Read Time: 21 minutes
[Professor Hausing On Manipur] A CJI Chandrachud led bench of the Supreme Court ordered that no coercive action be taken against Professor Kham Khan Suan Hausing, who has been embroiled in cases after his comments on the Meitei tribe of Manipur. Senior Advocate Anand Grover appearing for Hausing. He told the bench comprising Justices Pardiwala and Manoj Misra that Hausing was entangled in two different cases. "I am expert on this issue and have voiced my opinion..just give me protection like Advocate Deeksha Dwivedi..both these cases are motivated by the interview given to The Wire..I cannot be subjected to torture in Imphal where there is ethnic strife..there are no kukis left there..", Grover told the Court.Bench: CJI DY Chandrachud, Justices Pardiwala and Manoj Misra Case Title: Kham Khan Suan Hausing vs. The State Of Manipur Click here to read more
[Godhra Train Carnage] The Supreme Court refused to grant bail to three accused in the 2002 incidents of Godhra Carnage wherein 59 Hindu pilgrims were killed while returning from Ayodhya. "The incident is also a very serious one..it is not an isolated incident of murder..", a CJI Chandrachud led bench observed. Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde appeared for the convicts Shaukat, Siddique and Bilal. Hedge submitted that the allegation against two of the accused, was of stone pelting and a further allegation is of stealing ornaments was against one of them. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta relied on witness statements and said, "Bilal is the main conspirator. He was present in the mob with deadly weapons. He was seen damaging the train bogey with iron bars.."Bench: CJI DY Chandrachud, Justices Pardiwala and Manoj Misra Case Title: Abdul Raheman Dhantiya @ Kankatto @ Jamburo Vs. State of Gujarat Click here to read more
[Krishna Janmabhoomi] The Shri. Krishna Janambhoomi Mukti Nirman Trust has approached the Supreme Court of India seeking a direction for scientific survey of the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah premises. Instant SLP has been filed against the Allahabad High Court's order passed last month whereby it had dismissed a plea filed by the Trust seeking direction to the Mathura civil judge to decide its application for a scientific survey of said premises before disposal of the application by the management committee of the mosque and the Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central Waqf Board objecting to its suit. Notably, an ad interim ex parte stay against the impugned judgment/ final order has also been sought.Case Title: Shri. Krishna Janambhoomi Mukti Nirman Trust vs. Sahi Masjid Eidgah Management Committee & Ors Click here to read more
[Bihar Caste Census] Supreme Court resolved to hear the Patna High Court's order giving a go ahead to the state government's decision to conduct a caste-based survey on August 18. While doing so, a division bench has refused to stay the same. 'Ek Soch Ek Prayas', an NGO, had approached the top court against the High Court's recent decision to uphold the Bihar government's caste-based survey.Bench: Justices Sanjiv Khanna and SVN Bhatti Case Title: Ek Soch Ek Paryas vs. Union of India Click here to read more
[Adani-Hindenburg Case] SEBI has filed a plea in the Supreme Court seeking 15 more days to file its report on probe into Adani-Hindenburg issue, saying substantial work has been done in this regard. The top court had earlier directed the market regulator SEBI, to file its probe report with respect to Adani-Hindenburg case by August 14. In an application, the SEBI asked the court to pass an order extending the time granted to it in terms of the orders issued on March 2 and May 17, 2023 to conclude the investigation and submit the status report. The Supreme Court is now scheduled to hear the matter on August 29.Case Title: Vishal Tiwari Vs. Union of India & Ors. Click here to read more
[Abrogation of Article 370 Hearing] The Supreme Court was told that Jammu and Kashmir lost its external sovereignty post the Instrument of Accession, but not internal sovereignty. "On the status of the merger agreement, the Court said earlier that post the instrument of accession, sovereignty was surrendered absolutely. My submission on that is, external sovereignty was lost post the IoA, not internal.. please see the IoA that defines the extent of internal sovereignty, Article 370 was substitute to the merger agreement, without which we are lost...", Senior Advocate Rajeev Dhavan further told a five judge bench hearing pleas challenging abrogation of Article 370. Referring to Article 356 of the Indian Constitution, which gives the President that power to power to suspend state government and impose President’s rule on any state in the country, the senior counsel added that said provision was the bane of the Indian Constitution.Bench: CJI Chandrachud with Justices SK Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai and Surya Kant Case Title: In Re Article 370 of the Constitution Click here to read more
[Krishna Janmabhoomi] The Supreme Court granted status quo on the demolitions being conducted by Railways near the Krishna Janmabhoomi site in Mathura. The bench has issued notice on the petition and ordered status quo for ten days. Senior Advocate Prashanto Chandra Sen argued that the petition might become infructuous if the demolition drive was allowed to continue. "When we approached this court on Monday, all courts in Uttar Pradesh were closed. The authorities have now bulldozed over 100 houses, only some are left..", Sen said. On Monday, the case was mentioned before a CJI Chandrachud led bench which was told that demolitions were being carried out at the Krishna Janmabhoomi of settlements existing since 1800s.Bench: Justices Aniruddha Bose, Sanjay Kumar, and SVN Bhatti Case Title: Yakub Shah vs. Union of India & Ors Click here to read more
[Article 370] The Supreme Court was told Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP) abrogated Article 370 of the Constitution of India, granting special status to Jammu and Kashmir, only for votebank. Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave further added that BJP in their manifesto said that they will work towards abrogating Article 370 even though the Supreme Court had clarified on multiple occasions that a party's manifesto will have to comply with constitutional values. "...because they were in majority they went ahead with this.. only because they wanted to get votes..this was done completely for colorable intentions..", Court was informed.Bench: CJI Chandrachud with Justices SK Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, Surya Kant and BR Gavai Case Title: In Re: Article 370 Of The Constitution Click here to read more
[Land Acquisition – Narmada Project] The Supreme Court has directed the Gujarat government to pay higher compensation to landowners for the land acquired for the Vadodara branch canal of Narmada project in 1986. "In a welfare state like ours where we have promised all the citizens social and economic justice, it would be fair and just if the appellants are meted equal treatment as the other affected landowners," the bench said. The apex court set aside the Gujarat High Court's judgement of March 28, 2012 and restored the judgement and award of the reference court of May 10, 2007.Bench: Justices Bela M Trivedi and Dipankar Datta Case Title: Kalubhai Khathubhai Vs. State of Gujarat & Ors. Click here to read more
[Hate Speech] Brinda Karat, member of Polit Bureau of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) and KM Tiwari, Secretary of CPI(M) Delhi State Committee, have approached the Supreme Court of Indi for bringing certain hate speeches made by leaders of certain religious outfits recently in Delhi to its notice. In an impleadment application filed in the writ petition filed by Shaheed Abdullah, it has been submitted that leaders of Vishwa Hindu Parishad, Bajrang Dal etc. have incited people against Muslim community in the name of Hindu Religion at public meetings held in various places in Delhi such as Nangloi, Ghonda Chowk etc.Case Title: Shaheen Abdullah vs. Union of India Click here to read more
[Fodder Scam] Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has approached the Supreme Court of India seeking urgent hearing of their plea challenging bail granted to Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) leader Lalu Prasad Yadav in the fodder scam case. ASG SV Raju asked a CJI Chandrachud led bench to list the matter. Accordingly, the bench agreed to list it on August 25. In March this year, Supreme Court had tagged the plea filed by CBI challenging the grant of bail to Yadav in the 'Doranda Treasury case' of Jharkhand— the fifth case related to the fodder scam, along with other pending petitions.Bench: Justices Sanjay Karol and Manoj Misra Case Title: State of Jharkhand vs. Lalu Prasad Yadav Click here to read more
[Bihar Caste Census] Referring to the Bihar government's decision to hold a caste-based survey in the state, the Supreme Court said that it was not a not quasi judicial order, but an administrative decision, and as such the thought process and reasons behind the same were not to be given to the public. Supreme Court observed thus when a submission was made by Senior Advocate CS Vaidyanathan appearing for 'Youth for Equality' that the state government had a brought out a notification which was then published in the gazette.Bench: Justices Sanjiv Khanna and SVN Bhatti Case Title: Ek Soch Ek Paryas vs. Union of India Click here to read more
[Umar Khalid] The Supreme Court adjourned hearing in the bail plea filed by UAPA accused Umar Khalid, for two weeks. The bench took the matter up and said, "This has to go on a non-miscellaneous day...". Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal appearing for Khalid agreed with the court's suggestion. "List after two weeks on a non-miscellaneous day", the bench ordered while adjourning the matter. Last week, Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra had recused from hearing the bail plea filed by Khalid. When the matter was taken up, Justice AS Bopanna, who was also a part of the bench had said, "This will come before some other bench, here is some difficulty on part of my brother judge".Bench: Justices Aniruddha Bose and Bela M Trivedi Case Title: Umar Khalid vs. State of NCT Delhi Click here to read more
Please Login or Register
