Read Time: 01 hours

1. [Sarojini Nagar Jhuggis] Before the Supreme Court, the Additional Solicitor General of India KM Natraj submitted that no coercive steps will be taken with respect to the demolition of Jhuggis in Delhi's Sarojini Nagar till the next date of hearing of the matter. The Supreme Court was hearing a plea challenging the demolition of Jhuggis at Sarojini Nagar. Court, on hearing the ASG’s submissions, recorded the same and adjourned the case to May 2 for further hearing. During the hearing, Justice KM Joseph asked the government to deal with the issue humanely. He said, “Look at your notice, the impugned notice says that 'hand it over as it is government of India land'. These poor people occupy the land out of necessity. As a modern government, you cannot say that you will not do anything else.”
   Bench: Justice KM Joseph
   Case Title: Vaishali & Ors vs Union of India & Ors
   Click here to read more

2. [Children in Street Situation] The Supreme Court has directed States and Union Territories to follow the scheme suggested by the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) for the rehabilitation of Children in Street Situation (CiSS) unless they frame their own scheme. The bench was informed that the States of Tamil Nadu and Delhi have formulated their own schemes for the rehabilitation of CiSS. Whereas, the Court has directed them to circulate copies of the scheme and implement the same. The bench was hearing the suo-motu case pertaining to the children who are in street situations.
   Bench: Justice L Nageswara Rao and Justice BR Gavai
   Case Title: IN RE Children In Street Situations
   Click here to read more

3. [Mandatory vaccination for college entry] The Supreme Court upheld a Government Order (GO) issued by the State of Karnataka mandating Covid19 vaccination for students and staff for physical attendance at educational institutions. The bench said that this is one such case wherein it would not interfere. Challenging the High Court order, students and teachers of one Ayurveda college had pleaded that the circular is coercive in nature. They had argued that the World Health Organisation (WHO) has held that vaccination does not prevent the spread of the disease from person to person.
   Bench: Justices DY Chandrachud and Surya Kant
   Case Title: Sushma Aradhya Vs State of Karnataka
   Click here to read more

4. [Myanmar refugees] The Supreme Court stayed operation of a Manipur High Court Judgment challenged by the Centre which had granted passage to seven Myanmar refugees to New Delhi. The bench directed the petitioner, Nandita Haskar, who had sought directions from the High Court for safe passage of seven Myanmar’s illegal immigrants to Delhi, to take responsibility for them as they have become untraceable. Haskar had moved the Manipur High Court to allow the Myanmarese citizens to travel to New Delhi to seek protection from United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHRC).
   Bench: Justices Khanwilkar and AS Oka
   Case Title: Union of India Vs Nandita Haskar
   Click here to read more

5. [GNCTD vs Centre] The Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta while arguing before the Supreme Court in the Delhi Government's plea challenging amendments in sections of the ‘Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD) Act’ submitted that, "When the capitals are well managed, Countries are known by the name of its Capital. We all know London." Mehta said that the issue should not be a matter of one political party versus another, rather should be guided by the capital of this nation & how it would ensure its obligation.
   Bench: Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justice Surya Kant, and Justice Hima Kohli
   Case Title: GNCTD Vs. Union of India
   Click here to read more
    
6. [Sedition Challenge] The Supreme Court allowed the Central Government to file its response in a batch of petitions challenging the constitutionality of Section 124A which penalises the offence of Sedition and listed the matter for final round of hearing on May 5. The bench was hearing a batch of petitions including one filed by Major General SG Vombatkere, Editors Guild of India, etc. challenging section 124A of the Indian Penal Code.
   Bench: Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justice Surya Kant, and Justice Hima Kohli
   Case Title: S.G. VOMBATKERE Vs. UNION OF INDIAE | EDITORS GUILD OF INDIA AND ANR. Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
   Click here to read more
    
7. [Cancellation of ration cards] Supreme Court has asked the Chief Secretary of the State of Telangana to file an affidavit explaining the steps/verification undertaken by the government before canceling the ration cards of 19 lakh persons. The court has further directed the State to conduct a verification of all the ration cards that were canceled pursuant to the directives issued by the central government in 2016 for linkage of Aadhar card with ration card. The court was hearing the plea by social activist S.Q. Masood challenging the order of Telangana High Court dismissing his public interest litigation which challenged the cancelation of ration cards by the government without issuing notice to the persons concerned.
   Bench: Justices Nageshwar Rao and Gavai
   Case Title: SQ Masood Vs State of Telangana
   Click here to read more
    
8. [Draft Criminal Rules on Practice, 2021] The Supreme Court directed all the High Courts to expeditiously incorporate Draft Criminal Rules on Practice, 2021 as part of rules governing criminal trials, and the State Governments to make appropriate amendments in the criminal rules thereafter. A three-judge bench has further asked the High Courts to ensure that existing rules, notifications, orders and practice directions are suitably modified, and promulgated.
   Bench: Justice L Nageswara Rao, Justice BR Gavai and Justice S Ravindra Bhat
   Case Title: In Re: To Issue Certain Guidelines Regarding Inadequacies And Deficiencies In Criminal Trials
   Click here to read more
    
9. [GNCTD vs Centre] The Supreme Court has reserved its order on an application filed by the Central Government seeking direction to refer Delhi Government's plea which has challenged the constitutionality of Sections 21, 24, 33, 44 of the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Act, 1991 and Rules 3, 6A, 10, 14, 15, 19, 22, 23, 25, 47A, 49, 52 and 57 of Transaction of Business of the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Rules, 1993, to a Constitution bench.
   Bench: Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justice Surya Kant, and Justice Hima Kohli
   Case Title: GNCTD Vs. Union of India
   Click here to read more
    
10. [Article 21A] The Supreme Court of India directed the Central and State governments to respond to suggestions made by Amicus Curiae, Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan for declaring ‘the right to physical activity and literacy as a fundamental right’ under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. A division bench was hearing a plea, inter alia seeking directions to the Union Government to form a High-Level Committee in order to effectuate suggestions on amending Article 21A, so as to include "sports" as a Fundamental Right.
    Bench: Justice L. Nageswara Rao and Justice B.R. Gavai
    Case Title: Kanishka Pandey v. Union of India through the Cabinet Secretary & Ors.
    Click here to read more
     
11. [Rajiv Gandhi Assassination] Supreme Court while hearing the plea filed by AG Perarivalan, a convict in former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi’s assassination case, remarked that the concept of federalism will be destroyed if the governor refers recommendation of the State government cabinet to the president for approval. The remark was made in the light of the fact that the governor of Tamil Nadu RN Ravi had referred files pertaining to early release of seven persons who were convicted in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination plot.
    Bench: Justices Nageshwar Rao and Gavai
    Case Title: Perarivalan Vs State of Tamil Nadu
    Click here to read more
     
12. [Khargone Communal Riots] Plea in Supreme Court has been filed seeking court monitored Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe factum of “illegally & arbitrarily” running bulldozers over properties of petitioner(s) in Khargone, Madhya Pradesh, after communal riots broke out on April 10, 2022. The petition filed by Razia Mansoori and others has alleged that the local administration in Madhya Pradesh has demolished several properties of the petitioners on the “pretext or misconceived surmise that they were associated with alleged suspects of the Ram Navami violence in Khargone, Madhya Pradesh in view of the incident of stone-pelting and arson during Ram Navami processions on April 10, 2022”.
    Case Title: Razia Mansoori & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors.
    Click here to read more
     
13. [Hindustan Zinc disinvestment] The Central Government informed the Supreme Court that First Information Reports have been registered in view of the direction of the Court over alleged illegalities in the disinvestment of 26% shares of Hindustan Zinc Limited (HZL) by the Union Government in March 2002. Earlier, the Top Court had directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to register the case. Taking note of Center's submission, Court has posted the matter after vacation for further hearing.
    Bench: Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice Hima Kohli
    Case Title: National Confederation of Officers Association of Central Public Sector Enterprise & Ors v. Union of India & Ors
    Click here to read more
     
14. [Rakesh Asthana appointment] The Supreme Court listed the plea filed by the Centre for Public Interest Litigation, an NGO, challenging the appointment of Rakesh Asthana as Delhi Police Commissioner, along with a Special Leave Petition (SLP) against the judgment of the Delhi High Court upholding Asthana's appointment, for final hearing on May 18.
    Bench: Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice Hima Kohli
    Case Title: Centre for Public Interest Litigation Vs Union of India
    Click here to read more
     
15. [Security Upgradation in Tihar Jail] The Delhi Government has recently informed Supreme Court that the process of installation of mobile signal jammers and X-ray body scanners is in progress at Tihar Prison. The court was hearing an application for upgradation of security in Tihar Jail filed by Bhupinder Singh over alleged collusion between Chandra brothers, the jailed Unitech promoters, and Tihar jail officials. Senior Advocate Gautam Narayan appearing for the Delhi Government submitted that a new system of police tickets has been introduced to ensure and strengthen the security in jail.
    Bench: Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice MR Shah
    Case Title: Bhupinder Singh Vs Unitech Ltd
    Click here to read more
     
16. [Pakistani citizen] The Supreme Court on Friday directed that the Pakistani citizen detained in India shall be released on furnishing of surety of Rs. 5000 considering that he is 79 years old, his wife divorced him 10 years ago and Pakistan is also not going to accept him. The matter pertains to a man named Mohd. Qamar, who was born to Indian parents in Meerut. Qamar went to Pakistan as an eight-year-old to visit his relatives and his mother passed away before the expiration of his visa period. Thereafter, he continued to stay in Pakistan where he was raised by his mother’s relatives before he could return to India over three decades ago with a Pakistani passport. He married an Indian citizen in Meerut and has six children with her.
    Bench: Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice Hima Kohli 
    Case Title: Ana Parveen Vs Union of India
    Click here to read more
     
17. [JEE extra attempt] The 2020 and 2021Joint Entrance Examination Advance aspirants have moved Supreme Court seeking additional attempt in the 2022 Advance examination, challenging notification disqualifying them to appear in the 2022- Examination. The plea has challenged the notification issued by the Joint Admission Board allowing students of 2020-21 who could not register or qualify for the JEE (Mains) examination, however, disqualified the Students who appeared in both the JEE (Mains) examination with low marks.
    Case Title: Nilesh Jha & Ors. v UOI & Ors
    Click here to read more
     
18. [Kalkaji Mandir jhuggies] Supreme Court refused to grant status quo on eviction of unauthorised occupants from Jhuggis and Dharamshalas at Kalkaji temple. The court was hearing a plea challenging the directions issued by the Delhi High Court with respect to administration and maintenance of the temple.  The bench further refused to stay Justice Midha’s appointment as administrator to take care of everyday activities.
    Bench: Justices Chandrachud and Bela Trivedi 
    Case Title: Kalkaji Mandir Vikreta Sangathan-Ii And Ors. V. Piyush Joshi
    Click here to read more
     
19. [Communal violence] A division bench of the Supreme Court dismissed a plea filed by Advocate Vishal Tiwari praying for setting up a Judicial Enquiry Commission under the Chairmanship of the former Chief Justice of India to enquire into the religious clashes that took place on the occasion of Ram Navami and Ramzan.  Justice Rao questioned the nature of relief sought in the plea and said, "What is this relief, you want a judicial inquiry by former CJI?”. Stating that no one was free to conduct such an inquiry, Justice Rao remarked, "Such a relief cannot be granted. Dismissed".
    Bench: Justices L Nageshwar Rao and BR Gavai
    Case Title:  Vishal Tiwari vs. Union of India and Ors.
    Click here to read more
     
20. [Judicial Vista] Supreme Court recently noted that the reason judges don’t move around courts is that there is “horrible” overcrowding. In this light, the top Court asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta to “start planning” out a layout for enabling better access for judges, lawyers and officials. The bench added that though changes do not happen overnight, planning can begin. Court was hearing a plea seeking direction for preparation of a layout for construction of a 'Judicial Vista' so as to enable "access to better and dignified working conditions for the Judges, members of the Bar and registry officials."
    Bench: Justice Vineet Saran and Justice JK Maheshwari 
    Case Title:  Ardhendumauli Kumar Prasad vs The Supreme Court of India & Ors.
    Click here to read more
     
21. [Hijab issue]  The Supreme Court refused to list a plea challenging the Karnataka High Court order which upheld the ban on wearing the Hijab at Pre-University colleges in the Udupi district of Karnataka. The Karnataka High Court has recently held that the Hijab is not an Essential Religious Practice of Islam. The CJI led bench asked the parties to wait for two days.
    Bench: Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justice Krishna Murari and Justice Hima Kohli
    Click here to read more
     
22. [Dharam Sansad] The Supreme Court recorded the statement of the counsel for Uttarakhand that the Dharam Sansad event which is set to take place will not have any “untoward incident”. “If these issues do take place, the Chief Secretary (of Uttarakhand) will be asked to appear,” the bench warned the counsel orally while hearing an application highlighting Dharam Sansad events which according to the petitioner are springing up again and again.
    Bench: Justice AM Khanwilkar, Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice CT Ravikumar
    Case Title: Qurban Ali Vs Union of India
    ​​​​​​​Click here to read more
     
23. [Article 370] The Supreme Court on Monday said that it will consider the listing of a batch of petitions challenging the abrogation of Article 370 in Jammu and Kashmir before a 5 judges bench after vacations. Senior Advocate Shekhar Naphade mentioned the matter before the CJI led bench and submitted that the matter needs to be listed as the delimitation proceedings are going to commence soon. The Central Government has constituted a Delimitation Commission to mark boundaries in the Territory for all the constituencies before an assembly election can be held.
    Bench: Chief Justice of India NV Ramana and Justice Hima Kohli
    Case Title: Batch of pleas
    ​​​​​​​Click here to read more
     
24. [Plea in SC]  A plea has been filed before the Ministry of Home Affairs seeking high-level multi-agency joint investigation by National Investigation Agency, Enforcement Directorate, CBI into alleged terror funding activities by Jamiat-Ulema-i-Hind. The plea has sought house arrest of all its office bearers and a thorough investigation of them by all agencies. The plea by advocate and social activist Vibhor Anand, states that Jamiat has been involved in gross Anti-India activities and is also one of the premier Halal Certification organisations of the world.
    ​​​​​​​Click here to read more