A Supreme Court bench led by Justice Ashok Bhushan to shortly hear Uutarakhand Chief Minister Trivendra Singh Rawat's plea challenging the Uttarakhand HC order asking for CBI FIR against him and quashing charges against 2 investigative journalists. @tsrawatbjp @samachar_plus
Attorney General KK Venugopal for @tsrawatbjp : The CM was not a party in this case and the HC ordered a CBI probe. This is against SC verdicts which disallows destabilizing the government as such verdicts demand resignation of the CM which is happening.
AG: The question in one of the cases by you states that can the court suo motu orders an investigation. In this case, no notice was issued to the Chief Minsiter.
AG: The HC has mixed up all grounds. The person against whom FIR is registered is bound to be heard especially in case of a person who holds a public office. In Shivakumar case it was stated that since a person was not party in this case, investigation could not be ordered
AG cites case laws to substantiate the point as how court cannot pass an order against a person without him being heard or being a party in the case.
AG: In this case the parties never sought an FIR to be registered against Uttarakhand CM @tsrawatbjp
AG: Transfer of probe from one agency has been there when there was a violation of fundamental rights or material threat to witnesses or creation of undue pressure. Thus a corrective role is to transfer the case.
AG: HC was not entirely wrong in law to state that even though he is not a party and no notice or hearing was conducted and behind his back a probe is ordered. Look at the consequence and surely HC knows what will happen thereafter. HC is not competent to do this.
Senior Adv @KapilSibal appears for Umesh Sharma: The matter is so serious and there are whatsapp messages from CM and there are bank statements linking Uttarakhand CM
Justice MR Shah: HC has excercised suo motu powers under Article 226 when there was no issue raised by you.
Justice Bhushan: The CM was not a party and such a drastic order has been passed
Justice Shah: Everyone was just taken by surprise
SC: this matter needs consideration and you need to reply.
Sibal: We have no problem if you stay it.
SC: issue notice and let respondents file reply in 4 weeks.
Supreme Court stays para 155.6, 155.7, 155.8 of the Uttarakhand HC judgment.
[BREAKING] Supreme Court Stays Uttarakhand High Court order directing CBI probe against Chief Minister TS Rawat
[Breaking] Chief Minister not a party and such a drastic order was passed: Supreme Court stays Uttarakhand High Court direction to register FIR against CM TS Rawat @tsrawatbjp barandbench.com/news/supreme-c…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Nyaya Forum in collaboration with Roots Resources interviews Senior Lawyer Nitya Ramakrishnan on various aspects of Criminal Prosecution, Lawyering and the Justice System.
Watch Live:
Mustafa Rajkotwala introduces Senior Advocate Nitya Ramakrishnan
Nitya Ramakrishnan: I was a student of philosophy. In some ways, this is a continuation. Principles of deduction, inference, use of language, text... Perhaps that is an explanation.
Kerala High Court will shortly pronounce orders in the anticipatory bail applications moved by dubbing artist Bhagyalakshmi and feminist activists Diya Sana and Sreelakshmi Arackal, accused of assaulting a YouTuber for his slurs on feminists.
An intervention application has been filed on behalf of the YouTuber Vijay P. Nair.
Advocate Arjun Venogopal is appearing on Nair's behalf.
Actor Abduction case: The victim and the prosecution have moved the Kerala High Court in the sexual assault and abduction case in which actor #Dileep is an accused.
The victim and the prosecution have alleged bias on the part of the Additional Sessions Judge handling the case, and seek a Transfer of the case to another Court.
The Kerala High Court is expected to take up the petitions today.
The prosecution had earlier petitioned the Trial Judge to halt the trial and allow them to approach the High Court. This was rejected last week. barandbench.com/news/litigatio…
#BombayHighCourt extends abeyance of orders wrt to demolition/eviction/dispossession till the December 22, 2020.
“any order or decree for eviction / dispossession /
demolition which has been passed by any court / tribunal / authority shall remain in abeyance"
The court had earlier extended the abeyance orders till October 31, 2020. However despite opening up of various sectors in State, the court opined that access to justice was still not easy.
Breaking: Plea in Supreme Court seeks to protect fundamental rights of people of District Mewat-Nuh as they are being "forcefully converted to Islam" and is in a pitiable condition compared to the "dominant Muslim group." #SupremeCourt #conversion @Districtnuh
The petition prays for restoration of land, properties, cremation sites of Hindus and form an SIT to probe instances of gang rapes, murders and kidnapping committed by "Muslims" upon the "Hindu residents of the place."
Plea says that after the establishment of Tablighi Jammat the Neo Muslims became fundamentalist Muslims and slowly
they over powered the entire area and at present they are more than 95% in the area after eliminating Hindus from the area.