Supreme Court Bench headed by Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul takes up for hearing petition which had sought clearance of the protest site in Delhi's Shaheen Bagh where sit in protest against CAA was being staged.
Advocate Shashank Deo Sudhi declines to withdraw his petition.
Petitioner in person Amit Sahni: I have only thing to say that such kind of protests should not take place in future. Even yesterday there was a chakka jam in Haryana
Petitioner Amit Sahni: political compulsion cannot be the reason to continue such protests. Such protests cannot continue. Despite your direction to not block roads, some protests went on for 100 days. Keep this matter pending and pass directions
Adv Mehmood Pracha: if such protests are happening peacefully then no directions should be issued. Some persons were sent earlier in such protests to create a riot. This should not happen again
Pracha: State machinery was misused... Protests were proceeding for months there peacefully.
The aspect of violence is a crucial aspect which has to be considered.
(Pracha calls for a universal policy for holding such demonstrations)
Justice Kaul: There cannot be a universal policy because situations and facts are different every time.
Justice Kaul notes that #COVID19 pandemic led to a change in the situation so the experiment carried out by way of appointing interlocutors could not be seen.
Supreme Court heara a PIL seeking a media gag order in the case of Malayali nurse Nimisha Priya, who faces the death penalty in Yemen.
Bench: Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta
On August 22, the Court issued notice to Attorney General of India and orally observed that it would pass an order, if any, on Monday (today).
J Nath to Dr. KA Paul: What do want? Do you want nobody should come out and say anything to media....Leaned Attorney has said so that government of India will make nobody brief media. What else you want?
Supreme Court hears the Ranveer Allahabadia case where applications seeking respect for the dignity of disabled
AG R Venkataramani: I called for a meeting of all the stakeholders. There is some affidavit on apology etc. but the difficulty in a meeting of . .
Sr Adv Aparajita: Your lordships all the respondents have apologised.
Justice Kant: Respondent No 6 tried to portray himself as very innocent and then apologised. Anyways are you contemplating some guidelines ?
AG: some are in place we are examining. There cannot be a complete gag and that shall be difficult.
Justice Kant: It cannot be a reaction to a some incident. Policy is for future challenges. That's why we said even if you have some policy regime.. we will get some answers from experts as well.
Justice Kant: We are not shying away from taking strong steps
Goa High Court Bar Association felicitates Chief Justice of India BR Gavai
CJI BR Gavai: Now the registry examines and only in very rare matters we permit oral mentions in the Supreme Court of India. The sitting at Goa as a part of division bench, like in SC you don't know which case is next, in Goa we had variety of litigation...whether it be mining or personal laws.
CJI: I won't detain you all for long. For Goa standards, 7:30 pm is for something else.
CJI: I had decided that I will accept felicitations only at places where I was a member of the Bar or have worked there. This felicitation was to happen on July 19...and was to be the last one.
Supreme Court hears appeal against Allahabad HC order upholding the trial court’s order permitting a court-monitored survey of the Sambhal Masjid
Justice PS Narasimha: It is being argued that this case has to be seen from the lens of Places of Worship Act, 1991
Adv Vishnu Shankar Jain: Just by saying that the act is attracted does not attract the 1991 act.
SC: Question is survey arising out of 1991 act or the ASI act..
Sr Adv Huzefa Ahmadi: They say 1991 act does not apply..HC says there is no bar..I am in appeal and in meanwhile all surveys were stated.
Jain: On the face of it
Justice Narasimha: Yes you have a point that it is not concerned with 1991 act.. and HC gave finding against the Muslim side.. so we need to hear this.. the challenge is pending here...
SC: Mr Jain appearing for Respondent 3 to 8 takes notice of the SLP. It is surprising as to how two appeals have been filed by the same parties.
Jain: In court 4 item 10 has been dismissed.
Ahmadi: it is the mathura case...
SC: we were about to issue notice.
Justice Narasimha: Let us take a look at court 4 item 10 order.. we do not want to pass inconsistent orders. Let it be listed on Monday.
Supreme Court to resume hearing the Bihar SIR case today
Earlier the top court had asked the Election Commission of India @ECISVEEP to upload online the list of 65 lakh voters proposed to be deleted during the ongoing Special Intensive Revision
#SupremeCourt #BiharSIR_2025
Sr Adv Rakesh Dwivedi for the Election Commission of India: We have complied with it letter and spirit. Apart from BLA and panchayat we have also pasted this outside police stations.
#SupremeCourt #BiharSIR_2025
Dwivedi: Anyone wrongly excluded can file form with supporting documents.
Adv Prashant Bhushan: they have complied with the direction but the problem which has arisen