Supreme Court to shortly hear plea by 34 individuals from 34 different countries who had approached the top court challenging the MHA order blacklisting over 2,500 foreign nationals for their alleged involvement in #TablighiJamaat activities.
The matter to be taken up along with item 20 as prayers sought are similar.
Senior Adv Dr. Menaka Guruswamy: there are 8 individuals who have discharged pursuant to August 6 orders of this court as fast track court was asked to dispose off the matters. But these 8 have not been able to leave the country as lookout notices has not been withdrawn
SC: Where is SG Tushar Mehta? he had assured us in past that whatever needs to be done will be done. But there are still grievances. These are issues which can be sorted at your level (to ASG KM Nataraj)
SC: the persons who are discharged should be able to leave
Guruswamy: The more they overstay wrongfully they violate the term under their original visa. There is a list here which details out all the particulars. these 8 has no proceedings against them.
ASG Nataraj: we will seek instructions
SC: so far as the 8 persons are concerned, the names and case details are given. you have to make sure their travel plans are not impeded. Their visa must have expired by now
SC: we will take this case up on Thursday
Guruswamy: Purusant to Sept 1 order with reference to state of Bihar. You had said that Bihar counsel had assured that they will cooperate. Similar to Delhi, Patna HC was set to set up a fast track court to dispose off case. The counsel has not yet filed an application before HC
Guruswamy: We have filed an application in the HC but it is not listed yet
Adv Sahil Raveen appears for State of Bihar
SC: please take instructions on what the department has done after Sept 1 order.
The matter is listed for Thursday, October 15
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Bombay High Court will hear the PILs filed registering protest over the media trial being conduct in the reporting on the death of actor Sushant Singh Rajput today.
Bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice GS Kulkarni will begin the hearing shortly
In the previous hearing, Senior Advocate Devadatt Kamat continued arguments on behalf of the petitioners point out how the state had abdicated from its constitutional responsibilities by merely forwarding complaints to private organisations like NBA.
After hearing the case since its inception in October 2018, yesterday, a Spl MP/MLA Court had opined that the case ought to be transferred since it was not a case file against MP/MLA.
Bombay HC hears the anticipatory bail application of veteran actor Vikram Gokhale in connection with a case of alleged cheating and fraud over a 25-year-old land development project at Mulshi.
Sr. Adv. Shirish Gupte appearing for Gokhale argues that he was only the brand ambassador to attract people to the project.
He states that he was never on the board of the company Sujata Farms which is the company developing the project.
Court asks if there are any advertisement to prove Gupte's point.
Gupte: This project is 25 yrs old, the ads are 25 yrs old.
I can get it, but I do not have them now.
Supreme Court to shortly hear an anticipatory bail plea filed by former Punjab Director General of Police Sumedh Singh Saini---an accused in the 1991 Balwant Singh Multani murder case
Senior Adv Mukul Rohatgi: interest of the state is evident in this case. I will show you how gross and vindictive is the attitude of the case.
Senior Adv Rohatgi states the career credentials of Sumedh Singh Saini: :"he is a highly decorated officer. There are scores of death threats on this man. He took part in hundreds of operations and busted terror networks. When he was a DGP, he lodged five cases against current CM
Senior Adv Jitendra Sharma: I am not saying accused should not be handcuffed, but a request needs to be made before the magistrate for it
CJI: some prisoners are dangerous and they need to be handcuffed
Sharma reads SC verdict saying accused will not be handcuffed as a general rule.
CJI: a accused intends to assault the police and you want magistrate to ask him whether he wants to be handcuffed? Only a foolish person will say yes to handcuff. There are the ones who kill police