Read Time: 01 hours
[Abu Salem] Before the Supreme Court, the Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta strongly objected to terror convict Abu Salem's counsel's statement, asking the Home Secretary to file their stand on the extradition treaty with Portugal. “Your client has been accused of acts of terror, you cannot dictate terms to the government,” he said. It is Salem's case that he cannot be sentenced over 25 years as per the commitment given to Portugal authorities for his extradition. Rishi Malhotra, Counsel for Abu Salem then asked the court to direct Home Secretary to file an affidavit by tomorrow. The SG objected to this saying, “Your client is involved in bomb blast matter you are in no position to direct the government as to when they to file the affidavit.” Bench: Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and MM Sundaresh Case Title: Abu Salem Abdul Kayyum Ansari Vs. State of Maharashtra Click here to read more
[2015 Mehsana riots, Hardik Patel] The Supreme Court stayed the conviction of Indian National Congress leader Hardik Patel in a 2015 riot case. Patel had challenged the Gujarat High Court order upholding his conviction in the Mehsana riots case. The bench was hearing a plea against the judgment of the Gujarat High Court upholding Patel's conviction so that he could contest the 2019 Lok Sabha elections. Senior Advocate Maninder Singh appearing for Patel argued before the bench that not allowing Patel to contest the elections is a violation of his right to freedom. Whereas, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta opposed the stay as sought stating that there are allegations of several serious offences in the 2015 Riots case against Patel. Bench: Justice S Abdul Nazeer and Justice Vikram Nath Case Title: Hardik Bharatbhai Patel Vs. The State of Gujarat Click here to read more
[Extortion racket] The Supreme Court has granted bail to journalist Binu Varghese who was accused of being involved in extortion along with former Mumbai Police Commissioner Param Bir Singh. Varghese was booked by the Mumbai police in August 2021 for trying to extort a ransom from the Assistant Commissioner of Thane Municipal Corporation. The AC alleged that Varghese introduced himself as a "journalist" and demanded rupees ten lakhs to pay for a flat that he had booked. He further accused Varghese of black mailing him with an alleged fake certificate. Bench: Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and MM Sundaresh Case Title: Binu Varghese Vs. State of Maharashtra Click here to read more
[Deportation of foreigners] Supreme Court has tagged the plea seeking to stop the alleged harassment meted out to people belonging to the minority community in Assam in the name of identification, detection, determination and deportation of foreigners, with the connected matters. The Assam Sanmilita Mahasangha case deals with the constitutionality of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, 1955. In 2014, after hearing the petition preferred by Mahasangha, a division bench of the Top Court had referred the matter to a Constitutional Bench. Bench: Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice Surya Kant Case Title: Asom Sankhyalaghu Sangram Parishad Vs. UOI & Ors Click here to read more
[‘Bhaiya is back’ banner] Hoardings reading "Bhaiya is back", welcoming a person accused in a rape case after his bail, enraged the Supreme Court on Monday. “Ask your bhaiya to be careful this week,” a CJI led bench of the Supreme Court told the defence counsel as it decided to consider the victim's plea for cancellation of bail. The bench was told by the counsel for the girl that banners, saying ‘bhaiya is back’, have been put up in the local area celebrating the grant of bail to the accused by the Madhya Pradesh High Court. Bench: Chief Justice N V Ramana, Justice Krishna Murari and Justice Hima Kohli Case Title: Ms. P Vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh & Anr. Click here to read more
[Thane Creek Project] Supreme Court pulled up the Bombay High Court for directing the high court registry to release an amount of Rs.10 crores deposited by Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation as interim payment to the fishermen affected by the Thane creek bridge work near Vashi, Mumbai. Court expressed its displeasure over the order of the court as the matter has not reached finality as yet. The High Court, in February, had directed the MSRDC to deposit Rs 10 crore in the court, after being informed that despite directions passed in August 2021 for a committee to be set up to determine the compensation amount for the affected fishermen, there was no progress on it. Bench: Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna Case Title: Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation Vs. Mariyayi Macchimaar Sahkari Sanstha Maryadit Click here to read more
[Dharam Sansad Hate Speech] The Delhi Police has told the apex Court in relation to the December 2021 incident of alleged hate speech in Delhi that there has been no call for genocide against a particular community & that in fact, the bare perusal of video clip suggests that the speech is about empowering one’s religion & prepare for existential threats. Delhi police has said that the petitioners have moved the Court without approaching Police and as such, they have no locus to approach the Supreme Court, the same if allowed, will open floodgates of litigation. “Such a practice must be deprecated,” the Delhi Police claims. Case Title: Qurban Ali & Anr. Vs Union of India & Ors. Click here to read more
[Brick Kilns] The Supreme Court recently issued conditions to be followed by the Brick Kiln industries in the National Capital Region in view of the risk they pose to the environment. The State Pollution Control Board has also been directed to conduct surprise inspections without any notice and to issue warnings to the persons running the units from time to time to ensure that the production is being carried out in terms of the notification issued by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change dated February 22, 2022. Bench: Justice KM Joseph and Justice Hrishikesh Roy Case Title: NCR Brick Kiln Association Vs. Central Pollution Control Board & Ors. Click here to read more
[PostPe-PhonePe Trademark infringement] The Supreme Court last week dismissed a plea moved by a company called PostPe against PhonePe Ltd. challenging the orders of the Bombay High Court, which had granted liberty to PhonePe to pursue its suit for infringement and passing off of its trademark PhonePe. A dispute arose when PostPe started getting involved in the field of digital payments in which PhonePe is already involved in. The latter approached the Bombay High Court stating that PostPe was infringing upon its trademark. Bench: Justices DY Chandrachud and Surya Kant Case Title: Resiliant innovations Pvt Ltd Vs. PhonePe Click here to read more
[Color blind students-FTII] Supreme Court has directed the Film and Television Institute of India(FTII) to allow color blind candidates to take admission in all its courses. Court further mooted a proposal to make subjects that may not inclusive for such students to be made optional. In December last year, Ashutosh Kumar, a 35-year-old man approached the Supreme Court after being barred by the institute because he is color blind. The institute had put forth the logic that he may not be able to pass in certain subjects. Bench: Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and MM Sundaresh Case Title: Ashutosh Kumar Vs. FTII Click here to read more
[Orphan Adoption process] Supreme Court has issued notice in a plea seeking to to make adoption procedures simple, superfluous. The plea filed by The Temple of Healing, seeks an appropriate direction to the Union of India for improving the number of adoptions in the country. It is further sought that the Ministry of Women and Child Development be directed to give adequate publicity to HAMA (Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956) even though the Act has been formulated by the Ministry of Law and Justice. Bench: Justices DY Chandrachud and Surya Kant Case Title: THE TEMPLE OF HEALING Vs. UNION OF INDIA Click here to read more
[Caste-based census of OBCs] Top Court adjourned the hearing for four weeks on a plea seeking directions for caste-based census for the Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in the 16th Indian Census which will be taken this year. Noting that one other similar petition is pending before another bench as well, Court directed the instant matter to be listed along with the same after four weeks. The plea argues that that though the Central Government and State Governments are introducing and implementing multiple schemes for the socio-politico-economic development of backward castes, they are unable to share the benefits with all sections among backward castes due to lack of caste based survey. Bench: Justice L. Nageswara Rao and Justice B.R. Gavai Case Title: Krishan Kanhaya Pal Advocate Vs. Union of India & Ors. Click here to read more
[Consumer forums] The Supreme Court has recently directed all State Governments to establish consumer mediation cells for the District and State Consumer Dispute Redressal Forums. A division has further directed the States to incorporate e-filing systems in District and State Commissions as well. In addition to this, over the issue of the status of vacancies of President & Members in the State Commission and District Commission of States/ UTs, the Status report filed by the Amicus Curie stated that the lag is occurring on account of lack of suitable candidates, absence of qualified persons as per norms which may require relaxation by the Central Government and pay and allowances is an issue which is creating an impediment in some of the persons accepting the assignment. Bench: Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice MM Sundresh Case Title: In RE: Inaction of the Governments in appointing President and Members/ Staff of Districts and State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and inadequate infrastructure across India Click here to read more
Please Login or Register
