Allahabad HC directs that family members of the deceased victim i.e. the father, the mother, brothers and sisters shall also be present before this Court so that Court ascertains the facts and their version
concerned about the incidents leading up to Victims cremation, as alleged, have shocked our conscience, therefore, we are taking suo moto cognizance of the same.
"Shri Jaideep Narain Mathur, learned Senior Advocate and Shri Abhinav Bhattacharya, Advocate, who are practicing lawyers of this Court, as Amicus Curie and request them to assist this Court in the matter".
This is a time to strengthen our resolve to live up to the ideas which "Bapu" stood for, but, unfortunately ground realities are very different from the high values propagated and practiced by the Father of our Nation.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Book launch: [In] Complete Justice ? The Supreme Court at 75
Justice AS Oka to speak shortly
Editor of the Book, Sr Adv Dr S Muralidhar: Earlier there was a court of virtual hearings, courts willing to adopt the technological mode...What I miss is a court with It's a more rushed court, more chaotic, more miscellaneous work and new players are law researchers and law interns. One law researcher was asked to draft two drafts of judgments one allowing and one dismissing the appeal... For Milord to choose from
Justice AS Oka: Cartoons speak more than the reading material in this book. Celebrations started after we completed 75 years of constitution.. for legal fraternity celebration was not required.. introspection was needed as to where the course correction was needed.
Justice Oka: The biggest mistake we did was to ignore the trial judiciary on such platforms for over 75 years and we discussed only Supreme Court and High Court. I agree with Sr Adv Jaising when she says that it is a myth that woman judges address best the issues faced by woman. I believe this book triggers a debate which is required. .. Do we have judges anymore who tells their wife that my dissent will cost my Chief Justiceship. Another facet which needs to be looked at is the case listings.. if we spend 6 hours in reading files everyday and then on cases, how do we deliver judgments?
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.