he intended to amend the petition. "These are very serious issues. Don't file these petitions based only on newspapers reports for publicity purposes. Only those persons who are serious and committed should file these petitions. If you have gone through the newspaper reports, then you must be aware that the high court is seized of the matter," Justice Kant told the counsel. The bench said the petitioner must know that the high co
The Supreme Court on Monday granted interim bail to Rajendra Bihari Lal, vice chancellor of Uttar Pradesh's Sam Higginbottom University of Agriculture, Technology and Sciences (SHUATS), in a case of alleged illegal religious conversion. A bench of Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra issued notice to the UP government on his plea challenging the Allahabad High Court. The top court noted that the high court is not hearing the bail plea filed by Lal who has been in custody since December 31 last year. "Issue notice, in the meantime, by way of ad interim order, we grant interim bail to the petitioner," the bench said while adding that the quantum of bail bond shall not exceed Rs 25,000. Senior advocate Siddharth Dave, appearing for Lal, submitted that the petitioner was arrested despite the apex court's order. The Uttar Pradesh police had earlier told the apex court that Lal and other accused are the main perpetrators of a mass religious conversion
The Supreme Court on Monday rebuked Tamil Nadu Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin over his 'eradicate Sanatan Dharma' remark and asked why he has moved the top court with his plea after abusing his right of freedom of speech and expression. A bench of justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta told Stalin that he is a minister and should know the consequences of his remark. "You abuse your right under Article 19(1)(a) (of the Constitution). You abuse your right under Article 25. Now you are exercising your right under Article 32 (to file plea in the Supreme Court)? Do you not know the consequences of what you said? You are not a layman. You are a minister. You should know the consequences," the bench said and adjourned the matter to March 15. Udhayanidhi Stalin is the son of Tamil Nadu Chief Minister and ruling DMK chief M K Stalin. Speaking at a conference in September 2023, Udhayanidhi Stalin said that Sanatana dharma is against social justice and equality and should be "eradicated .
Jailed AAP leader Manish Sisodia on Monday sought early hearing of his two curative petitions in the Supreme Court challenging the 2023 verdict of the court denying him bail in the corruption and money laundering cases related to the alleged Delhi excise policy scam. A bench of Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra was told by senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for Sisodia, that a trial court has said it will not hear the bail plea till the curative is decided. "Just send an email, we will look at it" the bench said in response. A Delhi court had deferred hearing on Sisodia's bail plea after noting that an application related to the case was pending before the Supreme Court. On December 14, 2023, the top court dismissed Sisodia's pleas seeking review of its October 30 verdict dismissing his bail petitions in the corruption and money laundering cases related to the alleged Delhi excise policy scam. The apex court had denied him bail, sayi
The seven-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud said that parliamentary privileges do not protect bribery
As Centre and states contest the issue of taxation rights in court, CAGR of revenue from coal stands at 13.8% during 2014-23
Two of the 11 convicts in the Bilkis Bano case have moved the Supreme Court contending that its January 8 verdict cancelling remission of their sentence was "in teeth of" a 2002 constitution bench order and sought the issue to be referred to a larger bench for "final" adjudication. Radheyshaym Bhagwandas Shah and Rajubhai Babulal Soni, both lodged in Godhra sub-jail after the apex court verdict, said an "anomalous" situation has arisen wherein two different coordinate benches (benches of same strength) have taken diametrically opposite view on the same issue of premature release as well as on which policy of the state government would be applicable to the petitioners for remission. The plea, filed through advocate Rishi Malhotra, said while one bench on May 13, 2022 categorically ordered the Gujarat government to consider the application of Radheyshaym Shah for premature release in terms of the state government's remission policy of July 9, 1992, the bench that pronounced the verdic
The Supreme Court has said that Article 21 is the soul of the Constitution as the liberty of a citizen is of paramount importance and the high court not expeditiously adjudicating matters related to it would deprive a person of this precious right. A bench of Justice B R Gavai and Justice Sandeep Mehta made the observation after noting that the Bombay High Court has granted bail to one Amol Vithal Vahile, a prime accused in the murder of a corporator in Maharashtra, after a nudge from the apex court on January 29. The bench, in its recent order, said it is thus clear that before the order was passed by this court on January 29, 2024, the high court instead of deciding the application for bail on merits shunted it on one or the other ground. "Needless to state that Article 21 of the Constitution of India is the soul of the Constitution as the liberty of a citizen is of paramount importance. Not deciding the matter pertaining to liberty of a citizen expeditiously and shunting away the
Better insurance cover would enhance price transparency
Observing that urbanisation policies have flaws, the Supreme Court has said one of the main reasons for spurt in unauthorised constructions is the government's failure to provide people with affordable houses. Acknowledging that the right to have a roof over head is a fundamental right, the top court said there is a huge gap in the policies between the requirements of the economically weaker sections and what the government was doing at the ground level. The observations by a bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta came while hearing a case relating to demolition of commercial and residential units in Lucknow's Akbar Nagar where it imposed an interim stay on demolitions. "Let us be clear on housing. There's a difficulty. Our urbanisation policies have flaws. Really speaking, we have not provided for economically weaker sections. Somewhere, we will have to ensure Everyone knows that migration takes place to the cities. But there is a huge gap in the policies between the ..
The Supreme Court on Friday trashed a PIL seeking a direction to the Centre to digitally monitor MPs and MLAs round the clock for better governance, saying "there is something called right to privacy also". A bench comprising Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, Justice J P Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra asked whether the court can put a "chip" in the body of the lawmakers to track their movement round the clock. At the outset, the CJI cautioned petitioner Surinder Nath Kundra, a Delhi resident, that he should be ready to pay Rs 5 lakh as a fine for misusing the judicial time on such an issue. "If you argue and we do not agree with you then a cost of Rs 5 lakh will be recovered from you as land revenue. This is public time and this is not about our ego," the bench said. "Do you realise what you are arguing? You want 24/7 monitoring of MPs and MLAs... This is done only for a convicted felon who can flee justice. There is something called right to privacy and we cannot digitall
The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to hear an appeal of the Gyanvapi management committee against an Allahabad High Court order which held that lawsuits for "restoration" of a temple where the mosque stands in Varanasi are maintainable. "We will tag this with the main case," a bench comprising Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra said. The plea in the top court was filed by the Anjuman Intezamia Masjid, the committee which manages the affairs of the Gyanvapi mosque. On December 19 last year, the Allahabad High Court had dismissed pleas challenging the maintainability of a 1991 suit seeking the "restoration" of a temple at the site where the Gyanvapi mosque stands. The HC had said that the "religious character" of a disputed place can only be decided by the court. It had dismissed five related petitions -- on maintainability and also against a survey of the mosque premises -- filed over the years by the mosque committee and the Uttar Pradesh Sunn
Asaram Bapu, 85 years old, has been incarcerated in Jodhpur jail since 2013. In 2018, he received a life sentence for sexually assaulting a teenage student at his ashram
The plant has been closed since May 2018 after 13 people were killed as police opened fire to quell a protest over alleged pollution caused by it
The Supreme Court has upheld the two-child eligibility criterion of the Rajasthan government for seeking public employment, ruling that it is not discriminatory and does not violate the Constitution. The Rajasthan Various Service (Amendment) Rules, 2001 bar candidates who have more than two children from seeking government jobs. While upholding the two-child norm, the top court dismissed the appeal filed by ex-serviceman Ramji Lal Jat, who had applied for a constable's job in the Rajasthan Police on May 25, 2018 after his retirement from military in 2017. A bench headed by Justice Surya Kant held that Rule 24(4) of the Rajasthan Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1989, which says "no candidate shall be eligible for appointment to the service who has more than two children on or after June 1, 2002" is non-discriminatory and does not violate the Constitution. "This court held that the classification, which disqualifies candidates for having more than two living children, was ...
Himachal Pradesh Assembly Speaker Kuldeep Singh Pathania on Thursday disqualified six Congress MLAs, who had cross-voted in the recent Rajya Sabha polls, for abstaining from voting on the Budget in the assembly. One of the disqualified MLAs said they will appeal against the Speaker's order in the Supreme Court. The six rebel Congress MLAs had abstained from voting on cut motion and finance bill (Budget) in the assembly, defying a party whip to vote in favour of the government. The ruling Congress had sought their disqualification on this ground. The disqualified MLAs are Sudhir Sharma, Ravi Thakur, Rajinder Rana, Inder Dutt Lakhanpal, Chetanya Sharma and Devinder Kumar Bhutto. A notification in this regard was issued on Thursday evening which further said that these six MLAs ceased to be members of Himachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly with effect from February 29. "Consequent upon this, the seat of assembly constituencies Dharamshala, Lahaul and Spiti, Sujanpur, Barsar, Gagret an