The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to hear pleas challenging the Centre's decision to block a BBC documentary on the 2002 Gujarat riots. A bench comprising Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and justices P S Narasimha and J B Pardiwala took note of the submissions of lawyer M L Sharma and senior advocate C U Singh seeking urgent listing of their separate PILs on the issue. At the outset of the proceedings, lawyer Sharma, who has filed a PIL in his personal capacity, mentioned the plea, saying that people were being arrested. "It will be listed on Monday," the CJI said. Senior advocate C U Singh mentioned a separate plea on the issue filed by veteran journalist N Ram and activist lawyer Prashant Bhushan. He mentioned how the tweets by Ram and Bhushan were deleted allegedly by using emergency powers. He also said that students in Ajmer were rusticated for streaming the BBC documentary. "We will list," the CJI said. Lawyer Sharma filed the PIL against the Centre's decision to block the .
A fresh application has been moved before the Supreme Court urging that the matters related to alleged forcible religious conversions be taken up by a larger bench of five judges as they involve the interpretation of the Constitution. A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud is scheduled to hear the batch of pleas on Monday against anti-conversion laws of several states regulating religious conversion due to interfaith marriages and on matters related to alleged forcible conversions. The fresh application is filed by advocate Ashwini Upadhyay, who is among the petitioners. He has asked the court to refer the petitions to a larger bench saying there are several questions of laws involved which require the interpretation of the Constitution. He raised questions like whether the previous judgments of this Court interpreting Article 25(1) of the Constitution are grossly erroneous in so far as they upheld the word propagate would include entitlement to convert. "Whethe
This comes after Kiren Rijiju criticized the SC's collegium system of seeking RAW and IB inputs on the appointment of judges in the High Courts
A plea has been filed in the Supreme Court seeking a direction to the Centre and others to take steps to create an appropriate system which empowers citizens to petition Parliament and seek initiation of deliberations on issues highlighted by them. The plea came up for hearing on Friday before a bench comprising justices K M Joseph and B V Nagarathna. The bench asked the counsel appearing for petitioner Karan Garg to serve a copy of the plea to the Centre's lawyer and posted the matter in February. Advocate Rohan J Alva appeared for the petitioner. The plea has sought a declaration that it is the fundamental right of citizens under Articles 14, 19(1)(a) and 21 of the Constitution to directly petition Parliament to seek initiation of a debate, discussion and deliberation on the issues highlighted by them in their petitions. "The present writ petition prays that it is imperative for the respondents (Centre and others) to take substantive steps in order to ensure that citizens can ha
The chances are that as the din over the Karnataka election gathers steam, these things will be quickly forgotten
The Supreme Court on Friday refused to pass any order on a plea alleging that former IPL commissioner Lalit Modi made "scurrilous" remarks against former attorney general and senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi in a social media post. A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and M M Sundresh said parties are mature enough not to make such statements and asked the lawyers to sort out the issue. "It is nothing but extension of outburst of a family member. Don't take it too far. Whenever you start fighting out in public, it is always detrimental...We are not passing orders but you use your good office to ensure that remedial measures are taken," the bench observed orally. On August 1 last year, the Supreme Court appointed former apex court judge Justice R V Raveendran as a mediator to settle a family property dispute involving the former IPL head and his mother Bina Modi. Senior advocate Rohatgi is one of the counsels representing Bina Modi in the vexatious property dispute. At the outset, senior
Aam Aadmi Party's mayoral candidate Shelly Oberoi moved the Supreme Court on Thursday demanding the mayoral election be conducted in a time-bound manner, party officials said. The Delhi mayor election was stalled on Tuesday for the second time this month as the House was adjourned indefinitely by the LG-appointed presiding officer following a ruckus by some councillors. Accusing the BJP of hooliganism and halting Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) House proceedings, AAP National spokesperson Saurabh Bharadwaj said that the Leader of the House Mukesh Goel and mayor candidate Shelly Oberoi approached the top court to allow the mayoral elections be conducted in a time-bound manner. The case is likely to be taken up on Friday, AAP leaders said. Bharadwaj said that the party has also sought prohibition on voting by aldermen as per law. We have placed two major demands in the Supreme Court, the first is to elect the mayor in a time-bound manner and form the government in the MCD. Seco
Changes in Android will have far-reaching consequences
The Aam Aadmi Party has moved the Supreme Court over the repeated adjournments of mayoral polls in Delhi
The Supreme Court has ruled that when a victim dies after a lapse of considerable time due to injuries inflicted by an accused, it would not diminish the liability of the perpetrator in a murder case
It should not be challenged, yet judges should not select judges
Catch all the latest news and updates from around the world here
Says will take time to make all the changes that CCI has asked for
Google said on Wednesday it will allow device makers in India to license its individual apps for pre-installation and give an option to users to choose their default search engine
The Supreme Court on Wednesday questioned the CBI and the Gujarat government as to why they want to send social activist Teesta Setalvad and her husband Javed Anand back in jail after they have been out for over seven years on anticipatory bail. A bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Abhay S Oka and BV Nagarathna said, "Question is how long can you keep someone in custody. Seven years have passed since anticipatory bail was granted. You want to send her back to custody. Advocate Rajat Nair, appearing for the CBI and the Gujarat government said some additional material needed to be placed before the court with regard to the cases and, therefore, four weeks time may be given. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal and advocate Aparna Bhat, appearing for Setalvad and her husband Anand, said in one of the proceedings in which the CBI has come in appeal, anticipatory bail was granted following which a charge sheet was filed and after that regular bail was granted to her. He said since a regular b
The Supreme Court on Wednesday asked a special court in Ghaziabad, which has summoned journalist Rana Ayyub in a money laundering case lodged by the Enforcement Directorate (ED), to adjourn the proceedings scheduled for January 27 to a date after January 31. The apex court said it will hear on January 31 the petition of Ayyub challenging the summons issued to her by the special court. A bench of Justices Krishna Murari and V Ramasubramanian was informed by advocate Vrinda Grover, appearing for Ayyub, that the petitioner has been summoned by the Ghaziabad court on January 27. "List on January 31. In the meantime, the Ghaziabad special court is requested to adjourn the proceedings...fixed for January 27 to a date after January 31," the bench said. The top court said this order is being passed because the hearing could not be concluded before it on Wednesday due to paucity of time and it is not a reflection on the merits of the matter. At the outset, the bench asked why the petition
Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud Wednesday said the electronic Supreme Court Reports (e-SCR) project will now start providing apex court judgements in various Indian scheduled languages from Republic Day. As soon as the bench assembled for the day, the CJI told the lawyers the apex court will operationalise the part of the E-SCR project on Thursday for providing verdicts in some local scheduled languages free of cost. "Apart from the e-SCR, we also have now 1091 Supreme Court judgements in local languages which will be available on the Republic Day," he said. There are of 22 languages in the Eighth Schedule of the Constitution. They include Assamese, Bengali, Gujarati, Hindi, Kannada, Kashmiri, Konkani, Malayalam, Manipuri, Marathi, Nepali, Oriya, Punjabi, Sanskrit, Sindhi, Tamil, Telugu, Urdu, Bodo, Santhali, Maithili and Dogri. The apex court verdicts, as part the e-SCR project, will be available on the apex court website, its mobile app and on the judgment portal of
The basic structure of the Constitution has authority
Intelligence agency officials work in a secret manner for the nation, said Kiren Rijiju
Top court says it is it is more concerned about the risk factors of GM Mustard