- Home
- /
- Top Stories
- /
- Supreme Court Weekly Round-Up (8th-...
Supreme Court Weekly Round-Up (8th- 13th January, 2024)
Gyanvi Khanna
14 Jan 2024 5:00 AM GMT
With another week gone at the Supreme Court of India, Live Law is back with its Supreme Court Weekly Digest, dedicated to keeping our readers abreast of the most recent legal developments in the country's apex court. This digest aims to inform you about the latest judgments, orders, and Public Interest Litigations (PILs) filed in the Supreme Court during the past week and also the updates of...
With another week gone at the Supreme Court of India, Live Law is back with its Supreme Court Weekly Digest, dedicated to keeping our readers abreast of the most recent legal developments in the country's apex court. This digest aims to inform you about the latest judgments, orders, and Public Interest Litigations (PILs) filed in the Supreme Court during the past week and also the updates of the Constitution bench hearing in Aligarh Muslim University's minority status matter, providing a succinct overview.
Judgments/ orders
Case Title: Bilkis Yakub Rasool v. Union of India & Ors., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 22
Coram: Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan
The Supreme Court had set aside the remission of 11 convicts sentenced to life imprisonment for multiple murders and gang rapes, including that of Bilkis Bano, during the 2002 communal riots in Gujarat.
The court held that the State of Gujarat was not the "appropriate government" to decide the issue of remission as the trial was held in the State of Maharashtra. Since the Gujarat Government was found to be incompetent, the remission orders were held to be invalid. Accordingly, the court directed the convicts, who were given premature release in August 2022, to surrender in prison within two weeks.
Supreme Court Stays HC Direction To ECI To Hold Bye-Election For Pune Lok Sabha Seat
Case Title: Election Commission of India v. Sugosh Joshi and another., SLP(C) No. 200/2024
Coram: Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court on Monday (January 8) stayed the direction issued by the Bombay High Court to the Election Commission of India to hold bye-election for the Pune Lok Sabha seat, which has been vacant since the death of MP Girish Bapat on March 29, 2023.
The Bench observed that Section 151A of the Representation of Peoples Act 1951 would come into play in the instant case. According to this provision, the ECI need not hold bye-election to fill up a vacant seat if the remainder of the term in relation to the vacancy is less than one year.
Case Title: RAJEEV GUPTA vs. AJAY MISHRA ALIAS TANI., Diary No.- 33673 - 2023
Coram: Justices Bela M. Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal
The Supreme Court, today (on January 08), refused to interfere with the Allahabad High Court's order upholding the acquittal of Union Minister of State for Home, Ajay Mishra Teni, in the murder case of Prabhat Gupta. Gupta, a rising student leader, was killed in broad daylight in Lakhimpur Khiri district in the year 2000.
Case Title: Mukta Dabholkar and Anr. v. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors., SLP(Crl) No. 6539/2023
Coram: Justices Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma
The Supreme Court dismissed a plea challenging the discontinuation of the court-monitored probe into the 2013 murder of anti-superstition crusader Narendra Dabholkar.
Notably, the murder probe had been transferred by the High Court of Bombay in 2014 from Pune police to CBI, following a petition by activist Ketan Tirodkar and later by Dabholkar's daughter Mukta Dabholkar. Since then, the progress of the case was being monitored by the High Court.
Case Title: X v. President of SCBA Dr. Adish Aggarwal and Ors., WP(C) Diary No. 52330-2023
Coram: Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta
The Supreme Court directed that a counselling be arranged for the female advocate, who alleged sexual harassment by a male advocate. The counselling was directed to be arranged at the Supreme Court Mediation Centre.
Case Title: M/S E-GAMING FEDERATION vs. UNION OF INDIA W.P.(C) No. 001374 - / 2023, PLAY GAMES 24 7 PRIVATE LIMITED vs. UNION OF INDIA
Coram: Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court issued notice and sought the centre's response on a batch of petitions filed by online gaming companies, including Dream 11, Games 24x7, and Head Digital Works, challenging the constitutional validity of imposition of 28% GST.
Case Title: Mohammed Faizal v U. T. Administration Of Lakshadweep And Ors SLP(Crl) No. 12819/2023
Coram: Justices Hrishikesh Roy and Prashant Kumar Mishra.
The Supreme Court on Monday (January 08), while hearing an appeal against the order of the Kerala High Court, refusing to suspend the conviction of disqualified Lakshadweep MP Mohammed Faizal of the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) in a case of attempt to murder, was apprised that the case can be disposed off in terms with the recent judgment passed in the case of BSP MP Afzal Ansari.
Supreme Court Lifts Stay On Labour Court Proceedings Involving HT Media Private Limited
Case Title: RABEENDRA KUMAR DHAKAD v. HT MEDIA LTD & ANR., Diary No.- 51717 - 2023
Coram: Justices Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma
The Supreme Court issued a notice in a Special Leave Petition assailing the Delhi High Court's order wherein it stayed the proceedings referred in the Labour Court for adjudication of an industrial dispute between HT Media Private Limited and one Rabeendra Kumar Dhakad (the present petitioner) who worked in the former's office.
While staying the impugned order, the Bench also marked that it would be open for the Labour Court to proceed with the reference and decide the same in accordance with the law.
Case Title: GHANSHYAM GAUTAM vs. USHA RANI (SINCE DECEASED) THROUGH L.R.S RAVI SHANKAR., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 23
Coram: Justices Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma.
In a Criminal Appeal arising out of proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the Supreme Court held that once the settlement has been arrived at and the complainant has signed the deed accepting an amount in full and final settlement, the proceedings under this provision must be quashed.
Case Title: JAIPUR VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD. & ORS. V. MB POWER (MADHYA PRADESH) LIMITED & ORS., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 24
Coram: Justices BR Gavai and Prashant Kumar Mishra
The Supreme Court held that the State Electricity Regulatory Commission has a power to reject the adoption of tariff if it is not aligned with market prices. While adopting the tariff, the Commission is bound to take into consideration the protection of consumer interest.
Case Title: PRAYAS JUVENILE AID CENTRE (JAC) SOCIETY vs. UNION OF INDIA W.P.(C) No. 001444 - / 2023
Coram: Chief Justice, DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court bench on Monday (January 8) dismissed a petition challenging the constitutionality of S.15 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 (JJ Act) which provided for a preliminary assessment of Juveniles above the age of 16, charged with heinous crimes.
Refusing to entertain the petition, the bench, however, granted the petitioners the liberty to pursue their remedy under Article 226 before the Delhi High Court.
Case Title: JAIPUR VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD. & ORS. V. MB POWER (MADHYA PRADESH) LIMITED & ORS., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 24
Coram: Justices B.R. Gavai and Prashant Kumar Mishra
The Supreme Court in a recent decision observed that “the High Court, by the impugned judgment and order, could not have issued a mandamus to the instrumentalities of the State to enter into a contract, which was totally harmful to the public interest.”
The Court held that the High Court must exercise its discretionary power under Article 226 with great caution and should exercise it only in furtherance of public interest and not merely on the making out of a legal point.
Supreme Court Refuses To Interfere With Limits On Undertrial Prisoner Visits In Delhi Prisons
Case Title: JAI A. DEHADRAI AND ANR v. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR., Diary No.- 35777 – 2023
Coram: Justices Bela. M. Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal
The Supreme Court dismissed a SLP assailing the Delhi High Court's order which refused to interfere with its government's decision of restricting visits to jail inmates by family, friends, and legal advisers, allowing only twice a week.
Case Title: NATIONAL MEDICAL COMMISSION vs. HIMALAYAN INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES., Diary No.- 32618 – 2022
Coram: Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan
In another legal update, the Supreme Court is set to examine the validity of an Office Memorandum issued by the National Medical Commission stipulating that 50% of the seats in Private Medical Colleges “should be at par with the fee in the Government Medical Colleges of a particular State.”
The AHSI Association of Health Sciences Institutes has filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court challenging the NMC's decision. However, several High Courts were also seized with a similar matter. Considering the same, the Supreme Court allowed the transfer petitions filed by the NMC seeking the transfer of all similar matters to the SC.
Case Title: TUSHARBHAI RAJNIKANTBHAI SHAH vs. KAMAL DAYANI., Diary No.- 1106 – 2024
Coram: Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta
The Supreme Court came down heavily on the officers of Gujarat Police who took a man into custody ignoring the interim anticipatory bail granted to him by the Apex Court.
Expressing great dissatisfaction with the conduct of the police and the Magistrate, the Bench issued contempt notices to the Additional Chief Secretary of the Home Department of Gujarat Government, Commissioner of Police and Deputy Commissioner of Police, Surat, Police Inspector of Vesu Police Station. The Court also issued notice to the Additional Chief Magistrate, Surat, who remanded the petitioner to police custody despite the interim order of the Supreme Court.
Case Title: ALAGAMMAL AND ORS. V. GANESAN AND ANR., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 27
Coram: Justices Vikram Nath and Ahsanuddin Amanullah
The Supreme Court held that when a contract stipulates a specific time frame within which the consideration needs to be paid by the 'buyer' to execute the 'agreement to sale' by the 'seller', then the buyer must strictly adhere to such condition, otherwise, the 'buyer' can not avail a remedy of specific performance of the sale deed.
Case Title: SONESHWAR DEKA & ORS. V. BIRSING DEKA & ANR
Coram: Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court, in a case where the Gauhati High Court imposed costs of Rs 20,000 on an advocate for his attempt to mislead the court, requested the High Court to reconsider the same after the advocate tenders an unconditional apology. Additionally, the Top Court considered that the advocate was a junior at the Bar.
Case Title: NABENDU KUMAR BANDYOPADHYAY vs. THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 29
Coram: Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan.
The Supreme Court (on January 04) expressed dissatisfaction with the NGT's approach while dismissing an application. The application alleged that a waterbody/pond was being filled up. However, the NGT summarily dismissed the same without holding any inquiry. The Tribunal's findings were based only on certain photographs.
Discontent with the same, the Apex Court observed that when a citizen approaches the NGT with a grievance that a water body is being filled in, a different approach by the NGT is contemplated. It is not supposed to strictly apply the rigors of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Case Title: Container Corporation of India Ltd vs Ajay Khera and ors., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 31
Coram: Justices Abhay S Oka and Pankaj Mithal
The Supreme Court directed that the Union of India should formulate a policy of phasing out heavy-duty diesel vehicles and replacing them with BS VI vehicles. The policy should be framed within a period of six months., the Court said.
The case originated from concerns about pollution caused by heavy-duty diesel trailer trucks in and around Delhi, brought forward by a former executive at the Central Warehousing Corporation.
Case Title: THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERS V. YOGENDERA MOHAN SENGUPTA AND ANOTHER., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 32
Coram: Justices BR Gavai and Aravind Kumar
The Supreme Court approved the Shimla Development Plan, 2041 by holding that the development plan has been finalized after taking into consideration the reports of various expert committees and the studies undertaken with regard to various aspects including environmental and ecological aspects.
The Court found that the development plan, which has been finalized after taking recourse to the statutory provisions and undergoing the rigors thereto, cannot be stalled in entirety thereby putting the entire developmental activities to a standstill.
Coram: Justices Vikram Nath and Rajesh Bindal
Case Details: DINESH GUPTA v. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 33
The Supreme Court came down heavily on a litigant for misusing the legal system by lodging false and frivolous complaint with non-disclosure of necessary facts. The Court slammed the respondent for forum shopping and for registering FIR against appellants despite the commercial nature of dispute.
Condemning such intended acts of abuse of power, the Division Bench imposed the cost of ₹25 lakhs on the respondent.
Case Title: Dr Jaya Thakur & Ors. v. Union of India & Anr., Writ Petition (Civil) No. 14 of 2024
Coram: Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta
The Supreme Court agreed to hear Congress leader Jaya Thakur's plea challenging the constitutionality of Sections 7 and 8 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023. However, the top court refused to issue an immediate stay on the legislation.
Case Details: Nisith Pramanik v. State of West Bengal., Diary No. 950 of 2024
Coram: Justices Bela M Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal
The Supreme Court granted protection from arrest to Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) legislator and Minister of State (MoS) for Home Affairs Nisith Pramanik in an attempt-to-murder case registered in West Bengal. The protection order will operate till the Calcutta High Court hears his petition.
The BJP Member of Parliament (MP), representing the Dinhata Lok Sabha constituency, approached the top court after a division bench of the Calcutta High Court adjourned the hearing of his anticipatory bail plea last week without granting him relief.
Case Title: Sanjay Kundu v. Registrar General, High Court of Himachal Pradesh | SLP(Crl) No. 550-551/2024
Coram: Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court set aside the order of the Himachal Pradesh High Court transferring Sanjay Kundu IPS from the post of DGP of the State on the allegation that he was interfering with the fair investigation of a case.
The Bench expressed reservations about the manner in which the High Court passed the initial order ex-parte and then refused to recall the first order when the petitioner approached it.
Case Title: IN RE: TERMINATION OF CIVIL JUDGE, CLASS-II (JR. DIVISION) MADHYA PRADESH STATE JUDICIAL SERVICE, SMW(C) No. 2/2023
Coram: Justices BV Nagarathna and Sanjay Karol
In a suo motu writ petition registered in connection with simultaneous termination of services of 6 female civil judges by the Madhya Pradesh government, the Supreme Court issued notice to the Registrar General of the MP High Court.
Case Title: THE STATE OF KERALA V. UNION OF INDIA, ORGNL.SUIT No. 1/2024
Coram: Justices Surya Kant and KV Viswanathan
In a suit by State of Kerala challenging imposition of limits by the Union on the State's borrowing capacity the Supreme Court today issued notice to the Union Government.
During the hearing today, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal appeared for State of Kerala and submitted that the suit raises serious questions, including the one concerning Article 293(3). He requested that the prayer for interim relief may be considered, as the State has to pay pensions, etc.
Accordingly, the Bench issued notice in the State's application for interim relief as well, and listed the matter for January 25, 2024.
Case Title: S Rajaseekaran v. Union of India and others., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 35
Coram: Justices Abhay S Oka and Pankaj Mithal
Taking note of the dismal rate of grant of compensation under the scheme formulated by the Central Government for the victims of 'hit and run' accidents, the Supreme Court has issued a slew of directions.
The bench also suggested a revision of the compensation amount of Rs 2 lakh and Rs 50,000 for death and greivous injuries respectively arising out of hit and run cases.
Supreme Court Asks Lawyer Imprisoned For Contempt Of Court To Tender Apology Before Judges
Coram: Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
The Supreme Court asked a lawyer, who was sentenced to six months imprisonment by the Delhi High Court for contempt of court, to tender an unconditional apology before the judges against whom he made objectionable remarks.
'Untrustworthy Witness Statement' : Supreme Court Sets Aside Conviction In 1999 Murder Case
Case Title: STATE OF HARYANA v. MOHD. YUNUS & ORS., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 36
Coram: Justices M.M. Sundresh and Prashant Kumar Mishra
The Supreme Court, doubting the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses, set aside the conviction for the offences committed under Sections 302(murder) and 323(simple hurt) read with Section 34(common intention) of the Indian Penal Code.
Reversing the order and judgment passed by the High Court, the top court concurred with the finding made by the Trial Court that both the important prosecution witnesses made improvements in their statements. Therefore, when the statements are contrary, facts are twisted and improvements are made, no reliance can be made upon such statement.
Case Title: Naresh v. State of NCT of Delhi, Criminal Appeal No.1189/2012., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 37
Coram: Justices Bela M Trivedi and Ujjal Bhuyan
In a man's appeal challenging his conviction and sentence of life imprisonment for killing his wife, the Supreme Court recently observed that setting a person on fire is an act of 'extreme cruelty' and would fall under Section 302 of IPC (Punishment for Murder).
Dismissing the appeal, the Bench ordered that the appellant, whose sentence was suspended by the court in 2012 considering that he had undergone about 12 years of incarceration, surrender before jail authorities within 4 weeks.
Case Title: Birla Corporation Limited through its Managing Director v. Bhanwar Singh and Others, S.L.P.(C) No. 21211 of 2012 (and connected matters)., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 38
Coram: Justices Sanjiv Khanna and SVN Bhatti
Taking note of the history and legacy of the Chittorgarh Fort, Rajasthan, the Supreme Court issued directions for its protection against blasting activities being conducted within a 5 kms radius for mining of limestone (or other minerals).
As per the order, manual/mechanical mining operations are still permissible within the 5 kms radius, subject to a lessee possessing valid lease under law.
The Bench further directed constitution of an Expert Committee within 2 weeks, to undertake study of environmental pollution and impact on the Fort of blasting operations beyond the 5 kms radius. This Committee, to be constituted by Chairman, Indian Institute of Technology (Indian School of Mines), Dhanbad, Jharkhand, shall constitute a team of multi-disciplinary experts.
Constitution Bench Hearing- on minority status of the Aligarh Muslim University (AMU)
Case Title: ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY THROUGH ITS REGISTRAR FAIZAN MUSTAFA vs. NARESH AGARWAL C.A. No. 002286 / 2006 and connected matters
Coram: Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices Sanjiv Khanna, Surya Kant, JB Pardiwala, Dipankar Datta, Manoj Misra and Satish Chandra Sharma
The Supreme Court began the hearing of a batch of connected matters on the issue of minority status of the Aligarh Muslim University (AMU). Senior Advocate Dr Rajeev Dhavan opened the arguments on the AMU.
Drawing on the historical events that led to the culmination of the AMU Act, of 1920, Dhavan elaborated on the historical antecedents.
The Supreme Court in continuance of its hearing of the Constitution Bench matter on the issue of the minority status of the Aligarh Muslim University (AMU), noted that the requirement to 'administer' under Article 30 of the Constitution may not be absolute for an education institution to qualify the minority character.
While hearing the reference related to the minority status of the Aligarh Muslim University, the Supreme Court on Thursday (January 11) orally remarked that the protection of a minority educational institution under Article 30(1) is not lost merely because the minority community involves others in the administration.
"The object of Article 30 is not to ghettoise the minorities. So if you let other people associate with your institution, it doesn't detract from your character as a minority institution", observed Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud.
News Updates
Case Title: MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT FOREST AND CLIMATE CHANGE V. BIPLAB KUMAR CHOWDHURY & ORS., CIVIL APPEAL Diary No(s). 50124/2023
Coram: Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Dutta
In an appeal by Ministry of Environment, the Supreme Court has called for a report from the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) on the issue of pollution by Stone Crushing Units and as to whether these Units should be brought under the Schedule of the Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) Notification, 2006, thereby necessitating obtaining of environmental clearance.
The underlying issue in the matter was whether Environmental Clearance was required for stone crushing activity.
The Supreme Court on Monday (January 8) agreed to constitute a bench to hear a plea raising concerns regarding the collegium system in place for the appointment of judges in the Supreme Court and Higher Judiciary.
Advocate Mathews Nedumpara mentioned the petition, which seeks to abolish the collegium system, before CJI for urgent listing. The lawyer said that the recently retired judge Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul had highlighted 'faults' in the present collegium system in his interview to the PTI in December 2023.
Case Title: Satyendar Kumar Jain v. Directorate of Enforcement, Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 6561/2023
Coram: Justices Bela M Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal
In Aam Aadmi Party leader Satyendar Jain's challenge to denial of bail by the Delhi High Court, Senior Advocate Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi contended that no predicate offence could be made out against Jain, and as a consequence, there was no case under Prevention of Money Laundering Act as well.
It was submitted that no share was purchased by Jain in the relevant check period (2015-17). As there was no such purchase, there could neither be any DA (disproportionate assets), nor a predicate offence. In any case, Jain was not a public servant during the said period and hence the Prevention of Corruption Act was not applicable.
An application has been filed on behalf of Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray) questioning the impartiality of Maharashtra Speaker Rahul Narwekar in deciding the disqualification petitions filed against the members of the Eknath Shinde faction.
It is alleged in the application that the Speaker met Chief Minister Eknath Shinde at the latter's official residence on January 7, when just three days remain for the pronouncement of the verdict in the disqualification petitions.
[Also Note: The Maharashtra Legislative Assembly Speaker Rahul Narwekar held that Eknath Shinde led faction was the real Shiv Sena when the rival faction emerged within the party on June 22, 2022. He has refused to disqualify any member from both the factions, led by Shinde and Uddhav Thackeray.]
Case Title: Satyendar Kumar Jain v. Directorate of Enforcement, SLP(Crl) No. 6561/2023
Coram: Justices Bela M Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal
On Day 2 of arguments on merits in Aam Aadmi Party leader Satyendar Jain's bail matter, it was claimed before the Supreme Court today that there was not even any indirect evidence against the leader.
Senior Advocates Dr. AM Singhvi and N Hariharan, contended that the ED has changed the case against Jain from 'shareholding' in the companies (Paryas Infosolution, Akinchan Developers, and Mangalayatan Projects) to 'control' thereof. However, on the basis of evidence today, no case of 'control' by Jain is made out. In support of this contention, reliance was placed on the documents on record, including financial statements of the companies.
Case Title: Umar Khalid v. State of NCT of Delhi. Criminal Appeal No(s). 2826/2023
Coram: Justices Bela Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal
The Supreme Court adjourned the hearing of the petition filed by former JNU scholar Umar Khalid seeking bail in the Delhi riots larger conspiracy case. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, Khalid's lawyer, requested for adjournment as he is engaged in a Constitution Bench hearing.
The bench, though initially reluctant to adjourn the matter, ultimately agreed to post it on January 24 after repeated persuasions by Sibal.
Supreme Court Begins Hearing Pleas To Ban Cultivation Of GM Mustard
Case Title: Gene Campaign & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors. | Writ Petition (Civil) No. 115 of 2004 and other connected matters
Coram: Justices BV Nagarathna and Sanjay Karol
The Supreme Court began hearing the clutch of petitions seeking a ban on the commercial cultivation of indigenously developed genetically modified mustard, christened 'HT Mustard DMH-11', which in October 2022, received the imprimatur of the environment ministry. This is the first time a transgenic food crop is planned to be commercially cultivated in India.
Case Title: Sonu Agnihotri v. Chandra Shekhar & Ors., Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) Nos.12012-12013/2023
Coram: Justices Aniruddha Bose, PS Narasimha and Aravind Kumar
In a judicial officer's plea seeking expunging of remarks made against him by a Delhi High Court judge, the Supreme Court has sought the High Court's response through the Registrar General.
Stray Dog Issue | Supreme Court Lists Matter For Final Hearing On February 28
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 Sudhanshu Dhulia
The Supreme Court listed the matter concerning curbing stray dog attacks in the country for a final hearing on February 28, 2024. The Court also recorded that pleadings may be exchanged, if any, a week before the above-mentioned date. In the meantime, the parties were allowed to file their written submissions.
Case Details: Mohammed Nawab Malik v. the State of Maharashtra., Criminal Appeal No. 2415 of 2023
Coram: Justices Bela M Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal
The Supreme Court extended the interim bail granted last year to former Maharashtra minister Nawab Malik by another six months. Malik was arrested on February 23, 2022 by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) in a money laundering case, but was released on interim bail in August last year.
The Division Bench was hearing a special leave petition filed by Malik against a July 2023 order of the Bombay High Court declining the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) legislator's request for interim bail on medical grounds.
Case Title: Satyendar Kumar Jain v. Directorate of Enforcement, Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 6561/2023
Coram: Justices Bela M Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal
On the third day of Aam Aadmi Party leader and PMLA-accused Satyendar Jain's bail hearing, the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) objected to the release of the former minister on bail by arguing that he exercised de facto control over the companies allegedly at the centre of a purported money-laundering racket.
Case Title: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India | Writ Petition (Civil) No. 836 of 2020
Coram: Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta
While hearing a batch of petitions pertaining to the district-wise identification of minorities, the Supreme Court on Friday (January 12) expressed its disapproval over certain state governments' failure to submit affidavits and responses despite previous reminders.
The public interest litigants in this case has prayed for guidelines for the identification of minorities at the district level, with the stated objective of ensuring that only those religious and linguistic group that are socially, economically, politically non-dominant and numerically inferior get the benefits and protections guaranteed under Articles 29 and 30 of the Constitution.
Case Title: Tushar Gandhi v. State of Uttar Pradesh | Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 406 of 2023
Coram: Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan
In the latest development in the Muzaffarnagar student slapping case, the Supreme Court orally remarked that the state government had not acted in the manner expected after the incident.
The case relates to a primary school teacher in Uttar Pradesh's Muzaffarnagar instructing schoolchildren to slap their Muslim classmate, a video of which became viral on social media in August.
Case Title: Kerala Pravasi Association through its President Versus Union of India and Anr., W.P.(C) No. 882/2022., Diary No.- 31222 – 2022
Coram: Justices CT Ravikumar and Rajesh Bindal
The Supreme Court, while hearing a plea to constitute an independent expert committee for studying the efficacy of the Intra Dermal Rabies Vaccines (IDRV) administered to Humans, asked the Additional Solicitor General and Standing Counsel of Kerala to file their response within four weeks expeditiously. The Court termed this as a 'serious issue'.
