At least 3 important judgments will be pronounced tomorrow by Supreme Court
But the most important of those according to me would be the one on Tribunals because it could pronounce on issues touching upon Parliament and alleged circumventing of Rajya Sabha using money bill route
The Finance Act 2017 is under challenge in that case and one of the main grounds of challenge to it is that it was passed as Money Bill thus amounting to a fraud on the Constitution.
Since, the Rajya Sabha can only suggest amendments to money bills, all suggestions made by Rajya Sabha regarding the Bill were junked by the Lok Sabha and the Act came into force on April 1, 2017
A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court had dealt with a very similar issue last year - #AadhaarAct.
In a highly debatable judgment, Justice AK Sikri writing for majority had cleared the passage of the Aadhaar Act as Money Bill.
One judge had however dissented in #Aadhaar case holding categorically that the Passage of Aadhaar Act in the garb of a Money Bill was a fraud upon the Constitution.
That judge is also on the Bench tomorrow pronouncing the validity of the Finance Act, 2017.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
One of the most depressing stories to come out of court in recent times.
Man killed by police on ground that he was dacoit. Media also publishes the photo of the deceased as dacoit. Policemen involved are rewarded for the killing. But….(1/n)
The real dacoit found to be very much alive and in jail. The mother of the deceased man moves High Court for CBI probe. Police admit in court that the dacoit is alive but single-judge of HC still declines CBI probe. Hands over case to Police itself to probe fake encounter (2/n).
Mother moves Division Bench in appeal. Meanwhile, Police file closure report in the fake encounter but the investigating officer does not even find time to appear before the trial court after closure report is filed. (3/n)
Sudarshan News and media regulation: Hearing commences before Supreme Court.
Centre has filed a fresh affidavit calling for regulation of digital media before the court takes up issue of regulation of TV channels.
Senior counsel Mukul Rohatgi is appearing on behalf News Broadcasters Federation which has sought impleadment in the matter.
Rohatgi says NBF is the largest body of tv channels in India with 160 members from different parts of the country.
He submits News Broadcasters Association is not representative of news channels and seeks permission to file an affidavit to put forth a self-regulatory mechanism.
Hearing against Sudarshan News commences before the Supreme Court.
Sanjay Hegde enters appearance on behalf of Zakaf Foundation of India.
"I have a watching brief in this matter. We are not a party to this matter," says Hegde.
Justice DY Chandrachud tells Hegde that Sudarshan News has raised substantial issues against Zakaf Foundation.
"But we are not here to investigate into your client. But Sudarshan News has sought to justify their programme on the grounds of your source of funding"
Sudarshan News and UPSC Jihad: Hearing commences before Supreme Court.
Sr. Counsel Anoop Chaudhuri appearing for petitioner says Sudarshan news has filed an affidavit with vague allegations and submits he wants to file a rejoinder.
Shyam Divan says it was difficult to file a detailed affidavit in two days. We (lawyers) are all in different locations.
We were ambushed by various applications/ interventions, he submits.
Sudarshan News files affidavit before Supreme court defending its programme Bindas Bol and the use of the term "UPSC Jehad".
The affidavit largely focuses on foreign funding received by Zakat Foundation, an orgnisation which supports civil service aspirants.
Sudarshan News has claimed that some such funds received by Zakat Foundation are from terror-linked organisations.
The organisations/ individuals named in the affidavit are Madina Trust, Muslim Aid (UK), Zakat Foundation of America and Zakir Naik
The affidavit says the TV channel has no ill-will against any particular community or individual and do not oppose selection of any meritorious candidate
"There is no statement or message in the four episodes broadcast thatmembers of a particular community should not join UPSC"