The Supreme Court on Monday granted protection from arrest to actor Shreyas Talpade in a case of cheating and breach of trust against a society. A bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and K V Viswanathan issued notice to Haryana Police and others on the actor's plea. Thirteen people, including actors and brand ambassadors Talpade and Alok Nath, were booked ont he complaint of 37-year-old Sonipat resident Vipul Antil. Antil alleged both the actors "promoted the Human Welfare Credit Cooperative Society Ltd, as brand ambassadors". Additional Commissioner of Police, Murthal, Sonipat, Ajeet Singh said the complaint was against a multi-marketing company under investigated. About the two actors, the ACP had said, "It has been alleged that they were its brand ambassadors and victims get lured to invest because of such personalities. They were named in the complaint. An FIR has been registered. Now, it will be investigated what was their role." The FIR was registered on January 22 under Secti
The Supreme Court on Monday sought responses from the Centre and the states on a plea to declare consumers had a "right to know" about products aside from the details of distributors and sellers. A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta sought the responses within four weeks. The petition filed by petitioner Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay said "right to know" was crucial for consumers to make informed choices and to protect themselves from unfair or restrictive trade practices and unscrupulous exploitation. The plea sought directions to the authorities concerned to ensure every distributor, trader and shop owner displayed details of registration, including name, address, phone number and number of employees at the entry gate in bold letters on a display board visible to people. "Right to know helps consumers avoid falling prey to a fraudulent or deceptive distributor, dealer, trader, seller and shop owner, who might misrepresent a product/service or disappear after sale, purchase
The former promoters of Bhushan Steel and Power Ltd on Monday urged the Supreme Court to accord an open court hearing to their plea seeking review of the May 2 verdict ordering liquidation of BSPL under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. The top court had on May set aside the resolution plan submitted by JSW Steel for the BSPL, holding it illegal and in violation of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). A bench comprising Justice Bela M Trivedi (since retired) and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma had also ordered the liquidation of BSPL under the IBC. The former promoters of BSPL were Sanjay Singhal and his family, specifically including his father Brij Bhushan Singal and brother Neeraj Singal. On Monday, senior advocate Vikas Singh, appearing for former promoters of the ailing firm, told a bench comprising Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran that the review plea be listed before a bench for an open court hearing. The senior lawyer said the value of the assets o
The Enforcement Directorate is "crossing all limits", the Supreme Court said on Monday as it expressed serious concern over the agency summoning advocates for offering legal advice or representing clients during investigations. It also called for guidelines on the matter. The remarks from an apex court bench of Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran came during a suo motu hearing initiated by the court to address the implications of such actions on the independence of the legal profession. The communication between a lawyer and the clients is privileged communication and how can the notices be issued against them they are crossing all limits, the CJI said. Guidelines should be framed, the CJI said while responding to submissions that recent ED notices to legal professionals like senior advocate Arvind Datar could have a chilling effect on the practice of law. Attorney General R Vennkataramani and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said the issue had been taken up at the .
The Supreme Court has dismissed the ED's appeal against Karnataka HC order quashing Muda case summons to Siddaramaiah's wife; said political battles should not be fought through agencies
The Supreme Court on Monday questioned the Enforcement Directorate's conduct in politically sensitive cases as it upheld the Karnataka High Court's decision to quash the case against Chief Minister Siddaramaiah's wife in the MUDA case. Cautioning against the agency being used as a tool in political battles, a bench comprising Chief Justice B R Gavai said, "Let political battles be fought before the electorate. Why are you being used". The bench comprising Chief Justice Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran was hearing the ED's appeal challenging a Karnataka High Court order that quashed proceedings in the Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA) case involving BM Parvati, wife of the Karnataka chief minister. Mr Raju (Additional Solicitor General S V Raju who was appearing for the ED), please don't compel us to open our mouths. Otherwise, we will be forced to make some harsh comments about the ED. Unfortunately, I have some experience in Maharashtra. Don't perpetuate this violence ...
The Supreme Court on Monday refused to list for urgent hearing a plea seeking the registration of an FIR against the Allahabad High Court's Justice Yashwant Varma in connection with the cash discovery row. A bench comprising Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran was urged by lawyer Mathews Nedumpara that it was his third petition on the issue, and it be listed for hearing urgently. "Do you want it to be dismissed right now?" the CJI asked, adding that it will be listed in due course. "It is impossible to be dismissed. An FIR has to be registered. Now Varma seems to be asking for that only. There has to be an FIR, an investigation," the lawyer said. The bench took strong note of the fact that the lawyer addressed the high court judge as Varma'. "Is he your friend? He is still Justice Verma. How do you address him? Have some decorum. You are referring to a learned judge. He is still a judge of the court," the CJI said. "I don't think that greatness can apply to him.
A petition has been filed in the Supreme Court seeking to declare that consumers have a "right to know" about the quality, purity and certification of products, besides details of distributors and sellers for redressal against unfair restrictive trade practices. It has also sought directions to the Centre and the states to ensure that every distributor, trader and shop owner displays details of registration, including name, address, phone number and number of employees at the entry gate in bold letters on a display board visible to people. The plea is slated to come up for hearing on July 21 before a bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta. The petition filed by petitioner Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay said "right to know" was crucial for consumers to make informed choices and to protect themselves from unfair or restrictive trade practices and unscrupulous exploitation. "Right to know helps consumers avoid falling prey to a fraudulent or deceptive distributor, dealer, trader, sel
A five-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court is scheduled to consider on July 22 the Presidential reference on whether timelines could be imposed by judicial orders for the exercise of discretion by the President while dealing with bills passed by state assemblies. According to the cause list posted on the apex court website, a bench comprising Chief Justice of India BR Gavai and Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, PS Narasimha and Atul S Chandurkar will be hearing the matter. In May, President Droupadi Murmu exercised her powers under Article 143(1) and posed 14 crucial questions to the Supreme Court over its April 8 verdict that fixed timelines for governors and the President to act on bills passed by state assemblies. Article 143 (1) of the Constitution deals with the power of President to consult the Supreme Court "if at any time it appears to the President that a question of law or fact has arisen, or is likely to arise, which is of such a nature and of such public ...
JSW Group on Friday said its expansion plan will not be impacted by the Supreme Court order to set aside the acquisition of Bhushan Steel and Power Ltd (BSPL) through the insolvency process. JSW Steel Joint MD and CEO Jayant Acharya, in an earnings call, said that BPSL was not part of the brownfield expansion that the steel company took into account while setting the 50 million tonnes capacity target by 2030-31. "In our 50 MT tonne outlook (expansion) that we have given up to 2030-31, BPSL was not part of the brownfield expansion that which we have taken into account. So therefore, it will not impact our target which we have given," Acharya said, in an earnings call, said while replying to a question if the acquisition of BPSL asset going into legalities will affect JSW Steel's expansion plans. He also said that the company has filed a review in Supreme Court for BPSL case and believes there is a strong ground for the same. "For that 0.5 MnT (expansion) we will take a view. That is
The Supreme Court on Thursday transferred from high courts to itself, four PILs seeking a ban on opinion trading platforms for allegedly promoting illegal betting and gambling activities. A bench comprising Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan passed the order in a transfer petition of Probo Media Technologies Pvt Ltd, a firm which operates one such opinion trading platform. The bench, in its order, noted the factual position with regard to petitions pending in different high courts. Senior advocate Abhishek M Singhvi, appearing for the petitioner, said there were two petitions in the nature of PIL pending before the Bombay High Court. He said the third PIL is pending before the Gujarat High Court and the fourth before the Chhattisgarh High Court. Singhvi said the PILs from other high courts could be transferred to the Bombay High Court. Rejecting the submission, the bench said, All these four PILs should be heard by this court...we direct the High Court of Bombay, High Court o
The Supreme Court rules that tenants cannot claim Sarfaesi Act protection unless they can show tenancy began before the property was mortgaged
Supreme Court gives Centre, Maharashtra four weeks to respond on setting up exclusive NIA courts; says failure to act may lead to bail being granted in delayed terror-related trials
The Congress will support and its MPs will be among the signatories to the motion to be brought against Justice Yashwant Varma in the Lok Sabha, senior party leader Jairam Ramesh said on Friday, asserting that then-CJI Sanjiv Khanna had "forced our hand" in the matter by writing to the president and the prime minister. In an interview with PTI, Ramesh also stressed that the opposition would strongly push the issue of Justice Shekhar Yadav, against whom 55 opposition MPs moved an impeachment notice in the Rajya Sabha last December for allegedly delivering a hate speech at a gathering last year. A fire incident at Justice Varma's residence in the national capital in March, when he was a judge at the Delhi High Court, had led to the discovery of several burnt sacks of banknotes in the outhouse. Though the judge claimed ignorance about the cash, the Supreme Court-appointed committee indicted him after speaking to a number of witnesses and recording his statement. Justice Khanna had ...
The decision to refuse a stay on trial proceedings against RJD supremo Lalu Prasad Yadav comes at a politically sensitive moment, as Bihar prepares for assembly elections later this year
The Supreme Court was on Friday informed that the execution of Indian nurse Nimisha Priya, who is on death row for murder in Yemen, has been stayed. Attorney General R Venkataramani, appearing for the Centre, told a bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta that "efforts are on" in the matter. The top law officer said the government wants Priya to come back safely. "They (government) are taking good care of whatever is possible," the bench observed. The counsel appearing for the petitioner said they have to first get pardon and then the issue of "blood money" would come. The petitioner informed the court that the execution has been postponed. The bench posted the matter for further hearing on August 14. The apex court was hearing a plea seeking a direction to the Centre to use diplomatic channels to save Priya, 38, facing execution in Yemen. The execution was earlier scheduled for July 16. Priya, a nurse from Palakkad district of Kerala, was convicted of murdering her Ye
Justice Yashwant Varma moves SC against in-house panel report that indicted him after unaccounted cash was found at his Delhi home following a fire; calls probe unconstitutional
The Supreme Court extends the deadline for FSSAI expert committee to submit recommendations on mandatory front-of-pack labels for packaged food items, addressing public health concerns
According to the EC data, enumeration forms of over 86.32 per cent electors have been collected so far
Supreme Court dismisses Hindustan Motors' plea against West Bengal's takeover of 395 acres in Uttarpara, ending a legal dispute dating back to 2022