Abhishek Manu Singhvi argues that the SC on August 21 had ordered for a hearing on Friday, August 23. Prosecution should not have acted in a way (by arresting Chidambaram on August 21) to render a judicial order ineffective.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta was present in the Court when an order for hearing was passed. His client (CBI) should not have acted in this way then, Singhvi.
#Breaking: Supreme Court dismisses SLP filed by Chidambaram against Delhi High Court order denying him protection from arrest as far as CBI case is concerned. Court says matter is now infructuous.
Chidambaram granted liberty to move appropriate Court for regular bail
Supreme Court now hears the SLP filed in relation to the cases filed by ED against P Chidambaram.
Sibal questions the handing over of certain documents in a sealed cover to the Delhi High Court. He says that P Chidambaram was not aware of these documents/notes.
If they discovered some material between the time FIR was filed and I was arrested, they should have summoned me and interrogated me. They cannot spring it like a surprise in the Court, Sibal.
The Will that was spoken about by SG in the earlier hearing is in public domain. The attachment of properties is known. They cannot just make statements like this. ED's only case is that he is not cooperating. This is not fair, this is media trial, Sibal
SG has contended discovery of large number of mails, bank accounts, among other things. All this was never out to Chidambaram. He was examined by ED thrice and only once by the CBI. Neither agencies put any of this before him.
They have to clarify when these documents and notes were discovered. If it was before questioning, why didn't they confront him and if it was after questioning, then why was he not called again, Sibal
SG says Chidambaram is being evasive but the Court should peruse the questions that were put to him and the responses given by him to ascertain if he was being evasive.
The case is that Karti Chidambaram used his relationship with P Chidambaram to influence public servants to secure ex-post facto FIPB approvals for the downstream investment in INX media, Sibal
The CA Bhaskar Raman got bail, Karti Chidambaram got bail, Indrani and Peter Mukherjea are on default bail and no sanctions have been sought for the six government secretaries till now, Sibal
P Chidambaram is being made vicariously liable. The ED's case seems to be that since he's Karti's father, he must be involved... There is no chargesheet filed naming him so prima facie no offence has been committed, Sibal.
Sibal cites the judgment of a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of Gurbaksh Singh on the issue of right of an accused for anticipatory bail.
If there is a money trail, there must be documents and the source of the monies traceable. What are they trying to find out? First probe, find out and then seek custody, Sibal
If something is found after probing documents, it should be put before the accused for him to give an explanation. Here it's a one way street where documents are produced in Court but not put before accused, Sibal
Great ignominy and humiliation is attached to an arrest. The moment someone is arrested, you destroy that man. You make believe that the man js guilty. That is what is happening here, Sibal
On the Delhi High Court, Sibal says what is the application of mind of the Judge when certain paragraphs are a word for word, comma for comma copy of the note submitted by the SG?
That is exactly my objection that while he (SG) can put whatever he wishes before the Court but it should be put before me first. These are the procedural issues that need to be addressed in a case which involves personal liberty, Sibal
There is also another serious issue that why was the order reserved for seven month? It took him (Justice Sunil Gaur of the HC) 7 months to decide that there was gravity in the matter, Sibal
Their case is, and it is mentioned in the judgment, that Chidambaram has been evasive during questioning, then Your Lordships must ask for transcripts and decide if he was being evasive, Sibal
They (investigating agencies) are saying that they have cogent evidence against the petitioner and at the same time they say that evidence is yet to be unearthed. Then what is this cogent evidence then? - Sibal
They are claiming that there is apprehension of tampering of evidence. Tampering of what? Properties situated outside? Or bank accounts? If that tampering is possible, my arms must be really long, Sibal
Supreme Court to continue hearing the case tomorrow at 12 noon. P Chidambaram to file a rejoinder to the ED's affidavit. Interim protection from arrest granted to Chidambaram in the ED case to continue till tomorrow.
Ceremonial bench to commence shortly on the last working day of Justices JK Maheshwari and Pankaj Mithal
#SupremeCourt
CJI: this is like a ceremonial constitution bench. (Smiles)
AG R Venkataramani: Most judges are regarded for compassion and creativity....the two judges are no exception.
SG Mehta: I have never seen his Lordships without a smile on their face. In Justice Maheswari we found an elderly friend who always helped us. Justice Mithal's court always had a warm and conducive environment..
Sr Adv Mukul Rohatgi: I appeared before Justice Mithal before AP HC and it seems like 6 months ago. But it has been 5 years. Other day Justice Mithal why are you here and not a junior. I like that. Your Lordships retire in pink of health. 65 is not a retirement age. Now we have to get used to the new lot which is coming now. It will take another 6 months.
NEET UG Paper Leak: Supreme Court to shortly hear pleas by various stakeholders seeking measures ranging from replacing the NTA to shifting NEET entirely to a computer-based format
Bench: Justices PS Narasimha and Alok Aradhe
#NEET2026
SG Tushar Mehta: as directed, we have filed an affidavit. It’s filed by Dr. Radhakrishnan. He headed the commitee. The recommendations, suggestions etc. were to be implemented this year.
Court: we want to ask, you originally were part of the expert commitee, how much of monitoring has happened about the implementation? How did this failure occur? Despite your monitoring on the basis of HPC recommendation, if this incident has happened, then there would be a problem with the recommendation. Or the monitoring may not have happened.
Radhakrishnan: we had recommended 60 suggestions. In the first 60, mostly they have been implemented. A few are still in the process. In 2025 NEET UG was conducted satisfactorily. There were incidents of power failures in some centres, otherwise the recommendations were implemented and it worked.
Radhakrishnan: there are two areas, the first thing we have done is involvement of all state governments and district admin for secured conducting of the test.
Court: what was not in contemplation of the HPC that lead to this?
Radhakrishnan: certain practices are under implementation. At the moment these are being taken care of for the Reexamination on May 21.
Court: monitoring commitee meets regularly?
Radhakrishnan: yes. Our target is to ensure reforms are implemented.
Court: the real problem won’t stop till actual accountability arises. Not in terms of so and so will be liable, it will be effective when we know which individual shoulders the responsibility lies. Unless you identify the duty holders it will be a diffused obligation.
SG Mehta: the buck must stop somewhere.
Court: unless we identify the responsibility. If something goes wrong, we don’t know. It is a most sensitive situation.
Mehta: Government is concerned about youth.
Court: you need to learn from other institutions.
Mehta: some new mechanisms are put in place for 21st examinations. It may not be appropriate to divulge what’s there. Otherwise it may defeat the purpose.
Court: Is there a regular office who conduct it? With institutional memory?
Mehta: the NTA is having institutional memory. But it does not have domain experts. We have got experts from the IIT system etc. they have been brought into the system.
[Regarding persistent delay in pronouncement of judgments by several high courts]
CJI Surya Kant: Amicus had filed four volume reports before this court compiling High Court wise data before us. All suggestions from HCs were also compiled for uniform judicial guidelines. We are of the view that this is a fit case under Article 142 for our intervention to pass uniform guidelines.
#BREAKING CJI: 1. A matter where judgment is reserved, judgment to be pronounced within 3 months of reserving. Faster decisions in matters of personal liberty etc.
2. Bail application orders ideally within next day and if reserved then decision next day
3. Bail orders to be communicated to jail authorities
4. Undertrial to be released same day of bail or maximum the next day.
5. The trial court to inform HC of compliance.
CJI: 6. operative part to be announced in court and reasons to be uploaded within 7 days. Cases such as habeas corpus, demolition etc.
7. Necessary changes to be made to the HC website by the Chief justice of the respective high courts.
Supreme Court recognises Election Commission’s power to conduct Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls under Article 324 and Section 21(3) of the RP Act, while upholding the Bihar SIR.
The Court says EC can undertake a limited electoral inquiry into citizenship, but cannot finally determine citizenship. Deleted persons must be referred to the competent authority under the Citizenship Act #SIR #supremecourt @ECISVEEP
Judgment in a nutshell👇
• Supreme Court holds that the Election Commission has power to conduct Special Intensive Revision under Article 324 and Section 21(3) of the RP Act.
• The ruling arises from the Bihar SIR, but the legal principle laid down concerns the EC’s broader power to undertake SIR exercises.
• Court says SIR is a special statutory mechanism distinct from ordinary revision under Section 21(2) and Rule 25.
• Bench holds that free and fair elections depend on the integrity, accuracy and credibility of electoral rolls.
• Court finds the Bihar SIR was backed by legitimate constitutional purpose and was not merely an administrative exercise.
• SC holds that the SIR framework satisfies proportionality, given the safeguards of notice, hearing, objections, speaking orders and appeal.
• Court says inclusion in electoral rolls creates a rebuttable presumption of validity, not an absolute bar on verification.
• EC can examine citizenship only for deciding inclusion or exclusion from electoral rolls, not to finally declare citizenship status.
• Deletion on citizenship doubts does not mean the person is declared a non citizen. Final adjudication lies with authorities under the Citizenship Act.
• EC must refer persons deleted from the 2003 Bihar roll on citizenship grounds to the competent authority within four weeks.
[What favours the petitioners in the Supreme Court’s Bihar SIR ruling]
• Court clarifies EC cannot finally determine citizenship and its findings are confined only to electoral consequences.
• SC says inclusion in electoral rolls creates a rebuttable presumption in favour of existing electors.
• Bench directs that persons deleted on citizenship grounds must be referred to competent authorities under the Citizenship Act within 4 weeks.
• Court emphasises notice, hearing, speaking orders, appeals and judicial review as mandatory safeguards against arbitrary exclusion.
Supreme Court to resume hearing today pleas challenging the 2023 law that replaced the CJI with a Union Cabinet Minister on the panel appointing Election Commissioners.
Bench: Justices Dipankar Datta and SC Sharma
The matter is adjourned. Tentatively posted on 30th July.
While the matter was getting adjourned, and the next date was being fixed, the bench discussed about Court vacations:
Adv Prashant Bhushan presses for the matter to be listed immediately upon reopening.
Court: we can have it in August.
Bhushan: not possible in July?
Court: first two weeks, it requires some time for the engine to warm up, after 6 weeks of holidays..
SG Tushar Mehta: the vacation is already curtailed.
Justice Sharma: our vacation is further curtailed by 2 weeks. I can go out only after 15th. And final hearing cases are being listed (during vacations).
#SupremeCourt to pronounce today its verdict on the batch of petitions challenging the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls in Bihar, a case that has triggered one of the most consequential constitutional debates on voting rights, citizenship verification and electoral integrity in recent years #SIR @ECISVEEP @_YogendraYadav @adrspeaks
The challenge before the Bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant raises critical questions on the EC’s powers under Article 326, the Representation of the People Act and whether the revision exercise risked large-scale disenfranchisement ahead of elections #SIR
During hearings, petitioners alleged the process could exclude genuine voters through onerous documentation requirements, while the EC defended the exercise as necessary to cleanse voter rolls and verify citizenship claims #SIR