Read Time: 01 hours
[Bikram Singh Majithia] Top Court granted protection to Shiromi Akali Dal leader Bikram Singh Majithia till February 23, 2022 for a case under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. The Court took serious objection to the fact that leaders of the opposition party are being arrested by the government in the days leading up to the election. The CJI said - “Anticipatory bail plea of another opposition leader is coming up before us tomorrow? Is this how things are done? Please advise your government,” he told Sr. Adv. P. Chidabaram, appearing for Punjab. Bench: CJI NV Ramana, Justices AS Bopanna & Hima Kohli Case Title: Bikram Singh Majithia Vs State of Punjab Click here to read more
[Why I Killed Gandhi Movie] The Supreme Court dismissed the plea seeking stay on streaming of Movie “Why I killed Gandhi”, filed on the ground that it tarnishes the image of MK Gandhi. Top Court says it is not a fit case to approach SC for violation of Fundamental Rights under Article 32, as none have been curbed. The Court rejected the plea stating that no fundamental rights seem to have been breached of the petitioner and a writ petition under Art 32 can be filed when there is violation of fundamental right. Hence, the Court asked the petitioner to approach the High Court under Article 226. Bench: Justice Indira Banerjee and Justice J.K. Maheshwari Case Title: Sikander Behl v. Union of India & Ors. Click here to read more
[SK Supian Arrest Case] The Supreme Court has ordered the Union to provide copies of recorded statements to the petitioners in the matter pertaining to Trinamool Congress leader SK Supian @ Sheikh Sufiyan who has been accused of killing a Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP) supporter Debabrata Maiti at Chillogram in Nandigram after the results of state legislative polls were declared. The plea has been filed challenging the Calcutta High Court order dismissing Sufian's anticipatory bail application in the post-poll violence case. Earlier, Supian was granted interim protection by the top court stating that the Court can hear the matter only when the statements are placed on record. Bench: Justice L Nageswara Rao and Justice BR Gavai Case Title: SK Supiyan @ Suffiyan @ Supisan Vs The Central Bureau Of Investigation Click here to read more
[Future Coupons vs Amazon] The Supreme Court set aside the order of the Delhi High Court upholding the emergency arbitral award which injected Future Group from proceeding with the merger with Reliance Retail. The Court remanded the matter back to Delhi High Court for fresh consideration. The Delhi High Court had in February, 2021 upheld the award of an emergency arbitrator, directing the attachment of the properties of Future Retail Limited. The emergency arbitrator also injected Future Retail from proceeding with the merger with Reliance Retail. Bench: Chief Justice of India NV Ramana and Justices AS Bopanna and Hima Kohli Case Title: Future Coupons Vs Amazon Click here to read more
[Simarjit Singh Bains] The Supreme Court restrained the State of Punjab from arresting MLA and Lok Insaf Party leader Simarjit Singh Bains till Thursday. The court did so as the woman who alleged that she was raped by Bains, appeared through her lawyer and informed the court that she has filed a writ petition as well. Appearing for Bains, Mukul Rohatgi, Senior Advocate, had submitted that this was “a fake and a bogus complaint by a lady and that his petition for quashing the complaint is pending in the High Court”. Bench: Chief Justice of India NV Ramana and Justices AS Bopanna and Hima Kohli Case Title: Simarjit Singh Bains Vs State of Punjab Click here to read more
[Simarjit Singh Bains] The Supreme Court restrained the State of Punjab from arresting MLA and Lok Insaf Party leader Simarjit Singh Bains for a further period of one week. Earlier, on the last date of hearing on February 1, the Top Court had restrained the State of Punjab from arresting MLA Simarjit Singh Bains. The court had done so as the woman who alleged that she was raped by Bains, appeared through her lawyer and informed the court that she has filed a writ petition as well. Bench: Chief Justice of India NV Ramana and Justices AS Bopanna and Hima Kohli Case Title: Simarjit Singh Bains vs State of Punjab Click here to read more
[Reinstatement of District Judge] The Top Court reserved judgment in a plea by woman district judge seeking reinstatement after resigning from service alleging sexual harassment and deliberate pressure. Appearing for Madhya Pradesh High Court, Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta, had though submitted that a three-Member Committee that had looked into the allegation of the woman judge had discharged its mandate by holding that allegations of sexual harassment were not established. However, Indira Jaising, Senior Advocate, appearing for the petitioner had submitted that the committee report was submitted in December 2017 and the writ petition was filed in 2018. Bench: Justices L. Nageshwar Rao and BR Gavai Case Title: X Vs Registrar General, High Court of Madhya Pradesh Click here to read more
[Plea in SC] A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in the Supreme Court has sought investigation into the root-cause of death of 17-year-old Lavanya, who died of suicide and on January 19, 2022 in Thanjavur Tamil Nadu, allegedly on account of pressure & harassment to convert to Christianity. The petition filed by Advocate Ashwini Upadhyay has further sought declaration that fraudulent religious conversion and religious conversion by intimidation, threatening, deceivingly luring through gifts and monetary benefits offends Articles 14, 21, 25 of the Constitution. Case Title: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay Vs. Union of India and Ors. Click here to read more
[Abu Salem] The Supreme Court has asked the central government to consider Bombay blast convict Abu Salem’s submission that his imprisonment cannot extend beyond 25 years as per the assurances given by the government of India to Portugal during his extradition. Salem’s counsel Adv. Rishi Malhotra had submitted before the bench that the judgment of Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA) Court granting life imprisonment to Salem is against the assurance given by India to Portugal. He contended that even though the TADA Court had held that it was not bound by the assurances of the government, the Supreme Court has the power to rule on the same. Bench: Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and MM Sundaresh Case Title: Abu Salem Abdul Kayyum Ansari vs State of Maharashtra Click here to read more
[Children in Street Situation] The Supreme Court accepted the suggestions made by Amicus Curiae Gaurav Agrawal and Senior Advocate Anitha Shenoy relating to the Standard operating procedure for permissibility of recording evidence of children through video conferencing and directed the same to be put in practice as a regular feature. The bench added that “the procedure need not be restricted only to the period affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.” Bench: Justice L Nageswara Rao and Justice BR Gavai Case Title: IN RE Children in Street Situation Click here to read more
[BJP MLA Murder] The Top Court has granted 15 days parole to Rupam Pathak, a woman who murdered Raj Kishore Kesri, a four-time MLA from Purnea in Bihar. Kesri was stabbed to death by Pathak in an open assembly. Pathak has been directed to surrender after this period. A Special CBI court had in March 2012 convicted Pathak of Kesri’s murder and sentenced her to life imprisonment in 2012. Pathak, had in June 2010, filed a police case accusing Kesari of raping her in 2007. She later retracted that statement in court. Bench: Chief Justice of India Justice NV Ramana and Justices Bopanna and Hima Kohli Case Title: Rupam Pathak Vs State of Bihar Click here to read more
[Future Retail Limited] The Supreme Court did not pass any effective order in the plea by Future Retail Limited seeking directions of the court to restrain the banks from declaring it a Non-Performing Asset. Stressing that the retail giant owes rupees 17,000 crores to the banks, Rakesh Dwivedi, senior advocate, appearing for the consortium of banks had forwarded a suggestion that entire assets of FRL can be subjected to an open bid between Amazon and Reliance Industries, with whom also the Future group has formed private contracts. Upon this suggestion, Harish Salve, Senior Advocate, appearing for FRL, had also said that he agrees with Dwivedi, however, he had pointed out that Amazon cannot deposit a single rupee here being a foreign company. Bench: Chief Justice of India NV Ramana and Justices AS Bopanna and Hima Kohli Case Title: Future Retail Ltd Vs RBI Click here to read more
[PMLA] Before a 3-judge bench of Supreme Court, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal argued that “This (the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002) is a 'be-lagaam ghoda' (unbridled horse), there is no restraint...This case should thus be dealt with as soon as possible.” Sibal had said so in answer to bench’s query as to how many judicial hours had been invested in the case involving the challenge to various provisions of the PMLA Act. These oral remarks took place in a plea pertaining to issues ranging from the Enforcement Directorate's (ED) powers for taking on investigations, issuance of summons, carrying out arrests, etc., and the constitutional validity of the PMLA. Bench: Justices AM Khanwilkar, Dinesh Maheshwari, and CT Ravikumar Case Title: Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary and Ors. vs Union of India & Other Click here to read more
[Covid Vaccination] The Union of India informed the Supreme Court today that over 77 lakh persons without any identity proof have been administered the first dose of vaccination and over 14 lakh persons in the same situation have been administered both the doses. Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Aishwarya Bhati, informed the court that the Union will also file an affidavit in this regard. This has transpired in a PIL filed by Kush Kalra seeking Covid-19 vaccination for destitute persons including “those who are compelled to be on the streets to eke out their livelihood by pursuing avocations such as begging.” Bench: Justices Chandrachud, Surya Kant and Vikram Nath Case Title: Kush Kalra vs Union of India Click here to read more
[GATE 2022] The Top Court has dismissed a plea seeking postponement of Graduate Admission Test 2022. The bench held that the plea for postponement barely 48 hours before the scheduled date of the examination is replete with potential for chaos and uncertainty in the lives of the students. During the hearing, Justice Chandrachud remarked, “We can’t start postponing exams like this! We can’t play with the lives of the students. In your petition there is someone who runs a coaching class!” Bench: Justices Chandrachud, Surya Kant and Vikram Nath Case Title: Umesh Dande vs Union of India Click here to read more
[Post Poll Violence] The Supreme Court reserved its orders in the plea by Mamta Banerjee's election agent and Trinamool Congress leader SK Supian @ Sheikh Sufiyan, accused of killing a Bhartiya Janta Party Supporter Debabrata Maiti at Chillogram in Nandigram after the results were declared. Supian had challenged the Calcutta High Court order dismissing his anticipatory bail application in the post-poll violence case. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing on behalf of Supian, had submitted before the bench that as per the statement recorded of a witness where it was said that he 'heard' that Supian was the leader of this violent group, amounted to mere hearsay. Bench: Justices L Nageshwar Rao and Abhay S Oka Case Title: SK Supiyan @ Suffiyan @ Supisan Vs The Central Bureau Of Investigation Click here to read more
[Ex-Gratia compensation] The Supreme Court has directed the States to not reject the applications for ex gratia payments of family member of the victims of COVID-19 on "technical grounds". When the hearing for the matter commenced, a visibly upset Justice MR Shah noted, “We have gathered the information from the legal services authorities. No State has given any particulars, only Statistics is given. This is all. This was not our purpose!” The bench added that the object of earlier order to give particulars, is to understand that people who have not approached for compensation may be reached to through legal services authorities. Bench: Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna Case Title: Gaurav Bansal Vs Union of India Click here to read more
[Traditional cremation] Solicitor General (SG), Tushar Mehta and Fali S Nariman, Senior Advocate jointly informed the Supreme Court that the government and the Mumbai Parsi Panchayat have reached a settlement in the plea pertaining to traditional cremation for the victims of COVID-19 belonging to the Zoroastrian community. On January 17, the top court had suggested the Parsi Community to convene a meeting with Solicitor General Tushar Mehta to resolve the issue of traditional cremation for members of the Parsi community who succumbed to COVID-19. The Surat Parsi Panchayat had filed a plea challenging the Gujarat High Court’s order denying traditional cremation for members of the Parsi community who succumbed to COVID-19 Bench: Justices Chandrachud and Surya Kant Case Title: Surat Parsi Panchayat Vs Union of India Click here to read more
[Lavanya Death Case] The Tamil Nadu government through Director General of Police has moved Supreme Court challenging the Madras High Court (Madurai Bench) order directing a CBI probe into the death of a 17-year-old student amid allegations of conversion. Through his Special Leave Petition, the DGP has challenged the remarks that Madras High Court has made against the State Police's thorough inaction and lack of concerted effort in chasing the probable angle of conversion that led to the girl's suicide and instead bolstering the counter narrative of the involvement of the step mother. The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court on 31st January, 2022 had ordered the transfer of the the student death case to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). Case Title: Director General of Police v Muruganantham Click here to read more
[Sherlyn Chopra Porn Racket] The top court has granted interim protection to actress Sherlyn Chopra in the porn racket case. This is the matter in which Poonam Pandey and businessman Raj Kundra are co-accused. The Bombay High Court had rejected her plea for anticipatory bail in November 2021. Chopra apprehended arrest on account of an FIR registered in 2021 for charges registered under Indian Penal Code and Information Technology act. Bench: Justices Vineet Saran and Aniruddha Bose Case title: Sherlyn Chopra Vs State of Maharashtra Click here to read more
[Mulla Periyar dam] The State of Tamil Nadu has filed an affidavit before the Supreme Court saying that Kerala is obstructing it from carrying out the strengthening measures / maintenance works in the Mulla Periyar dam accordance with court's order dated 27th February 2006 and 7th May 2014. The affidavit has been filed in a plea highlighting the “inaction” of Supervisory committee appointed by the court to take care of material and safety aspects of Mulla Periyar Dam. Case Title: Dr.Joe Joseph Vs State of Tamil Nadu Click here to read more
[Supertech Emerald Court Twin Tower] Supreme Court has put an end to a dispute pertaining to refund of payments made by home buyers to Supertech in the Emerald Court Twin Tower demolition case in terms of the court's order dated 31st August 2021. The court accepted the note circulated by amicus curiae, Gaurav Aggarwal and made it clear that that terms of the settlement will not be disputed now. Bench: Justices Chandrachud and Surya Kant Case Title: Supertech Ltd. Vs. Emerald Court Owner Resident Welfare Association and Other Connected Matters Click here to read more
[Plea in SC] The Supreme Court today issued notice in a plea against the order of Punjab and Haryana High Court wherein the High Court had dismissed a case of sexual harassment “Since there is no medical evidence much less corroborative, to establish offence of rape, together with the inordinate delay against especially when the lady is grown up, mature, educated and remained silent throughout nor shared it with anyone and had the audacity to level such unsubstantiated allegations after she was thrown out of the job, are matters which have adverse impact to the case of the prosecutrix." Bench: Justices Indira Banerjee and J K Maheshwari Case Title: X vs Narender Singh Randhawa & Ors Click here to know more
Please Login or Register
