The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its verdict on a batch of pleas including those seeking review of some verdicts of 2011 which had held that mere membership of a banned organisation will not make a person criminal unless he resorts to violence or incites people to violence. The top court noted that the Union of India was not heard by its two judges-bench when the 2011 verdict was passed reading down section 3 (5) of Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (now repealed). The top court on February 3, 2011, had acquitted suspected ULFA member Arup Bhuyan, who was held guilty by a TADA court on the basis of his alleged confessional statement before the Superintendent of Police, and said that mere membership of a banned organisation will not make a person a criminal unless he resorts to violence or incites people to violence or creates public disorder by violence or incitement to violence. Similar views were taken by the apex court in two other verdicts of 2011
The Supreme Court Thursday took exception to the Gujarat government keeping proposals for improving the infrastructure of district courts pending for years. A bench of Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices P S Narasimha and J B Pardiwala, which is hearing a matter relating to the improvement of judicial infrastructure across the country including filling up of vacancies, directed that the vacancies in Gujarat state district judiciary, which is around one-third of the sanctioned strength, be filled by March this year. "There is no justification for proposals to be kept pending by Gujarat for eight years. Proper coordination between the High Court and the state would have ensured proposals are cleared. We direct that at least 40 proposals be cleared at the earliest," the bench said. It added that the state law secretary and the registrar general of the high court will monitor the progress with regard to other proposals. It noted that out of the 75 pending proposals regarding ...
The Supreme Court has agreed to hear on Friday a plea seeking a direction to the Centre to constitute a committee monitored by a retired apex court judge to inquire and investigate into the Hindenburg Research report which has made a slew of allegations against the business conglomerate led by industrialist Gautam Adani. Advocate Vishal Tiwari, who has filed the petition, mentioned the matter for urgent listing before a bench headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud on Thursday. Tiwari told the bench, also comprising Justices P S Narasimha and J B Pardiwala, that a separate plea filed on the issue is scheduled to be listed for hearing on February 10. He urged the bench that his plea be also heard on Friday along with the separate plea. In his public interest litigation (PIL), Tiwari has also sought directions to set up a special committee to oversee the sanction policy for loans of over Rs 500 crore given to big corporates. Last week, another PIL was filed in the apex court by advo
The Supreme Court on Thursday said it must bring the curtain down on issues plaguing the All India Football Federation (AIFF), including the objections raised to certain aspects of its draft constitution. "We must now bring the finality...I mean the curtain down on the issue related to the federation (AIFF)," a bench headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud said. The bench, also comprising Justices P S Narasimha and J B Pardiwala, asked senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, assisting it as an amicus curiae (friend of the court), to have a meeting with the counsels of all stakeholders and find out key objections to the draft constitution of AIFF. "We will list it for hearing after the hearing of the Constitution bench concludes, the bench said. The amicus said everybody will have some kind of objections. Responding to the query of the bench as to who is heading the AIFF currently after the elections, the amicus said Kalyan Chaubey, a former goalkeeper from West Bengal, is the ...
Amid an ongoing tiff between the Executive and the Judiciary over the procedure to appoint judges, the government has asked the Supreme Court Collegium to reconsider 10 proposals reiterated by it, Law Minister Kiren Rijiju told Rajya Sabha on Thursday. Out of these 10 proposals, the SC Collegium has reiterated its earlier recommendation for appointment in three cases. On the remaining seven reiterated proposals, the collegium has sought additional inputs from the high court collegium, he said in a written reply to a question. "Ten proposals reiterated by SCC (Supreme Court Collegium) were recently referred back to the SCC for reconsideration," he said. In view of various reports and input received by the government, which in its opinion warrant further consideration by the Collegium, the Centre has sent such reiterated cases for reconsideration as was done in the past as well, Rijiju explained. "There have been instances in the past when the SC Collegium had agreed to the views ...
Over 69,000 cases are pending in the Supreme Court while there is a backlog of over 59 lakh cases in the country's 25 high courts, Rajya Sabha was informed on Thursday. Citing details available on the SC website, Law Minister Kiren Rijiju said in a written reply that 69,511 cases were pending in the top court as on February 1. "There are 59,87,477 cases pending in the high courts across the country as per the information available on National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG) on February 1, 2023," he said. Out of these, 10.30 lakh cases were pending in the Allahabad High Court -- the biggest high court of the country. The Sikkim High Court has the least number of 171 cases. The government, Rijiju said, has taken several initiatives to provide "suitable environment" for expeditious disposal of cases by the Judiciary.
The Election Commission (EC) should wait for its decision on the original Shiv Sena party symbol until the Supreme Court gives its order on the disqualification of rebel MLAs
The Supreme Court Thursday remanded back to the Bombay High Court for fresh adjudication in four weeks an appeal filed by the CBI challenging the nod granted to Mainak Mehta, the brother-in-law of fugitive diamantaire Nirav Modi, to travel to Hong Kong. Nirav Modi is an accused in the Punjab National Bank (PNB) fraud case. The CBI has alleged that Mehta received a large sum of money siphoned off in the PNB fraud scam and transferred them to his and his wife's offshore bank accounts. A bench comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justices PS Narasimha and J B Pardiwala said the CBI and Mehta may file additional documents in the high court within a period of two weeks and the plea will be decided within two weeks after that. The court, in its order, noted that Mehta's counsel senior advocate Amit Desai, on instruction, has agreed to give a letter of authority to the central probe agency to access the details and probe his two offshore bank accounts. The CBI plea, filed through i
Supreme Court said Delhi Ridge acts as a lung which supplies oxygen to city residents, while directing DDA to not go ahead with land allotment in areas considered to be notified as protected areas
Citizens of Sikkim including Chief Minister Prem Singh Tamang and other political leaders on Wednesday expressed jubilation after the Supreme Court ordered the removal of reference to the Sikkimese-Nepalese as "people of foreign origin" from its January 13 verdict. The remark made by the apex court had sparked protests in the small northeastern state, with the formation of a Joint Action Council (JAC) by people from all sections of the society to carry out demonstrations seeking removal of the tag from the verdict on tax exemption in Sikkim. Tamang, who is also the chief of the ruling Sikkim Krantikari Morcha (SKM), state BJP president DR Thapa, opposition Sikkim Democratic Front (SDF) and the JAC said they are happy with the development and thanked the Supreme Court. A bench of justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna earlier in the day modified the verdict while hearing the Centre's plea along with petitions filed by Sikkim and private parties seeking modification of the remark. The ch
The Supreme Court on Wednesday sought responses of the office of the lieutenant governor, pro tem presiding officer Satya Sharma of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) and others on a plea filed by AAP mayoral candidate Shelly Oberoi seeking early holding of the mayoral election. A bench of Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices P S Narasimha and J B Pardiwala said it is issuing notice on the plea and seeking replies by next Monday. Senior advocate A M Singhvi, appearing for the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader, pointed out that the House was convened three times but the election of the mayor was not held. "We have several objections including that the pro tem presiding officer of the MCD is insisting on holding elections for mayor, deputy mayor and members of standing committee all at once. This is contrary to the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act," he said. Singhvi said the other issue is the voting rights of nominated members of the House and it needs to be adjudicated. The
Uddhav Thackeray, who heads a faction of the Shiv Sena, on Wednesday said that the decision by the Supreme Court on the disqualification of the party's rebel MLAs should come first and then by the Election Commission on who the original party belongs to. Addressing a press conference, Thackeray also asked why the EC froze the Shiv Sena name and its bow and arrow' symbol when it has not been used by the rival Eknath Shinde faction yet. The decision on disqualification should come first and then by the Election Commission (which faction Shiv Sena belongs to), Uddhav said, adding that the apex court will start hearing the matter related to the disqualification of rebel MLAs on a daily basis from February 14. The Sena was split last June after a rebellion led by Shinde, prompting his faction and the one headed by Uddhav Thackeray to try to stake claim over the party's name and its symbol.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday sought responses from the office of Lieutenant Governor of Delhi, pro tem presiding officer Satya Sharma of MCD and others on a plea filed by Aam Aadmi Party's (AAP) mayoral candidate Shelly Oberoi seeking early holding of mayoral election for the civic body. A bench of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justices PS Narasimha and JB Pardiwala said it is issuing notice on the plea and seeking the replies from them by next Monday. Senior advocate AM Singhvi pointed that the session of the House was called three times but no election for the Mayor was held. We have several objections including that the pro tem presiding officer of the MCD is insisting on holding elections for Mayor, Deputy Mayor and members of standing committee all at once. This is contrary to the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, he said. The bench, which noted the submissions of Singhvi, said it will hear the matter on Monday.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to entertain an appeal filed by Rapido challenging the Maharashtra government's denial to grant two-wheeler bike taxi aggregator licence to the company
A plea has been moved in the Supreme Court seeking a gag order to prevent media from publishing allegations in connection with the Adani group firms unless market regulator Sebi verifies them
The Supreme Court on Tuesday denied bail to Christian Michel James, an alleged middlemen in AgustaWestland chopper scam cases, who is being probed by both the CBI and Enforcement Directorate. The Rs 3,600-crore alleged scam relates to the purchase of 12 VVIP helicopters from AgustaWestland. A bench of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justices PS Narasimha and JB Pardiwala said James' argument that he be released on bail on ground that he has served half of the maximum sentence in the cases cannot be accepted. It, however, said James may pursue his remedy of regular bail before the trial court in the cases. James has sought bail under section 436A of CrPC which says that a person can be released on bail if he has completed half of the maximum sentence prescribed for the offence.
Apex court bench says court can only decide the question of Gowri's eligibility, not her suitability
A bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and BR Gavai said that it could not presume that the Collegium was not aware of Gowri's political background or the articles that later surfaced
The Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed a plea of journalist Rana Ayyub challenging summons by the Ghaziabad special court in a money laundering case. A bench of Justices V Ramasubramanian and JB Pardiwala allowed Ayyub to raise the issue of jurisdiction before the trial court, saying it is a question of evidence. On January 31, the top court had reserved its verdict on a plea of Ayyub challenging the summons. On January 25, the top court had asked a special court in Ghaziabad to adjourn the proceedings in the money laundering case against Ayyub scheduled for hearing on January 27 to a date after January 31. In her writ petition, Ayyub has sought quashing of the proceedings initiated by the ED in Ghaziabad citing lack of jurisdiction as the alleged offence of money laundering occurred in Mumbai. On November 29 last year, the special PMLA court in Ghaziabad took cognisance of the prosecution complaint (charge sheet) filed by the ED and summoned Ayyub. The ED charge sheet was filed
While the Supreme Court is seized of the matter related to the plea to restrain lawyer Lekshmana Chandra Victoria Gowri from taking oath as a judge of the Madras High Court, a senior advocate, who was among those who opposed her elevation said on Tuesday that they are waiting for the outcome of the proceedings in the apex court. N G R Prasad, a noted senior lawyer told PTI that the plea against Gowri for making 'hate speech' against minorities is with the top court and strong legal points have been made seeking to restrain her from taking oath as judge. However, her swearing-in is scheduled at 10.35 AM on Tuesday in the Madras High Court. Under the circumstances, "We have to keep our fingers crossed," he said. The outcome of the fight against Gowri's appointment hinges on the Supreme Court taking a decision and giving a direction ahead of her swearing-in. In case the swearing-in happens before a direction is received, then the scenario would be different, he said. The SC has said