- Home
- /
- Supreme court
- /
- Supreme Court Weekly Roundup:...
Supreme Court Weekly Roundup: September 11 To September 17, 2023
Suraj Kumar
18 Sep 2023 11:57 AM GMT
Judgments/OrdersIt Is Duty Of Police To Produce Imprisoned Accused Before Court, Accused Can't Be Blamed For Police's Negligence: Supreme CourtCase Title: Satendra Babu vs. State of Uttar PradeshCitation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 766The Supreme Court recently stated that when accused persons are in prison, it is the duty of the police to produce them before the trial court. If the police fail...
Judgments/Orders
Case Title: Satendra Babu vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 766
The Supreme Court recently stated that when accused persons are in prison, it is the duty of the police to produce them before the trial court. If the police fail to produce them before the court, then the accused cannot be made to suffer due to such negligence of the police.
Case Title: Central Bureau of Investigation v. Dr RR Kishore | Criminal Appeal No. 377 of 2007 and other connected matters
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 770
In a significant development, a constitution bench of the Supreme Court on Monday declared that its 2014 judgment, which declared Section 6A of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act 1946 as unconstitutional, will have retrospective effect. This means that Section 6A is held to not be in force right from the date of its insertion.
Section 6A of the DSPE Act required the Central Bureau of Investigation to obtain prior sanction from the central government to investigate corruption cases against an officer of the rank of joint secretary and above. This provision was struck down as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India
Case Title: Central Bureau of Investigation v. Dr RR Kishore | Criminal Appeal No. 377 of 2007 and other connected matters
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 770
Once a law is declared unconstitutional on grounds of it infringing any of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution, it would be held to be unenforceable right from the date of enactment, a Supreme Court constitution bench has observed. While holding that its 2014 judgment declaring Section 6A of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act 1946 unconstitutional, will have a retrospective effect, the court said –
“It is crystal clear that once a law is declared to be unconstitutional, being violative of Part III of the Constitution, then it would be held to be void ab initio, stillborn, unenforceable and non est in view of Article 13(2) of the Constitution and its interpretation by authoritative pronouncements. Thus, the declaration made by the constitution bench in the case of Subramanian Swamy will have retrospective operation. Section 6A of the DSPE Act is held to be not in force from the date of its insertion i.e. September 11, 2003.”
Case Title: Central Bureau of Investigation v. Dr RR Kishore | Criminal Appeal No. 377 of 2007 and other connected matters
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 770
A Supreme Court constitution bench on Monday(September 11) reiterated that any change in procedure after an offence is committed would not be unconstitutional on grounds of the bar on the retrospective application of ex post facto laws contained in Article 20(1) of the Constitution, since procedural matters were not covered by the said clause.
Case Title: JAGPAL SINGH v. THE STATE OF U.P. & ORS., SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.31526 OF 2017
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 771
If an employee who is continuing in service on the strength of an interim order gets a promotion, such promotion will get nullified once the interim order is dismissed, held the Supreme Court recently.
The Court was considering a challenge to a judgment passed by the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court, as a result of which the services of the petitioner, a temporary Collection Peon, stood terminated, notwithstanding the subsequent promotion earned by him on the post of Collection Amin on the strength of his continued working under the interim order passed by the High Court.
Supreme Court Disapproves Of High Court Order Limiting Bail To Three Months
Case: Ranjit Digal v. State of Odisha
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 772
The Supreme Court recently disapproved of an order passed by a High Court which restricted the bail to a particular period.
"Once the High Court came to the conclusion that the accused was entitled to bail, there was no reason to restrict the bail to the period of three months", the Court observed in the case Ranjit Digal vs State of Odisha
Case Title: M/S. RPS Infrastructure Ltd V. Mukul Kumar, Civil Appeal No. 5590 of 2021
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 773
The Supreme Court on Monday said that admitting claims after the Resolution Plan has been accepted by the Committee of Creditors (COC) under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) even though the Adjudicating Authority has yet to approve the plan, would make the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) an endless process.
The Apex Court was considering whether the claim pertaining to an arbitral award, in appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act), could be admitted after the resolution plan had been approved by the COC. “We find it difficult to unleash the hydra-headed monster of undecided claims on the resolution applicant” the Apex Court said while dismissing the plea of the claimant.
Case Title: P. M. PAUL v. THE STATE TAX OFFICER & ORS.
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 774
The Supreme Court has ruled that since appeal is a statutory remedy, the assessee cannot be barred from seeking restoration of the appeal which was withdrawn by him as a pre-condition for availing the benefit under an Amnesty scheme, if the assessee is subsequently unsuccessful in availing the benefit of the scheme.
The top court remarked that the appellate authority as well as the Kerala High Court ought to have allowed the assessee to seek restoration of his appeal before the appellate authority so that the same could have been heard on merits. The court thus set aside the order of the High Court where it had upheld the appellant authority’s decision rejecting assessee’s application for restoration of appeal against the assessment order passed against him.
Case Title: A. Valliammai V. K.P. Murali, Civil Appeal No. 5342 of 2023
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 777
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (12.09.2023) held that, when no time is fixed for specific performance of a contract, then the limitation period for a specific performance suit as per Article 54 of Part II of the Schedule to the Limitation Act, 1963, will run from the date on which the plaintiff had notice of refusal on part of the defendant to perform the contract to determine the period of limitation.
The first part of Article 54 states that the limitation period for filing a suit for specific performance would be three years from the date fixed for performance. However, when no date is fixed, the period of limitation is three years from the date when the plaintiff has notice that performance has been refused, as per the second part of Article 54.
Case Title: A. KRISHNA SHENOY v. GANGA DEVI G. & ORS, Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 8080/2019
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 778
In a recent development, a Division Bench of the Supreme Court made an important observation that in a suit for partition, every interested party is considered to be a plaintiff. Further, the law does not prohibit the passing of numerous preliminary decrees.
“Admittedly, we are dealing with a suit for partition, in which every interested party is deemed to be a plaintiff. The law does not bar passing of numerous preliminary decrees.”
Supreme Court Upholds Life Sentence For Men Who Murdered Woman Alleging Witchcraft
Case title: Bhaktu Gorain v. State of West Bengal
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 779
In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court upheld the rigorous life imprisonment sentence of the convicts in a witchcraft-related murder case. The Court ruled that the convicts had a common intention to kill the victim.
The five accused persons called the deceased a witch (diayen) who is the cause of trouble to the villagers as she used to indulge in witchcraft and killed her.
The Court observed “The very fact that they had assembled in the morning and surrounded (gheraoed) the deceased with deadly weapons is a sufficient indication to infer that they had surrounded (gheraoed) in a pre-planned manner with a pre-determined mind. Thus, the submission that they had no common intention stands completely ruled out. Moreover, the nature of injuries which have been caused on the head of the deceased with the deadly weapons proves that they had assembled with the common intention and not merely to threaten her or to deter her from practicing witchcraft.”
Case title: Rupesh Manger (Thapa) v. State of Sikkim
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 781
The Supreme Court observed that the standard of proof to prove the lunacy or insanity is only ‘reasonable doubt’.
An accused who seeks exoneration from liability of an act under Section 84 of IPC has to prove legal insanity and not medical insanity, the bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and Prashant Kumar Mishra observed.
Case Title: Javed Shaukat Ali Qureshi v. State of Gujarat
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 782
The jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution can be invoked even suo motu in compelling cases, observed the Supreme Court in a recent judgment, while setting aside the conviction of certain accused persons, even though they themselves had not filed any appeal.
While considering the appeal filed by another accused person, the Court noted that the evidence against all the accused persons were the same. Hence, the benefit of acquittal given to one accused has to be extended to the other accused also, even if they haven't approached the Supreme Court.
Case Title: VASANT NATURE CURE HOSPITAL & PRATIBHA MATERNITY HOSPITAL TRUST & ORS. v. UKAJI RAMAJI-SINCE DECEASED THROUGH HIS LEGAL HEIRS & ANR, 2023INSC825
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 783
Case Title: The National Law University Jodhpur v. Prashant Mehta & Ors
Citation: Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 13762- 13764/2019, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 782
The Supreme Court has expressed serious concerns at the National Law University, Jodhpur, operating only with contractual teachers. "To say the least, this is unacceptable and undesirable", the Court observed.
The Court noted that as per the regulations of the University Grants Commission, only 10 percent of the staff can be contractual staff. The Court was told that the NLU's regulations were recently amended to provide for 50 percent permanent staff and 50 per cent contractual. However, even this has not been implemented
Case Title: Brihan Karan Sugar Syndicate Private Limited v. Yashwantrao Mohite Krushna Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 784
The Supreme Court has reiterated that in a suit for passing off, for establishing goodwill of the product, it is necessary for the plaintiff to prove not only the figures of sale of the product but also the expenditure incurred on promotion and advertisement of the product.
Case Title: KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD. KSCARDB VS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER, TRIVANDRUM AND ORS.
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 786
The Supreme Court has held that if a cooperative society does not transact the business of banking as defined in Section 5 (b) of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 (BR Act), it would not be a cooperative bank. Thus, if a co-operative society is not a ‘co-operative bank’ within the meaning of Section 56 of the BR Act, then such an entity would be entitled to deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, the court has ruled.
“But on the other hand, if it is a co-operative bank within the meaning of Section 56 of BR Act, 1949 read with the provisions of NABARD Act, 1981 (National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development Act), then it would not be entitled to the benefit of deduction under sub-section (4) of Section 80P of the Act,” the bench of Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan said.
Case Title: Tata Power Western Odisha Distribution Limited & Anr. V Jagannath Sponge Private Limited
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 788
The Supreme Court has held that under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”), once the Resolution Plan stands approved by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), the Electricity Department cannot demand payment of arrears, which were payable by the Corporate Debtor, from the Successful Resolution Applicant for restoration/grant of electricity connection.
Case Title: B.C. Nagaraj and Anr. V. The State of Karnataka
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 789
The Supreme Court on Wednesday (13.09.203) granted the benefit of revised UGC pay scale as per a 1999 Karnataka Government Order (G.O) to two Physical Education instructors with retrospective effect from 1st January 1996, despite a 2008 G.O that stated that the revised UGC pay scale was to be notionally extended from 27th July 1998.
The Apex Court extended such benefit to the appellants despite the 2008 G.O limiting pay revision because a similarly situated person had been given the same benefit by the Karnataka High Court in 2009 despite the 2008 G.O, which was later affirmed by the Supreme Court.
Case title: DBS Bank India Ltd. v. State NCT of Delhi & Ors; Religare Finvest Ltd v. State of NCT of Delhi
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 790
The Supreme Court recently(11 Sep) emphasized that a company's criminal responsibility is recognized when it can be attributed to the actions of individual employees, directors, or officials. This approach aligns with previous legal precedents, including cases such as Tesco, Meridian Global Funds, Standard Chartered Bank, and Iridium, where corporate criminal liability was recognized based on individual actions within the company.
Case title: DBS Bank India Ltd. v. State NCT of Delhi & Ors, Religare Finvest Ltd v. State of NCT of Delhi
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 790
The Supreme Court today ruled that DBS Bank and its directors, who were appointed after the amalgamation with Lakshmi Vilas Bank(LVB) and had their appointments approved by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), cannot be held criminally liable for actions attributed to erstwhile directors of LVB.
The Court held, “In the present context, public confidence in the banking system was at stake when RBI stepped in and imposed a moratorium and asked DBS to take over the entire functioning, management, and assets of erstwhile LVB. To permit the prosecution of DBS for acts of LVB who are facing criminal charges would result in a travesty in justice. Therefore, pending criminal proceedings arising out of the FIR, to the extent it involves DBS and all consequent proceedings are hereby quashed. The impugned judgment is set aside. Appeal by DBS is allowed.”
Case title: Axis Bank Ltd. v. Naren Seth
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 791
The Supreme Court today dismissed an appeal by Axis Bank Limited(appellant), thereby affirming the condonation of delay in initiating the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) by the State Bank of India (SBI) against a corporate debtor under Section 7 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code(IBC), 2016.
The Court observed, “For all reasons recorded above, no merit in appeal the same is dismissed”.
Case Title: STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANOTHER v. M/S. CHIRANJILAL (MINERAL) INDUSTRIES OF BAGANDIH
Citation: CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8238 OF 2022
The Supreme Court has elucidated the exceptions applicable to Section 10-A (1) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (MMDR Act), which provides that all applications received for grant of mining lease prior to 12.01.2015, shall become ineligible. The court remarked that the object and purpose of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Act, 2015 is to ensure that allocation of mineral resources is done through auctioning. This is the reason why sub-section (1) to Section 10-A, which is inserted by the 2015 Amendment Act, mandates that all applications received prior to 12.01.2015 shall become ineligible, the court remarked.
The court held that where a prospecting licence has been granted to the permit holder or the licensee has the right to obtain a prospecting licence followed by a mining lease, and the State Government is satisfied that the permit holder or the licensee has complied with the requirements specified in Section 10-A (2)(b) of the MMDR Act, the bar of Section 10-A (1) shall not be applicable.
Case title: Buddhadeb Saha v. State of West Bengal
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 794
The Supreme Court recently upheld the conviction of the appellants in a dowry death case, despite the absence of a positive viscera report. The case revolved around the death of Tuli Shah, who allegedly committed suicide due to harassment for dowry.
The Court observed “Thus, the absence of detection of poison in the viscera report alone need not be treated as conclusive proof of the fact that the victim has not died of poison. As pointed out by this Court in a number of cases, where the deceased dies as a result of poisoning, it is difficult to successfully isolate the poison and recognize it. Lack of positive evidence in this respect would not result in throwing out the entire prosecution case, if the other circumstances clearly point out the guilt of the accused.
Case title: Union of India v. Vinod Kumar
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 795
The Supreme Court on Thursday(Sep 14) referred a significant case regarding the employment status of civilian employees working in Unit Run Canteens (URCs) within the Armed Forces to a larger bench. This decision comes in light of conflicting judgments in previous cases, specifically the Mohd. Aslam (2001) and R.R. Pillai's case (2009).
In ‘Union of India vs. Mohd Aslam’ reported in [2001] 1 SCC 720, a two-judge bench declared that the status of the employees in the URCs must be held to be that of a government employee. Whereas in ‘R.R. Pillai (Dead) through LRs. Vs. Commanding Officer, HQS, Southern Air Command(U) & Others.’ reported in [2009] 13 SCC 311, a 3-judge bench held that the employees of URCs are not government servants.
Case Title: CHEN KHOI KUI v. LIANG MIAO SHENG & ORS
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 796
The Supreme Court has upheld the decision of the Calcutta High Court where it was held that the Registrar of Society can only cancel registration granted to a society under the West Bengal Registration Act, 1961, by exercising a power of procedural review. The High Court was of the view that there is a vital difference between the power of substantive review and procedural review, and the former was not available to the Registrar while deciding an application for cancellation of registration.
Case title - Sachin Chaudhary v. State Of UP And 2 Others,
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 797
Recently, the Supreme Court dismissed a petition filed by the Secretary of UP Youth Congress, Sachin Chaudhary, seeking to quash an FIR over his alleged remark that Prime Minister of India Narendra Modi was in a "love affair" with Industrialist, founder and chairman of Adani Group, Gautam Adani.
News Updates
Case Details: Hemant Soren v. Union of India & Anr.
Citation: Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 378 of 2023
Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren has moved the Supreme Court of India against the latest summons issued by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in connection with a money laundering case. In his recent plea seeking a stay on and the quashing of the latest summons, the chief minister has assailed the ‘repeated’ summonses as ‘politically motivated’ to ‘browbeat, humiliate and intimidate’ him. Apart from being ‘derogatory, unwarranted, and illegal’, these summonses, according to Soren, also have the effect of undermining the high office of a chief minister of a state.
During a panel discussion held to mark the launch of the book, authored by Gautam Bhatia, ‘Unsealed Covers: A Decade of the Constitution, the Courts, and the State, Senior Advocate Rebecca John made strong observations about the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA). She stated:
“What is the problem with UAPA? I mean, there are many problems… the whole act is problematic but essentially, we can zero in on two statutory provisions. Section 43 allows the custody of an individual to be extended from 90- days to 180 days before a charge sheet is filed. Section 43 D (5), which places restrictions on the grounds of bail.
Public Conversations About Judicial Ideology Necessary: Gautam Bhatia
During a panel discussion held to mark the launch of the book, authored by Gautam Bhatia, ‘Unsealed Covers: A Decade of the Constitution, the Courts, and the State’., Bhatia spoke about certain important issues in the Indian Judiciary including the acknowledgment of judicial ideology. Talking more about the need for criticism especially when the line of political space is blurring and shifting in the judiciary, and the role of critics in mitigating that balance of power, he said:
“The key thing to understand is that the line of political space is always blurring and shifting, and I think that one reason why a certain kind of criticism that might appear harsh is necessary is that while the executive and the state have the tangible power to get things done and to apply pressure, all that the critic has is the pen. Sometimes, you need to speak in certain ways to even slightly balance out that imbalance in power and try and shift that line. In that sense, if criticism at times feels strong or harsh, it is not because it is meant to be harsh. Sometimes, if that is the only weapon you have, you have to use it as strongly as you can to try and mitigate that balance.”
Case Title: Poulomi Pavini Shukla v. Union Of India And Ors
Citation: W.P.(C) No. 503/2018 PIL-W
The Supreme Court on Friday (September 15, 2023), sought the response of the Union Government and all State Governments on whether Section 2(d) of the Right to Education Act, 2009, which defined the expression "child belonging to disadvantaged groups" could also include orphaned children. Schools are mandated to provide at least 25% quota for the 'Children belonging to disadvantaged groups' as per Section 12 of the Act.
The court also sought instructions on whether benefits provided under the PM Cares Fund to children orphaned during the COVID pandemic could be extended to other orphans too
The basic structure doctrine has achieved constitutional permanence not only in India, but also in six other nations globally that have both acknowledged and embraced the principle of placing a restraint on the legislative power of constitutional amendment, renowned Indian lawyer Fali S Nariman, Senior Advocate, said on Friday. He also urged people to maintain faith in the overarching integrity of the higher judiciary as an institution, even though occasional concerns may arise regarding specific judgments handed down by individual Supreme Court judges.
The Supreme Court on Friday (15.09.2023), stayed the order of the Kerala High Court that had directed the State Government to pay annuity to the legal heirs of the Malayala Brahmin family that possessed sovereign rights over the territory of Paravur in present day Ernakulam district.
On Friday, Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud expressed his disapproval of the manner in which the Manipur High Court admitted a PIL seeking to quash the fact-finding report published by the Editors Guild of India (EGI) on the ethnic violence in Manipur. The bench led by the CJI and comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra was hearing the petition challenging the Manipur Police's FIR against members of the EGI over the report.
Madras Tax Bar Challenges CGST Appellate Tribunal Provisions; Supreme Court Issues Notice
Case Title: Madras Tax Bar v. Union Of India
Citation: W.P.(C) No. 900/2023 PIL-W
On Friday, the Supreme Court issued notice on a petition filed by the Madras Tax Bar challenging the constitutional validity of Sections 149 and 150 of the Finance Act, 2023 that seek to substitute Sections 109 and 110 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act). The sections in question relate to appointments and conditions of service of members to the Appellate Tribunal under the CGST Act.
Chief Justice of India, DY Chandrachud on Friday said that steps are being taken to bring more transparency into the collegium system. “The idea is to make the process of recommending appointments to the Supreme Court more transparent. Not by sharing our discussions in the public realm, which we obviously cannot do. But by laying down objective parameters for selection to the Supreme Court and High Courts.” he said.
The Chief Justice said that the Supreme Court along with the Centre of Research and Planning, has prepared a platform where the top 50 judges in the country who would be considered for appointment to the Supreme Court are assessed. Data on reportable judgments of these judges and the quality of their judgments is collected and assessed he said. “It is a work in progress, but we are improving”. He added.
Notion That Migrants & Asylum Seekers Have No Rights Must Change: Justice S Muralidhar
Justice (Retd.) S. Muralidhar, while delivering the keynote address on the topic “Opening Doors to Justice: Prevention of Violence Against Migrant Women” stated that illegal migrants and asylum seekers are the right bearers and stated that the notion that these people have no rights must change. Further, with respect to Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, he noted that the same provides rights to everyone, not particularly to citizens or documented persons.
Case Title: Dinganglung Gangmei v. Mutum Churamani Meetei And Ors
Citation: Diary No. 19206-2023
In the matter pertaining to Manipur violence, the Supreme Court today clarified the means through which the statements of the victims and the witnesses were to be taken. The bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra issued the clarification in response to a letter received by the Supreme Court from the Manipur High Court seeking clarity in this regard.
In its recent order referring the batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of Sedition law under Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code to a bench of at-least five judges, the Supreme Court noted that the judgment in Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar (1962), which had upheld the provisions of Section 124A, had not considered the aspect of Articles 14 of the Constitution in the matter.
Are Virtual Hearings Allowed? If Not, Why? Supreme Court Asks All High Courts, NCLAT, NCDRC & NGT
Case Title: Sarvesh Mathur v. The Registrar General of Punjab and Haryana High Court| Citation: W.P.(Crl.) No. 351/2023
The Supreme Court on Friday (September 15) asked the Registrar Generals of all High Courts and the Registrars of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) and the National Green Tribunal (NGT) to state on affidavits if they are allowing virtual hearings to continue.
If the hybrid hearing option has been discontinued, then the reasons should be stated, the Court added.
Supreme Court To Hear Jharkhand CM Hemant Soren's Plea Against ED Summons On September 18
The Supreme Court will hear on Monday, September 18, a writ petition filed by Jharkhand chief minister Hemant Soren seeking the quashing of the summons issued by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in connection with a money laundering case.
Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, while appearing for former Delhi Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia in a bail case, expressed concerns about media discussions on the merits of ongoing legal matters, even while the courts are hearing these cases.
He told the Court that news articles about Sisodia's case appear shortly before his matter is listed in the Court. He said that he will submit a chart showing the dates of the publications and the court postings.
Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud on Friday (September 15) expressed his strong disapproval of an advocate's email which stated that the Supreme Court should hear ordinary cases instead of Constitutional cases.
CJI DY Chandrachud was referring to an email sent by Advocate Mathews J. Nedumpara expressing his view that the Supreme Court should prioritize hearing non-Constitution bench matters over Constitution bench matters, which he referred to as "useless".
Will Defer Summons To Telangana CM's Daughter K Kavitha By 10 Days, ED Tells Supreme Court
Case Details: Kalvakuntla Kavitha v. Directorate of Enforcement
Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 103 of 2023
Hours after summoning Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) leader K Kavitha for questioning on Friday, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) today informed the Supreme Court that it would be deferring for ten days the summons issued to the former Lok Sabha member in connection with the Delhi excise policy case. The central agency is currently investigating her role in influencing the now-scrapped liquor policy in the national capital and related bribery allegations.
Case Title: Seema Guha v. The State Of Manipur
Citation: W.P.(Crl.) No. 415/2023
In the petition challenging FIRs lodged against the members of the Editors Guild of India (EGI) over a fact-finding report published by them about the ethnic violence in Manipur, the Supreme Court today orally remarked that the complaint filed against the EGI members was "a counter-narrative of the government". The Court further orally remarked that even if the EGI's report is assumed to be false, making false statements in an article, by itself, was not an offense under Section 153A of the IPC.
The Supreme Court has granted two weeks to the Manipur police and the complainant to file their response in the matter. Till then, the Court extended the interim order granting protection to the EGI journalists from coercive actions based on the FIR.
Case: Abhishek Yadav and others v. Army College of Medical Sciences
Citation: W.P.(C) No. 730/2022
The Supreme Court on Friday (September 15) directed the National Medical Commission to respond to a complaint that 70 percent of medical colleges do not pay any stipend or are not paying the minimum set stipend to doctors who are doing MBBS internships.
A bench led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud directed the National Medical Commission(NMC) to file a tabulated chart and explain (i) whether the above statement regarding the lack of stipend for medical interns is true and (ii) what steps the NMC is taking to ensure compliance with the norm of paying internship stipend.
Supreme Court Seeks Report From NALSA On Implementation Of Women’s Integrated Help System
Case Title: The National Federation Of Societies For Fast Justice And Anr. v. Union Of India And Ors.
Citation: Diary No. 26994-2023 PIL-W
Today, a Division Bench of the Supreme Court called for a report from the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) in a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking a direction for the implementation of the NALSA women’s integrated help system (NWIHS-181/15100) in all States and Union Territories. NWIHS-181/15100 is a technology-integrated system of 181 women helpline and NALSA legal Aid helpline 15100 and all other government schemes that are meant to provide women and girls, who are victims of violence, with hassle-free access to the criminal justice system.
The National Medical Commission (NMC) recently informed the Supreme Court that individuals diagnosed with ‘mental illnesses’ will now be eligible for undergraduate medical education without any bar. In a recent report filed in the Supreme Court, the Undergraduate Medical Education Board of the Commission has stated –
“On thorough consideration of the recommendations received from the expert members, the Under Graduate Medical Education Board reaches a conclusion that in respect of mental illness, "the diagnosis of Mental Illness can no longer be a bar for eligibility to pursue medical education (MBBS) provided the candidate falls in the merit list in competitive entrance examination i.e., NEET-UG.”
Case Title: Arjun Gopal Vs. Union Of India
Citation: W.P.(C) No. 728/2015
The Supreme Court Thursday told the Delhi Police that the issues relating to violation of the firecracker ban imposed in Delhi NCR must be nipped in the bud. The Court orally remarked that there was no point in taking action after violations had taken place.
Case Title: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay vs. Union of India
Citation: Writ Petition (C) No. 699 of 2016
Senior Advocate Vijay Hansaria, the amicus curiae appointed by the Supreme Court in the matter relating to criminal cases against elected representatives (MPs/MLAs) in his 19th report has suggested a string of directions to be issued for expeditious disposal of such cases.
The suggestions of the amicus in his latest report include calling for monthly reports from Special Court set up for disposal of cases against MPs/MLAs to the High Courts regarding reasons for delay in cases pending for more than five years and any difficulties faced in the concluding the trial in such cases. The Amicus has also suggested that High Courts create a separate section on their websites regarding pending cases against MPs/MLAs
Case Title: Bilkis Yakub Rasool v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 491 of 2022
The Supreme Court on Thursday questioned if the non-payment of fines by the convicts in the Bilkis Bano case would be an important consideration when examining their conduct in jail. The court also observed that in this case, the convicts had the privilege of getting parole for many days, unlike several other convicts
Former Orissa High Court chief justice S Muralidhar said that politics and judicial functioning are getting increasingly mixed up and judges often make political choices, even while thinking they are neutral.
He said – “Many issues coming to court are political issues dressed as legal issues. Judges do make political choices. They may think they are being neutral. Politics and judicial functioning are not as separate as we want them to be. They are getting increasingly mixed up. What we wear, what we eat, what we speak - they are all becoming constitutional issues now and judges are being forced to make a choice, and make that choice in public.”
Case Title: Brihan Karan Sugar Syndicate Private Limited V. Yashwantrao Mohite Krushna Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 784
The Supreme Court on Thursday (14.09.2023) expressed concern about the huge pendency of suits in Trial Courts in Maharashtra and urged the members of the Bar to cooperate. The Court disapproved of advocates raising unnecessary objections during cross-examinations as they would result in trials getting delayed.
“If the advocates start objecting to every question asked in the cross-examination, the trial cannot go on smoothly. The trial gets delayed", the Apex Court said.
Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud announced today that the Supreme Court is officially 'onboard' with the National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG) now. The CJI described the onboarding of the Supreme Court data on NJDG portal under the court's 'open data policy' as a step "to bring transparency and accountability in the judicial domain."
The NJDG gives real-time data regarding the pendency of cases in District Courts and High Courts across the country. So far, the data of the Supreme Court was not available in the NJDG. Now the Supreme Court data is also available on NJDG.
The Supreme Court today expressed its strong disapproval today when a junior counsel appeared before it unprepared and sought an adjournment. In a stern response, the Court levied costs on the Advocate-on-Record responsible for sending the ill-prepared junior, highlighting the adverse impact of such conduct on both the court's proceedings and the junior counsel's professional growth
Case Details: Ajmal Ahmed v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 19225 of 2021
The Supreme Court of India on Thursday refused to interfere with the Lakshadweep administration’s decision to exclude chicken, beef, and other meat from the menu of mid-day meals for schoolchildren, as well as its order directing the closure of all dairy farms in the archipelago run by the animal husbandry department.
Prime Minister Lauds Supreme Court & CJI For Making SC Data Available On National Judicial Data Grid
The Prime Minister of India Narendra Modi lauded the Supreme Court and Chief Justice DY Chandrachud for the onboarding of the Supreme Court data on the National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG). Stating that the harnessing of technology would further transparency, the Prime Minister took to his twitter account to state–
"Laudatory step by the Supreme Court and CJI DY Chandrachud Ji. Such harnessing of technology will further transparency and enhance the justice delivery system in our country."
The Supreme Court on Wednesday said that it will soon hear the curative petition on the issue whether unstamped/insufficiently stamped arbitration agreements are unenforceable.
Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, who was presiding over a 5-judge bench, said that the curative petition might be heard next week. CJI also invited lawyers specialised in arbitration law to assist the Court in the matter, regardless of whether they are appearing for any of the parties involved in the case.
Case title: Deepanshu & Ors v. UPSC| Pranav Kesharwani & Ors v. UPSC
Citation: W.P.(C) No. 979/2023|W.P.(C) No. 977/2023
In a significant order today, the Supreme Court came to the aid of candidates who faced the cancellation of their candidature in the upcoming UPSC Civil Services Mains Examination, 2023.
The Court directed the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC-respondent) to issue admit cards to eight candidates for the Mains Exam which is scheduled to take place this coming Friday (September 15). This interim relief is subject to the final outcome of their petitions. The UPSC had rejected the candidature of two of the petitioners due to the non-submission of provisional certificates in support of their educational qualification. As regards other six petitioners, the UPSC had cited certain errors in the Economically Weaker Section(EWS) certificates
Case Title: PUCL v State of Maharashtra
Citation: Crl.A. No. 1255/1999
The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed the Union Ministry of Home Affairs to prepare a comprehensive manual on media briefings by police personnel within a period of three months. The bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice PS Narasimha, and Justice Manoj Misra also directed Director Generals of Police (DGPs) of all states to submit their suggestions for the manual. Additionally, the court directed that the input of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) be considered in this matter.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday (September 13) told BJP MP Manoj Tiwari that it won't interfere with the firecracker ban imposed in the National Capital Territory of Delhi. Tiwari's counsel argued before a bench comprising Justices AS Bopanna and MM Sundresh that the Delhi Government has imposed an absolute ban on the sale and use of firecrackers, despite the orders of the Supreme Court against a blanket ban.
Supreme Court Asks Delhi Police How It Plans To Enforce Firecracker Ban In Delhi-NCR
Case Title: Arjun Gopal v. Union Of India
Citation: W.P.(C) No. 728/2015
The Supreme Court on Wednesday questioned the Delhi Police on how they were going to implement the firecracker ban imposed in the National Capital Territory of Delhi.
A bench of Justice A S Bopanna and Justice M M Sundresh was hearing a batch of petitions filed seeking a ban on the sale, purchase and use of firecrackers in India.
Case Title: M/S. BAJAJ ALLIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD. v. RAMBHA DEVI
Citation: Civil Appeal No(s).841/2018
Deferring the hearing on the Light Motor Vehicle Driving License issue, a Supreme Court Constitution Bench on Wednesday urged the Union Government to consider if the matter could be resolved through amendments to the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 and policy changes.
The issue before the Constitution Bench is whether a person holding a driving licence in respect of a “light motor vehicle”, could on the strength of that licence, be entitled to drive a “transport vehicle of light motor vehicle class” having unladen weight not exceeding 7500 kg.
Union Cabinet Approves E-Courts Phase III For 4 Years With Budget Of Rs.7210 Crore
The Union Cabinet today approved the e-Courts Project Phase III as a Central Sector Scheme spanning four years (2023 onwards) with financial outlay of Rs.7210 crore, stated the Union Ministry of Law and Justice in a post in X(formerly Twitter).
"With the Cabinet approval of eCourts Project Phase III, we are ushering in a new era of justice delivery in India. Integrating advanced technology will make our judicial system more accessible and transparent", said Prime Minister Narendra Modi in X
Justice BR Gavai represented the Supreme Court of India in the Commonwealth Magistrates and Judges Association Conference at Cardiff, United Kingdom.
Today, Justice Gavai delivered his speech on the topic: We must move from “Corporate Social Responsibility” to “Corporate Legal Responsibility”
Justice Gavai, while addressing the session, has said: “Corporate Social Responsibility is a concept where businesses are mandated to integrate social and environmental concerns in their business activities. However, Corporate Social Responsibility in all cases works on self-regulation and allows flexibility to the corporations to fulfil their social obligations. It has mainly been considered as a moral and normative responsibility that corporates can voluntarily pursue.
But, “in the event of conflict or serious harm to the environment, animals or people, where corporate irresponsibility is occurring, it is manifestly illogical to leave to the corporation the task of self-regulating.” This shows that Corporate Social Responsibility as a concept lacks legal accountability for non-performance of social obligations by companies. Therefore, there should be a shift in focus towards legally mandated accountability.”
Senior Advocate Vijay Hansaria, the amicus curiae appointed by the Supreme Court in the matter relating to criminal cases against elected representatives (MPs/MLAs) in his 19th report has suggested that limiting the period of disqualification to contest elections after conviction to 6 years, is manifestly arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. The Amicus has suggested permanent disqualification of such convicts instead of a 6 year ban.
The Amicus has described the position occupied by Law Makers to be 'sacrosanct', and has suggested that once MPs/MLAs are found to have committed an offence involving moral turpitude, they should be permanently disqualified from holding office
Case Title: M/s. PLR Projects Pvt. Ltd. v. Mahanadi Coalfields Limited And Ors.
Citation: Diary No. 33859/2022
The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued notice to a bar association in Odisha for abstaining from court work for a day citing the death of one of its members. Taking a critical view of the decision of the Raigarh Bar Association, the Court said that even though the death of a lawyer is an unfortunate incident, it cannot be a reason to bring the judicial work to a standstill.
Case Title: SAFIQ AHMAD vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 1110/2017
A Division Bench of the Supreme Court resumed its hearing concerning the filing of fake claim petitions for getting compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act. The Bench, comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and S.V.N. Bhatti, directed the State governments to file up-to-date status reports regarding fake claims and actions taken. Further, the State governments were also asked to inform the Court whether special investigation teams (SITs) have been constituted.
In addition to the above directions given to the States, the Court also directed the Bar Council of each state to file status reports indicating whether any complaints relating to fake cases and involvement of advocates have been decided or are pending. Lastly, the insurance companies were also asked to file status reports with complete details regarding fake claim cases.
Case Title: K. Babu V. M. Swaraj
Citation: SLP (C) No. 15320/2023
The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to stay the proceedings in the election petition filed against Congress MLA K Babu pending before the Kerala High Court, challenging his election from the Tripunithura constituency in the 2021 Kerala Legislative Assembly Elections.
Case Title: Branch Manager, Punjab National Bank & Ors. v. Guru Nanak Engineering Works & Ors.
Citation: Diary No. 2477 of 2023
The Supreme Court of India on Monday (September 11) requested the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) to submit an affidavit clarifying its directives concerning banks’ obligations to borrowers. Specifically, the court sought answers to three key questions: whether banks are required to provide borrowers with signed loan documents if they must inform borrowers about changes in interest rates, and whether the lenders are under an obligation to furnish borrowers with annual statements of their loan accounts.
The Supreme Court observed that a deposit of a minimum 20% amount under Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act as a condition to suspend sentence is not an absolute rule.
When an Appellate Court considers the prayer under Section 389 Cr.P.C. of an accused who has been convicted for offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, it can consider whether it is an exceptional case which warrants grant of suspension of sentence without imposing the condition of deposit of 20% of the fine/compensation amount, the Court observed.
In the petition challenging FIRs lodged against the members of the Editors Guild of India (EGI) over a fact-finding report published by them about the ethnic violence in Manipur, the Supreme Court today orally remarked that the issue pertained to just a report and was not a case of someone committing an offence on the ground. The writ petition, jointly filed by journalists Seema Guha, Sanjay Kapoor, Bharat Bhushan, and the President of the Editors Guild of India was being heard by a bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra. The court also stated that it was not inclined to quash the FIRs itself and was contemplating whether the matter should be transferred to the Delhi High Court or should be heard by the Manipur High Court.
Case title: Medical Officers Association (Ayurveda) State Of Gujarat v. Union Of India
Citation: W.P.(C) No. 723/2023
The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to entertain applications seeking recall of its judgment delivered on April 26, 2023, which held that Ayurved doctors cannot claim equal pay as Allopathy doctors. However, the Court has left open the remedy of filing a review petition against the judgment.
The Court also deferred the hearing of an application filed by the National Commission for Indian System of Medicine (NCISM) seeking modification of the judgment till the final disposal of the review petition.
“The Miscellaneous Application No. 26128/2023(National Commission for Indian System of Medicine (NCISM) will await the decision of the review petition. It's also open for them to file a review petition if advised", the Court observed.
The Supreme Court today witnessed a courtroom exchange on the growing 'street dog menace' in the country. Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud expressed concerns when he noticed an injury on a counsel's arm and inquired about its cause. What began as a simple inquiry quickly evolved into a discussion on the growing menace of street dogs in the country's neighbourhoods
A Supreme Court constitution bench on Monday(September 11) reiterated that any change in procedure after an offence is committed would not be unconstitutional on grounds of the bar on the retrospective application of ex post facto laws contained in Article 20(1) of the Constitution, since procedural matters were not covered by the said clause.
The Supreme Court on Monday (September 11) issued notice on a petition raising a significant question regarding the authority of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to file a chargesheet under section 173(2) Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner raised a question of law whether an SIT can be considered a police station with the power to initiate legal proceedings. This was in reference to an SIT formed by the State of Karnataka(petitioner) in 2015 to probe into allegations of corruption against officials of Lokayukta
Case Title: Umar Khalid v. State of NCT of Delhi
Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 6857 of 2023
The Supreme Court on Tuesday granted leave in the bail application of former JNU scholar and activist Umar Khalid in connection with the Delhi riots larger conspiracy case. He has been behind bars since September 2020, awaiting his trial under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act for his alleged involvement in the larger conspiracy surrounding the communal violence that broke out in February 2020 in the national capital
Case : SG Vombatkere v. Union of India
Citation: W.P.(C) No. 682/2021
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (September 12) referred the petitions challenging the sedition law (Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code) to a bench of at least 5-judges.
A three-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud said that a reference to a larger bench was needed as the provision was upheld by a 5-judge bench in the 1962 judgment Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar. Being a smaller bench, it may not be appropriate for it to doubt or overrule Kedar Nath, said the bench led by Chief Justice of India.
The bench, also comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, stated in its order that that Kedar Nath was decided on the basis of the narrow understanding of the fundamental rights which was prevalent then. Also, Kedar Nath examined the issue only from the angle of Article 19, as per the understanding of Constitutional law prevalent then that the fundamental rights operate in distinct silos. Later, this understanding of law changed in view of subsequent judgments which held that Articles 14, 19 and 21 operate in harmony
Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing In SNC Lavalin Case At CBI's Request
Case Title: Kasthuri Ranga v. State Rep. By Addl. Superintendent Of Police CBI And Ors. Citation: SLP(Crl) No. 7801/2017
The Supreme Court on Tuesday adjourned the appeals filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) challenging the discharge of Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan and other accused in the SNC Lavalin Case.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday adjourned until September 25 the hearing of the bail plea of Aam Aadmi Party leader and former Delhi government cabinet minister Satyendar Jain in a money laundering case. Jain was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate in May 2022 and was granted interim bail due to medical reasons earlier this year. The court today clarified that this interim relief will continue until the next date of the hearing.
Case: Mafabhai Motibhai Sagar v. State of Gujarat
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 774
The Supreme Court on Monday directed the release of a prisoner on parole, due to the delay of one year on the part of the Gujarat Government in considering his prayer for premature release. The Apex Court also directed the State Government to place its decision on record within two weeks.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday criticized the Registry for shifting the blame on Court Masters for not complying with the Court’s orders.
“This is a very sorry state of affairs. The members of the staff of the Registry are not able to understand simple orders passed by this Court and they are trying to shift the entire burden on the Court Masters which was uncalled for.” The Apex Court said.
