Senior Counsel Ranjit Kumar arguing today on behalf of plaintiff in suit no. 1, Gopal Singh.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: Ranjit Kumar relying on certain exhibits which had been produced by him in trial court in Section 145 CrPC proceedings.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: Ranjit Kumar placing reliance on am affidavit filed by one Abdul Gani as per which Mosque was erected by demolishing Ram temple but in spite of erection of said mosque the Hindus did not give up possession and were all along worshipping idol there.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: Ranjit Kumar placing reliance on more such affidavits by Muslims in Section 145 proceedings.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: Bench asking him whether those Muslim persons were cross examined to determine the veracity of contents of affidavits.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: Ranjit Kumar admits they were not cross examined but those persons had come forward and made these statement, so an inference can be drawn
"I am not saying what they said should be taken as gospel truth. But nobody has objected to what they have said"
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: Ranjit Kumar citing judgments to explain the scope of concept of 'Hindu'.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: Idol worship or rituals or ceremonies may not be practised by all persons though they may be professing Hindu religion, Ranjit Kumar reading out excerpts of judgments dealing with scope of Hindu and Hinduism.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: My right to worship is an unfettered right which arise due to centuries of worship that has been happening at the site, Ranjit Kumar concludes his submissions.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: Senior Advocate VN Sinha resumes, reiterates that the disputed land had become part of British crown on annexation by British.
Unless the land was leased out, the land was vested with the British crown
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: Senior Advocate Sushil Kumar Jain now begins his second round of arguments. He had not completed his arguments earlier.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: Sushil Kumat Jain reiterates on behalf of Nirmohi Akhara that it had Shebaitship.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: Suit no. 4 by Muslim parties is barred by limitation since the limitation ran from 1934 and not 1949 as claimed, Sushil Kumar Jain.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: Discussion now on Nirmohi Akhara's stance on whether they are claiming title or not.
Is there a contradiction in the stance taken by them earlier in HC and now?
CJI Gogoi asks Sushil Kumar Jain to respond on the same.
Whether chargesheet filed without Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) report in case under NDPS Act, 1985 can be termed as 'incomplete report' under CrPC? #SupremeCourt to shortly hear the matter
A three-judge Bench of Justices Surya Kant, Sudhanshu Dhulia and Ujjal Bhuyan will also examine various related aspects that concern the fairness and efficacy of the trials under the NDPS Act
#SupremeCourt to shortly hear appeal by Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) against 2023 Delhi HC decision ruling that application for drawing sample of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substance before Magistrate u/s 52A of NDPS Act should be made within 72 hours @narcoticsbureau
In May 2023, the High Court had observed that such an application cannot be moved at the “whims and fancies” of Narcotics Control Bureau, being the prosecuting agency.
When matter came before Supreme Court earlier, the Court had orally remarked that Section 52A is enabling not mandatory.
Supreme Court to shortly deliver judgment laying down pan-India guidelines on use of bulldozer by state governments as a punitive measure to demolish house or shop of a person immediately after he or she is named as accused of an offence
#SupremeCourt
Judgement to be delivered by a bench of Justices BR Gavai and KV Vishwanathan
#SupremeCourt #bulldozer
Supreme Court Bar Association holds farewell for CJI DY Chandrachud #SupremeCourtofIndia
Sr Adv Rachana Srivastava, VP SCBA: CJI Chandrachud was a part of 23 constitution benches. Your journey in the legal world has pushed boundaries. You leave behind a court which has hope for all of us. You had unwavering dedication to the rule of law.
Sr Adv Kapil Sibal, President SCBA: when you have to journey the judge of any judge what is the benchmark. We can criticise a judge all we want. You have to judge the man in the backdrop of the times we live in. When we discuss him, his manner, his affability which is of one of the greatest judges of this country.
Ceremonial bench on the last working day of CJI DY Chandrachud
CJI Chandrachud along with CJI Designate Sanjiv Khanna, Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
#SupremeCourt
Attorney General R Venkataramani: Recently in Brazil after the conference ended everyone started dancing. what if I ask everyone here to dance on your retirement and I am sure most will vote in favour of me.
SG Tushar Mehta: Complete impartiality in dispensation of justice. We were never hesitant in good or bad matters before you. For govt we won few we lost many but we knew that we did not get an opportunity to convince the court and put our point forward. My lord has always taken a stand as the karta of the family
DYC will really be missed.
#BREAKING Supreme Court to State of UP: How can you just enter someone's home and demolish it without following course of law or serving notice?
CJI DY Chandrachud: We are not inclined to accept the request of the State of UP to adjourn the proceedings since pleadings are completed and the court is required to evaluate the materials placed before to decide legality of action.
#SupremeCourtofIndia @myogioffice
CJI: The following position emerges from narration of facts: state of UP has not produced original width of state highway notified as national highway, no material was placed to show whether any inquiry was conducted to figure out encroachers, there is no material produced to indicate that land was acquired before demolition was carried out. The state has failed to disclose the precise extent of encroachments, the width of the existing road, the width of notified highway, extent of property of petitioner which feel within central line of highway and why the demolition was needed beyond the area of alleged encroachment. NHRC report shows demolition was far in excess than the area of alleged encroachment. #SupremeCourtofIndia
#BREAKING
CJI: The demolition was carried out without any notice or disclosure to the occupiers of the basis of the demarcation or the extent of demolition to be carried out. It is clear demolition was high handed and without the authority of law. The petitioner states the demolition was only because the petitioner had flagged irregularities in road construction in newspaper report. Such action by the state cannot be countenanced and when dealing with private property law has to be followed.