Supreme Court Weekly Round Up, July 5 To July 11, 2021

JUDGMENTS THIS WEEK1. 'Delhi Can Ill-Afford Another Riots; Role Of Facebook Must Be Looked Into': Supreme Court Upholds Delhi Assembly SummonsTitle : Ajit Mohan & Others vs Legislative Assembly, National Capital Territory of Delhi and others Citation : LL 2021 SC 288The Supreme Court has refused to quash the summons issued to Facebook India Managing Director Ajit Mohan by the Peace and Harmony committee of the Delhi Assembly Committee seeking his appearance in an enquiry related to Delhi Riots.However, the Court held that the Delhi Assembly's enquiry cannot encroach into "prohibited domains" of law and order and criminal prosecution, as they are subjects under the domain of the Union Government. Therefore, the Court held that any representative of the petitioner can deny answering any question by the committee if it falls within the prohibited domains.Ajit Mohan had approached the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution challenging the summons issued by the Peace and Harmony committee of the Delhi Assembly, headed by Raghav Chadha MLA, to probe the role of fake social media posts in creating communal riots in North East Delhi in February 2020.The Court rejected the argument that the Delhi Assembly has no legislative competence to enquire into the matter of Delhi riots. The committee has right to seek information on any matter related to peace and harmony without encroaching in any subject of the Union under the 7th schedule. Also Read: Facebook Can't Disrupt India's 'Unity In Diversity' Claiming Ignorance Or Lack Of Pivotal Role : Supreme Court2. Recovery Of Weapon Used In Commission Of Offence Is Not A Sine Qua Non For Conviction: Supreme CourtCase: Rakesh vs. State of UP [CrA 556 OF 2021]Citation: LL 2021 SC 282For convicting an accused recovery of the weapon used in commission of offence is not a sine qua non, the Supreme Court observed while upholding a conviction of a murder accused.The bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud and MR Shah observed that minor contradictions which do not go to the root of the matter and/or such contradictions are not material contradictions, the evidence of such witnesses cannot be brushed aside and/or disbelieved.In this case, the accused were convicted under Section 302 r/w 34 of the IPC for having killed one Bhishampal Singh in an incident which happened on 28.01.2006. In appeal, one of the contention raised on behalf of the accused was that as per the ballistic report the bullet found does not match with the fire arm/gun recovered and therefore the use of gun as alleged is doubtful and therefore benefit of doubt must be given to the accused is concerned.3. CB Judgment Which Held Delay Beyond 45 Days In Filing Written Statement Before NCDRC Can't Be Condoned Applies Only Prospectively: Supreme CourtCase: Dr. A Suresh Kumar vs. Amit AgarwalCitation: LL 2021 SC 290The Supreme Court reiterated that the Constitution Bench judgment in New India Assurance Company Limited vs. Hilli Multipurpose Cold Storage Private Limited [(2020) 5 SCC 757, which held that the delay beyond the period of 30+15 day (45 days) in filing the written statement cannot be condoned by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission operates only prospectively.In this case, the application for condonation of delay was filed prior to the judgment of the Constitution Bench [ 04.03.2020] with a delay of 7 days beyond the period of 30+15 days (45 days). NCDRC rejected the application for condonation of delay in filing the written statement citing the Constitution Bench judgment. Against this dismissal, the party filed appeal before Apex Court.4. Grant Of Benefits Of Higher Pay Scale To Central/State Govt Employees Stand On Different Footing Than That By An Instrumentality Of The State: Supreme CourtCase: Punjab State Co-operative Milk Producers Federation Ltd. vs. Balbir Kumar Walia [CA 7427 OF 2011]Citation: LL 2021 SC 291The grant of benefits of higher pay scale to the Central/State Government employees stand on different footing than grant of pay scale by an instrumentality of the State, the Supreme Court observed.The bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Hemant Gupta allowed the appeal filed by Punjab State Co-operative Milk Producers Federation Ltd.against the judgment of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana which held that the Federation is a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India and that the employees are therefore entitled to pay scale equivalent to their counterparts in the State of Punjab from 1.1.1986, though the revised pay scale was allowed by the Federation w.e.f. 1.1.1994.IMPORTANT APEX COURT UPDATES1. IT Rules : Supreme Court Posts Centre's Plea To Transfer Petitions Filed By 'The Wire', 'The Quint' & 'LiveLaw' On July 16The Supreme Court this week posted to July 16 the petition filed by the Central Government seeking to transfer to the top court petitions filed in High Courts of Delhi and Kerala challenging the Information...

Supreme Court Weekly Round Up, July 5 To July 11, 2021

Nupur Thapliyal

Tags