The Supreme Court is scheduled to pronounce on Monday its judgement on a batch of pleas challenging the validity of the 103rd Constitution amendment providing 10 per cent reservation to economically weaker sections (EWS) persons in admissions and government jobs. According to the causelist of November 7 uploaded on the apex court website, a five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Uday Umesh Lalit would deliver the verdict in the matter. The apex court had on September 27 reserved the verdict on the legal question of whether the EWS quota violated the basic structure of the Constitution after hearing a battery of senior lawyers, including the then Attorney General K K Venugopal and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, in the marathon hearing that had lasted for six-and-half-day. Academician Mohan Gopal had opened the arguments in the case before the bench, which also comprised justices Dinesh Maheshwari, S Ravindra Bhat, Bela M Trivedi, and J B Pardiwala, on September 13 and
The Supreme Court has said a borrower cannot claim further extension of time as a matter of right for making payment under the one-time settlement (OTS) scheme. The apex court said the borrower has to establish any right in its favour to claim the extension as a matter of right. A bench of Justices M R Shah and Krishna Murari quashed the Punjab and Haryana High Court judgement delivered in March, which had granted further six weeks to a borrower, a company, to make the payment of balance amount with interest to the State Bank of India according to the sanctioned letter of OTS . The top court observed that rescheduling the payment under the OTS scheme and granting extension of time would tantamount to "rewriting the contract", which is not permissible while exercising the powers under Article 226 of the Constitution. The modification of the contract can be done only by mutual consent under section 62 of the Indian Contract Act, it said. Article 226 of the Constitution deals with th
The Supreme Court on Friday constituted a committee to look into records relating to 108 people, who went missing during the 1992-93 riots in Mumbai, and said the Maharashtra government shall make all possible efforts to trace their family members or legal heirs. The apex court observed that violence witnessed by Mumbai in December 1992 and January 1993 adversely affected the right of the residents of the affected areas to lead a "dignified and meaningful life" and if citizens are forced to live in an atmosphere of communal tension, it affects their right to life guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution. A bench headed by Justice S K Kaul said the state shall pay compensation of Rs 2 lakh to the legal heirs of the missing persons, traced out hereafter, with interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum from January 22, 1999 till actual payment. "The committee consisting of the Secretary of MSLSA (Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority) and the other two government officers ..
The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to list for hearing on November 10 a PIL seeking fresh guidelines on stubble burning to curb rising air pollution in Delhi and the national capital region (NCR). A bench comprising Chief Justice Uday Umesh Lalit and Justice Bela M Trivedi took note of the submissions of lawyer Shashank Shekhar Jha, who filed the PIL in his personal capacity, that the air pollution situation has worsened due to stubble burning in areas close to Delhi. "Even normal people cannot walk in such a situation," the lawyer said, adding that "Air Quality Index (AQI) level has risen due to stubble burning." "List it on November 10," the CJI said. The petition also sought a direction to the schools, colleges and government and private offices to go virtual/online. The lawyer alleged that the problem of pollution arises every year and that there was a serious threat on life and liberty due to the smog in Delhi NCR. "The matter is of grave concern which requires immediate ...
The Supreme Court on Friday directed that all FIRs against expelled BJP leader Naveen Kumar Jindal lodged across the country in connection with his alleged derogatory remarks against Prophet Muhammad be transferred to Delhi Police. A bench of Justices MR Shah and MM Sundresh also extended interim protection to Jindal till the probe is concluded by Delhi police. The top court allowed Jindal to move Delhi High Court for quashing of FIRs lodged over his alleged remarks and said all future FIRs would also be transferred to Delhi Police for investigation. "All FIRs to be transferred to Delhi Police IFSO Unit. No precipitative action or further FIRs against the accused for eight weeks so he can pursue his appropriate remedy before the Delhi High Court," the bench said. The apex court had earlier provided similar relief to suspended BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma in connection with FIRs/complaints lodged against her in several states over her remarks on the Prophet during a TV debate. It
The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to hear during the day itself a plea seeking grant of interim bail to former promoter of Fortis Healthcare Ltd Malvinder Mohan Singh in view of the critical condition of his wife. A bench comprising Chief Justice Uday Umesh Lalit and Justice Bela M Trivedi took note of the submissions of senior advocate Kailash Vasudev, appearing for Singh, that the plea be heard urgently as the condition of his wife is critical due to decrease in her platelet count The top court issued notice to the standing counsel of the Delhi government and posted the plea for hearing at 1 pm. Singh is presently lodged in Tihar jail in a case related to alleged misappropriation of funds at Religare Finvest Limited (RFL). In September this year, the Supreme Court awarded a six-month jail term to Singh in a contempt case related to the sale of shares of Fortis to Malaysia-based IHH Healthcare.
The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to examine on November 10 a plea seeking urgent steps in connection with air pollution in Delhi
The Supreme Court on Thursday approved a fresh timeline submitted by the Justice (retired) L N Rao committee for the election of the Indian Olympic Association (IOA) executive committee, to be held on December 10. A bench of Justices D Y Chandrachud and Hima Kohli also allowed circulation of the draft amended constitution among members of the IOA so that it could be adopted in the general body meeting scheduled to be held on November 10. It said former apex court judge Justice L N Rao has submitted a note dated November 2 which indicates the comprehensive exercise which has been carried out by him on an expedited basis and this court appreciates the alacrity with which the assignment has been taken up in the national interest. The bench noted that the judge has interacted with all stakeholders including the International Olympic Committee, Indian Olympic Association (IOA) and State Associations. "There is a broad consensus in terms of the note submitted by Justice L Nageswara Rao t
The plea stated that the modified seeds can contaminate non-GM mustard crops and that the sowing of such seeds should be put on hold
Uncertainty surrounds the second attempt to introduce the genetically modified oilseed
The UCPMP is voluntary and there is no legal penalty for violating the code
The lawyer of fugitive businessman Vijay Mallya on Thursday told the Supreme Court that he was not receiving any communication from him and sought to be discharged from the case as a counsel. A bench of Justices D Y Chandrachud and Hima Kohli allowed the discharge of advocate E C Agrawala from the case and asked him to furnish the e-mail ID of the liquor baron along with his present residential address in the United Kingdom to the apex court registry. "Counsel seeking discharge the case because in spite of communication from his end, no instruction is forthcoming," the bench said and asked the lawyer to follow the process of discharge. Agrawala told the top court, "I want to be discharged from this matter as I am not receiving any instructions from my client. I am not able to establish contact with him. He is incommunicado for a long time." The top court discharged the lawyer from the two petitions filed by Mallya against the October 5, 2018 and September 13, 2019 orders of the ...
The bench queried the Centre's counsel on the current status in connection with the environmental release of GM mustard
Fugitive businessman Vijay Mallya's lawyer, facing extradition, told the Supreme Court on Thursday that he has been incommunicado for a long time and requested the court to discharge him
The Supreme Court on Thursday turned down a plea seeking directions to change the name of Bombay High Court to Maharashtra High Court. A bench of Justices Aniruddha Bose and Vikram Nath dismissed the petition filed by a former judge. "These are issues for law makers to decide. What fundamental right is prejudiced for you to bring it here?", the bench said. The plea filed by Thane-based V P Patil, who had served as a judge for 26 years, has also sought a direction to the authorities to take effective steps for implementation of a clause of the Maharashtra Adaptation of Laws (State and Concurrent Subjects) Order, 1960 for conservation and preservation of distinct culture, heritage and traditions of the people of Maharashtra. Patil said authorities concerned in other states should also be directed to change the names of their high courts as per the name of the states where they are located. It said that the assertion of the word 'Maharashtra' denotes special significance in the life
The Supreme Court on Thursday dismissed the plea of Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) terrorist Mohammad Arif alias Ashfaq seeking review of its judgement awarding death penalty to him in the 2000 Red Fort attack case that left three people, including two Army jawans, dead. A bench comprising Chief Justice Uday Umesh Lalit and Justice Bela M Trivedi said that it has accepted the prayers that electronic records be considered. We have accepted the prayers that electronic records must be placed in consideration. His guilt is proved. We affirm the view taken by this court and reject the review petition, the bench said. Arif was one of the accused, who had entered the Red Fort on December 22, 2000 and had opened indiscriminate firing leading to the death of three.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday reserved its verdict on the issue of sale of unused floor area ratio (FAR) of Amrapali Group of Companies in order to generate funds for its stalled projects. FAR is the ratio of a building's total floor area (gross floor area) to the size of the piece of land on which it is built. A bench of Chief Justice of India U U Lalit and Justice Bela M Trivedi reserved its verdict on the issue. The CJI will be demitting office on November 8, a court holiday, and will hold court last on November 7. The Noida and Greater Noida authorities have opposed the sale of the unused FAR while court receiver and attorney general R Venkataramani has supported it saying it will help in generating funds for the stalled projects of the group. Venkataramani had earlier told the bench that to complete the stalled projects, funds will be needed and despite the payment of home buyers, selling of unsold inventories and bank loans, the amount collected will be very less as compare
The non-reporting of sexual assault against a minor despite knowledge is a "serious crime" and an attempt to shield the offenders, the Supreme Court said on Wednesday. The apex court said prompt and proper reporting of commission of offence under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act is of utmost importance and the failure to do so would defeat the very purpose and object of the law. The top court set aside the Bombay High Court's judgement of April last year quashing an FIR and the charge sheet regarding a medical practitioner who allegedly did not inform the authority about sexual assault against several minor girls at a hostel despite having knowledge about it. A bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi and C T Ravikumar observed it is true that the FIR and the charge sheet still remain in respect of other accused in the case. "But then, non-reporting of sexual assault against a minor child despite knowledge is a serious crime and more often than not, it is an attemp
The petition sought contempt proceedings and criminal action against Justice Chandrachud, objected to CJI Lalit hearing the case
The Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed a plea seeking to restrain its seniormost judge, Justice D Y Chandrachud, from taking oath as the Chief Justice of India on November 9 by terming the entire petition "misconceived". "Having heard the counsel, we see no reason to hear.... We find the entire petition to be misconceived," a bench of the apex court said. Earlier, the bench headed by Chief Justice Uday Umesh Lalit agreed to hear the plea during the day itself, instead of Thursday. "Get the paper books for my brother and sister (justices S Ravindra Bhat and Bela M Trivedi). We will list the matter at 12.45 pm today itself," the CJI said. Justice Chandrachud, the CJI-designate, is set to take oath as the 50th Chief Justice of India on November 9. The plea was filed by one Mursalin Asijith Shaikh.