Read Time: 01 hours

1. [Lakhimpur Kheri Violence] The Supreme Court has cancelled the bail of Ashish Mishra, the prime accused, in the Lakhimpur Kheri violence incident that happened in October 2021.  A special bench led by Chief Justice of India NV Ramana asked Mishra to surrender in one week's time. While setting aside the order of Allahabad High Court which granted bail to Ashish Mishra, prime accused in the Lakhimpur Kheri Violence case, the Supreme Court has said that while granting him bail, the High Court denied the victims', their right to participate in the proceedings.
   Bench: CJI Ramana with Justices Surya Kant and Hima Kohli
   Case Title: Jagjeet Singh & Ors Vs Ashish Mishra
   Click here to read more
    
2. [Adarsh Cooperative Society Scam] Supreme Court has granted bail to a person named Jainam Rathod who is under investigation for misappropriating an amount of Rs. 223.77 crores, for alleged purchase of Suit Lengths (Cloth) by a Co-operative Society from 27 Companies. Rathod is also under investigation for misappropriating Rs. Rs.90.03 Crores all of it during the time of demonetisation. Rathod was arrested on 28th August 2018. He had sought for a bail from the Punjab and Haryana High Court which was declined in 2019.
   Bench: Justices Chandrachud and Surya Kant
   Case Title: Jainam Rathod Vs State of Haryana
   Click here to read more
    
3. [Hanuman Jayanti communal clashes] A plea has been filed by advocate and social activist Vineet Jindal in Supreme Court seeking direction to be issued to the central government to hand over the investigation of communal clashes that broke out in various states on the occasion of Ram Navami and Hanuman Jayanti to National Investigation Agency (NIA). The plea states that these clashes indicate involvement of international organizations to target Hindus across the country intent of trying to dis-balance the social structure of India.
   Case Title: Vineet Jindal Vs Union of India
   Click here to read more
    
4. [Gain Bitcoin Scam] "Do not play games with this court, we are not some Tis Hazari Court," said Justice DY Chandrachud today, while lashing out at Gain BitCoin scam accused Ajay Bharadwaj for not complying with the last order of the court asking him to reveal the wallet credentials as per the last order. Bhardwaj was arrested in March 2018 and later was granted bail by the Supreme Court on April 3, 2019. The GainBitcoin CEO Bharadwaj is an accused in Rs. 2000 crore crypto currency scam Ajay Bharadwaj.
   Bench: Justice Chandrachud and Surya Kant
   Case Title: Ajay Bharadwaj Vs Union of India
   Click here to read more
    
5. [Plea in SC] Jamie Ulama-I-Hind has filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in the Supreme Court of India against bulldozers being employed to raze the homes of persons allegedly involved in acts of violence. The organisation has urged the top court to issue appropriate directions to the centre and States that such actions cannot be taken against any accused in any criminal proceedings. The plea further seeks for the court to issue directions that residential premises cannot be demolished as a punitive measure.
   Click here to read more
    
6. [Delhi-Dehradoon Expressway] While reconstituting the committee to oversee the construction of Delhi-Dehradun expressway the Supreme Court has held that the judgment of the court in this case cannot be cited as a precedent in other pending cases in this regard. On the last date of hearing, the Supreme Court refused to issue notice in plea by Citizens for Green Doon challenging the expansion of Delhi-Dehradun expressway. The bench however stated that, it will consider whether a non-government member/organisation can be appointed to the 12-member expert committee set-up by National Green Tribunal.
   Bench: Justices Chandrachud and Aniruddha Bose
   Case Title: Citizens of Green Doon Vs Union of India
   Click here to read more
    
7. [NEET-UG Admissions] The Supreme Court has disposed of a batch of petitions challenging the Delhi High Court order, whereby the plea against the upper age limit of 25 years and 30 years in the NEET UG admissions for the general and reserved category had been dismissed, taking into account the National Medical Council's (NMC) decision to not insist on the upper age limit. The order noted that, "In view of the decision taken by the NMC it does not insist on any upper age limit for candidates appearing in NEET-UG."
   Bench: Justice L Nageswara Rao and Justice BR Gavai
   Case Title: Jalaludheen T. Jose Abraham Vs. Medical Council of India & Ors.
   Click here to read more
    
8. [Pendency before SC] During the hearing of a matter concerning pollution through Firecrackers, Justice MR Shah of the Supreme Court remarked that "one of the reasons for the pendency (in the top court) is adjournment letters and personal difficulty". He added, "We give 5% weightage to junior counsels if they argue." The bench was discussing the issue of pendency of matters in the apex court when Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave pointed out that there are 70,000 pending cases in the Supreme Court.
   Bench: Justice MR Shah and Justice BV Nagarathna
   Case Title: Arjun Gopal and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors.
   Click here to read more
    
9. [Jahangirpuri encroachment demolition] Supreme Court has ordered status quo on the demolition drive against the encroachment at Jahangirpuri in Delhi. The North Delhi Municipal Corporation yesterday launched a special encroachment removal action program. A senior official of the North Delhi Municipal Corporation wrote to the DCP north-west, apprising that encroachment removal action programme will comprise the PWD, local body, police and several departments of the North corporation. Dushyant Dave, Sr. Adv, today mentioned the matter before the Supreme Court and submitted that notice were given for demolition and that the process has started today at 9 AM despite the authorities being aware that the matter is being mentioned before Supreme Court. The court on hearing the submissions granted an order of status quo and directed that the matter be listed tomorrow.
   Bench: Chief Justice of India Justice NV Ramana with Justices Krishna Murari and Hima Kohli
   Click here to read more
    
10. [Bhaiya is Back poster] The Chief Justice of India Justice NV Ramana while hearing a case seeking cancellation of bail of a rape accused remarked that the rape accused is a student leader and that political parties in power put up such hoardings.  On April 11, the bench took a serious view of hoardings that read "Bhaiya is Back" being put up to welcome the accused after he was released on bail by Madhya Pradesh High Court. The counsel for the accused submitted that they were put up during the local body election.
    Bench: Chief Justice of India Justice NV Ramana with Justices Krishna Murari and Hima Kohli
    Case title: Ms. P Vs State of Madhya Pradesh
    Click here to read more
     
11. [Karnataka Iron Ore mining] The Supreme Court has said that the court will ask the appointed Judge heading the committee to decide on the issue of Rs. 20,000 Crores Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) funds in the Karnataka iron ore mining case. The Special Purpose Vehicle known as Karnataka Mining Environment Restoration Corporation has been constituted by the State Government. The Court appointed Committee has been constituted to look over the issue of welfare of regions falling in the mining impact zone.
    Bench: Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justice Krishna Murari and Justice Hima Kohli
    Case Title: Samaj Parivartana Samudaya vs Karnataka
    Click here to read more
     
12. [Demolition of illegal encroachment] Solicitor General Tushar Mehta informed Supreme Court that the submission by Jamiat-Ulema-I-Hind that muslims that they are being targeted in the illegal encroachment demolition drives is factually incorrect. The Solicitor General said that the government doesn't segregate it's citizens on the basis of religion. He then went on to state that the raging debate in the country is that of demolitions which were carried out in Khargone, wherein 88 per cent of demolitions that took place were homes of Hindus and not Muslims.
    Bench: Justice L. Nageswara Rao & Justice BR Gavai
    Click here to read more
     
13. [Jahangirpuri encroachment demolition] The Communist Party of India (Marxist) leader and former Rajya Sabha MP Brinda Karat has moved the Supreme Court against the anti-encroachment demolition drive at Jahangirpuri. Karat has further sought the directions of the court commanding the authorities to grant compensation to the victims of alleged 'illegal demolition', since the demolition was not stopped despite the status quo order of the court.
    Case Title: Brinda Karat Vs North Delhi Municipal Corporation
    Click here to read more
     
14. [Death Sentence Mitigation Experts] The Supreme Court has taken suo motu cognizance on the 'controversy' over the death sentences being awarded and appointing Mitigation Experts. The bench has noted that to deal with the issue of death sentences, an institutionalised approach is necessary. A three-judge bench will hear the matter pertaining to the appointment of “mitigation experts” in death sentence matters.
    Bench: Justice UU Lalit, Justice S Ravindra Bhat and Justice PS Narasimha
    Case title: Irfan@ Bhayu Mevati Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh
    Click here to read more
     
15. [Halal Ban] A Public Interest Litigation has been filed by Advocate and Social Activist Vibhor Anand seeking directions of the court to ban Halal certified products across India, withdraw Halal Certified products from markets & declare Halal certifications issued since 1974 null & void. The plea states that it has been filed by Anand on behalf of 85% Citizens of the Country for the enforcement of their Fundamental Rights provided under Article 14, 21 of the Constitution of India. According to the plea, the fundamental rights of 85% of the population is being infringed and violated because for the sake of 15% of the population, rest 85% people are being forced to consume Halal Products against their will.
    Case title: Vibhor Anand Vs Union of India
    Click here to read more
     
16. [Dharam Sansad events] Supreme Court refused to issue notice in plea by army veterans seeking a probe by Special Investigation Team into the alleged hate speeches that were made at the Dharam Sansad events in Haridwar and Delhi agreed to keep the matter on board. The court however agreed to list the matter with the other petition seeking court’s intervention in respect of the ‘hate speeches’ that were delivered on the 17th December 2021 at Haridwar organised by Yati Narsinghanand, and on 19th December 2021 at Delhi, organised by an organization called ‘Hindu Yuva Vahini’.
    Bench: Justices Khanwilkar and Abhay Oka
    Case title: SG Vombaktere Vs Union of India
    Click here to read more
     
17. [Uniform Compensation Code] The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a plea seeking direction to the Central Government to frame Guidelines for Compensation to Victims of Wrongful Prosecution and implement the recommendations of Law Commission Report No-277 on Miscarriage of Justice. A PIL filed by Advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay in this regard that, "The absence of effective statutory/legal scheme for providing mandatory compensatory scheme to victims of wrongful malicious. prosecutions and incarceration of innocents, infringes fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 14 and 21 of the constitution."
    Bench: Justice UU Lalit and Justice S Ravindra Bhat and Justice PS Narasimha
    Case title: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay Vs. Union of India & Ors.
    Click here to read more
     
18. [SEBI's investigation into RIL] Reliance Industries Limited (RIL) has moved Supreme Court against a Bombay High Court order dismissing its plea seeking disclosure of documents that Security Exchange Board of India (SEBI) relied upon, in order to investigate against RIL. The matter pertains to an Complaint filed by Journalist S Gurumurthy to SEBI over the alleged irregularities in Capital Market during 1994 to 2000. In furtherance to this, SEBI moved special SEBI court seeking direction to initiate proceedings against RIL in 2020, but the same rejected on the ground of delay in filing application.
    Click here to read more
     
19. [TATA-Adani dispute] The Supreme Court on Friday issued notice in a plea moved by Tata Power challenging the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL) order which upheld the Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission's order allowing Rs 7000 crore power transmission contract to Adani Electricity on a nomination basis. Tata Power has challenged the APTEL order which upheld the MERC decision while noting that the order cannot be said to be "incorrect, perverse or inappropriate." Whereas, the plea has stated that the policies mandate competitive bidding as the ideal process for the allotment of large infrastructure contracts.
    Bench: Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice Surya Kant
    Case title: THE TATA POWER COMPANY LIMITED TRANSMISSION Vs. MAHARASHTRA ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION & ORS.
    Click here to read more
     
20. [Demolition of Jhuggis' in Sarojini Nagar] The Supreme Court has refused to allow status quo in the plea against the demolition of Jhuggi's in the Sarojini Nagar area. The court refused to accept the contention of Senior Advocate Vikas Singh appearing for the petitioner that the “same thing will happen to them early morning” on Monday. The bench was hearing a plea challenging the Delhi High Court order, which the single judge's order, refusing to grant rehabilitation to the jhuggi dwellers of the Sarojini Nagar area.
    Bench: Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justice Krishna Murari and Justice Hima Kohli
    Case title: Vaishali & Ors vs Union of India & Ors 
    Click here to read more
     
21. [Hate speech] Solicitor General Tushar Mehta has sought permission from the apex court to examine the prayers in a plea seeking disqualification of persons from contesting elections if they are found to be engaging in Hate speech. The bench was hearing a plea filed by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Ashwini Upadhyay, the petition states that injury to the citizens is extremely large because hate speech and rumor mongering has the potential of provoking individuals or society to commit acts of terrorism, genocide, ethnic cleansing etc.
    Bench: Justice AM Khanwilkar and Justice Abhay S Oka
    Case title:  Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay vs Union of India
    Click here to read more
     
22. [Pornographic content] The Supreme Court has tagged a Public Interest Litigation seeking several directions including formulation of appropriate gender neutral law against revenge porn, impersonation and morphing on the internet with the transfer petition seeking clubbing of plea's before High Courts which have challenged the The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021. After being informed by the Solicitor General Tushar Mehta that there had been an amendment to Intermediary Rules 2021 and it was challenged before several high courts and due to this, transfer petition(s) had been filed, the bench tagged the subject matter along with the other similarly placed petition(s).
    Bench: Justice AM Khanwilkar and Justice Abhay S Oka
    Case title: Skand Bajpai & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors. 
    Click here to read more
     
23. [Dharam Sansad] Supreme Court asked the Delhi Police to file a fresh affidavit in plea pertaining to alleged hate speech at the the Dharam Sansad event. The bench while expressing its displeasure on the affidavit asked the Additional Solicitor General appearing for Delhi police, “This affidavit is filed by Deputy Commissioner of Police? We hope he understands the nuances as also the other aspects. If he has merely reproduced the enquiry report or has he applied his mind? If this is the stand, we will have to ask the Commissioner to look into it.” 
    Bench: Justices Khanwilkar and Abhay Oka
    Case title:  Qurban Ali Vs Union of India
    Click here to read more
     
24. [Security to BCI inspection teams] The Supreme Court has directed the State Governments to provide security to the Bar Council of India’s inspection teams during their visit to conduct inspections of the States' law colleges. A plea was filed by the Bar Council of India challenging the Gujarat High Court’s judgment which permitted persons with employment to practice as advocates without having to resign from their jobs. The Top Court had appointed Senior Advocate KV Vishwanathan as an amicus curie in the case to analyze the position of law.
    Bench: Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and MM Sundresh 
    Case title: Bar Council of India v. Twinkle Rahul Mangonkar And Ors
    Click here to read more
     
25. [Uber licenses] Top Court granted status quo on the order of Bombay High Court dated March 7, 2022 directing cab aggregator Uber to obtain necessary licenses under the Motor Vehicle aggregator guidelines in order to operate in Maharashtra. The High Court asked the aggregators to apply for the same by March 16, 2022. The Ministry of Road Transport and Highways had in 2020 issued Motor Vehicle Aggregators Guidelines, 2020 in order to regulate the cab aggregator market. The Guidelines were issued to serve as a guiding framework for State Governments and provide for ease of doing business, customer safety and driver welfare
    Bench: Justices Nageshwar Rao and Gavai
    Case title: Uber India Systems Pvt Ltd Vs Union of India
    ​​​​​​​Click here to read more
     
26. [Abu Salem extradition case] Supreme Court expressed their displeasure over the affidavit filed by Home Secretary in the matter pertaining to assurances given to Portugal while extraditing terror convict Abu Salem in 2002. The court in its order recorded that it does not appreciate the tenor of the affidavit. The court further took a serious view of the contents of the affidavit. The court said in its order that “it is for the court to decide as to what to do or not do.”
    Bench: Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and MM Sundresh
    Case title: Abu Saleem Vs State of Maharashtra
    ​​​​​​​Click here to read more
     
27. [Non-adherence by trial court] The Supreme Court had expressed their displeasure over a trial court in Andhra Pradesh not granting interim bail to an accused to whom the Supreme Court had granted interim bail in the year 2020. The top court in September 2020, while granting interim bail, had directed the accused to be produced before the trial court within three days of the order and had further directed the trial court to release him on interim bail on such terms and conditions as the it may deem appropriate.
    Bench: Justices Ravindra Bhatt and PS Narasimha
    Case title: Gopisetty Harikrishna Vs State of Andhra Pradesh
    ​​​​​​​Click here to read more
     
28. [Pulsar Sani] The top court has granted interim protection to Pulsar Suni accused in a sexual assault & abduction case of an actress. Notice has also been in his plea challenging a Kerala High Court order, which dismissed his plea seeking bail in a sexual assault and abduction case, wherein Malyalam cinema actor Dileep is also an accused. 
    Bench: Justice Ajay Rastogi and Justice Bela M Trivedi 
    Case title: Sunil NS Vs. The State of Kerala 
    ​​​​​​​Click here to read more
     
29. [Land dispute] Supreme Court has stayed the take over of land allotted to Mohammad Ali Jauhar University at Rampur by Sate of Uttar Pradesh. The order of stay was passed in a case where the land was sought to taken over by state on the ground that the trust which is running the university had violated conditions based on which it was granted. The university was established in 2005 for which the Uttar Pradesh government permitted the Mohammad Ali Jauhar Trust to acquire 400 acres of land over the ceiling of 12.5 acres under the UP abolition of Zamindar & Land reforms act. The permission was granted on the basis of many conditions. Samajwadi Party leader Azam Khan is the head of the trust.
    Bench: Justices Ajay Rastogi and CT Ravikumar 
    Case title: Maulana Mohammad Ali Jauhar Trust Vs State of UP
    ​​​​​​​Click here to read more
     
30. [Iron Ore export] The Supreme Court has reserved its judgement on an application by iron ore manufacturers, seeking direction to lift the ban on export of iron ore in Karnataka. A CJI led bench said that it will first deal with the issue of export and E-auction of the iron ore, whereas, deal with the issue of cap on the iron ore manufacturing at a later stage. Ministry of Steel's affidavit supported the lifting of ban on iron ore export from Karnataka. The affidavit stated that there must be equality among Karnataka and other States, the policy allows export of Iron ore to all the States and it must be followed.
    Bench: Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justice Krishna Murari and Justice Hima Kohli
    Case title: Samaj Parivartana Samudaya vs Karnataka
    ​​​​​​​Click here to read more