Post

@VodafoneIN

@VodafoneIN

@VodafoneIN

More from @barandbench

Bar and Bench

@barandbench

May 29

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.

Read 13 tweets

Bar and Bench

@barandbench

May 29

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.

Read 7 tweets

Bar and Bench

@barandbench

May 29

[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.

Read 9 tweets

Bar and Bench

@barandbench

May 27

[SIR JUDGMENT SUMMARISED]
Thread 👇

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.

Read 4 tweets

Bar and Bench

@barandbench

May 27

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).

Read 8 tweets

Bar and Bench

@barandbench

May 27

#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

Read 4 tweets

Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

Bar and Bench

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

More from @barandbench

Bar and Bench

Bar and Bench

Bar and Bench

Bar and Bench

Bar and Bench

Bar and Bench

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Send Email!