Read Time: 01 hours

1. [Andhra PSC Recruitment] The Supreme Court of India refused to stall the 2019 recruitment process of the Andhra Public Service Commission and held that since the selections have commenced in 2018 and have substantively progressed, there seems no reason to stop them at this juncture. The above order was passed in a plea filed by aspirants challenging the orders of the division bench and single judge bench of Andhra Pradesh High Court. Petitioners had urged the court to declare the action of the authorities neglecting the mistakes that occurred in Telugu translation of at least 51 questions illegal and violation of fundamental rights and consequently, to set aside the same.
   Bench: Justices Bopanna and Vikram Nath 
   Case Title: Sheik Sanwaj & Ors vs. APSC
   Click here to read more
    
2. [Mohammad Naseer’s Bail Plea] The Supreme Court issued notice in a plea filed by Bollywood actor Mohammad Naseer seeking bail in a case registered against him by CBI under provisions of the Prize Chits Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978. Naseer contended that he was taken into custody after more than 2 years of filing chargesheet.
   Bench: Justice Bopanna and Vikram Nath
   Case Title: Mohammad Naseer vs. Enforcement Directorate
   Click here to read more
    
3. [Former Judges Request CJI to take cognizance] Former judges of the Supreme Court, various High Court and a few Senior Advocates have written to the Chief Justice of India Justice NV Ramana appealing him to take suo motu cognizance of the recent acts in Uttar Pradesh of illegal detention, violence on protestors and those in police custody, after protests broke out across the country against certain objectionable remarks made by BJP spokespersons.
   Click here to read more
    
4. [Former MD of Amrapali Group Granted Bail] The Supreme Court, while considering the plea of the Managing Director of Amrapali group on medical grounds, today remarked that it has become a fashion to go to jail, fall sick, and then enjoy at the hospital. The division bench of the court was considering a plea for bail filed by Anil Kumar Sharma, former Managing Director of the infamous Amrapali group. Sharma had filed the plea challenging the order of the Lucknow Bench of Allahabad High Court.
   Bench: Justice MR Shah and Justice Aniruddha Bose
   Case Title: Anil Kumar Sharma vs. Union of India
   Click here to read more
    
5. [PIL in SC] A Public Interest Litigation plea has been moved before the Supreme Court seeking direction for the Central Government to ascertain the feasibility of enacting a stringent population control law to secure fundamental rights, mainly rule of law, right to air, right to water, right to food, right to health, right to sleep, right to shelter, right to livelihood, right to justice and right to education.
   Case Title: Devkinandan Thakur Ji vs. Union of India & Ors.
   Click here to read more
    
6. [Copyright] Supreme Court refused to entertain a plea filed by Puma Sports India Ltd against the order of Punjab and Haryana High Court, refusing to interfere and quash a complaint issued by Phonographic Performance Limited. The complaint alleged that their music was being played in retail outlet of Puma store at Elante Mall, without there being a licence in their favour issued under the Copy Right Act, 1957.
   Bench: Justices JK Maheshwari and Hima Kohli
   Case Title: M/s Puma Sports India Pvt Ltd and others vs. The Union Territory of Chandigarh and others
   Click here to read more
    
7. [Private Defence] The Supreme Court held that right of private defence is necessarily a defensive right that is available only when the circumstances so justify it. "Such a right would be available to the accused when he or his property is faced with a danger and there is little scope of the State machinery coming to his aid", a division bench further observed.
   Bench: Justice BR Gavai and Justice Hima Kohli
   Case Title: EX. CT. MAHADEV vs. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL, BOARDER SECURITY FORCE & ORS.
   Click here to read more
    
8. [NCLT members] Supreme Court adjourned the plea moved by the National Company Law Tribunal Bar Association challenging the notification of the Corporate Affairs Ministry fixing the tenure of the members of the Tribunal as three years. The contention of the Bar Association is that the tenure should be a period of five years. Court asked Solicitor General Mehta to file the documents that have been provided to the court for reference with an affidavit.
   Bench: Justices J.K.Maheshwari and Hima Kohli
   Case Title: NCLT Bar Association vs. Union of India
   Click here to read more
    
9. [Former TN Minister Rajenthra Bhalaji] Top Court dismissed the application filed by former Tamil Nadu minister Rajenthra Bhalaji for relaxation of the conditions of the bail granted to him in a job scam case. Sidharth Bhatnagar, Sr. Adv, mentioned the matter before the court stating that Bhalaji has fully co-operated with the investigation and he wishes to go to Chennai to attend a party conference this month. The bench, however, told him that there is no urgency in the matter.
   Bench: Justices J.K.Maheshwari and Hima Kohli
   Case Title: Rajendra Balaji vs. State Represented by Inspector of Police
   Click here to read more
    
10. [PIL in SC] A Public Interest Litigation plea has been filed before the Supreme Court seeking a direction that a Minister, shall be temporarily debarred from holding office, after spending 2 days in judicial custody. Alternatively, it is sought that the Law Commission of India should examine the election law of developed countries and prepare a comprehensive report to maintain nobility & dignity of Ministers, Legislators and Public Servants in spirit of Article 14.
    Case Title: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay vs. Union of India and Ors
    Click here to read more
     
11. [Talaq-e-hasan] The Supreme Court has agreed to hear the plea seeking direction to declare the practice of Talaq-e-Hasan and other forms of unilateral extrajudicial Talaqs void and unconstitutional. Adv Ashiwni Upadhyay mentioned the matter stating that the victim has already received two Talaq notices and the final notice will come on June 19.
    Bench: Justice AS Bopanna and Justice Vikram Nath
    Case Title: Benazeer Heena vs. Union of India & Ors.
    Click here to read more
     
12. [Tuticorin Port Trust] Supreme Court issued notice in a special leave petition filed by the Cargo Terminal Operator PSA SICAL Terminals Limited and directed that a status quo will be maintained between the parties. The Madras High Court on June 7, 2022 had rejected the challenge by PSA SICAL for consideration of the tariff charge and royalty issue before a committee that was specifically formed to adjudicate it.
    Bench: Justices J.K.Maheshwari and Hima Kohli
    Case Title: PSA SICAL Terminals Limited vs. Union of India & Anr
    Click here to read more
     
13. [Fine Indisales Chit Fund Scam] Supreme Court issued notice in plea filed by Mohammad Arif, an accused in Indisales chit fund scam. Arif has challenged the order of the Orissa High Court denying him bail. Arif was arrested in November 2019 by Enforcement Directorate and has been in custody ever since. A case under provisions of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978 was registered against Arif at Balasore, Orissa alleging that Fine Indisales Pvt. Ltd defrauded the complainant by alluring to invest money in the attractive investment Scheme.
    Bench: Justices J.K.Maheshwari and Hima Kohli
    Case Title: Mohammad Arif vs. Enforcement Directorate
    Click here to read more
     
14. [Hemant Soren] Supreme Court has adjourned the Jharkhand Government's plea challenging the Jharkhand High Court order stating that the Public Interest Litigation filed against the Chief Minister of Jharkhand over the issue of money laundering is maintainable. Court remarked that the government should ideally approach it once the final judgment in the case is pronounced as opposed to challenging orders in a piecemeal manner.
    Bench: Justices J.K.Maheshwari and Hima Kohli
    Case Title: State of Jharkhand vs. Shiv Shankar Sharma and Ors.
    Click here to read more
     
15. [UP Demolitions] The Supreme Court refused to intervene in Uttar Pradesh demolitions. Court refused to grant an interim stay as sought in the applications filed against the demolitions of properties in Prayagraj and Kanpur and directed the authorities to follow due process of law. Court asked the authorities to make sure that nothing untoward happens in the meantime and has allowed the authorities to issue notice to the offenders.
    Bench: Justice AS Bopanna and Justice Vikram Nath
    Case Title: Jamiat Ulama I Hind and Anr. vs. Union of India and Ors.
    Click here to read more
     
16. [Usage Of Seine Nets For Fishing] The Supreme Court issued a notice in an application seeking an interim stay on the Tamil Nadu Government order banning fishing via purse seine nets in toto. Court was informed that around 15 lakh fishermen are affected by the order. It was argued that the ban on using purse-seine fishing must leave for not only 15 lakhs people's livelihood but also for Blue Economy.
    Bench: Justice AS Bopanna and Justice Vikram Nath
    Case Title: GNANASEKAR & ORS vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS
    Click here to read more
     
17. [Limitation Act] The Supreme Court has recently held that the question of limitation is not to be examined with a view to decline the condonation, but to do substantial justice. A division bench made these observations while condoning a delay of 67 days in filing the revision plea before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.
    Bench: Justices Hemant Gupta and V Ramasubramaniam
    Case Title: MANAGER, INDUSIND BANK LIMITED & ANR. vs. SANJAY GHOSH
    Click here to read more
     
18. [O.XX R.18 CPC] The Supreme Court has addressed a concerning trend of delay in drawing up the final decrees under Order XX Rule 18 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (‘CPC’) which deals with decrees in suits for partition or separate possession of share therein. Court thus held that once a preliminary decree is passed by the Trial Court, the court should proceed with the case for drawing up the final decree suo motu. 
    Bench:  Justice S Abdul Nazeer and Justice Vikram Nath 
    Case Title: KATTUKANDI EDATHIL KRISHNAN & ANR. vs. KATTUKANDI EDATHIL VALSAN & ORS.
    Click here to read more
     
19. [Soyabean farmers] Supreme Court stayed the order of the Bombay High Court directing Bajaj Allianz to compensate 3.5 lakh farmers from the Osmanabad district of Maharashtra for Soybean crop loss due to heavy rainfall in the Kharif season of 2020. The stay is however subject to the insurance company depositing a sum of Rs.200 crores with the Registry of Supreme Court in a period of six weeks.
    Bench: Justices J.K.Maheshwari and Hima Kohli 
    Case Title: Bajaj Allianz vs. Dnyanraj & Ors
    Click here to read more
     
20. [Husband-wife relationship] The Supreme Court on Monday reiterated that if a man and a woman live together for long years as husband and wife, there would be a presumption in favour of wedlock. Court further said, “Such a presumption could be drawn under Section 114 of the Evidence Act. Although, the presumption is rebuttable, a heavy burden lies on him who seeks to deprive the relationship of legal origin to prove that no marriage took place."
    Bench: Justice S Abdul Nazeer and Justice Vikram Nath 
    Case Title: KATTUKANDI EDATHIL KRISHNAN & ANR. vs. KATTUKANDI EDATHIL VALSAN & ORS.
    Click here to read more
     
21. [Civil Services] While exercising its plenary power under Article 142 of the Constitution, and with a view to do complete justice, the Supreme Court on Tuesday directed the Union of India that based on the re-medical fitness report, it may consider the case of a Civil Services aspirant for appointment as per his placement in the consolidated reserve list originally published of Civil Services Examination (CSE), 2014 on 19th January, 2016.
    Bench: Justice Ajay Rastogi and Justice Vikram Nath
    Case Title: UNION OF INDIA vs. K. RAJASHEKHARA REDDY AND ANOTHER
    Click here to read more
     
22. [Mop-up round in nursing courses] The Supreme Court dismissed a plea seeking extension of the time schedule and additional Mop-up round for filling up seats that remained vacant in Nursing courses. Court while relying on the Notification issued by the Indian Nursing Council, which stated that the last date of admission for all nursing programmes for the year 2021-2022 was 31st of March, 2022, said, "As per the settled position of law, the time schedule for admission in the educational institutions has to be adhered to. As such, the High Court has rightly refused to entertain the petitions and grant any relief of further Mop-up round to fill up the seats, which have remained vacant."
    Bench: Justice MR Shah and Justice Aniruddha Bose
    Case Title: ST. STEPHENS HOSPITAL COLLEGE OF NURSING vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
    Click here to read more
     
23. [Quality of Medical Education] "There cannot be any compromise with the merits and/or quality of Medical Education, which may ultimately affect the Public Health", observed the Supreme Court while dismissing the plea seeking directions to conduct a special stray counselling round for vacant NEET-PG seats pertaining to the academic year 2021. "The process of admission and that too in the medical education cannot be endless. It must end at a particular point of time. The time schedule has to be adhered to, otherwise, ultimately, it may affect the medical education and the public health...", further remarked the top court.
    Bench: Justices MR Shah and Aniruddha Bose
    Case Title: Dr. Astha Goel and Ors. vs. The Medical Counselling Committee & Ors.
    Click here to read more
     
24. [PIL Against Hemant Soren] The Supreme Court had refused urgent listing of the Jharkhand Government's plea challenging the Jharkhand High Court order stating that the Public Interest Litigation filed against the Chief Minister of Jharkhand over the issue of money laundering is maintainable. However, the bench asked the Counsel to mention the matter before the Registrar.
    Bench: Justices J.K.Maheshwari and Hima Kohli 
    Case Title: State of Jharkhand vs. Shiv Shankar Sharma and Ors.
    Click here to read more
     
25. [Kalkaji Temple] Supreme Court has passed an order stating that the redevelopment of Kalkaji Temple is to be carried out without dispossessing the priests living there. Court was dealing with a plea challenging the order of the Delhi High Court whereby it was held that redevelopment of the Kalkaji Mandir can commence only if all persons who are in occupation of the dharamshalas (lodging rooms for devotees) vacate the premises which are in their occupation.
    Bench: Justices Bopanna and Vikram Nath
    Case Title: Nati Ram Bharadwaj vs. Neeta Bharadwaj
    Click here to read more
     
26. [Agnipath scheme] A Public Interest Litigation plea has been moved before the Supreme Court seeking direction for the formation of a Special Investigation Team to investigate the violent protests against the recently launched 'Agnipath Scheme'. The plea submits that the consequence of the recently launched Agnipath Scheme by the Central Government has been far-reaching for the citizens of this country resulting in intensified vandalism and protest leading to severe destruction of public property and goods.
    Case Title: Vishal Tiwari vs. Union of India & Ors.
    Click here to read more
     
27. [Conman Sukash Chandrashekar] Supreme Court has ordered that it would be appropriate to shift alleged conman Sukash Chandrashekar from Tihar Jail. It is Chandrashekar’s plea that there is a threat to his life at Tihar since many officials of the jail have been arrested for taking bribes from him. It has been alleged that Chandrashekar bribed Tihar officials to live comfortably in the jail.
    Bench: Justices Bopanna and Vikram Nath
    Case Title: Sukash Chandra Shekar vs. Union of India
    Click here to read more
     
28. [Leena Paulose’s Bail Plea] Supreme Court has refused to entertain a plea by alleged conman Sukesh Chandrashekar’s wife, Leena Paulose seeking bail to attend her nephew’s baptism. Paulose had moved the Delhi High Court thrice seeking similar relief. Paulose, is a master con woman and strategist, as well as the brains and key factor behind the schemes created to launder the proceeds of crime by her husband Sukash Chandrashekar. Paulose has been chargesheeted by Enforcement Directorate for a Rs.200 crore money laundering case.
    Bench: Justices JK Maheshwari and Hima Kohli
    Case Title: Leena Paulose vs. Enforcement Directorate
    Click here to read more