Supreme Court Weekly Round Up [April 17-23, 2023]

[Hate Speech – Anurag Thakur and Parvesh Verma] The Supreme Court issued notice in a plea by Communist Party of India (Marxist) leader Brinda Karat seeking registration of FIRs against Union Minister Anurag Thakur and Bharatiya Janata Party Leader Parvesh Sahib Singh Verma for allegedly making hate speeches in the year 2020, at a rally in Rithala on January 27 and 28th. The bench deliberated on judicial pronouncements that exist for purposes of registration of FIRs against public servants while the lawyer for Karat informed Court that the wounds of the past will not be healed unless an FIR is registered against the political leaders. The Court was hearing an appeal against last year's Delhi High Court judgment challenging a trial court decision that had refused to order registration of FIRs against Thakur and Verma.
Bench: Justices KM Joseph and BV Nagarathna
Case Title: Brinda Karat Vs State of NCT Delhi
Click here to read more

[PIL in SC – Atique Ahmed Murder] Advocate Vishal Tiwari has moved the Apex Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India seeking an investigation by a judicial committee led by a retired judge of the apex court into the murder of gangster-turned-politician Atiq Ahmed and his brother Ashraf Ahmed while they were in police custody. Through his plea, Tiwari requested the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to undertake responsibility for the investigation into the Vikash Dubey fake encounter case in 2020. His plea also requested an investigation into the 183 encounters that have occurred in Uttar Pradesh since 2017.
Case Title: Vishal Tiwari vs. Union Of India and Ors.
Click here to read more

[Aarey Forest Tree Felling] While imposing a cost of INR 10 lacs on Mumbai Metro Rail Corporation Limited's (MMRCL) for removing an excess of 84 trees, in contravention of an earlier order of the top court, Supreme Court allowed the authority to also remove 177 more so that the public project does not come to a standstill. The Court said that the authority had indulged in an overreach, but at the same time directed that IIT-Bombay must overlook the process of afforestation. The matter pertains to the issue of the felling of a large number of trees for the purpose of constructing a metro car shed near Aarey Forest area.
Bench: Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices P S Narasimha and J B Pardiwala
Case Title: In Re: Felling of Trees in Aarey Forest
Click here to read more

[Gyanvapi Dispute – Wuzu in Mosque during Ramzan] The Supreme Court on Monday, April 17, said that it will pass official orders on whether "Wuzu", an Islamic Practice can be performed at the disputed Gyanvapi site, where a mosque stands, on Friday, i.e. the 21st of April. Upon the assurance of the Solicitor General of India (SG) Tushar Mehta that a meeting will be held with concerned parties tomorrow to deliberate on a solution, the court put up the plea of the Committee of Management Anjuman Intezamia Masjid later in the week. The plea had sought performance of Wuzu on the disputed site and access to toilets during the month of Ramadan. SG informed top court that the area where Wuzu has been sought is also where the Shivling exists and that it may create a problem if an order is passed without deliberations. After the committee's lawyer, Huzeifa Ahmedi told Court that even mobile toilets will be enough, SG stated that even in that case maintaining the sanctity of place is of utmost importance.
Bench: Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices P S Narasimha and J B Pardiwala
Case Title: Committee of Management Anjuman Intezamia Masajid Varanasi Vs Rakshi Singh
Click here to read more

[Abhishek Banerjee – TMC] The Supreme Court stayed a Calcutta high court order directing the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and Enforcement Directorate (ED) to question Trinamool Congress general secretary Abhishek Banerjee in the ongoing probe concerning the infamous "bribes for jobs" scam. The next hearing is on April 24. “The petition was in the mentioning list. Dr AM Singhvi has adverted to the contents of the order and the directions passed, by which the ED and CBI have been directed to file a report with respect to a probe in connection with a public speech by Abhishek Banerjee. List on April 24, 2023. Till the next date of listing, there shall be stay on all action against petitioner in relation to the directions passed in impugned order,” the bench said.
Bench: Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices P S Narasimha and J B Pardiwala
Click here to read more

[Bilkis Bano] The Supreme Court last week remarked that the Gujarat Government should have paid heed to the gravity of offence in terms of the gang rape of Bilkis Bano, while granting parole to her convicts. "Apples and Oranges cannot be compared. It was a horrendous act," said the bench while putting up the plea's challenging the remission granted to the convicts on May 2 for a final decision. Court also said that a single murder and a massacre cannot be compared.
Bench: Justice KM Joseph & BV Nagarathna
Case Title: Bilkis Yakub Rasool vs. Union of India & Ors. | Batch of petitions
Click here to read more

[Same Sex Marriage Recognition] The Chief Justice of India, DY Chandrachud (CJI) reflected on existing gender spectrums during the hearing on same-sex marriage recognition. During the hearing, the exchange between the CJI and the Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta (SG) riveted around the existing scope of the institution of marriage in India. When bench pointed out that the Special Marriages Act will be delved into for the time being, the SG pointed that as of now, the concept of marriage existed between a biological male and a biological woman. To this, the CJI said, "There is no absolute notion of a man and it is far more complex than that, it is far beyond what your genitals are". At the beginning of the hearing, the court said it will hear the petitioner(s) in order to understand skeletal averments that are to be projected, after the SG pointed out that the Centre's preliminary objection of the issue being part of legislature's domain must be decided first.
Bench: CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice SK Kaul, Justice S. Ravindra Bhat, Justice Hima Kohli, Justice PS Narasimha
Case Title: Supriyo@ Supriya Chakraborthy v. Union of India & Anr. (a batch of petitions)
Click here to read more
Read More: Same-Sex Marriage| Denial Of Right To Marry Is Denial Of Citizenship: Sr Adv Mukul Rohatgi Tells Supreme Court

[Atique Ahmed] The Supreme Court on Tuesday, April 18, said that it will look into the plea seeking probe into gangster and politician Atique Ahmed's murder in Prayagraj while they were in police custody. The bench said that they will hear the plea by Advocate Vishal Tiwari on April 24. Advocate Vishal Tiwari has moved the Apex Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India seeking an investigation by a judicial committee led by a retired judge of the apex court into the murder of gangster-turned-politician Atiq Ahmed and his brother Ashraf Ahmed while they were in police custody.
Bench: CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice PS Narasimha & JB Pardiwala
Case Title: Vishal Tiwari vs. Union Of India and Ors.
Click here to read more

[Asaram Bapu] The Supreme Court has set aside the order of the Rajasthan High Court summoning IPS Officer Ajay Pal Lamba to testify as a court witness in connection with Asaram Bapu's appeal contesting his conviction for raping a minor. Court has also directed the Rajasthan High Court to take up this matter for hearing expeditiously. After Asaram’s conviction, an application was filed before the High Court claiming that the victim was tutored and this could be corroborated by the accounts given in the book Gunning For The Godman: The True Story Behind Asaram Bapu's Conviction which is co-authored by Lamba.
Bench: Justices Sanjiv Khanna and MM Sundresh
Case Title: State of Rajasthan vs. Asharam @ Ashumal
Click here to read more

[Same Sex Marriage Recognition] Senior Lawyer Mukul Rohatgi reflected on the need to balance rights of marriage and the majority heteronormative structures vis-a-vis the minority LGBTQIA community. He told a Constitution bench that just because the heterogenous majority had fixated views, it cannot weigh down the minority. "The heterogenous majority has no right to steamroll the minority.. all discorded notes have been corrected by this court over time, this court is the guarantor of fundamental rights.... .and if India has to go forward, this court has to take the lead and say, look Mr. Society, remove the stigma, remove this dogma.. because this court enjoys moral confidence," the Senior Lawyer made an ardent appeal for the rights of the LGBTQIA community.
Bench: CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice SK Kaul, Justice S. Ravindra Bhat, Justice Hima Kohli, Justice PS Narasimha
Case Title: Supriyo@ Supriya Chakraborthy v. Union of India & Anr. (a batch of petitions)
Click here to read more
Read More: [Same-Sex Marriage] Societal Values Cannot Trump Equal Treatment: Sr Adv AM Singhvi Argues Before Top Court

[Bail for Alleged Maoist] The Supreme Court set aside the order passed by the Bombay High Court at Nagpur Bench discharging former Delhi University professor GN Saibaba and others in an alleged Maoist links case. While allowing the appeal moved by the state government of Maharashtra against the decision of the high court, the court remitted back the matter to the high court to decide afresh. The bench noted that the high court had passed the impugned orders solely on the ground of invalid sanction and absence of sanction in case of one accused.
Bench: Justice MR Shah and Justice CT Ravikumar
Case Title: The State of Maharashtra vs. Mahesh Kariman Tirki & Ors
Click here to read more

[Akhil Gogoi] The Supreme Court has granted bail to Member of Assam Legislative Assembly, Akhil Gogoi in a case registered under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) for being responsible for provoking a crowd to commit violence which led to serious injuries on police official, apart from destruction of property and vehicles during the CAA protests. Court has also refused to discharge him in the case while upholding a High Court order setting aside a special court’s 2021 verdict discharging Gogoi. A division bench also refused to accept the National Investigation Agency (NIA)’s objections to Gogoi's plea while noting that it was a fit case for granting bail as the investigation in the case was over and there was nothing to show that Gogoi was involved in any unlawful activity since he was discharged.
Bench: Justices V Ramasubramanian and Pankaj Mithal
Click here to read more

[MNREGA Funds allocation] The Supreme Court has sought the Centre's response in plea highlighting the pending wages of workers under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005 (MNREGA). The bench was hearing the PIL filed by Swaraj Abhiyan seeking redressal of grievances of the workers. The Court has issued a notice to the ministry of rural development (MORD), stating that the beneficiaries must get their dues, posting the case in July. The main PIL was disposed off in 2018 but a fresh application was filed highlighting the negative back up of funds being created across states.
Bench: Justices Ajay Rastogi and A. Amanullah
Case Title: Swaraj Abhiyan vs. Union of India
Click here to read more

[Same Sex Marriage Recognition] A wide range of arguments were presented today before the Supreme Court and senior lawyers for the petitioner(s) batted in favour of Gay Marriage by highlighting various facets of legal and social orders. The Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud today reflected on the psychological implications of domestic violence in a household on children. The CJI led constitution bench was hearing the case concerning recognition of same-sex marriages and the issue of adoption was being discussed between the bar and the bench. Currently, the adoption laws and CARA (Central Adoption Resource Authority) guidelines only stipulate adoptions for heterosexual couples. Arguments were also advanced from perspective of mental health, Article 21 and the allegedly invasive provisions of the Special Marriage Act.
Bench: CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice SK Kaul, Justice S. Ravindra Bhat, Justice Hima Kohli, Justice PS Narasimha
Case Title: Supriyo@ Supriya Chakraborthy v. Union of India & Anr. (a batch of petitions)
Click here to read more

[Facilities for Retd Judges – IAS Cadre officers arrest in UP] The Supreme ordered forthwith release of the two officers who had been arrested in Uttar Pradesh on account of an Allahabad High Court order on charges of criminal contempt for failing to provide facilities such as domestic help etc. to retired judges. The high court, however, opined that the officer had suppressed material facts and misled the court and therefore, held them prima facie liable for contempt of court and ordered their arrest. The Allahabad HC had ordered two secretaries of the Uttar Pradesh finance department Shahid Manzar Abbas Rizvi, Secretary (Finance) and Sarayu Prasad Mishra, Special Secretary (Finance) to be taken into custody.
Bench: CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice PS Narasimha
Case Title: Association Of Retired Supreme Court And H.C.Judges And Another vs. Union Of India And Others
Click here to read more

[Gyanvapi-Wuzu] Supreme Court recorded Solicitor General Tushar Mehta's submission that sufficient drums of water would be provided to the devotees in close proximity of the Gyanvapi disputed site for performing Wuzu. This assurance was made by SG Mehta on an application filed before the Supreme Court seeking permission to perform "Wuzu", an Islamic Practice at the disputed Gyanvapi site. Today, Court was told that the administration had agreed to provide water to the devotees 70 mts away from the place, against their request of availability within the premises. "Inside is not possible, I spoke to the DM, it is not possible at all", SG added.
Court then agreed with the SG's submission that drums of water be provided within close proximity.
Bench: CJI DY Chandrachud, Justices PS Narasimha & JB Pardiwala
Case Title: Committee of Management Anjuman Intezamia Masajid Varanasi Vs Rakshi Singh
Click here to read more

[Grievance Redressal in High Courts] The Supreme Court has directed all the High Courts to constitute a Grievance Redressal Committee in their respective High Courts which may be headed by the Chief Justice, to deal with issues behind lawyer's going on strikes. Such a grievance redressal committee will be consisting of two other senior Judges, one each from service and one from the Bar to be nominated by the Chief Justice as well as the Advocate General, Chairman of the Bar Council of the State and President of the High Court Bar Association, the court said.
Bench: Justices MR Shah and Ahsanuddin Abdullah
Case Title: District Bar Association Dehradun vs Ishwar Shandilya & Ors.
Click here to read more

[NSA Invocation against Youtuber] CJI DY Chandrachud today questioned the State of Tamil Nadu on its invocation of National Security Act against Youtuber Manish Kashyap who has been booked by the Tamil Nadu police for sharing fake videos of attack on Bihar based migrant labourers. "NSA Mr. Sibal, what is this?", the CJI asked Senior Lawyer Kapil Sibal, who was appearing on behalf of Tamil Nadu. "See what he is doing, he is making videos saying that these people are coming from Bihar and getting killed..", Sibal replied. "But NSA..", the CJI replied. Last Tuesday, the Supreme Court bench of Justices Krishna Murari and Sanjay Karol had issued notice in the plea by Kashyap and sought responses from the Central government and the States of Bihar and Tamil Nadu on a plea by the Youtuber seeking consolidation of First Information Reports (FIR) registered against him.
Bench: CJI DY Chandrachud & PS Narasimha
Case Title: Manish Kashyap vs. Union of India and Ors
Click here to read more

[Same Sex Marriage] In a group of petitions requesting recognition of same-sex marriage before the Supreme Court of India, the National Commission for the Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) has opposed granting adoption rights to same-sex couples.In a petition for intervention lodged with the apex court, the NCPCR asserted that the social and psychological effects of adoption by same-sex parents have been demonstrated in studies.The plea stated that according to a study conducted by Dr. Paul Sullins of the Catholic University of America, emotional and developmental problems are twice as prevalent in children with same-sex parents compared to those with opposite-sex parents.
Case Title: Supriyo@ Supriya Chakraborthy vs. Union of India & Anr. (a batch of petitions)
Click here to read more

[Migrant Labourers] Supreme Court has granted three months’ time to the States and UTs across the country to undertake the exercise to issue ration cards to the left out migrant labourers who are registered on eShram portal by giving wide publicity. The eShram portal is meant to register and support the unorganised/migrant workers by providing them with a Universal Account Number (UAN). "...the concerned State/UT to approach them through the office of the concerned Collector of the District so that more and more registrants on eShram portal are issued the ration cards and so that they may get the benefit of the benevolent schemes floated by the UOI and the State Government including the benefit under the National Food Security Act", order adds.
Bench: Justices MR Shah and CT Ravikumar
Case Title: In Re Problems and Miseries of Migrant Labourers
Click here to read more

[Mob violence] In a plea seeking a direction to the States asking them to frame a scheme for the purpose of providing victim compensation in cases of lynching/mob violence, the Supreme Court on Friday, April 21 issued notice to the Union of India and respective state governments. Advocate Javed R. Shaikh, appearing for the petitioner, drew the court's attention to the pertinent passage in the Tehseen Poonawalla judgment wherein it was directed that the States shall frame a scheme for the purpose of providing victim compensation in cases of lynching/mob violence under Section 357A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Bench: Justices KM Joseph and BV Nagarathna
Case Title: INDIAN MUSLIM FOR PROGRESS AND REFORMS IMPAR vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Click here to read more

[Nupur J Sharma-OpIndia] Last week, the Supreme Court ordered that no coercive action be taken against OpIndia Editor-in-Chief, Nupur J Sharma in the FIR filed against for her story on Bihari migrants being attacked in the state of Tamil Nadu. Sharma and OpIndia CEO Rahul Roushan had approached the Top Court seeking quashing of said FIR. While refusing to do so, a CJI Chandrachud led bench has granted them four weeks of interim protection, with liberty to move the Madras High Court.
Bench: CJI Chandrachud and Justice Narasimha
Case Title: Nupur J Sharma vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Click here to read more