A Justice Ashok Bhushan led bench of the Supreme Court to hear a batch of petitions today seeking to postpone the NEET-UG exams set to be held on September 13.
There are three cases listed. Lead case of Keshav Maheshwari is set to be argued by @advocate_alakh .. the other two of Arijit Sau and Pragya Pranjal too seeks to postpone NEET-UG exams. Pleas filed through @anubha1812
Justice MR Shah: Mr. Datar, all arrangements will be made for the #NEET exams
Arvind Datar refers to UGC judgment by #SupremeCourt
Datar seeks to highlight the example of Bihar where there are only 2 exam centres
SC observes that there cannot be different dates for different States.
SC: Whatever date is fixed, there might be some difficulty
Datar urges for the exam to be considered to be postponed by three weeks
SC points out that a review petition was also dismissed
Senior Advocate KTS Tulsi arguing for petitioners: #COVID19 cases are increasing and now there are 90,000 daily case.
Tulsi shows example of the Bombay HC's recent order where the JC said those who could not appear for the exam should be appropriately considered @MPKTSTulsi
Justice Ashok Bhushan: Whether the students should be considered or not is for the body to decide not for this Court to pass directions on
@MPKTSTulsi cites the Disaster Management Act and says that the students are at a high risk of contracting the virus
Senior Adv Tulsi cites Article 21
Advocate Shoeb Alam now arguing: My petition (Arijit Sau) is different from the petitions so far and is not seeking for deferment of the exams
Alam: I want to point out some lacuna in the guidelines issued by the NTA
Adv Shoeb Alam Alam prays that there might be some facilitation for aspirants to reach the exam centres.
Alam: The local authorities may be directed to ensure that the guidelines are enforced
SC: All this will be done
Adv Shoeb Alam: A slight nudge from your lordships will go a long way. At a time when there is a cap on large gatherings, there are hundreds of students who have to go out to take the exams so a direction from the Court will go a long way
Supreme Court is hearing the plea filed by the Management Committee of Thakur Shri Banke Bihari Ji Maharaj Temple challenging the Uttar Pradesh government’s move to take over the administration of the famed Vrindavan temple through a statutory trust framework.
Senior Advocate Shyam Divan is leading arguments for the temple management
Senior Advocate Shyam Divan, appearing for the Banke Bihari temple Goswamis, tells Supreme Court that the current Goswami representatives in the High Powered Committee do not enjoy the confidence of the larger Goswami community.
Divan says 197 Goswamis from the Sayanthok and 46 from the Rajbhog gave consent through a Google form endorsing the representatives elected in the June 13, 2025 General Body meeting.
“There is a communication gap between the committee and the Goswami members,” Divan submits, adding that traditional rituals followed “for centuries” are not being adequately conveyed before decisions are taken.
He urges the Court to either accept the four representatives proposed by the Goswamis or conduct fresh elections. Alternatively, he suggests expanding the Goswami representation in the committee by adding three more members.
Divan also opposes changes made to temple darshan timings by the committee’s September 19, 2025 order, saying rituals and timings followed “since time immemorial” should not be disturbed.
Senior Advocate Shyam Divan: The deity is a living child. There is a period for the waking of the deity. There are rituals which are performed. There is an afternoon rest period, etc. Therefore, the timings should not be changed. This is something which is deeply embedded in the rituals.
The rituals are being performed. There are certain Goswamis there, but there is a lot of dissatisfaction amongst the members. They are saying, look, you cannot have this. The deity timings are now being shifted. This is not correct according to us.
This is a pro tem arrangement being made by a committee, an ad hoc committee appointed until the constitutional challenge is determined by the High Court. Therefore, the question we ask ourselves is, why should there be a change in timing?
This is something which is deeply embedded in the rituals. So we have raised it.
Supreme Court to hear the suo motu case focussing on alleged bias and irregularities in the probe into Twisha Sharma's death #TwishaSharma #SupremeCourt
CJI Kant: We are slightly pained. We request media not take statements of friends or relatives etc. the mother in law is a former district judge and it is unfortunate that it is being said judiciary is detailing the trial..
Sr Adv Siddharth Dave: I appear for the accused. My section 161 statement is in newspaper today
CJi: We are against the narrative that is being created. That is why learned CBI should take it over. We beleive the state police and judiciary
SG Mehta: This former judge has been giving interviews in some or other channel maligning the deceased. We requested her so many times to record her statement she does not want to do it. We were okay to go to her place also. But she is not cooperating.
SG Mehta appearing for the state of Madhya Pradesh
SG: now it has gone to CBI
CJI: yes the decision is very fair. That is why state gave it to the CBI.
Dave: the mother in law's statement was recorded thrice.
CJI: once state has entrusted CBI we don't have to ...
Sr Adv Sidharth Luthra: Let there be DoPT notification be out so that CBI can take it over.
Justice Bagchi: This is an administrative exercise between state and CBI now..
Supreme Court to resume hearing today ED’s writ petition against former West Bengal CM Mamata Banerjee and other State officials for their alleged interference in its probe and searches at the Kolkata offices of political consultancy firm I-PAC and its co-founder Pratik Jain.
@MamataOfficial
The hearing is adjourned.
Court: we will hear it after partial working days.
Justice PK Mishra: Mr. Kalyan Banerjee where are you?
Sr. Adv. Kalyan Banerjee: I am here virtually. The Hon’ble Chief Justice directed Monday and Friday will be in virtual, that’s why I’m in virtual.
Justice Mishra (in jest): he has permitted physically also now. Only for you the circular was changed. Now you have to appear personally.
Book launch: “The Constitution is my home” by Senior Advocate Indira Jaising.
CJI Surya Kant and Justice BV Nagarathna to shortly address the event.
Sr. Adv. Indira Jaising: CJI told me that has has been called out by the Prime Minister in relation to the BRICS judicial forum meeting.
Jaising’s discussion with senior journalist Sreenivasan Jain:
Jaising: the constitution is very personal home. In this country, the first question everyone asks is “Where are you from?” I found the answer. I said to myself I belong to the constitution of India.
Jaising: all governments regardless with which party they belong to have tried to shake the foundation of the constitution. The first time we saw it is when the emergency was declared. Currently also I believe that the constitution is under threat.
Court: the court has had detailed interaction with the parties. Today it considered what would be the immediate next step in the exercise undertaken in the present proceedings so as to take some real, effective steps on the ground.
Stray dogs case: Supreme Court to shortly pronounce verdict in its suo motu case to manage stray dog population across the country.
Bench: Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta, and NV Anjaria
The Court had reserved its verdict on January 29 after hearing the final leg of submissions made by various States, the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) and the Animal Welfare Board of India (AWBI).
Court: we have divided the judgement into theee parts. We have given detailed consideration to applications seeking recall of Nov 7 judgement. We have dismissed all the applications.
Court: In para 85 we have concluded- this courts finds no reason to interfere with the Nov SOP by AWBI. The challenge does not merit acceptance in the light of conclusions herein above. All IAs challenging the SoPs stands dismissed.