#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: CS Vaidyanathan citing precedents on adverse possession and ownership.
"There has never been any adverse possession in this case. Hindus have always expressed their desire to worship at this place", Vaidyanathan.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: Discussion now happening on how question of adverse possession will arise only if the property is alienable.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: The property itself being birthplace of Ram and a deity, it is res extra commercium. Thus, there is no question of anyone putting up a mosque there and claiming adverse possession, CS Vaidyanathan argues.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: There cannot be a destruction of an idol or temple. Even if there is no temple, the place itself has sanctity which will always remain, CS Vaidyanathan.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: The property is res extra commercium and cannot be transferred, sold, alienated or dealt with in any manner, argues Vaidyanathan.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: In Hindu law unlike in Mohammaden law, a person in the capacity of trustee or Shabait cannot alienate the property, submits Vaidyanathan.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: Discussion happening now on whether property can be alienated and when the same can be done.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: Their suits having been dismissed as time barred, how can they grant relief to them in my suit when most of the findings are in my favour, Vaidyanathan asks.
"I am. I am defendant no. 20 in suit 4", replies PN Mishra.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: I will argue that based on our doctrine, tenets and beliefs, it is a temple. I will start with Atharva Veda, submits PN Mishra.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: It is our case that Babur never built a mosque there and Hindus have been worshipping at that place all along, submits PN Mishra.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: PN Mishra relying on Skanda Purana, Valmiki Ramayana to argue on exact location of Ram Janmasthan.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: Hindu texts as the basis for faith is not disputed; what we really need are objective parameters, documentary evidence for temple, Bench tells PN Mishra.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: Bench is more interested in objective evidence than references to scriptures.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: Justice Chandrachud asks what is the relevance of who built the mosque - be it Babur or somebody else?
Was there a mosque? Thats what is relevant, Justice Chandrachud to PN Mishra.
Once territory of Awadh was annexed to British empire, all structures raised on the soil also got annexed to Britain, Sinha says.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: Bench objects, says territory annexed means sovereignty is lost; Does not mean all structures in the territory is vested with the empire.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: Sinha says he did not think his turn to argue would come today.
"I thought I would be asked to argue at the very end", says Sinha.
"Is anybody in suit no. 5 ready to argue", asks CJI Ranjan Gogoi.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: Now Senior Advocate Ranjit Kumar making arguments for plaintiff Gopal Singh who died in 1986 and his son has been substituted.
He is plaintiff in suit no. 1, defendant no. 1 in suit no. 4 and defendant no. 1 in suit 5.
Sonam Raghuvanshi case: Supreme Court to shortly resume hearing the State of Meghalaya’s plea seeking cancellation of the bail granted to Sonam by the High Court.
Bench: Justices MM Sundresh and PB Varale
Sonam is accused for the murder of her husband Raja Raghuvanshi during their honeymoon last year. She was granted bail by a trial court, which was upheld by the High Court.
Delhi High Court to hear the appeal filed by Gitanjali Angmo, wife of activist Sonam Wangchuk, challenging a single judge order rejecting her plea to discharge Wangchuk from Safdarjung Hospital and transfer to Medanta Hospital.
The matter is listed before Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia.
From the government's side, Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta, ASG Chetan Sharma and standing counsel Ashish Dixit will appear.
Senior advocate Akhil Sibal is likely to appear on behalf of Angmo.
Can a law graduate be denied enrollment as an advocate merely because there is a pending criminal case against them? Supreme Court hears
Bench: Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and R Mahadevan
The case concerns KR Sudersan, a Chartered Accountant by profession who also completed his law degree. When he applied to enroll as an advocate, the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry rejected his application. The Bar Council cited a pending criminal case against him involving Section 120B (criminal conspiracy) read with Section 420 (cheating) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The Bar Council's rejection was rooted in a 2017 judgment by the Madras High Court. That order had directed Bar Councils to prevent the enrollment of law graduates with pending criminal cases. It was intended to be a "temporary measure" to keep people with criminal backgrounds out of the profession until the legislature amended the laws.
Supreme Court hears plea by Delhi Police against Delhi High Court’s decision to allow Devangana Kalita, an accused in the Delhi riots conspiracy case, to inspect the unrelied documents in malkhana - a secure storage room or warehouse inside a police station where physical evidence and seized properties are stored.
Bench: Justices Aravind Kumar and Vipul M Pancholi
ASG SV Raju (for Delhi Police): inspection is not warranted. She is not entitled to any documents till the charges are framed. What is the purpose of inspection at this stage? This is unrelied upon documents. I’ve got extracts of judgements on this point. Only prosecution documents are to be looked at.
Raju: please have a look at the Sarla Gupta judgement. Trial starts after charges are framed. Before commencement of trial they have no right to inspect. Trial has not started now. Suppose she is discharged, where’s the question of inspection?
CJI: There is lack of uniformity in facilities for retired judges. Some states are giving all that is needed. But some states do nothing at all
Justice Bagchi: Security of one police officer for five years is reasonable for a high court judge..because they deal with sensitive issues also.
CJI: See the clause Rs 15,000 for secretarial services, security, travel etc
Adv: Yes the multiplier is low. But we are giving 50,000 also
CJI to SG Mehta: The govt should constitute a committee.. the issue is some basic amenities to be provided for HC judges. There is a need for uniformity. Centre can prescribe some norms as centre also releases some funds. If centre does not constitute then we have to
CJI: It appears that the Union of India is also a rightful stakeholder, especially when we expect that a part of the differential burden ought to be shared by the Union and the States in a defined manner.
There can indeed be no doubt that these facilities must be ensured on a uniform basis, as there is no reason whatsoever for such amenities to vary from State to State.
Keeping this perspective in mind, we have impressed upon the Union of India to constitute a committee to lay down uniform guidelines and also the manner and mechanism for financial assistance.
Such a committee shall be constituted within two weeks. Thereafter, the committee shall submit its recommendations to the Union of India and also place the same before this Court within three months from the date of its constitution.
List this matter after three months.
Sr Adv Amit Sharma: On the last occasion, Your Lordships had directed all the High Courts to file affidavits indicating whether they were facing any difficulty pursuant to the directions passed by this Hon'ble Court. All the High Courts have filed their compliance affidavits.
I would only request that the learned Amicus prepare a compilation of those affidavits and place it before this Hon'ble Court, so that if any further directions are required, the Court may consider passing them
Delhi High Court to hear at 2:30 pm the plea filed by Gitanjali Angmo, the wife of activist Sonam Wangchuk, seeking to declare his confinement at Safdarjung Hospital as unconstitutional and permit transfer to a hospital of his choice.
The urgent hearing will take place before Justice Mini Pushkarna.
The hearing will commence at 3pm. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma and Standing counsel Ashish Dixit are likely to appear.