Best Of 2024 : Top 5 Supreme Court Decisions Of Past Year

The Supreme Court delivered several notable judgments in 2024 (a compilation of the 100 important judgments of the past year can be read here). Out of these, here is a pick of the top five judgments, which have the effect of strengthening the rule of law, boosting public confidence in the judiciary and triggering a positive change in the social and political spectrum.1. Setting aside the remission of the convicts in the Bilkis Bano caseCase Title : Bilkis Yakub Rasool v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 22Within a week of the new year, the Supreme Court delivered a bold judgment setting aside the Gujarat Government's decision to grant remission to eleven convicts who were sentenced to life in the horrific Bilkis Bano case. The premature release of the eleven convicts on the independence day of 2022 had shocked the public conscience, as they were convicted for their inhuman and brutal acts of multiple murders and gang-rapes of the Bilkis Bano family during the 2002 Gujarat riots. Several PILs were filed by social activists, politicians and former civil servants in the Supreme Court challenging the remission. Bilkis Bano herself also filed a petition.On January 8, 2024, a bench comprising Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan set aside the premature release of the convicts and directed them to surrender. The main premise of the decision was that the Gujarat Government was not the "appropriate government" as per Section 432 CrPC to grant remission, since the case was tried in the State of Maharashtra. The Court held that the rule of law was breached by the Gujarat Government by usurping the powers of the State of Maharashtra. The Court observed that the Gujarat Government "acted in tandem" with the convicts as it omitted to file a review petition against an earlier judgment which directed the Gujarat Government to decide remission. The Court also went to the extent of stating that the earlier judgment (which allowed the Gujarat Government to decide remission) was obtained by fraud and was hence per incurium."A woman deserves respect howsoever high or low she may otherwise be considered in society or to whatever faith she may follow or whatever creed she may belong to," the judgment stated. While rejecting the argument that asking the convicts to surrender would violate their right to liberty, the Court stated :"If the convicts can circumvent the consequences of their conviction, the peace and tranquillity in the society will be reduced to a chimaera. The courts have to be mindful not just to the spelling of justice but also the content of it. It is the duty of this court to correct arbitrary orders at the earliest and to retain the foundation of trust of the public."Relevance of the judgmentThe case had political ramifications, as the party in power at the State and the Union were seemingly in support of the convicts. The Court displayed immense boldness by not only calling out the State Government's collusion but also by declaring a previous judgment of the Court as erroneous due to the play of fraud. The judgment was a powerful affirmation of the rule of law and a reflection of judicial courage to enforce it, regardless of the consequences. The judgment is also a good precedent on the principles of remission.2. Electoral bonds judgmentCase Title : Association for Democratic Reforms & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 118On February 15, 2024, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court struck down the anonymous electoral bonds scheme, which allowed big corporates to make large donations anonymously to political parties. A 5-judge bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice Sanjiv Khanna, Justice BR Gavai, Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra nullified the various amendments made to the RP Act, Income Tax Act, and Companies Act which facilitated the electoral bonds scheme.The Court held that the scheme violated the voters right to information about political funding under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. The court held that the restrictive means test of the doctrine of proportionality is not satisfied and that there are other means other than electoral bonds to achieve the purpose of curbing black money, even assuming it to be a legitimate objective."Information about funding of political parties is essential for the effective exercise of the choice of voting," Chief Justice Chandrachud stressed, emphasising the importance of open governance. Relevance of the judgmentThe judgment has the impact of enhancing a voter's right to information, thereby increasing transparency in political funding and strengthening the electoral process. The judgment is a strong bulwark protecting free and fair elections from unlimited and unaccounted corporate funding.It is particularly laudable that the Court ensured that the judgment was enforced as it took the SBI - which was giving lame excuses for not divulging donors' information - to task. The Court made sure that the SBI and ECI published ...

Best Of 2024 : Top 5 Supreme Court Decisions Of Past Year

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags