The epic battle of Judicial Discretion v. Judicial Destruction: Good bye Sec. 6A(1)

A constitutional bench recently in Dr. Subramaniam Swamy v. Director, CBI & Ors. struck down Sec. 6A(1) of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 & Sec. 26(c) of CVC Act, 2003 to that extent. Section 6A(1) made it mandatory for the CBI to take prior approval of the Central Government to conduct any enquiry or investigation against employees of Central Government above the rank of joint secretary and senior officers appointed by Central Government in companies etc for an offence...

Some Freedom to ‘Caged Parrot CBI’: Still a long Way to Go

I thank my god every day for having blessed this country with a Supreme Court, which is the savior of good against the evil and beholder of light against the darkness.Central Bureau of Investigation, a caged parrot of the Centre has been freed and at least one door of the cage is now being opened by the Supreme Court which gave a free hand to the Agency to inquire into corruption charges against top bureaucrats. The Court invalidated a provision that mandated the CBI to obtain the government’s...

Respect All, Suspect All; Beware thou, deceit! The riches of thy loot may go back to public

Rupees 50,00,000/- (fifty lakhs) is the rough estimate of the sum of spoils by a business enterprise over a period of five years, or more, that is to go back to the public by the order delivered in the case under reference. It indicates that ever so long can you build up your riches, by deceiving people, the longer arms of the law have got inclined to a richer behave in dispensation of justice to public, through awarding greater than ever pecuniary penalties, if found indulged in unfair trade...

By the Judges For the Judges

On 22nd April 2014, Supreme Court of India delivered a judgment in a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by an orthopedic Surgeon, who is concerned with the alarming number of road accidents in our country. A bench consisting of Chief Justice P.Sathasivam, Justices Ranjan Gogoi and N.V. Ramana heard thematter in detail and gave deep thoughts to the points raised by the petitioner. Court graciously accepted the arguments put forward by the petitioner with data comparing the number of accidents...

Letter of MLA – Is it not Contempt of Court?

On 04/03/2014, a grave and serious incident happened in the precincts of the Supreme Court. When Sri. Subratho Roy, the Chief of Sahara Group of Companies was brought to the Supreme Court, Sri. Manoj Sharma, an Advocate positioned himself close to where Sri. Subratho Roy was to enter and threw ink on him. Though the incident appears to be trivial, it assumes importance, as it was happened in the precincts of the Supreme Court.The very next day, Hon’ble Supreme Court comprising of Five Judges...

Top 10 judgments by Justice Sathasivam

Justice Sathasivam, the 40th Chief Justice of India was elevated to the post of a Supreme Court Judge on 21st August 2007 from wherein the hon’ble judge retired from the highest judicial post on 26th April 2014 after holding it for a period of around 9 months. He has been succeeded by Justice Rajendra Mal Lodha. On a very humble pedestal, every judgment he penned down is definitely an ideal pronouncement upholding the rule of law in the country, yet this piece takes the liberty to comfine itself...

Prosecutrix in a Rape Case – Evaluation of Evidence – Part I

The most important question in a prosecution for the offence of rape is how exactly to appreciate the testimony of the rape victim. One important aspect is whether the testimony invariably requires corroboration or not and in case corroboration is required or desired, what is the nature and extent of such corroboration and the source of such corroboration.(2) In Rameshwar V/s. State of Rajasthan the accused, charged with the offence of raping a girl below 8 years of age was convicted by the...

Comment on Aveek Sarkar & Another v. State of West Bengal & Others

The case under comment is a judgment penned down by Justice K.S. Radhakrishnan for the Supreme Court bench with Justice A.K. Sikri on 3rd February 2014.The facts of the case was that, a German magazine by name "STERN" having worldwide circulation published an article with a picture of Boris Becker, a world renowned Tennis player, posing nude with his dark-skinned fiancée by name Barbara Feltus, a film actress, which was photographed by none other than her father. The article states that, in an...

A tribute to Chief Justice Sathasivam: by a lawyer who had the privilege to appear before him

Judging human conduct and governmental actions is a very unpleasant task and Judges are endowed with that official duty.  No wonder when stern Judges retire after long years of public service many of the lawyers do not attend their farewell function.  I am reminded of a wonderful Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, who raised the image of Supreme Court so high in the eye of general public and Government and all private and public authorities, retiring from the Supreme Court without getting a...

Kesavanda Bharthi Judgment safeguards the idea of India.

It was on this day; forty year ago Supreme Court decided the landmark judgement for ever, Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala. The most significant contribution by Kesavananda Bharati judgment is the recognition of supremacy of the Constitution of India and its unalterable features.As Senior Lawyer Arvind P Datar notes : “The case of Kesavananda Bharati v State of Kerala had been heard for 68 days, the arguments commencing on October 31, 1972, and ending on March 23, 1973. The hard work and...

The Religion of Succession

The Constitutional mandate set out as Directive Principles of the Constitution defines the agenda for state action in the area of legislation and policy. In the last six decades, some of these stated goals have been transformed into fundamental rights through judicial interpretation (protection of environment, right to education) while others have been realized through legislation (empowerment of Village Panchayat). But one directive principle that has been constantly ignored by the state...

Pronouncing a judgment and then withdrawing it : An unsung blatant error in law!!

On March 31, 2014 in the RIL-Government dispute relating to cost recovery in the KG-D6 Basin area, Justice Surinder Singh Nijjar as a designate of the Chief Justice of India appointed James Spigelman as the third arbitrator in an application filed by RIL under Sec. 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996. However, two days later this duly pronounced reportable judgment was ‘recalled'. In my humble view, this is a blatant error in law and should be discussed and debated across with...