Supreme Court Archives - Page 4 of 17 - Lokmarg

Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah Masjid dispute

SC To Pronounce Judgement On Pleas Challenging Abrogation Of Article 370 Today

By LokMarg 11th December 2023

The Constitution bench of the Supreme Court will pronounce its verdict on a batch of petitions challenging the abrogation of Article 370 and bifurcation of the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir into two Union territories on Monday (December 11).

Five-judge constitution bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai, and Surya Kant will pass the judgement today.

On September 5, the apex court reserved the judgement after hearing the arguments for 16 days.

The central government had defended its decision to abrogate Article 370, saying there was no “constitutional fraud” in repealing the provision that accorded special status to the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir.

Attorney General R Venkataramani and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appeared for Centre.

The Centre had told the bench that Jammu and Kashmir was not the only state whose accession to India was through instruments of accession, but many other princely states that too had joined India post-independence in 1947, with conditionalities and after their merger, their sovereignty was subsumed in the sovereignty of India.

At the time of independence in 1947, the majority of the 565 princely states were in Gujarat and many had conditions relating to taxes, land acquisition and other issues, the central government told the bench.

The Centre had also submitted that the status of Jammu and Kashmir as a Union Territory is only temporary and it will be restored to statehood; however, Ladakh would remain a Union Territory.

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing on behalf of the petitioners, had opened the arguments, saying Article 370 was no longer a “temporary provision” and had assumed permanence post the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir.

He had contended that the Parliament could not have declared itself to be the legislature of J-K to facilitate the abrogation of Article 370, as Article 354 of the Constitution does not authorise such an exercise of power.

Highlighting that the express terms of clause 3 of Article 370 show that a recommendation from the Constituent Assembly was essential to removing Article 370, Sibal had argued that in the wake of the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly, whose recommendation was required to abrogate Article 370, the provision could not be revoked.

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court Bar Association had told the Supreme Court that while acceding to India, the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir acceded to his sovereignty over the territory of the state but not his sovereign power to rule and govern the state.

The accession of Jammu and Kashmir to India was territorial and except for defence, external affairs and communication, all the powers were retained with the state to make laws and govern, said senior advocate ZA Zafar, appearing for the J-K High Court Bar Association.

The Central government had defended its decision to abolish Article 370 in Jammu and Kashmir, saying that after the changes, street violence, which was engineered and orchestrated by terrorists and secessionist networks, has now become a thing of the past.

Since 2019, when Article 370 was abrogated, the entire region has witnessed an “unprecedented era of peace, progress and prosperity,” the Centre said.

After the abrogation of Article 370 in Jammu and Kashmir, life has returned to normalcy there after three decades of turmoil, the Centre, in its affidavit, told the Supreme Court.

The Constitution Bench was hearing a batch of petitions challenging the abrogation of Article 370 of the Constitution and bifurcating the state into two Union Territories.

Several petitions were filed in the top court, including those of private individuals, lawyers, activists, politicians and political parties challenging the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019, which splits Jammu and Kashmir into two Union Territories: Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh.

On August 5, 2019, the Central government announced the revocation of the special status of Jammu and Kashmir granted under Article 370 and split the region into two union territories. (ANI)

For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/

SC Adjourned For Jan 10 Hearing Of Umar Khalid’s Bail Plea

By LokMarg 29th November 2023

The Supreme Court on Wednesday adjourned for January 10, 2024, the bail plea hearing of former Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) student Umar Khalid in a UAPA case related to the alleged conspiracy behind the North-East Delhi riots in February 2020.

A bench of Justices Bela M Trivedi and Satish Chandra Sharma adjourned the hearing as senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Khalid and Additional Solicitor General SV Raju were not available.

The bench also listed the pleas challenging the provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) on January 10.

Sibal had earlier said certain provisions of the UAPA, including provisions concerning terrorism, raising funds for terrorist acts, and conspiracy, did not apply in this case.

Khalid had approached the top court challenging an October 2022 Delhi High Court verdict that had denied bail to him.

Khalid, arrested by Delhi Police in September 2020, in the High Court had sought bail on grounds that he neither had any “criminal role” in the violence in the city’s North-East area nor any “conspiratorial connect” with any other accused in the case. The Delhi police had opposed Khalid’s bail plea.

He had approached the High Court, challenging the dismissal of his bail application by the trial court in March 2022.

He was charged with criminal conspiracy, rioting, and unlawful assembly, as well as several sections of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).

Besides Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, activist Khalid Saifi, JNU students Natasha Narwal and Devangana Kalita, Jamia Coordination Committee members Safoora Zargar, former AAP councillor Tahir Hussain and several others were booked under the stringent law in the case.

The violence that erupted during the protests against CAA and NRC left 53 people dead and over 700 injured. (ANI)

For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/

SC Rejects Plea Seeking Ban On Pak Artists From Performing In India

By LokMarg 28th November 2023

The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected the plea seeking to prohibit Pakistani artists from performing in India and asked the petitioner not to be narrow-minded.

A Bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and SVN Bhatti rejected the plea seeking filed by one

Faaiz Anwar Qureshi, a self-proclaimed cine worker.

Qureshi has challenged the Bombay High Court which has dismissed his plea.

In his plea, Quershi has sought to ban employing or soliciting any work or performance from Pakistani artists.

The top court remarked to the petitioner that he should not be so narrow-minded in his thinking.

The petition has sought directions to the Centre to issue appropriate notifications imposing a ban and prohibiting the granting of visas to Pakistani artists. (ANI)

For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/

SC Constantly Working To Ensure Legal Processes Become Simpler: CJI

By LokMarg 26th November 2023

Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud said on Sunday that the Supreme Court is constantly working to ensure that legal processes become easier and simplified so that citizens do not languish in jails unnecessarily.

CJI said that last year, on Constitution Day, President Droupadi Murmu raised the concern of overcrowding of prisons and the incarceration of citizens from marginalized backgrounds.

Responding to that, CJI said, “Madam President, I want to assure you that we are constantly working to ensure that legal processes become easier and simplified, so that citizens do not languish in jails unnecessarily. The version 2.0 of the FASTER initiative that will be launched today ensures that judicial orders of release of a person are immediately transferred to jail authorities via electronic means, so that the person is released on time.”

In addition, on the judicial side, the Supreme Court has been hearing cases relating to prisoners’ rights, overcrowding, etc., CJI said, adding that he has also tasked the research centre of the Court to come up with a project to improve the conditions of prisons.

Speaking at the Constitution Day event in the Supreme Court, CJI Chandrachud said the goal behind these initiatives has been to ensure that the people feel that the constitutional institution of the judiciary is working for them.

“Today, on the occasion of Constitution Day, I want to tell the people of India that the doors of the Supreme Court have always been open for you and will remain open in future also. You never need to be afraid of coming to court,” CJI said.

Similarly, CJI said, that the statue of Dr Ambedkar that we unveiled today in the Supreme Court premises is an extension of the thought that the right to approach the Court is the “heart and soul” of the Constitution, as Dr Ambedkar famously said.

He further told the gathering that individuals should not be afraid of going to court or view it as a last resort.

“Rather, it is my hope that by our efforts, citizens of every class, caste, and creed can repose trust in our court system and view it as a fair and effective forum to enforce their rights. Sometimes, we as a society may frown on litigation as a disreputable entanglement.”

“But, just as the Constitution allows us to resolve our political differences through established institutions and processes, our court system helps resolve our many disagreements through established principles and processes. In this way, every case in every court in the country is an extension of constitutional governance,” CJI added.

CJI Chandrachud said that our Constitution has allowed us to take our unbridled passions and energy and streamline them through the institutional structures of government.

“So when we say today, we honour the adoption of the Constitution, first and foremost, we honour the fact that the Constitution “exists” and that the Constitution “works,” he said.

“The Constitution and its framers successfully channelled the energies of liberty and independence to build a ship and chart a course for liberty, equality, and fraternity. As we honour their achievements, we must also recognise our generation’s solemn duty to keep the ship afloat, ensure there is wind in its sails, and continue the journey,” CJI added.

In the last seven decades, the Supreme Court of India has acted as a “people’s court,” he said further.

The CJI said thousands of citizens have approached its door with the faith that they will get justice through this institution.

“Citizens came to the Court to seek the protection of their personal liberty, accountability against unlawful arrest, protection of rights of bonded labourers, asking for guidelines to prevent sexual harassment at workplace, prevention of social evils such as manual scavenging, even hoping for interference to get clean air, food security, and so many more instances that cannot be summarised in few minutes. These cases are not just citations or statistics for the Court,” said the CJI.

These cases resemble the expectations of the people from the Supreme Court, as well as the Court’s own commitment to deliver justice to the citizens, he said.

“Our Court is perhaps the only Court in the world where any citizen, no matter who they are or where they come from, can set in motion the constitutional machinery of the Supreme Court simply by even writing to the Chief Justice of India,” he further said.

Apart from ensuring that the citizens get justice through its judgements, the Supreme Court of India has been making continuous endeavours to ensure that even its administrative processes are citizen-centric so that the common citizen feels a connection with the working of the Court, said the CJI.

He said that courts are now live-streaming their proceedings and this decision was taken with the view that the citizens should know what is happening inside the courtrooms. Constant media reporting about the proceedings of the courts indicates the engagement of the public with the workings of the courtrooms.

The Supreme Court also took a decision to translate its judgments to regional languages with the help of artificial intelligence and machine learning, he said.

He mentioned that as of November 25, 2023, the Supreme Court delivered 36,068 judgments in English. All of these judgments are available for free on the e-Supreme Court Reports (e-SCR) platform of the Court, which was launched in January this year.

Supreme Court today also launched e-SCR (Hindi), as 21,388 judgments have been translated into Hindi, vetted, and uploaded on the e-SCR portal. e-SCR (Hindi) will allow the users to search for judgments in Hindi. Rest judgments translated into Hindi, are being vetted and shall be uploaded soon.

Besides, 9,276 judgments have been translated into other Indian languages, which include Punjabi, Tamil, Gujarati, Marathi, Telugu, Odia, Malayalam, Bengali, Kannada, Assamese, Nepali, Urdu, Garo, Khasi, and Konkani. These judgments have also been uploaded to the e-SCR portal.

While the judiciary embraces technology, it also launched e-Sewa Kendras in all courts to ensure that no citizen is left behind in the judicial process. “We embrace our citizens as co-equal partners in a shared national endeavour,” said the CJI.

The event was attended by President Droupadi Murmu, Union Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal and other Supreme Court judges. (ANI)

For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/

Kerala: First Woman Judge of SC Fathima Beevi Passes Away

By LokMarg 23rd November 2023

Justice Fathima Beevi, the first woman judge of the Supreme Court passed away in Kollam at a private hospital at the age of 96.

Fathima Beevi was also the Governor of Tamil Nadu from 1997 to 2001. She also served as the first chairperson of the Commission for Backward Classes and a member of the first Central Human Rights Commission.

Fathima Beevi was honoured with the Kerala Prabha Award, the second-highest honour given by the Government of Kerala in 2023.

Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan expressed his condolences on the death of Justice Fathima Beevi.

He said, Fathima Beevi’s life was an unforgettable symbol in the history of women’s advancement in the state. Pursuing her higher education in an era when even primary education was difficult for girls, she graced prestigious positions in the judiciary, from Munsiff to the first woman judge of the Supreme Court. Kerala got its first woman judge in the Supreme Court through Justice Fatima Beevi. Justice Fathima Beevi is the first Muslim woman to rise to high positions in the judiciary.”

The Chief Minister added, “Fathima Beevi had the unique power to overcome the negative factors of social situations seeing them as a challenge. It inspired the whole society, especially women. Her actions to protect human rights as a member of the National Human Rights Commission is also notable. It was during her tenure as the Governor of Tamil Nadu that her constitutional wisdom in judicial life was manifested in practical terms. Fatima Beevi was the owner of a great personality who raised the reputation of Kerala in many ways. Her demise is a great loss to our society. As a tribute to Justice Fatima Beevi’s life path, the state has chosen her for the Kerala Prabha Award.”

The Chief Minister also said that he shares the grief of her relatives. Ministers, leaders from the opposition and other parties expressed their condolences on her death. (ANI)

For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/

SC Gives 5 Weeks’ Protection Against NBW To Surjewala

By LokMarg 9th November 2023

The Supreme Court on Thursday granted five weeks’ protection against Non Bailable Warrant (NBW) to National Spokesperson of Congress Randeep Surjewala in a 23-year-old case of violent protest in the divisional commissioner’s court and office compound in Varanasi.

A bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra ordered that a non-bailable warrant (NBW) issued against Surjewala shall not be executed for five weeks.

The bench also granted four weeks to Surjewala to move the application before the Varanasi court and seek cancellation of the NBW.

“We permit the petitioner to move the trial court for cancellation of NBW within four weeks and the warrant shall not be executed for the period ending after five weeks,” the bench said.

A Special Judge (MP-MLA) in Varanasi issued NBW on November 7, 2023, ordering him to be produced before the court on November 21 in connection with the case.

The court also wrote a letter to the Delhi Police Commissioner, directing him to ensure his appearance in the court on the prescribed date.

During the hearing, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Surjewala, told the bench that the case dates back to the year 2000 when an FIR was registered against him because of alleged political agitation he did as a youth Congress leader.

Singhvi told the apex court that the incident occurred in 2000, and the summons against Surjewala was issued 22 years later in August 2022. (ANI)

For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/

Held Discussions With Farmers: AAP After SC Order On Delhi Air Crisis

By LokMarg 7th November 2023

Speaking on the Supreme Court’s order to the Punjab government to stop burning the stubble, state cabinet minister Bram Shanker Sharma said that the government is putting all efforts from their side to control one of the main cause of pollution in Northern India – stubble burning by farmers.

Amid rising concerns over deteriorating air quality in the Delhi-National Capital Region (NCR), the Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the Punjab government to stop stubble burning and listed the matter for hearing on November 10.

Bram Shanker Sharma told ANI “Punjab government put in all efforts from their side. We held discussions with farmers and appealed to them not to burn stubble and to choose alternative crops. The government is committed to stop burning stubble so that the environment is not harmed. We respect the Supreme Court. CM Bhagwant Mann has also appealed to the farmers and I am hopeful that the situation will improve.”

A bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia, apex observed that there can’t be a political battle all the time and that stubble burning needs to be stopped.

“We want it (stubble burning) stopped. We don’t know how you do it, it’s your job. But it must be stopped. Something has to be done immediately,” the apex court told Punjab after the government’s counsel said that farmers are burning the stubble on account of economic reasons.

Additionally, the top court directed Delhi, Uttar Pradesh, and Rajasthan governments to stop stubble burning forthwith.

The Court also made the local SHO responsible for implementing the court’s direction on stubble burning under the supervision of DGPs and the Chief Secretary.

Further, the SC noted that a smog tower installed as per an earlier order is not working, and directed the government to ensure it is repaired.

The SC observed that schemes like odd-even for vehicles to tackle pollution issues are mere optics. (ANI)

For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/

SC Extends Satyendar’s Interim Bail Till Nov 24

By LokMarg 6th November 2023

The Supreme Court on Monday extended the interim bail granted to AAP leader Satyendar Jain till November 24 in a money laundering case.

A bench comprising Justice A.S. Bopanna and Justice Bela M. Trivedi extended the interim relief granted to Jain while adjourning the hearing of the bail plea till the next date of hearing.

Meanwhile, Jain’s counsel, Senior Advocate AM Singhvi, pressed for his bail. Jain underwent surgery on July 21. The interim bail given to Jain on medical grounds is extended from time to time.

On May 26, the top court granted interim bail to Satyendar Jain for six weeks in the money laundering case but imposed various conditions, including refusing to talk with the media or leaving Delhi without permission.

The top court had also given Jain the right to choose any hospital of his choice for his medical treatment. The top court had made it clear that interim bail is considered in medical conditions.

Satyendar Jain has moved the top court seeking bail in money laundering cases. He has challenged the Delhi High Court order dismissing his bail plea in the money laundering case against him.

Satyendar Jain’s lawyer had told the top court that he had lost 35 kg and turned into a skeleton due to this.

Former Delhi minister Satyendra Jain has moved the Supreme Court challenging the Delhi High Court order dismissing his bail plea in the money laundering case against him.

On April 6, the Delhi High Court dismissed the bail plea of Satyendra Jain. The HC, while dismissing the Jain’s bail plea, stated that the applicant is an influential person and has the potential to tamper with evidence.

Satyender Jain/applicant, at this stage, can’t be held to clear the twin conditions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

The HC had kept the order reserved for March 21 after the conclusion of the submissions made by the defence and prosecution sides after multiple hearings.

During arguments in the High Court, Additional Solicitor General SV Raju appearing for the Enforcement Directorate, contented that money laundering is crystal clear against Jain and other co-accused. In his bail plea, Jain stated, “I appeared before the ED on seven occasions. I have cooperated and participated in the investigation. I was arrested five years down the line in 2022.”

On November 17, 2022, the trial court dismissed the bail petition of Satyendar Jain. He was arrested on May 30, 2022, under sections of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) by the Enforcement Directorate.

The ED case is based on a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) complaint registered on the allegation that Satyender Jain had acquired movable properties in the name of various persons from February 14, 2015, to May 31, 2017, which he could not satisfactorily account for. (ANI)

For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/

SC Adjourns Hearing Of Pleas Of NewsClick Founder

By LokMarg 6th November 2023

The Supreme Court on Monday adjourned until after the Diwali break pleas filed by Newsclick founder and Editor-in-Chief Prabir Purkayastha and website’s human resources head Amit Chakraborty challenging their arrest under Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) over alleged Chinese funding to promote anti-national propaganda.

A bench of Justices BR Gavai and PK Mishra said, “We will have it immediately after vacation.”

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal told the bench, “Grounds of arrest have to be supplied in writing. Nothing has been supplied.”

Earlier, the top court had issued notice to Delhi police on pleas.

Purkayastha and Chakraborty moved the apex court challenging the Delhi High Court’s order upholding the trial court order remanding them to police custody. They have since been remanded to judicial custody.

They were arrested by the Special Cell of the Delhi Police on October 3 after it searched 30 locations connected with the online news portal and its journalists in a case filed under the UAPA following allegations that it received money for pro-China propaganda.

Purkayastha and Chakravarty subsequently moved the High Court challenging the arrest as well as the seven-day police custody and sought immediate release as an interim relief.

The Court had rejected their pleas and said it is of the view that “the fact that serious offences affecting the stability, integrity, sovereignty and national security have been alleged against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to pass any favourable orders.”

According to the FIR, a large amount of funds to the news portal allegedly came from China to “disrupt the sovereignty of India” and cause disaffection against the country.

The probe agency also alleged that Purkayastha conspired with a group – People’s Alliance for Democracy and Secularism (PADS) – to sabotage the electoral process during the 2019 Lok Sabha polls. (ANI)

For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/

Same Sex Marriage: Review Petition Filed Against Constitution Bench Order

By LokMarg 1st November 2023

A plea has been moved in the Supreme Court seeking to review its judgement denying marriage equality rights to queer persons, urging for an open court hearing on the petition.

The review petition raised that the majority judgment has failed to take the logical next step of prohibiting discrimination. The Majority Judgment’ is facially erroneous because it finds that the Respondents are violating the Petitioners’ fundamental rights through discrimination, and yet fails to enjoin the discrimination.

“Nonetheless, the Majority Judgment fails to take the logical next step of prohibiting the discrimination. It instead invites the Respondents to consider such impacts and make necessary recommendations,” read the review petition, lamenting that “whether this will happen through proactive action of the State itself, or as a result of sustained public mobilisation is a reality that will play out on India’s democratic stage, and something only time can tell.”

The review petition has been filed against the judgement dated October 17, 2023, passed by the five-judge Constitution Bench. The review petition said that the judgement suffers from several errors.

The petition has sought to direct the instant review petition to be listed for an open court hearing to enable the petitioners to address oral arguments in support of the review petition.

“It is most respectfully submitted that for a Constitutional Court to specifically identify discrimination; but fail to grant appropriate remedies, is an abdication of its responsibility under the Constitution of this country,” read the petition.

It further added, “As correctly noted by the Chief Justice, the Majority Judgment fails to address whether Regulation 5(3) is discriminatory for distinguishing between married and unmarried couples for the purpose of adoption and for the disproportionate impact that it has on the members of the queer community while simultaneously holding that “the State cannot, on any account, make regulations that are facially or indirectly discriminatory on the ground of sexual orientation.”

The petition states that the majority judgement is self-contradictory in its understanding of “marriage”.

It acknowledges that the Special Marriage Act, 1954 (the “Act” / “SMA”) confers the “status” of marriage, observing that the Act “in fact created social status or facilitated the status of individuals in private fields” and that the Parliament “has intervened and facilitated the creation of social status. (marriage) through SMA,” the petition highlighted.

The review petition also said that the majority judgement is manifestly unjust because it countenances animus-motivated depravation of the petitioners’ fundamental rights.

“The Majority Judgment erroneously likens this case to a petition for ‘the construction of a road’ to enforce the right to travel, or creation of a ‘platform’ for a ‘poet who wishes to share their work’, when in fact, here, the Respondents have constructed the metaphoric road and poetry platform–only that homosexuals are barred from both because the Respondents think homosexuals are inherently a problem,” read the review petition.

“The Majority Judgment effectively compels young queer Indians to remain in the closet and lead dishonest lives if they wish for the joys of a real family. It is fallacious that, under these facts, and in the absence of a fundamental right to marry or form a union, the rights to equal protection, dignity and fraternity are insufficient to justify judicial intervention,” the review petition said.

The plea has sought a review of the top court’s five-judge bench order, which refused to give marriage equality rights to same-sex couples.

The review petition has been moved by one of the 21 petitioners through Karanjawala & Co.

On October 17, the five-judge Constitution bench comprising the Chief Justice of India, DY Chandrachud, Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, S Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli and PS Narasimha delivered the order.

There were four judgements separately authored by the CJI and Justices Kaul, Bhat and Narasimha. While the CJI and Justice Kaul had the same opinion, Justices Bhat, Narasimha and Kohli agreed with each other.

The majority judges by 3:2 held that non-heterosexual couples cannot be granted the right to jointly adopt a child. However, CJI and Justice Kaul said that these couples have the right to jointly adopt a child.

Around 21 petitions were filed in the Supreme Court seeking legal recognition of same-sex marriage.

One of the petitions earlier raised the absence of a legal framework that allowed members of the LGBTQIA+ community to marry any person of their choice. (ANI)

For more details visit https://lokmarg.com/