Here's a comprehensive overview of the Supreme Court of India proceedings during April 2024. This monthly digest aims to inform you about the latest judgments, orders, and Public Interest Litigations (PILs) filed in the Supreme Court during the month of April and also the updates of the Constitution bench hearing on the taxation matter of mineral-bearing lands and on overlapping...
Here's a comprehensive overview of the Supreme Court of India proceedings during April 2024. This monthly digest aims to inform you about the latest judgments, orders, and Public Interest Litigations (PILs) filed in the Supreme Court during the month of April and also the updates of the Constitution bench hearing on the taxation matter of mineral-bearing lands and on overlapping powers between the Centre and the State in production, manufacturing, supply and regulation of 'Industrial Alcohol', providing a succinct overview.
Orders/ Judgments
Case Title: State of Kerala v. Union of India., Original Suit No. 1 of 2024
Coram: Justices Surya Kant and KV Viswanathan
The Supreme Court referred the suit filed by the State of Kerala against the Union of India, challenging the limits imposed on the State's borrowing capacities to a 5-judge Constitution Bench in terms of Article 145(3) of the Constitution.
At the same time, however, the bench refused to pass orders on the interim relief sought by the State for additional borrowing for the financial year 2023-24.
Case Title: COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT ANJUMAN INTEZAMIA MASAJID VARANASI v. SHAILENDRA KUMAR PATHAK VYAS & ANR.
Coram: CJI DY Chandchrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court on Monday (April 1) issued notice on a Special Leave Petition filed by the Gyanvapi mosque committee challenging the orders of the Varanasi District Court and the Allahabad High Court allowing the performance of Hindu religious rituals at a tehkhana (cellar) of the mosque.
While doing so, the Court also ordered that that status quo shall be maintained with respect to the observance of Namaz by Muslims in the rest of the Gyanvapi mosque and the performance of Hindu worship at the tehkhana.
Case Title: V. Senthil Balaji v. The Deputy Director, SLP(Crl) No. 3986/2024
Coram: Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan.
The Supreme Court today issued notice on a petition filed by MLA and former Minister V Senthil Balaji against a Madras High Court order denying him bail in a cash-for-jobs money laundering case.
Case Title: Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi v. Office of LG of Delhi W.P.(C) No. 197/2024
Coram: Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court issued notice to the Delhi Finance Secretary on a petition filed by the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD) seeking the release of the funds approved by the Delhi Assembly for the Delhi Jal Board.
Case Details : IN RE: ASSAULT ON TWO MEMBERS OF THE SUPREME COURT BAR ASSOCIATION AT DISTRICT COURT COMPLEX, GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR
Coram: Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court, while hearing the suo moto case over the assault on two members of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) at Gautam Budh Nagar District Court during a lawyers' strike, took serious note of the fact that the CCTV cameras at the Court complex were not functioning on that day.
The Court issued notice to the State of Uttar Pradesh on the issue of non-functioning CCTV cameras in the District Courts.
Case Title: Udhayanidhi Stalin v. The State of Maharashtra and Ors., W.P.(Crl.) No. 104/2024
Coram: Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta
While hearing Tamil Nadu Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin's plea for clubbing of criminal cases registered against him across multiple states over his controversial 'Sanatana Dharma' remarks, the Supreme Court today expressed that Ministers cannot be equated with media persons.
Case Title: P.V. ANVAR (M.L.A.) vs. UNION OF INDIA, Diary No.- 11294 - 2024
Coram: Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and PB Varale
The Supreme Court dismissed the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Kerala MLA PV Anvar seeking directions to the Central Government to formulate an action plan to tackle human-wildlife conflict in the Kerala State.
Supreme Court Issues Notice To ECI On Plea For 100% EVM Votes-VVPAT Verification
Case Title: Arun Kumar Agrawal v. Election Commission of India and Anr., W.P.(C) 184/2024
Coram: Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta
The Supreme Court issued notice on a petition seeking inter-alia counting of all Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) paper slips in elections, instead of verification of only 5 randomly selected Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) in each assembly segment of a parliamentary constituency.
Supreme Court Grants Bail To AAP MP Sanjay Singh In PMLA Case After ED's Concession
Case Title: Sanjay Singh v. Union of India & Anr. | Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 14510 of 2023
Coram: Justices Sanjiv Khanna, Dipankar Datta and PB Varale
The Supreme Court granted bail to Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader and Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Singh in the money laundering case related to the Delhi liquor policy case after a concession was made by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED). When the ED said it has no objection to grant of bail to Sanjay Singh in peculiar facts of the case, the Court ordered his release, clarifying that nothing was being expressed on merits.
Case Title: X v. Y, Diary No.- 11727 – 2023, Kerala Muslim Jamaat v. Y Diary No. 16709 - 2023
Coram: Justices AS Bopanna and Sanjay Kumar
In a petition filed against a Kerala High Court judgment recognizing Muslim women's unconditional right to resort to khula (a form of divorce under Muslim personal law), the Supreme Court issued notice.
Case Title: SACHIN KUMAR vs. THE STATE OF UTTARAKHAND., Diary No.- 51567 – 2023
Coram: Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan
Recently, the Supreme Court expressed its dilemma regarding how, for the last few months, the panel of Advocates in the States/Union Territories has witnessed change after the shift in political power. The Court observed that this change in the panel often results in adjournments.
Against this backdrop, the Top Court has proposed that the States/Union Territories maintain the previous panel of Advocates for at least six weeks while changing the panel of Advocates. This was suggested to avoid adjournments.
Case Title: BALLU @ BALRAM @ BALMUKUND AND ANOTHER VERSUS THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Coram: Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta
The Supreme Court reiterated that in the event of the possibility of two views, if the trial court acquits the accused, then it would not be permissible for the High Court to interfere with the trial court's order of acquittal unless the view taken by the trial court was perverse.
Case Title: PREM RAJ VERSUS POONAMMA MENON & ANR.., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 272
Coram: Justices Sanjay Karol and Aravind Kumar
Observing that a judgment of the civil court will be binding on the criminal court to the extent of sentences or damages, the Supreme Court set aside a conviction in a criminal case for cheque dishonour under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act based on a finding in a civil suit between the same parties that the cheque was offered as a security.
Case Title: PURNI DEVI & ANR. VERSUS BABU RAM & ANR., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 273
Coram: Justices Sanjay Karol and Aravind Kumar
The Supreme Court held that the time consumed in contesting bonafide litigation by the litigant at a wrong forum (believing it to be appropriate) would be excluded while computing the period of limitation under Section 14(2) of the Limitation Act.
Case Title: LEVEL 9 BIZ PVT. LTD. VERSUS HIMACHAL PRADESH HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ANOTHER., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 275
Coram: Justices Bela M Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal
The Supreme Court imposed a fine of Rs 5 lakhs on the Himachal Pradesh Housing and Urban Development Authority (HIMUDA) for colluding with a private company to secure a tender by deceiving the High Court for building a commercial complex in Shimla.
Case Details: RAJENDRA BIHARI LAL vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH SLP(Crl) No. 002944 - / 2024
The Supreme Court dismissed an application filed by the State of Uttar Pradesh to recall the interim bail granted to the Vice Chancellor of Sam Higginbottom University of Agriculture, Technology and Sciences (SHUATS), Dr Rajendra Bihari Lal, a case over alleged forceful religious conversion.
Case Title: BHAGIRATHI DASH v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR., Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 166/2024
Coram: Sudhanshu Dhulia and Prasanna Bhalachandra Varale
The Supreme Court has issued a notice in a writ petition challenging the constitutional validity of Section 166 (3), which was added through the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 2019. As per this provision, a claim for compensation on account of a motor vehicle accident must be filed before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal within six months from the date of the accident.
Case Details: Navneet Kaur Harbhajansingh Kundles @ Navneet Kaur Ravi Rana v. The State of Maharashtra and Ors., Civil Appeal No. 2741-2743/2024
Coram: Justices JK Maheshwari and Sanjay Karol
In a major relief to Amravati MP Navneet Kaur Rana, who won 2019 Lok Sabha elections from a constituency reserved for Scheduled Castes, the Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the Bombay High Court which set aside her Scheduled Caste certificate.
Case Title: Sharad Pawar v. Ajit Anantrao Pawar & Anr. | Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 4248 of 2024
Coram: Justices Surya Kant and KV Viswanathan
In the matter related to rift within the Nationalist Congress Party(NCP), the Supreme Court on Thursday (April 04) directed both Ajit Pawar and Sharad Pawar groups to strictly abide by the Court's previous interim order passed on March 19, 2024.
Case Title: UNION OF INDIA & ANR. VERSUS JAHANGIR BYRAMJI JEEJEEBHOY (D) THROUGH HIS LR., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 276
Coram: Justices Aniruddha Bose and JB Pardiwala
Expressing displeasure with the approach adopted by the Union of India for seeking condonation of more than 12 years of delay in filing the restoration suit, the Supreme Court refused to condone the delay stating that it would be a mockery of justice if the delay gets condoned, as it would result in pushing the decree-holder to undergo the lengthy litigation process again.
Case Title: Abhishek Yadav and others v. Army College of Medical Sciences | W.P.(C) No. 730/2022
Coram: Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Prasanna B Varale
In a pivotal matter regarding the payment of stipends for doctors undergoing their MBBS internships, the Supreme Court issued a clear directive to the National Medical Commission (NMC) to submit details regarding the stipend status of medical colleges across all States.
Case Title: G.V. Harsha Kumar VERSUS Election Commission of India & Anr., WPC 205/2024
Coram: Justices Surya Kant and Sandeep Mehta
The Supreme Court dismissed as withdrawn a plea seeking imposition of a cooling off period on public servants to prevent them from contesting elections on political party tickets immediately after discontinuation of their service.
Case Title : Anjum Kadari and another v. Union of India and others Diary No. 14432-2024, Managers Association Madaris Arabiya UP v. Union of India SLP(C) No. 7821/2024 and connected matters
Coram: Chief Justice of India DY Chandracuhd, Justice JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court stayed the Allahabad High Court's March 22 judgment striking down the 'Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act 2004' as unconstitutional.
Case Title: G.V. Harsha Kumar VERSUS Election Commission of India & Anr., WPC 205/2024
Coram: Justices Surya Kant and Sandeep Mehta
The Supreme Court dismissed as withdrawn a plea seeking imposition of a cooling off period on public servants to prevent them from contesting elections on political party tickets immediately after discontinuation of their service.
Case Title : Anjum Kadari and another v. Union of India and others Diary No. 14432-2024, Managers Association Madaris Arabiya UP v. Union of India SLP(C) No. 7821/2024 and connected matters.
Coram: Chief Justice of India DY Chandracuhd, Justice JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court stayed the Allahabad High Court's March 22 judgment striking down the 'Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act 2004' as unconstitutional.
"We are of the view that the issues raised in the petitions merit closer reflection. We are inclined to issue notice," the Court observed while issuing notice on five Special Leave Petitions filed against the High Court's judgment.
Supreme Court Grants Bail To Shoma Sen In Bhima Koregaon Case
Case Details: Shoma Kanti Sen v. State of Maharashtra & Anr., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 280
Coram: Justices Aniruddha Bose and Augustine George Masih
The Supreme Court granted bail to former Nagpur University professor Shoma Sen who is booked under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act 1967 (UAPA) for alleged Maoist links in connection with the Bhima Koregaon case.
The Court also raised prima facie doubts over the tenability of the allegations against her regarding the commission of offences under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act 1967 (UAPA).
Case Title: Abbas Ansari v. The State of Uttar Pradesh, Diary No. 14377/2024
Coram: Justices Surya Kant and Sandeep Mehta
The Supreme Court issued notice on a plea by Uttar Pradesh MLA Abbas Ansari seeking permission to attend 'Fatiha' ceremony scheduled on April 10 in respect of his father Mukhtar Ansari, a gangster-turned politician who died on March 28 following a cardiac arrest while undergoing sentence of life imprisonment.
Case Details : DARGAH HAZRAT MULLA SYED vs. UNION OF INDIA Diary No.- 1449 - 2024
Coram: Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court dismissed a petition seeking to bring the mortal remains of Sufi leader Hazrat Shah from Dhaka, Bangladesh to India for burial at the Hazrat Mulla Syed Dargah at Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh.
Noting that Hazrat Shah was a Pakistani citizen, who died in Dhaka in January 2022, the Court stated that there was no enforceable constitutional right involved to invoke Article 32 of the Constitution. The writ petition was filed by Hazrat Mulla Syed Dargah. Late Hazrat Shah was the Sajjada-nasheen of the said Dargah from 2008 till his death.
'Verfiy & Pay It' : Supreme Court To Delhi Finance Secretary On Funds Due To Delhi Jal Board
Case Details : GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI vs. OFFICE OF LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR OF NCT OF DELHI W.P.(C) No. 000197 - / 2024
The Supreme Court asked the Finance Department of the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD) to verify the amounts pending to be paid to the Delhi Jal Board (DJB) and settle the dues before the next hearing.
Supreme Court Delivers Split Verdict On Appointment Of Shiksha Karmi's In Madhya Pradesh
Case Title: KRISHNADATT AWASTHY VS. STATE OF M.P., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 279
The Supreme Court delivered a split verdict in a case concerning the appointment of Shiksha Karmis in the State of Madhya Pradesh.
Justice JK Maheshwari upheld the High Court's decision to cancel the appointment of the Appellants, whereas Justice KV Viswanathan reversed the High Court's order canceling the appointment of the Appellants.
Case Title: Quazi Moinuddin v. Hindu Front For Justice and Ors |Diary No. 13072-2024
Coram: Justices Hrishikesh Roy and Prashant Kumar Mishra
The Supreme Court refused to entertain a Special Leave Petition filed by the Mutawalli of the Kamal Maula Mosque complex challenging the Madhya Pradesh High Court's direction for a survey by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) at the Bhojshala Temple cum Kamal Maula Mosque complex in MP.
Case Title: Manikandan versus State by the Inspector of Police., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 281
Coram: Justices Abhay S Oka and Pankaj Mithal
While rebuking Tamil Nadu Police for tutoring the witnesses to depose against the accused, the Supreme Court directed the Tamil Nadu's Director General of Police to make an enquiry into the conduct of the police officials of tutoring witnesses at the concerned Police Station and to take action against the erring police officials in accordance with law.
Commercial Transactions Outside Purview Of Consumer Protection Act 1986: Supreme Court
Case Title: ANNAPURNA B. UPPIN & ORS. VERSUS MALSIDDAPPA & ANR., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 284
Coram: Justices Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma
The Supreme Court held that complaints seeking recovery of the investment from which the complainant is deriving benefit in the form of interest cannot be entertained under the Consumer Protection Act of 1986.
Coram: Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan
Case Title: A.DURAIMURUGAN PANDIYAN SATTAI @ DURAIMURUGAN Versus STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE AND ANR., SLP(Crl) No. 6127/2022
The Supreme Court restored the bail granted to Youtuber A. Duraimurugan Sattai in a case involving allegations of his making derogatory remarks against Tamil Nadu Chief Minister MK Stalin.
Notably, Oka J posed to Sr Adv Mukul Rohatgi (appearing for State) during the hearing, "If before elections, we start putting behind bars everyone who makes allegations on Youtube, imagine how many will be jailed?"
Case Title: Sanjay Singh v. Piyush M. Patel & Anr., Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 2929/2024
Coram: Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta
The Supreme Court today refused to entertain Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MP Sanjay Singh's plea against summons issued to him in a defamation case over remarks on PM Modi's academic degree.
Case Details: GOPI SHANKAR M vs. UNION OF INDIA Diary No.- 4315 – 2024
Coram: CJI DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court issued a notice in Public Interest Litigation raising the need for central legislation recognising the rights of intersex children and persons. The PIL sought directions to curb sex-reassignment surgeries performed on inter-sex children before they attain the age of majority.
Case Title: ANNAPURNA B. UPPIN & ORS. VERSUS MALSIDDAPPA & ANR., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 284
Coram: Justices Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma
Recently, the Supreme Court held that the legal heirs of a deceased partner do not become liable for any liability of the firm upon the death of the partner.
Case Title: Devesh Sharma v. Union of India | Diary No. 4303-2024
Coram: Justices Aniruddha Bose and Sudhanshu Dhulia
In the matter raising the question of Bachelor of Education (B.Ed.) degree holders' eligibility for appointment as primary school teachers, the Supreme Court today clarified that its judgment of August, 2023 shall have prospective application and services of teachers, in whose case the notice of advertisement specified B.Ed. as qualification, shall not be disturbed.
Case Details: Pradeep Rameshwar Sharma vs State of Maharashtra., Diary No. 13604-2024
Coram: Justices Hrishikesh Roy and Prashant Kumar Mishra
The Supreme Court admitted the appeal filed by former Mumbai Police encounter specialist Pradeep Sharma challenging the recent Bombay High Court's order sentencing him to life imprisonment in a fake encounter killing case. The Court also issued notice to the State of Maharashtra on his plea.
Case Title: YASH TUTEJA vs. UNION OF INDIA, W.P.(Crl.) No. 000153 - / 2023 and connected matters
The Supreme Court quashed the money laundering case in relation to the alleged Chhattisgarh liquor scam.
The Court noted that the complaint filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) was based on an alleged conspiracy(Section 120B IPC) to commit an Income Tax Act offence, which is not a scheduled offence as per the Prevention of Money Laundering Act(PMLA). Since there is no predicate offence, there are no proceeds of crime. Therefore, there can't be a money laundering offence, the Court observed.
Case Title: STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. Versus NATIONAL ORGANIC CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES LTD., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 285
Coram: Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and PB Varale
Observing that no stamp duty is to be paid on every individual increase in the share capital of the company, the Supreme Court held that if the 'Articles of Association' remained the same and the stamp duty was already paid on the increase in the share capital of the company, then the duty paid on the same very instrument will have to be considered for every subsequent individual increase in the share capital of the company.
Case Title: KARIM UDDIN BARBHUIYA VERSUS AMINUL HAQUE LASKAR & ORS., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 287
Coram: Justices Aniruddha Bose and Bela M. Trivedi
In a major relief to All India United Democratic (AIUDF) leader and Assam MLA Karim Uddin Barbhuiya, the Supreme Court on Monday (April 08) dismissed the Election Petition filed by the former Assam BJP leader Aminul Haque Laskar (now a member of Congress Party) and others challenging Barbhuiya's 2021 Assembly election from the Sonai Legislative Assembly Constituency in Assam.
Motive Is Insignificant When There Is Direct Evidence Proving The Guilt Of Accused: Supreme Court
Case Title: CHANDAN VERSUS THE STATE (DELHI ADMN.)., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 288
Coram: Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and PB Varale
While upholding the accused conviction for committing a day-light murder, the Supreme Court held that if there's a direct ocular piece of evidence inspiring the confidence of the court then the motive behind the commission of the offence would be of little relevance and the prosecution need not prove the motive of the accused in the commission of the crime.
Case Title: KARIKHO KRI vs. NUNEY TAYANG, C.A. No. 004615 / 2023
Coram: Justices Anirudhha Bose and Sanjay Kumar
Holding that candidates contesting elections are not required to disclose each and every moveable property owned by them or their dependents unless they are of substantial value or reflect a luxurious lifestyle, the Supreme Court on Tuesday (April 09) upheld the 2019 election of the Independent MLA Karikho Kri from the Tezu Assembly constituency in Arunachal Pradesh.
Supreme Court To Hear Plea For 100% EVM Votes-VVPAT Verification On April 16
Case Title: Association of Democratic Reforms v. Election Commission of India & Anr. | Writ Petition (Civil) No. 434 of 2023
Coram: Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta
The Supreme Court clarified that the matter pertaining to Electronic Voting Machine (EVM) data cross-checking against voter-verifiable paper audit trail (VVPAT) records will be heard next Tuesday (April 16).
Supreme Court Permits Jailed UP MLA Abbas Ansari To Attend Father-Mukhtar Ansari's Fatiha Ceremony
Case Title: Abbas Ansari v. The State of Uttar Pradesh, Diary No. 14377/2024
Coram: Justices Surya Kant and KV Viswanathan
The Supreme Court permitted Uttar Pradesh MLA Abbas Ansari to attend a 'Fatiha' ceremony scheduled for April 10 in respect of his father Mukhtar Ansari, a gangster-turned politician who died on March 28 following a cardiac arrest while undergoing sentence of life imprisonment.
Case Title: PATHAPATI SUBBA REDDY (DIED) BY LRS AND ORS vs. SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR (LA)
Coram: Justices Bela M Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal
While refusing to condone the delay of 5659 days in preferring an appeal, the Supreme Court on Monday (April 08) laid down eight principles by providing harmonious construction to Sections 3 and 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
Case Title: KHENGARBHAI LAKHABHAI DAMBHALA vs. THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Coram: Justices Bela M Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal
The Supreme Court held that approaching the High Court under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution for the release of the seized vehicle would not be a proper remedy without approaching the magistrate under Section 451 Code of Criminal Procedure (“Cr.P.C.”).
Case Title: INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION v. UNION OF INDIA | W.P.(C) No. 645/2022
Coram: Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah
The Supreme Court rejected the second affidavit of apology filed by Patanjali Ayurved and its Managing Director Acharya Balkrishna in the contempt case over the publication of misleading medical advertisements.
Supreme Court Stays Trial In PMLA Case Against Lottery Baron Santiago Martin, Seeks ED's Response
Case Title: S MARTIN v. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT., SLP(Crl) No. 4768/2024
Coram: Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan
The Supreme Court has admitted the plea of Santiago Martin, a giant in India's lottery industry, against the Special Court's order refusing to defer his trial in a money laundering case until the disposal of the predicate case registered by the CBI.
The Court has also stayed the trial and has sought the response of the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) in the present appeal. The trial is pending before the Special PMLA Court at Ernakulam, Kerala.
Case Details : RAVI KUMAR GOLHANI vs. THE CHAIRMAN, STATE BAR COUNCIL OF MADHYA PRADESH Diary No.- 14523 - 2024
Coram: Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court stayed the Madhya Pradesh High Court order which debarred 10 members of the Seoni District Bar Association from appearing in any court for a period of one month and contesting elections to the Bar Association or Bar Council of the state.
Supreme Court Stays MP Administration's Decision To Deny Permission For Christian Prayer Meet
Case Title: SURESH CARLETONS vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH., Diary No.- 16136 - 2024
Coram: Justices B.R. Gavai, Satish Chandra Sharma, and Sandeep Mehta
The Supreme Court (on April 10) issued notice in the matter challenging the Madhya Pradesh High Court's order affirming the Indore administration's decision to cancel a Christian community prayer meeting scheduled for today.
Coram: Justices Bela M Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal
The Supreme Court, in a 2015 case registered against Congress MLA Sukhpal Singh Khaira under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act and the Arms Act, was informed that it would not proceed with the trial.
Case Title : Aminul Haque Laskar v. Karim Uddin Barbhuiya
Coram: Justices Aniruddha Bose and Bela Trivedi
The Supreme Court expressed serious concern over the misuse of social media platforms, where factually incorrect and unfounded statements are made regarding cases which are subjudice. Taking note of a Facebook post published by a party whose case was reserved for judgment, the Court initiated contempt proceedings against him for misleading the public about the court.
Case Title : State of Karnataka vs MN Basavaraja and others., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 293
Coram: Justices Dipankar Datta and SVN Bhatti,
The Supreme Court recently decided that testimonies from family members of the deceased in dowry death cases should not be dismissed simply because they are considered interested witnesses.
Case Title: KARIKHO KRI vs. NUNEY TAYANG, C.A. No. 004615 / 2023., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 290
Coram: Justices Aniruddha Bose and PV Sanjay Kumar
The Supreme Court has observed that mere failure to get a transferred vehicle registered in the name of the new owner will not mean that the sale/gift transaction will get invalidated.
Case Title: KIZHAKKE VATTAKANDIYIL MADHAVAN (D) THR. LRS vs. THIYYURKUNNATH MEETHAL JANAKI., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 293
The Supreme Court held if someone tries to transfer property rights to another person through a legal document but doesn't actually own those rights, the new owner or their successors won't have the legal right to claim those rights from that document.
Supreme Court Expunges Gujarat HC's Adverse Observation Against GST Officials
Case Title: THE STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. V. PARESH NATHALAL CHAUHAN
Coram: Justices P.S. Narasimha and Aravind Kumar
The Supreme Court expunged the observations made by the Gujarat High Court in an interim order that statutory protection of the good faith clause under Section 157 of the Goods and Services Tax Act may not be available to the GST officers who conducted a search operation in the instant case.
Case Title: RAVISHANKAR TANDON vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 296
Coram: Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta
To convict an accused based on the statements made under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, the Supreme Court observed that the prosecution must establish the fact that the discovery of the evidence based on the statement made by the accused under Section 27 of the Evidence Act must not be known to anyone before the information was given by the accused.
Case Title: Smt. Najmunisha, Abdul Hamid Chandmiya alias Ladoo Bapu Vs. State of Gujarat, Narcotics Control Bureau
Coram: Justices Aniruddha Bose and Augustine George Masih
The Supreme Court recently (on April 09) overturned the conviction of the accused individuals under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (Act), rejecting the interpretation of Section 41 (Power to issue warrant and authorization) put forth by the National Bureau of Narcotics.
In the present case, there was no written information, as stipulated under the Act, with the raiding party before it commenced the search in the accused house. In this context, the Court turned down the National Bureau of Narcotics's contention that there is no need to take down information when it arises from personal knowledge.
Financial Position Of Employer Strong Factor In Fixing Wage Structure Of Employees: Supreme Court
Case Title: The VVF Ltd. Employees Union v. M/s. VVF India Limited & Anr., Civil Appeal Nos. 2744 - 2745 of 2023 (and connected matter)
Coram: Justices Aniruddha Bose and Sanjay Kumar
While setting aside a High Court judgment over an industrial dispute, the Supreme Court recently reiterated that financial capacity of an employer is an important factor which cannot be ignored while fixing wage structure of employees.
Insurance Law| Insurer's Burden To Prove Insured Suppressed Material Facts : Supreme Court
Case Title: MAHAKALI SUJATHA versus THE BRANCH MANAGER, FUTURE GENERALI INDIA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED & ANOTHER., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 300
Coram: Justices BV Nagarathna and AG Masih
While upholding the insurance claim repudiated by the insurance company on the ground of suppression of policies already held by the insured, the Supreme Court observed that the insurance company failed to discharge the burden of proof to show that the insurer had other policies existing while taking a policy from it.
Case Title: MANISHA MAHENDRA GALA vs. SHALINI BHAGWAN AVATRAMANI
Coram: Justices Pankaj Mithal and Prashant Kumar Mishra
The Supreme Court explained in a recent judgment that a Power of Attorney holder can only depose about the facts within his personal knowledge and not about those facts which are not within his knowledge or are within the personal knowledge of the person who he represents.
Coram: Justices Aniruddha Bose and PV Sanjay Kumar
Case title: Hanif Ansari Vs state (Govt of NCT of Delhi) (SLP (Crl.) No(s). 15293/2023
The Supreme Court has referred to a larger bench the question as to whether a person accused of committing offences under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985 is entitled to default bail on the failure of the prosecution to furnish the report of the Forensic Science Laboratory along with the chargesheet within the prescribed time.
Case Title: ARVIND KEJRIWAL v. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT., SLP(Crl) No. 5154/2024
Coram: Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta
The Supreme Court issued notice to the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on the petition filed by Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal against his arrest by the ED in connection with the Delhi liquor policy case. Seeking the ED's response, the Court posted the matter in the week commencing on April 29, 2024.
CASE Title: AMANATULLAH KHAN vs. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT., SLP(Crl) No. 4837/2024
Coram: Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta
The Supreme Court refused to entertain the petition filed by Aam Aadmi Party MLA Amanatullah Khan against the dismissal of his anticipatory bail by the Delhi High Court, in a money laundering case related to alleged irregularities in the recruitment of the Delhi Wakf Board.
However, at the same time, the Bench expressed their reservations with regard to certain observations on the merits of the matter made by the Delhi High Court in the impugned judgment.
Case Title: Vishal Tiwari vs. Union of India, Diary No.- 23592 - 2023
Coram: Justices Surya Kant and KV Viswanathan
Appreciating the steps taken by Indian Railways for the implementation of 'Kavach (anti-collision) System' in trains, the Supreme Court disposed of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL).
The PIL was filed by Advocate Vishal Tiwari following the Balasore train accident of last year seeking improvement of the anti-collision measures in railways.
Case Details: NAULAK KHAMSUANTHANG vs. ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA., W.P.(C) No. 000243 - / 2024
Coram: CJI DY Chandrachud comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court declined to entertain a petition seeking voting arrangements for approximately18,000 who got displaced from Manipur due to the ethnic clash to cast their votes in their home constituency in the Lok Sabha General Elections scheduled to take place on April 19 and 26.
Case Title: SANDIPKUMAR M. PATEL & ANR. v. THE STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS., Diary No(s). 16341/2024
Coram: Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta
The Supreme Court refused to interfere in a petition filed by two practising advocates from Gujarat challenging an inquiry ordered by the Gujarat High Court against them for alleged misconduct of forging their client's vakalatnama.
Case Title: MEHER FATIMA HUSSAIN VERSUS JAMIA MILIA ISLAMIA & ORS., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 303
Coram: Justices Abhay S. Oka and Pankaj Mithal
Observing that the University Grants Commission (UGC) regulations are binding on the Universities, the Supreme Court directed the reinstatement of the teachers at Jamia Milia Islamia (“University”) on a permanent basis who were denied regularization by the University even after UGC's letter to University directing regularization of the teachers who were selected through a regular selection process and possessed required qualifications.
Supreme Court Upholds Appointment Of Technical Assistants As Assistant Engineers In TN PWD
Case Title: ASSOCIATION OF ENGINEERS vs. THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 304
Coram: Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta
While upholding the decision of the Tamil Nadu Government to appoint Technical Assistants as Assistant Engineers in the Public Works Department, the Supreme Court expressed displeasure over the attitude of the Association of Engineers in Tamil Nadu to grab all posts of Assistant Engineers in the State without leaving the posts for the candidates promoted from the subordinate services.
Case Title: Shamim Khan v. Debashish Chakraborty and others., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 305
Coram: Justices CT Ravikumar and Rajesh Bindal,
A two-judge bench of the Supreme Court has called for an early adjudication of the issue whether prior sanction is mandatory for a Magistrate to forward a complaint against a public servant for investigation as per Section 156(3) CrPC.
Case Title: M/S RAJCO STEEL ENTERPRISES VERSUS KAVITA SARAFF & ANR., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 306
Coram: Justices Aniruddha Bose and Sanjay Kumar
Recently, the Supreme Court upheld the acquittal of an accused in a 16-year-old cheque dishonor case since the complainant failed to prove that there exists a legally enforceable debt against the accused.
Case Title: SANDEEP KUMAR VS. GB PANT INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY GHURDAURI
Coram: Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta
Observing that the termination of the services of the employee without holding disciplinary enquiry violates the principles of natural justice, the Supreme Court directed the reinstatement of the Registrar at the GB Pant Institute of Engineering and Technology, Ghurdauri.
Waqf Board & Not Waqf Tribunal Has Jurisdiction To Decide Issue Of Mutawalli : Supreme Court
Case Title: S V CHERIYAKOYA THANGAL v. S.V P POOKOYA & ORS., CIVIL APPEAL NO.4629/2024
Coram: Justices M.M Sundresh and S.V.N. Bhatti.
Recently, the Supreme Court held that the original jurisdiction to decide the issue pertaining to Mutawalliship vests with the Waqf board and not the Waqf Tribunal. Distinguishing the role of the Waqf Tribunal from that of the board, the Court said that the former is an adjudicatory authority while the latter deals with administration-related issues.
Case Title: THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL VS. JAYEETA DAS
Coram: Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta
The Supreme Court held that in the absence of the designation of a special court by the state government, the Court of Sessions would have the jurisdiction to try offences punishable under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (“UAPA”).
Case Title: THE STATE OF TELANGANA & ORS. VERSUS MOHD. ABDUL QASIM (DIED) PER LRS.
Coram: Justices MM Sundresh and SVN Bhatti
A week after recognizing for the first time the fundamental right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change, the Supreme Court has delivered another judgment highlighting the potential adverse impacts of climate change.
Case Title: Aruna Roy and Anr. v. Union of India, W.P.(C) No. 249/2024
Coram: Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta
The Supreme Court issued notice on a plea filed against passing of 'blanket' orders under Section 144 CrPC (prohibiting public meetings, etc) ahead of Lok Sabha/Vidhan Sabha elections and directed that any applications of the nature filed by the petitioners shall be decided by the competent authority within 3 days of filing.
Case Title: THE STATE OF TELANGANA & ORS. VERSUS MOHD. ABDUL QASIM (DIED) PER LRS., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 314
Coram: Justices M.M. Sundresh and S.V.N. Bhatti
The Supreme Court imposed a cost of Rs. 5 Lakhs on the State of Telangana with liberty to recover the said cost from the erring officials who have facilitated and filed incorrect affidavits in the ongoing proceedings.
The case relates to the declaration of the reserved forest land as private land in favor of the private persons by the High Court while exercising its review jurisdiction despite having its earlier order where it had given a clear finding that the title over the reserved forest land wasn't proved by the private person.
Case Title: Swami Ram Dev v. Union Of India., W.P.(Crl.) No. 265/2021
Coram: Justices MM Sundresh and SVN Bhatti.
The Supreme Court heard Yoga Guru Baba Ramdev's plea to combine the several FIRs filed against him in different states over his alleged remarks that Allopathy cannot cure COVID.
Observing that the petition was filed in the year 2021 and the charge-sheet would have been filed, the Court granted time to the State of Bihar and Chhattisgarh to inform it about the status regarding the FIRs and the chargesheet filed.
Case Title: JUMMA MASJID TRUST COMITTEE vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA., Diary No.- 16176 - 2024
Coram: Justices Surya Kant and K.V Vishwanathan
Today, the Supreme Court ordered that the keys to a mosque in Erandol Taluka, Jalgaon, will remain with the municipal council. While ordering thus, the bench disposed of an appeal preferred by the Jumma Masjid Trust Committee against the Bombay High Court's order directing it to return the keys of the Jalgaon mosque to the council by April 13.
Case Title: MUKHTAR ZAIDI VS. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 315
Coram: Justices Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma
The Supreme Court held that if the Magistrate takes cognizance of the offence and issues summons to an accused by recording satisfaction based on the additional evidence produced by way of a protest petition filed by the informant, then such a protest petition ought to be treated as a private complaint case under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Case Details : SHALINI AGNIHOTRI vs. HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SLP(Crl) No. 003917 - / 2024
Coram: CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala
The Supreme Court stayed the order of the Himachal Pradesh High Court which directed the transfer of Superintendent of Police (SP), Kangra District. The High Court in the impugned order refused to recall its earlier directions on transferring Kangra SP Shalini Agnihotri and DGP Sanjay Kundu.
Case Title: Shri Kant Bhati v. Union of India and Anr., W.P.(C) No. 33/2024
Coram: Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta
The Supreme Court permitted withdrawal of a plea seeking regulation of inappropriate content on over-the-top (OTT) platforms, while granting liberty to the petitioner to make a representation to the Union of India.
Case Title : Babu Sahebagouda Rudragoudar and others v. State of Karnataka., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 316
Coram: Justices BR Gavai and Surya Kant
In a notable judgment, the Supreme Court has discussed how to prove a disclosure statement made by an accused under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act.
The Court noted that the statement of an accused recorded by a police officer under Section 27 of the Evidence Act is basically a "memorandum of confession" of the accused recorded by the Investigating Officer during interrogation which has been taken down in writing. This statement is admissible only to the extent it leads to the discovery of new facts.
Case Title: INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY BOARD OF INDIA VERSUS SATYANARAYAN BANKATLAL MALU & ORS.
Coram: Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta
Observing that the offences committed under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”) would be tried by the Special Court established under Section 435 of the Companies Act, 2013 and the sessions judge would have the power to issue process against the accused, the Supreme Court upheld the issuance of process by the sessions judge to the accused.
Case Title: PARTEEK BANSAL vs. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.
Coram: Justices Vikram Nath Prashant Kumar Mishra
The Supreme Court imposed a cost of Rs.5 Lakhs on a wife's father for lodging a false Section 498A IPC case at different places against the husband to harass him by facing trial at different places.
Case Title: Yash Raj Films Vs Afreen Zaidi | C.A. No. 4422/2024
Coram: Justices PS Narasimha and Aravind Kumar
The Supreme Court allowed an appeal filed by Yash Raj Films against an order of the National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC) which imposed a penalty on YRF for not including a song in the 2016 Shah Rukh Khan-starrer 'Fan', which was shown in the promos and the teasers of the movie.
Case: ASHWINI KUMAR UPADHYAY vs UNION OF INDIA | Diary No. 17329-2024
Coram: Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala
The Supreme Court refused to entertain a petition seeking to allow 3-year LL.B degree course right after the 12th standard.
After the bench expressed disinclination to entertain the matter, the petitioner chose to withdraw the petition.
Case Title: MADHAVI VISWANATHAN v. THE STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR., Diary No. 13692-2024
Coram: Justices Bela M Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal
The Supreme Court issued a notice in a special leave petition assailing the bail of four accused convicted in the 2008 murder case of journalist Soumya Vishwanathan.
Supreme Court Allows Termination Of 28-Week Pregnancy Of 14-Year Old Rape Survivor
Coram: CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala
The Supreme Court allowed an urgent plea for terminating the pregnancy of a 14-year-old minor rape survivor. While exercising its powers to do complete justice under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Court directed the Dean of Sion Hospital, Maharashtra to undertake the medical termination of the 28 weeks pregnancy.
Case Details : SAYAN MUKHERJEE vs. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO HIS EXCELLENCY THE GOVERNOR OF WEST BENGAL Diary No.- 12854 - 2024
Coram: CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala
The Supreme Court issued notice in a petition challenging the inaction on the part of the West Bengal Governor Dr C.V. Ananda Bose in giving assent to the West Bengal Universities (Amendment) Bill 2022, which was passed by the State legislature in June 2022. The Court has sought a response from the Principal Secretary to the Governor of West Bengal, the Union as well as the Principal Secretary of the Department of Higher Education in this regard.
Case Title: Seema Girija And Anr. v. UoI And Ors. Diary No. 29329/2021
Coram: CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala
The Supreme Court expressed disappointment at the inadequate implementation of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act 2016 (RPwD) across states. Observing that the enforcement of RPwD is in a 'dismal' state, the Court directed the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment to consider the larger picture and provide an update in the next hearing.
Supreme Court Suspends Sentence Of Congress MLA Mohammed Moquim In ORHDC Loan Fraud Case
Case Title: MOHAMMED MOQUIM vs. STATE OF ODISHA., Diary No.- 16787 - 2024
Coram: Justices Surya Kant and Dipankar Datta
The Supreme Court suspended the sentence of Congress MLA Mohammed Moquim in the Orissa Rural Housing Development Corporation (ORHDC) loan fraud matter. The senior Congress leader had approached the Apex Court against the Orissa High Court's order affirming his three-year sentence by the Special Judge (Vigilance), Bhubaneswar, in 2022.
Case Title: JYOTI DEVI VERSUS SUKET HOSPITAL & ORS., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 320
Coram: Justices Sanjay Karol and Aravind Kumar
Observing that the compensation was wrongly reduced by applying "Eggshell Skull Rule", the Supreme Court enhanced the compensation amount to be paid to a patient from Rs. 2 Lakhs to Rs. 5 Lakhs after recording that she was suffering persistently post-surgery due to deficiency in service by the doctor.
Case Title: PERNOD RICARD INDIA (P) LTD. vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH., Diary No.- 30175 - 2017
Coram: Justices Narasimha and Aravind Kumar
In an important judgment, the Supreme Court observed that, subject to statutory stipulation, a repealed provision ceases to operate from the date of repeal, and the substituted provision starts operating as and when it is substituted.
Case Title: THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL VERSUS GANESH ROY
Coram: Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta
Deprecating the practice of High Courts routinely directing the personal appearance of the government officer, the Supreme Court held that if the High Court found it necessary to direct the presence of the government officer then it should have been first through video conferencing.
Case : Union of India and ors v. Sudipta Lahiri., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 326
Coram: Justices Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma
The Supreme Court recently imposed a cost of Rs. 5,00,000/ on the Union of India challenging an order passed by the Meghalaya High Court based on the Union's own concession that a previous decision covered the matter.
Deprecating the Union's move to challenge the High Court's order, the Supreme Court recorded that this was a “sheer abuse of the process of law” and cautioned the Union against filing frivolous petitions.
Case: Union of India and ors v. Sudipta Lahiri., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 326
Coram: Justices Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma
The Supreme Court recently imposed a cost of Rs. 5,00,000/ on the Union of India challenging an order passed by the Meghalaya High Court based on the Union's own concession that a previous decision covered the matter.
Case Title: GOVIND KUMAR SHARMA & ANR. VERSUS BANK OF BARODA & ORS., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 325
Coram: Justices Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma
The Supreme Court observed that after setting aside of the auction sale of the property the banks cannot automatically claim physical possession over the property held in the possession of the tenant who was the successful bidder in the auction sale.
3000 Tonnes Of Solid Waste Not Processed Daily In Delhi : Supreme Court Expresses Concerns
Case Title: MC Mehta v. Union of India & Ors., WP(C) No. 13029/1985
Coram: Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan
The Supreme Court recently observed that 3000 tonnes of Municipal Solid Waste is not being processed in Delhi on a daily basis and flagged concerns inter-alia about non-compliance with the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016.
'Stridhan' Is Wife's Absolute Property, Husband Holds No Title Over It: Supreme Court Reiterates
Case Title: MAYA GOPINATHAN vs. ANOOP S.B., Diary No.- 22430 - 2022
Coram: Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta
The Supreme Court reiterated that stridhan is an “absolute property” of a woman, and while the husband has no control over the same, he can use it in times of distress. Nevertheless, he has a “moral obligation” to restore the same or its value to his wife.
Supreme Court Registry Refuses To Receive Petition To Abolish Collegium System & Revive NJAC
Case Title: Shri Mathews J. Nedumpara & Ors. v. Hon'ble The Chief Justice of India & Ors., WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 1005 OF 2022
In the latest development, the Supreme Court's Registry refused to receive a writ petition seeking the abolition of the collegium system and to render the 2015 NJAC verdict as void ab initio.
In a significant development, the Supreme Court on Friday (April 26) rejected the pleas seeking 100% cross-verification of Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) data with Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) records.
Case Title: SHRIRAM MANOHAR BANDE VERSUS UKTRANTI MANDAL & ORS.
Coram: Justice PS Narasimha and Aravind Kumar
Taking note of prevalent service jurisprudence, the Supreme Court on held that the employment is deemed to be terminated from the date on which the letter of resignation is accepted by the appropriate authority.
Case Title: GARIMA KHARE vs. THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH., Diary No.- 18316 - 2024
Coram: Justices Hrishikesh Roy and Prashant Kumar Mishra
The Supreme Court declined to interfere with the Madhya Pradesh High Court's order upholding the rule that stipulated eligibility of at least three years of practice or 70 percent marks in law graduation for entry-level judicial service candidates in the State.
Case Details: JUSTICE K.K. DENESAN vs. THE SENIOR ACCOUNTS OFFICER SLP(C) No. 008948 - / 2024
Coram: CJI Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court issued notice in a matter concerning the issue of deduction of pension from the salary drawn in a post-retirement position of a former High Court Judge. The Court was considering the plea of Justice KK Denesan, a former judge of the Kerala High Court, who served as an Ombudsman under the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act from 2017 to 2020.
Case Title: Justices Vikram Nath and KV Viswanathan
The Supreme Court held that procedural formalities cannot be used to deny regularization of service to an employee whose appointment was termed "temporary" but has performed the same duties as performed by the regular employee over a considerable period in the capacity of the regular employee.
When Does Debt Become Financial Debt & Operational Debt Under IBC? Supreme Court Explains
Case Title: GLOBAL CREDIT CAPITAL LIMITED & ANR. versus SACH MARKETING PVT. LTD. & ANR.
Coram: Justices Abhay S. Oka and Pankaj Mithal
In a significant development, the Supreme Court on held that debt would be treated as an operational debt only if the claim subject matter of the debt has some connection or co-relation with the 'service' rendered by the creditor to the debtor.
Supreme Court Issues Contempt Notice To Delhi Development Authority Vice Chairman For Felling Trees
Coram: Justices B R Gavai and Sandeep Mehta
The Supreme Court issued contempt notice to the vice-chairman of the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) for the felling of over 1,000 trees for the construction of an approach road between Chattarpur Road and SAARC University near Maidan Garhi here.
Case Title: ANIRUDDHA KHANWALKAR VERSUS SHARMILA DAS & OTHERS
Coram: Justices C.T. Ravikumar and Rajesh Bindal
For summoning of an accused, prima facie case made out on the basis of allegations in the complaint and the pre-summoning evidence led by the complainant is sufficient, the Supreme Court held.
Supreme Court Stays Construction Of 4 Dams In Haryana's Kalesar Wildlife Sanctuary
Coram: Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta
The Supreme Court has stayed the construction of four dams in the Kalesar Wildlife Sanctuary in Haryanain view of the report of the Wildlife Institute of India that their construction will adversely impact the wildlife population and the ecosystem.
Case: Sufiya PM v Union of India W.P.(C) No. 135/2024
Coram: Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court issued notice on a writ petition seeking a declaration that a person who was born a Muslim, but ceased to be believer, would not be governed by the Shariat law.
The petition was filed by a Kerala-based woman named Safiya PM, who stated that she was not a believer and hence should be governed by the Indian Succession Act 1925 with respect to inheritance instead of the Muslim Personal Law. The petitioner is the General Secretary of an organization of named "Ex-Muslims of Kerala."
Case: VARAD BALWANT VASANT AND ORS., W.P.(C) No. 255/2024
Coram: Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court rejected a petition to postpone the CA exams held by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) in view of Lok Sabha elections.
The Court noted that the Chartered Accountant exams for intermediate and final level are scheduled on the 8th and the 14th May, whereas the elections are on the 7th and 13th of May 2024. The Court said that postponing the exams one day after the phase-wise polling, as suggested by the petitioners, will cause severe hardship to several students.
Case Title: K Annamalai v. V Piyush | Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 2323 of 2024
Coram: Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta
The Supreme Court today extended till September the stay on trial against Tamil Nadu Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader K Annamalai over his alleged remarks against a Christian missionary non-profit.
Case Title: State of Karnataka v. Union of India and Ors., W.P.(C) No. 210/2024
The Supreme Court, while hearing the petition filed by the Karnataka government against the Union of India for drought relief funds, asked the Union to submit the report of the Inter-Ministerial Central Team (IMCT). The team visited drought-hit districts of Karnataka to assess the drought situation across the State.
NEET-PG : Supreme Court Dismisses Plea Seeking Extension Of Internship Cut-Off Date For NEET PG 2024
Case Details : RIDDHESH vs. UNION OF INDIA W.P.(C) No. 000263 - / 2024
The Supreme Court refused to entertain a petition seeking an extension of internship cut-off for the upcoming NEET PG 2024 examinations.
The counsel appearing for the petitioners stressed that non-extension may lead to him losing out on the time and efforts which were put in as a candidate.
Case Title: Amanatullah Khan Versus The Commissioner Of Police, Delhi And Ors., SLP(Crl) No. 5719/2023
Coram: Surya Kant and K. V. Viswanathan
The Supreme Court disposed of the petition filed by Aam Aadmi Party MLA Amanatullah Khan challenging the opening of a history sheet against him by Delhi Police in the year 2022, declaring him a 'bad character.' While doing so, the Court directed that the amended Standing order issued last month by the Commissioner of Delhi will be applicable in this case.
Case Title: Frank Vitus v. Narcotics Control Bureau and Ors., SLP(Crl) No. 6339-6340/2023
Coram: Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan
The Supreme Court orally observed that asking the accused to share his Google PIN to enable access to his live location to the investigation officer couldn't be a condition for the grant of bail.
Case Title: Pooja Singhal v. Directorate of Enforcement, SLP(Crl) No. 11971/2022
Coram: Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta
The Supreme Court refused to grant bail to ex-IAS officer Pooja Singhal in a money laundering case pending against her over alleged embezzlement of MNREGA funds in Khunti district. The decision came as ED informed the court that 12 out of 17 witnesses sought to be examined had already deposed.
Case Title: David Hangshing and Anr. v. National Investigation Agency and Ors., T.P.(Crl.) No. 671/2023
Coram: Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan
The Supreme Court transferred from Manipur to Assam the trial of arms theft case against Kuki Revolutionary Army (KRA) Chief David Hangshing and United Kuki Liberation Front (UKLF) leader Lhunkhoson Haokip.
Case Details : THE CHAIRMAN, STATE BAR COUNCIL OF MADHYA PRADESH vs. HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Diary No.- 17447 – 2024
Coram: Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court stayed the order of the Madhya Pradesh High Court for continuing criminal contempt proceedings against the Chairman and members of the State's Bar Council and several District Bar Associations. The petitioners contended that the High Court continued the contempt proceedings against them despite tendering an unconditional apology.
Case Title: Indian Medical Association v. Union of India | W.P.(C) No. 645/2022
Coram: Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah
In the contempt case proceedings pending against Patanjali, its Managing Director Acharya Balkrishna and co-founder Baba Ramdev over the publication of misleading medical advertisements in breach of a court undertaking, the Supreme Court today observed that there was a "marked improvement" in the nature of apology published by Patanjali in newspapers but the original copies of the same, as asked, had still not been filed.
Case Title: Arvind Kejriwal v. Directorate of Enforcement, SLP(Crl) 5154/2024
Coram: Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta
While hearing Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's plea challenging his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate in the Delhi Liquor Policy case, the Supreme Court asked ED counsel Additional Solicitor General SV Raju to come prepared on next date with an answer to five queries, one being related to the timing of Kejriwal's arrest.4
Case Title: Tarsem Lal v. Directorate of Enforcement Jalandhar Zonal Office, Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 121/2024 (and connected matters)
Coram: Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan
The Supreme Court reserved the Judgment on the issue whether an accused in a money laundering case is required to fulfil the twin conditions for bail under Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) when he executes a bond for appearance before the Special Court in pursuance of a summons issued to him.
Case Details: Prabir Purkayastha v. State., Diary No, 42896 of 2023
Coram: Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta
The Supreme Court questioned the Delhi Police for its "hot haste" in producing Prabir Purkayastha, editor of digital portal NewsClick, before the Magistrate after his arrest without informing his lawyer.
Raising a volley of questions at the manner in which the arrest was carried out, the bench reserved judgment on Purkayastha's petition challening his arrest and remand in a case under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967.
Case Title : Dolly Rani v. Manish Kumar Chanchal
Coram: Justices BV Nagarathna and Augustine George Masih
In a recent ruling, the Supreme Court clarified the legal requirements and sanctity of Hindu marriages under the Hindu Marriage Act 1955.
The Court emphasized that for a Hindu marriage to be valid, it must be performed with the appropriate rites and ceremonies, such as saptapadi (seven steps around the sacred fire) if included, and proof of these ceremonies is essential in case of disputes.
Nine Judge Constitution Bench Hearing
Case Details : STATE OF U.P. vs. M/S. LALTA PRASAD VAISH C.A. No. 000151 / 2007 & Other Connected Matters
Coram: Justices Hrishikesh Roy, Abhay S. Oka, B.V. Nagarathna, J.B. Pardiwala, Manoj Misra, Ujjal Bhuyan, Satish Chandra Sharma And Augustine George Masih.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (April 2) commenced the hearing of the 9-judge Constitution Bench on the issue of overlapping powers between the Centre and the State in production, manufacturing, supply and regulation of 'Industrial Alcohol'.
The matter was referred to a nine-judge bench in 2007 and pertains to the interpretation of Section 18G of the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951.
Section 18G allows the Central Government to ensure that certain products related to scheduled industries are distributed fairly and are available at reasonable prices. However, as per Entry 33 of List III of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution, the State legislature has the power of regulating trade, production, and distribution of products from industries under Union control and similar imported goods.
The court dwelled into deeper nuances of the state and union list entries concerning alcohol. The focal point of discussion revolved around the interpretation and interplay between Entry 8 List II (regulation powers to the state with regards to 'Intoxicating Liquor') and Entry 52 List I ( Industries controlled by the Union in Public Interest).
Power Over Industrial Alcohol Reserved For Union, AG Tells Supreme Court [Day 3]
The Supreme Court Constitution Bench last week( on April 4) resumed its third day of hearing the issue relating to the State's power to regulate and levy tax on industrial alcohol. The underlying issue is whether 'intoxicating liquor' over which the States have power, includes 'industrial alcohol'. The Union in its opening arguments countered the earlier contention of the appellants that the term 'liquor' should be given the widest interpretation possible. As per the Union, what is important is to understand simple terms like 'liquor' from the perspective of the framers of the Constitution when interpreting different entries within the 7th Schedule.
During the hearing, the Court questioned the Union's argument that it has exclusive control over 'industrial alcohol', by pointing out that the States may find it necessary to control the illegal conversion of industrial alcohol into alcohol meant for human consumption.
The Union, represented by Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehtaa, submitted that the expression -intoxicating liquor had to be strictly understood as a drinkable beverage, which has an intoxicating impact on human beings, under licensed premises or under a varied license. It was also clarified that 'human consumption' in this context has to mean human 'legitimate' consumption.
The Supreme Court's 9-judge Constitution bench on Tuesday (April 16) resumed its 5th day of hearing the issue of interpretation of 'Intoxicating Liquor'.
The Solicitor General (SG) Mr Tushar Mehta contended that the the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951(IDR Act) occupied the complete field of the alcohol industry. In contending so, he placed reliance on the test of repugnancy, stressing that when a Parliamentary Legislation holistically covers all aspects of a subject matter, it established the intention of the Union to occupy the complete field.
A 9-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court on Thursday (March 14) reserved its verdict on the issue of whether 'denatured spirit or industrial alcohol' can be brought within the meaning of 'intoxicating liquor' under State legislation's law-making powers.
The 6 day-long hearing deliberated upon the interplay between the Union's law-making powers over 'controlled industries' under Entry 52 List I, the State's powers to make laws on the subject of 'intoxicating liquor' under Entry 8 List II and the concurrent powers of Union and States on regulating trade, production, and distribution of products from industries under Union control. The Court was essentially tasked to examine whether the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, of 1951 gave complete regulatory power to the Union on the subject of industrial alcohol.
Case Details: Property Owners Association v. State of Maharashtra (CA No.1012/2002) & Other Connected Matters
Coram: CJI DY Chandrachud and Justices Hrishikesh Roy, B.V. Nagarathna, Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.B. Pardiwala, Manoj Misra, Rajesh Bindal, Satish Chandra Sharma and Augustine George Masih.
The Supreme Court commenced the hearing of the 9-judge constitution bench which is set to examine whether 'material resources of the community' includes privately owned resources in its ambit under Article 39(b) of the Constitution.
Carrying forward from the previous day's discussion on Justice Krishna Iyer's minority decision in State of Karnataka v. Ranganatha Reddy & Anr., wherein Justice Krishna Iyer held privately owned property to be a part of 'Material resources of the community' under Article 39(b), Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud analyzed the judgement from the lens of Gandhian ethos. The Court also dissected the conundrum posed by the decision in Minerva Mills which struck down the amended version of Article 31C, leaving the bench to wonder if that would lead to the revival of the unamended version before the coming of the 42nd Amendment Act of 1976.
A Supreme Court 9-Judge Constitution bench, while hearing the issue of interpretation of Article 39(b), pondered whether the legislature needed to pass necessary amendments to delete a provision from the statute book after it has been struck down by the Court as unconstitutional.
The Court noted that even after a provision is struck down, it remains in the statute books with a footnote stating that it has been struck down. This might escape the attention of common people, who might be under the impression that the provision was still active. Hence, the Court pondered whether there was a need for a specific legislative amendment to omit the struck-down provisions from the statute books.
Attorney General (AG) Mr R Venkataramani opened his arguments on the interpretation of Article 39(b). The AG spotlighted that Article 39(b) has to be seen as independent of all possible political and economic theories of the past. Since society's definition of resources and needs evolves with time, painting the constitutional provision with just one ideological colour would go against the very flexible nature of the Indian Constitution.
News Update
Case Title: Indian National Congress v. Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi | C.A. No. 64-65/2018
Coram: Justices BV Nagarathna and Augustine George Masih.
The Income Tax Department undertook before the Supreme Court that no coercive action will be taken against the Indian National Congress (INC) in respect of the income tax demand of approximately Rs 3500 crores till July 2024 because of the impending Lok Sabha elections.
Coram: Justices Surya Kant and KV Viswanathan
The Supreme Court adjourned till April 19 the hearing of a Special Leave Petition filed by the State of Haryana opposing the Punjab & Haryana High Court's order of a judicial inquiry into the death of a protesting farmer, Shubhkaran Singh. Refusing to stay the High Court order, the Court orally observed that a judicial probe would ensure a fair investigation of the allegations against the Haryana police.
Case Title: HEMANT SOREN Versus DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT., SLP(Crl) No. 4004/2024
Coram: Justices Surya Kant and KV Viswanathan
Former Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren on Monday (April 1) withdrew from the Supreme Court his petition challenging the Jharkhand High Court's order refusing his plea to participate in the Budget Session, which was scheduled to be held on February 23. While allowing Soren to withdraw the petition, the Supreme Court left open the question of law whether a legislator who is in custody has the right to attend the assembly session.
Case Details: AROON PURIE vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA SLP(Crl) No. 003706 - / 2024
Coram: CJI DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court stayed the criminal proceedings against India Today Editor-Chief Mr Aroon Purie, senior journalist Mr Rajdeep Sardesai and senior editor Mr Shiv Aroor charged with offences under forgery for harming reputation, cheating and promoting enmity between different groups. The plea pertained to a challenge against the Karnataka High Court's order refusing to quash the FIR registered against the senior journalists by MLA Mr BR Patil for conducting an alleged sting operation on him in 2016.
Case Title: VISHAL TIWARI VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS., Writ Petition(s)(Criminal) No(s). 177/2023
In the aftermath of Uttar Pradesh-based Gangster-Politician Mukhtar Ansari's death in custody, an Interlocutory Application has been presented to the Supreme Court. The application seeks a direction to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to launch an inquiry into the deaths, killings, and encounters of detainees and accused individuals in police custody in Uttar Pradesh since 2017.
Case Details : Directorate of Enforcement v. State of Tamil Nadu & Ors. | Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 1959-1963 of 2024
Coram: Justices Bela Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal
The Supreme Court chastised the District Collectors of Tamil Nadu who refused to appear in person before the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) in pursuance to the summons issued by the central agency to them for investigating the money laundering case arising from the illegal sand mining activities.
Case Title: INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION vs. UNION OF INDIA| W.P.(C) No. 000645 - / 2022
Coram: Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah
The Supreme Court came down heavily on Patanjali Ayurved Ltd, its Managing Director Acharya Balkrishna and its co-founder Baba Ramdev while hearing the contempt case against them over the publication of misleading medical advertisements in breach of an undertaking given to the Court.
The Tamil Nadu government has filed an original suit before the Supreme Court against the Union Government, claiming that the Union was withholding the relief funds for natural calamities. The state's plea, filed under Article 131 of the Constitution, requests the Court to instruct the Union government to provide over Rs. 37,000 crore in aid for damages caused by recent floods and cyclone Maichung.
Supreme Court To Hear Pleas Seeking 100% EVM-VVPAT Tally After 2 Weeks
On a mentioning by Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, the Supreme Court today said that the matter pertaining to Electronic voting machine (EVM) data cross-checking against voter-verifiable paper audit trail (VVPAT) records will be taken up after 2 weeks.
The Directorate of Enforcement told the Supreme Court today that Advocate Bansuri Swaraj's appearance (on behalf the agency) has inadvertently crept into the order passed yesterday granting bail to Aam Aadmi Party MP Sanjay Singh in the Delhi Liquor Policy case.
'Elections By Ballot Paper The Rule' : Lawyer Seeks To Intervene In Supreme Court Plea On EVM-VVPAT
CASE TITLE: ARUN KUMAR AGRAWAL v. ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA & ANR, WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 184 OF 2024
Suggesting that voting in the upcoming Lok Sabha elections should be conducted through ballot papers, Advocate Mehmood Pracha has approached the Supreme Court and prayed that he be permitted to intervene in the matter pending before the Court regarding Electronic Voting Machines (EVM) and Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) verification.
Supreme Court Notifies List Of Cases To Be Posted On All 5 Days During Summer Vacation 2024
The Supreme Court notified the matters to be listed during the upcoming Summer Vacation 2024. According to the notice, the matter under the three subject categories can be filed and listed before the vacation bench. These categories are Labour Matters, Service Matters, and Habeas Corpus Matters. Apart from this, the Court, in its notice, has also attached more than a thousand matters, under the same categories, that are ready to be listed. These matters will be listed throughout the week from Monday to Friday during the summer break.
Supreme Court Transfers To Itself Petitions Pending In High Courts Challenging GST On Online Gaming
Case Title : Union of India v. Deltatech Gaming Ltd and Another, T.P.(C) No. 755-781/2024
Coram: Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court transferred to itself the petitions pending in the High Courts challenging the imposition of 28% Goods and Services Tax (GST) on online gaming companies.
The bench ordered the transfer of 27 writ petitions pending in eleven High Courts and tagged them with the petition pending in the Supreme Court filed by GamesKraft.
Case Title: YASH TUTEJA vs. UNION OF INDIA, W.P.(Crl.) No. 000153 - / 2023
Coram: Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan
Observing that there was no predicate offence and proceeds of crime, the Supreme Court expressed the inclination to quash the money laundering case against some accused in relation to the alleged Chhattisgarh liquor policy scam.
Case Details : KULDEEP KUMAR vs. U.T. CHANDIGARH SLP(C) No. 002998 - / 2024
Anil Masih, who was the returning officer of the controversial Chandigarh Mayor election, tendered an unconditional apology before the Supreme Court. Masih is facing criminal proceedings initiated by the Supreme Court under Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for making a false statement that the ballots were invalid.
Case Details: ORGANISATION FOR UNAIDED RECOGNISED SCHOOLS ® (OUR SCHOOLS) v. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS., SLP(C) No. 8142/2024
Coram: Justices Bela Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal
The Supreme Court stayed the order passed by the Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court allowing board exams for students of 5, 8, 9, and 11th standard of the schools affiliated to the State Board.
The Court also ordered that the results of the Board Exams declared by any school shall be kept in abeyance and not be taken into consideration for any purpose whatsoever and nor it shall be communicated to the parents if not communicated so far.
Case Title: State of Karnataka v. Union of India and Ors., W.P.(C) No. 210/2024
Coram: Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta
In a writ petition filed by the Karnataka government alleging that the Centre was denying it financial assistance for drought management, the Attorney General and the Solicitor General told the Supreme Court today that they would get instructions from the Union Government.
Case Title : Frank Vitus v. Narcotics Control Bureau and Ors., SLP(Crl) No. 6339-6340/2023
Coram: Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan
In a case involving the question as to whether sharing of Google PIN with Investigating Officer as part of bail conditions violates a person's right to privacy, the Supreme Court today was informed that the appropriate authority to explain the working of Google PIN would be Google LLC, not Google India.
Plea In Supreme Court To Allow Voters Displaced From Manipur To Vote In Lok Sabha Elections
Supreme Court agreed to hear a plea seeking voting facilities in the upcoming elections for eighteen thousand internally displaced persons (IDPs) in the light of the ongoing Manipur crisis.
The counsel for the petitioner, Ms Hetvi Patel had mentioned before the bench headed by CJI DY Chandrachud that 18000 internally displaced persons want to cast their votes in the General Elections of 2024. It was further submitted that the Election Commission of India (ECI) rules permit voting of the IDPs who are within the state.
Chief Justice Of India, DY Chandrachud expressed serious concerns about High Court judges reserving judgments on matters for long periods after completing the hearing.
CJI said that after he wrote to High Court Chief Justices seeking information about the details of cases where judgments have been reserved for over three months, several High Court judges released those matters from their board.
Case Title: Vivek Kumar Gaurav v. Union of India, SLP(C) No.7446/2024
Coram: Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta
The Supreme Court today issued notice on a petition seeking directions to authorities for free-of-cost supply of chargesheets/final reports to complainants/victims and issuance of notice at pre-trial stage.
For First Time, Supreme Court Recognizes Right To Be Free From Adverse Effects Of Climate Change
CASE TITLE: MK Ranjitsinh And Ors. v. Union of India And Ors. WP(C) No. 838/2019
Coram: CJI DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
In its first, the Supreme Court, through its judgment dated March 21, has recognized a right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change as a distinct right. The Court said that Articles 14 (equality before law and the equal protection of laws) and 21 (right to life and personal liberty) of the Indian Constitution are important sources of this right.
Case Title: Gautam Navlakha v. National Investigation Agency & Anr. | Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 9216 of 2022
Coram: Justices MM Sundresh and SVN Bhatti
The Supreme Court orally told Bhima Koregaon-accused Gautam Navlakha's Advocate, Shadan Farasat, that if house arrest was sought, the surveillance expenses incurred by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) must be paid. However, Farasat submitted that paying the expenses was of no difficulty and that the issue is about calculating such expenses. He added that he would take the latest calculation from the Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, representing the NIA, and will address it.
Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal Moves Supreme Court Against ED Arrest In Liquor Policy Case
After Delhi High Court's dismissal of his plea yesterday, Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal has approached the Supreme Court challenging his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in the Delhi Liquor Policy case.
Mentioning the petition before Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud for urgent listing, Singhvi said, "I have sent an email for urgent listing...the order passed is based on an unrelied document which is suppressed from us".
Case Details: BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA vs. RAHAMATHULLA KOTHWAL T.P.(C) No. 000876 - / 2024
The Supreme Court transferred to itself a pending petition before the Karnataka High Court challenging the Bar Council Of India (BCI) Rules (for qualification/Disqualification and produce for election and code of conduct for the elections of S.B.C/B.C.I.) 2023 (Rules of 2023) on grounds that similar cases with identical issues of conducting free and fair state bar council elections have been transferred to the Top Court.
Case Title: Priyanka Tyagi v. Union of India & Ors., Special Leave to Appeal (C) 3045/2024
It was unfortunate that the Indian Coast Guard was opposing the grant of Permanent Commission for women officers despite the Army, Air Force and Navy inducting women on a permanent basis following Court directions, observed the Supreme Court.
Expressing the intent to decide the issue, the Supreme Court transferred to itself the petition pending in the Delhi High Court.
Case Details : MALEM THONGAM vs. STATE OF MANIPUR W.P.(Crl.) No. 000164 - / 2024
Coram: CJI DY Chandrachud, Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court refused to entertain writ petition filed under Article 32 by transgender activist Ms Malem Thongam who sought to quash the FIRs registered against her for fasting until death to protest against the ongoing Manipur crisis. The Court has given the liberty to approach the Manipur High Court under a section 482 CrPC Petition. Ms Thongam has been fasting unto death since February 27, 2024, with a demand to restore peace and harmony in the State of Manipur.
Case Details: Sandipkumar M Patel & Anr v. State of Gujarat & Ors.
A petition has been filed in the Supreme Court by two practising advocates from Gujarat against whom the Gujarat High Court has directed to lodge an inquiry for alleged misconduct of forging the vakalatnama of their client. The petitioners have sought a stay on the order, contending that such a direction impinged upon their reputation, dignity and right to continue their profession under Article 21 and 19(1)(g) respectively.
Supreme Court To Hear Delhi CM Kejriwal's Challenge Against ED Arrest On April 15
The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear the Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's petition challenging his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Monday (April 15).
The Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by CM Kejriwal is listed for hearing before the bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta.
Case Title: Committee of Management Trust Shahi Masjid Idgah v. Bhagwan Shrikrishna Virajman & Ors., Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 14275 of 2023 and connected cases.
Coram: Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta
The Supreme Court posted to August 2024 a batch of petitions challenging the orders passed by the Allahabad High Court in relation to the Krishna Janambhoomi dispute.
Case Details: Tushar Gandhi v. State of Uttar Pradesh, Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 406 of 2023
Coram: Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan
The Supreme Court asked the State of Uttar Pradesh about the steps taken to prosecute the offender in the Muzaffarnagar school slapping case. The case related to the alleged incident where a teacher at a school in Muzaffarnagar asked her students to slap a student and allegedly uttered communal slurs against him.
Case Details : DR. RENGA RAMANUJAM vs. UNION OF INDIA W.P.(C) No. 000222 - / 2024
Coram: CJI DY Chandrachud comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court issued notice in a Public Interest Litigation raising the issue of exclusion of Persons With Disabilities from appointment to the District Judiciary in many States.
The petitioner contends that the judicial service rules of many States do not provide for the PwD (Persons with Disability) Quota, under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act 2016.
Case Details: MD ANAS CHAUDHARY vs. REGISTRAR-GENERAL HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD W.P.(C) No. 001429 - / 2023
Coram: CJI DY Chandrachud, Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court asked the Registrar General of the Allahabad High Court to enable e-filing facility at e-Sewa Kendras of all the District Courts in the State of Uttar Pradesh. The Court also stated that a hybrid hearing before the High Court through a virtual set-up in the District Courts of Western UP may take place in compliance with the Allahabad High Court Rules (Rules of 1952) within 2 weeks.
Case Title: INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION v. UNION OF INDIA | W.P.(C) No. 645/2022
Coram: Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah
Baba Ramdev, co-founder of Patanjali Ayurved Ltd, personally appeared before the Supreme Court and expressed unconditional apology for publishing misleading advertisements and making comments against Allopathic medicines in breach of an undertaking given to the Court.
Supreme Court Seeks States' Responses On Steps Taken In Mob Lynching Cases
Case Title: National Federation of Indian Women v. Union of India & Ors., Writ Petition (Civil) No. 719 of 2023
Coram: Justices BR Gavai, Aravind Kumar, and Sandeep Mehta.
The Supreme Court directed the States, which have not yet responded to the public interest litigation (PIL) filed by the National Federation of Indian Women (NFIW) regarding the increase in mob lynching incidents, to file detailed affidavits specifying the steps taken by them in respect the mob-lynching incidents mentioned in the PIL.
Case Title: State of West Bengal v. Dr. Sanat Kumar Ghosh & Ors., Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 17403 of 2023
Coram: Justices Surya Kant and KV Viswanathan
The West Bengal Governor has agreed to fill up six vacancies of Vice Chancellors by appointing candidates out of the list recommended by the West Bengal Government. Attorney General for India R Venkataramani informed the Supreme Court about the decision of the Governor (Chancellor of the Universities).
Case Title : Ireo Grace Realtech Pvt Ltd vs Sanjay Gopinath
Coram: Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah
The Supreme Court has issued notice to two members of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) seeking explanation from them for issuing non-bailable warrants against the directors of a company, ignoring a previous interim order of the Supreme Court.
Case : ASHWINI KUMAR UPADHYAY vs UNION OF INDIA | Diary No. 17329-2024
A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition filed in the Supreme Court seeks directions to have a 3-year law degree course after school. Presently, the LL.B course which the students can join after their 12th standard has a duration of 5 years. Three-year law degree course is available only for graduates.
Case Title: Association of Democratic Reforms v. Election Commission of India & Anr. | Writ Petition (Civil) No. 434 of 2023
Coram: Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta
The Election Commission of India (ECI) has responded to the 2019 news report of 'The Quint' regarding alleged discrepancies between votes polled and votes counted in the previous 2019 General Lok Sabha Elections.
As per the report, there was a mismatch between the votes polled and counted votes in 373 constituencies. In the EVM-VVPAT case in the Supreme Court, the petitioners had cited the report to question the credibility of EVMs.
Supreme Court Mulls Framing Guidelines For Trial Against Accused With Hearing & Speech Disabilities
Case Title: RAMNARAYAN MANHAR v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH., Diary No.- 15153 – 2024
Coram: Justices Surya Kant and K.V Vishwanathan
In a significant development, the Supreme Court observed that it has yet to establish guidelines for conducting trials against accused with hearing and speech disabilities. In this regard, the Top Court has issued notice to Union of India through the Attorney General to examine this question of law and posted the matter on July 26.
Case Title: Abhishek Boinpally v. Directorate of Enforcement | Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 9038 of 2023
Coram: Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta
The Supreme Court today extended till May 8 the interim bail of five weeks granted to Hyderabad businessman Abhishek Boinpally in the Delhi Liquor Policy case.
The matter, though not listed today, was taken on Board by the Bench upon a mentioning by Sr Adv Kapil Sibal. The order was passed as the case was directed to be listed in week commencing April 29 but had been posted to May.
The Election Commission of India has told the Supreme Court that no mismatch has been detected ever between the votes counted in the Electronic Voting Machines and the Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail slips (VVPATs).
Case Details : Manipur Tribal Forum Delhi v. State of Manipur & Anr WP (Civil) No. 540 of 2023
The Manipur Tribal Forum has filed an interim application before the Supreme Court raising apprehensions about fresh onslaught of violent acts against the Kuki-Zo community in the state of Manipur.
The application seeks protection by the Indian Army and calls for the arrest of the leaders inciting violence in the state.
Case Title: XYZ and Anr. v. Union of India, W.P.(C) No. 238/2024
Coram: Justices BV Nagarathna and AG Masih
The Supreme Court on Friday sought the Union government's response on a plea filed to allow an intending couple, having a healthy biological child, to beget a second child through surrogacy if it so wants.
Case Title: A (MOTHER OF X) v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.
Bench: CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala
The Supreme Court, in an urgent hearing, ordered a medical examination of a 14-year-old minor seeking termination of a 28-week pregnancy caused by sexual assault.
The bench led by CJI Chandrachud, in a post-4 PM hearing, has directed the medical examination of the minor at Sion Hospital, Maharashtra to be conducted tomorrow (April 20). The medical examination has been directed to apprise the Court of the possible mental and physical impacts on the minor in the event of allowing such a termination.
Case Details : AGRICULTURE PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE, SURAT vs. STATE OF GUJARAT SLP(C) No. 008250 - 008251 / 2024 & other connected matters
Coram: CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala
The Supreme Court on Friday (April 19) declined to interfere with the order passed by the Gujarat High Court directing the Agricultural Produce Market Committee (APMC), Surat to auction the land allegedly misappropriated for the construction and running of a 5-star hotel. The Supreme Court observed that the High Court was correct in directing such an auction for the land allotted to be utilized for making a district market yard.
Case Title: Ashish Mishra Alias Monu v. State of U.P. SLP(Crl) No. 7857/2022
Coram: Surya Kant and JK Maheshwari
The Supreme Court, while hearing Ashish Mishra's bail plea in connection with the Lakhimpur Kheri incident, observed in its order that the public prosecutor and the local police need to take effective steps to ensure the presence of witnesses during Ashish Mishra's trial in connection with the Lakhimpur Kheri incident. The Court passed this direction after noting that certain witnesses were not present for examination, which resulted in prolonging the trial.
Case Title: State of Karnataka v. Union of India and Ors., W.P.(C) No. 210/2024
Coram: Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta
In the case filed by the Karnataka government against the Union of India for drought relief funds, the Supreme Court was informed by Attorney General R Venkataramani that the Election Commission has given clearance to the Centre to deal with the issue.
Can State Bar Councils Collect More Than Rs 600 As Enrollment Fee? Supreme Court Reserves Judgment
Case Title: Gaurav Kumar v. Union of India W.P.(C) No. 352/2023 and connected cases.
Coram: Chief Justice of India DY Chandracuhd and Justice JB Pardiwala
The Supreme Court reserved judgment on a batch of petitions challenging the enrollment fees charged by different State Bar Councils as exorbitant.
A main point raised by the bench during the hearing was whether the Bar Councils can charge anything more than the amount prescribed as per Section 24(1)(f) of the Advocates Act 1961(Rs 600 for the State Bar Council and Rs 150 for the Bar Council of India).
Case Title: David Hangshing and Anr. v. National Investigation Agency and Ors., T.P.(Crl.) No. 671/2023
Coram: Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan
While hearing a petition filed by Kuki Revolutionary Army (KRA) Chief David Hangshing and United Kuki Liberation Front (UKLF) leader Lhunkhoson Haokip seeking transfer of trial of the arms theft case against them from Manipur to Assam, the Supreme Court asked Additional Solicitor General Vikramjit Banerjee appearing for respondent-NIA to take instructions on which court/state would be more convenient.
Case Title: State of Tamil Nadu v. The State of Kerala, Original Suit No.4/2014
Coram: Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan
In view of State of Tamil Nadu's objections to the Survey of India report filed in relation to construction of a mega car park project by Kerala in the Mullaperiyar catchment area, the Supreme Court today posted the state's original suit against Kerala for framing of legal issues on July 10.
Case Title: RINA KUMARI @ RINA DEVI @ REENA Versus DINESH KUMAR MAHTO @ DINESH KUMAR MAHATO AND ANR., Diary No. 7336-2024
Coram: Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta
The Supreme Court is set to examine whether a wife who refuses to live with her husband, citing mental cruelty inflicted by his husband and his family members, can be denied maintenance in view of Section 125 (4) of the CrPC.
Case Details : SHALINI DHARMANI vs. THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SLP(C) No. 016864 - / 2021
Coram: CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala
The Supreme Court directed the government of Himachal Pradesh to review its policies on Child Care Leaves (CCL) concerning working mothers, especially mothers of children with special needs. Noting the lack of any policy framework in the State to provide CCL to mothers of differently abled children, the Court further directed to constitute a committee headed by the State Commissioner under the Rights of Persons With Disability Act 2016 to examine the possible solutions to the present issue.
'Is Your Apology As Big As Your Advertisements?' : Supreme Court Asks Patanjali Ayurved
Case Title: INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION v. UNION OF INDIA | W.P.(C) No. 645/2022
Coram: Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah
The Supreme Court asked Patanjali Ayurved if the public apology published by it in newspapers yesterday was as big as its advertisements.
The Court also cautioned the petitioner-Indian Medical Association also with regard to complaints of unethical practices by allopathic doctors.
Case Title: Centre for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL) v. Union of India | Miscellaneous Application in WP(c) 423/2010
The Union of India has moved an application before the Supreme Court seeking clarification of its judgement in the 2G Spectrum case decided 12 years ago which mandated that public resources like spectrum should be assigned through public auction.
The Union has sought a modification of the judgement to allow the assignment of spectrums through processes other than public auctions in certain situations. The Top Court in 2012 set aside the 'first-come-first-served (FCFS) basis for the assignment of 2G spectrum which was done with alleged arbitrariness by the Government Officials.
A petition has been filed in the Supreme Court seeking the constitution of a Special Investigation Team to investigate the alleged instances of quid pro quo arrangements between corporates and political parties through Electoral Bonds donations
Former Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren has approached the Supreme Court with a fresh petition challenging his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate, saying that the Jharkhand High Court has not yet delivered judgment on his petition despite concluding the arguments way back on February 28.
Case Title: Re-Inhuman Conditions In 1382 Prisons v. Director General of Prisons and Correctional Services and Ors., W.P.(C) No. 406/2013
Coram: Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah
While hearing a matter pertaining to overcrowding in Indian prisons, the Supreme Court pulled up States/UTs for not filing their affidavits giving data on jail infrastructure, despite court directions.
The bench gave 2 weeks' time to the Chief Secretaries of the concerned States/UTs, emphasizing that the affidavits shall mention the manner in which recommendations given by the respective Committees are proposed to be implemented and the timelines for such implementation.
In a notable development, the State of West Bengal has filed a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court against the Calcutta High Court's order invalidating almost 24,000 teaching and non-teaching jobs that were filled as a result of the 2016 SSC Recruitment process.
Case Title: Association of Democratic Reforms v. Election Commission of India & Anr. | Writ Petition (Civil) No. 434 of 2023 (and connected matters)
Coram: Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta
In pleas seeking 100% cross-checking of Electronic Voting Machine (EVM) data against voter-verifiable paper audit trail (VVPAT) records, the Election Commission of India (ECI) informed the Supreme Court today that micro-controllers installed in the machines are one-time programmable and cannot be changed.
Case Title: M/s Ireo Grace Realtech Pvt. Ltd. v. Sanjay Gopinath., C.A. No. 2764-2771/2022
The Supreme Court expressed its reservation on the explanation offered by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission's members for issuing non-bailable warrants against a company's directors despite the Top Court's order directing non-coercive steps.
Can Stray Dog Issue Be Resolved By Animal Birth Control Rules 2023? Supreme Court Asks
Case Title: Animal Welfare Board of India V. People For Elimination of Stray Troubles C.A. No. 5988/2019
Coram: Justices J K Maheshwari and Sanjay Karol
While hearing the petitions relating to the stray dog issue, the Supreme Court asked the counsels representing various states to look into the Animal Birth Control Rules, 2023.
The Court also marked that if the 2023 rules can solve the problem, then the authorities can be asked to examine the issues as per the rules. If any further grievance arises, then the parties may approach the concerned High Courts, the Supreme Court suggested.
Chief Justice DY Chandrachud announced the new initiative of integrating the WhatsApp messaging services with the IT services, launched by the Supreme Court.
As per the new initiative, all the Advocates on Record and Parties in Person will receive important updates relating to the filed cases directly to their WhatsApp numbers. The CJI opined this to have the potential of bringing a 'big bang impact'
Case Title: ARVIND KEJRIWAL v. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT., SLP(Crl) No. 5154/2024
By assisting the formulation of the Delhi liquor policy which allegedly enabled liquor companies to recoup the bribes paid as profits, Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal is "directly and indirectly" involved in the process connected with the "proceeds of crime", said the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) in its affidavit filed in the Supreme Court.
Case Title: ARVIND KEJRIWAL v. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT., SLP(Crl) No. 5154/2024
Justices Sanjiv Khanna, Dipankar Datta, and Prasanna Bhalachandra Varale
Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi told the Supreme Court that Arvind Kejriwal's petition challenging his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) is shown to be listed on May 6 though the Court had directed it to be listed in the week commencing from April 29.
Supreme Court Seeks ECI Response On Plea To Cancel Election If NOTA Gets Majority Votes
Case Title : SHIV KHERA Vs THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA | W.P.(C) No. 252/2024
The Supreme Court issued notice on a petition seeking a direction that an election must be declared as "null and void" if maximum votes from the constituency are polled for "None of The Above" (NOTA) and a fresh election should be held for the constituency.
Supreme Court Seeks ASI Response To Vision Document To Protect Taj Mahal From Pollution
Case Title: MC Mehta v. Union of India., Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 13381/1984
Coram: Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan
The Supreme Court has sought a response from the Archaeological Survey of India regarding the Vision Document prepared for the protection of the Taj Mahal.
Case Title: Ramveer v. The State of Rajasthan, Criminal Appeal No. 1441/2024
Coram: Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan
The Supreme Court, while hearing a matter in which a prosecution witness had levied allegations against police officials of assault, prima facie noted that it is not satisfied with the action taken by the Director General of Police (DGP), Rajasthan, in this regard.
Case Title: ANJUMOL V.A. vs. KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION., Diary No.- 18441 - 2021
Coram: Justices J.K Maheshwari and Sanjay Karol
The Supreme Court expressed difficulty in its day-to-day functioning due to issues related to paper books, failure to send convenience compilations and other similar problems.
The issues include orders not being attached to paper books, counter-affidavits attached to SLP paper books without clear indication, failure to send convenience compilations to judges, improper exhibition of interlocutory applications (IA) numbers, and other ancillary issues.
Case Title: Hemant Soren v. Directorate of Enforcement and Anr., SLP(Crl) No. 5769/2024
Coram: Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta
The Supreme Court issued notice on a petition filed by former Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren challenging his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED).
The Bench posted the matter in the week commencing from May 6 stating that, in the meantime, it shall be open to the Jharkhand High Court to pronounce the judgment which was reserved on February 28, 2024. It may be noted that Soren has filed the present Special Leave Petition citing the delay by the High Court in pronouncing the verdict on his petition challenging ED arrest.
Case Title: THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL vs. HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA THROUGH REGISTRAR GENERAL., Diary No.- 18313 – 2024
The Supreme Court adjourned until July 2024 a Special Leave Petition, filed by the State of West Bengal against the Calcutta High Court's judgment, directing the CBI to investigate the allegations of land-grabbing and sexual assault in Sandeshkhali.
Case Details : THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL vs. BAISHAKHI BHATTACHARYYA (CHATTERJEE) SLP(C) No. 009586 - / 2024
Coram: Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court asked if it was possible to segregate untainted appointments out of the over 25,000 appointments made by the West Bengal School Service Commission (WB SSC)to teaching and non-teaching posts in 2016, which the Calcutta High Court has directed to be set aside entirely on the ground of fraud.
Supreme Court Adjourns Pleas Seeking Enumeration Of OBCs In Census Till September
Case Title: Tinku Saini v. Union of India and Ors., WP(C) 901/2020 (and connected matters)
Coram: Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta
The Supreme Court adjourned until September public interest litigations (PILs) seeking enumeration of Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in the national Census.
The Bench directed that the same be listed in the week commencing September 9.
Case Title: ALL INDIA OPHTHALMOLOGICAL SOCIETY vs. UNION OF INDIA., Diary No.- 15181 - 2024
The Supreme Court asked how could the Government fix a uniform rate for the medical services provided by private hospitals and doctors.
The Court was considering petitions that raised issues regarding the provisions of the Clinical Establishments Act, 2010, and the Clinical Establishment (Central Government) Rules, 2012.
The manufacturing licenses of 14 products of Patanjali Ayurved Ltd and its sister concern Divya Pharmacy were suspended on April 15, stated the Uttarakhand State Licensing Authority in an affidavit filed before the Supreme Court on Monday (April 29).
Case Title: Arvind Kejriwal v. Directorate of Enforcement, SLP(Crl) 5154/2024
Coram: Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta
While arguing Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's plea challenging his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate in the Delhi Liquor Policy case, Senior Advocate Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi alleged before the Supreme Court today that the AAP leader's arrest was consequent to Model Code of Conduct (with respect to Lok Sabha elections) being put in place, even though there was no "reason to believe" or "new" material with the agency to take the action.
Case Title: Gautam Navlakha v. National Investigation Agency & Anr., Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 9216 of 2022
Coram: Justices MM Sundresh and SVN Bhatti.
The Supreme Court, while hearing National Investigative Agency's challenge against the Bombay High Court order granting bail to Bhima Koregaon-accused Gautam Navlakha, orally said that the trial “may not be over for another ten years.”