Court: There was an application moved by Sharjeel, what has happened to his belongings?
Jail Superintendent: As per the statement of officers, he has not handed over anything. Only Rs 1000 was recovered which has been deposited with the Govt treasury
Sharjeel Imam: I handed over at least 50 pages of written material…
Jail official: As per duty register, it only mentions record of Rs 1,000 was made from him and it was deposited in the treasury.
Sharjeel Imam: That is simply incorrect.
Jail official: Can you name out an official?
Imam: Sir it was the duty officer ...
Court records in order: Reply has been given that there have been no belongings belonging to accused (Imam) deposited with Jail no.2. Jail official has reiterated the same. The applicant submits that he was told by jail official that his belongings have been recovered.
Court: Concerned jail official is requested to coordinate with the concerned Asst Jail Superintendent so that the matter can be disposed of
Jail official: If he could name the official..
Court: He is saying the Asst Superintendent and the Roshan officer.
Matter posted to Dec 7
Court now takes up the main matter.
Umar Khalid: I just want to reiterate that hardcopies of both chargesheets (should be provided). Its hard to find contents of chargesheets from newspapers everyday.
Court says it cannot order hard copies of the chargesheets to be provided now as its earlier order directing hardcopies has been stayed by Delhi High Court.
Court: It can't happen right now. Question of hardcopy is pending with the Delhi HC. It is beyond my power now
Court asks if softcopy should be provided to Khalid or his counsel
Khalid: How would I access a soft copy in jail?
Court again says it cannot order for hard copies now since the matter is pending in HC
Adv TrideepPais: I am counsel for Umar Khalid, kindly provide him soft copy
Court asks if Sharjeel Imam would also want a soft copy of the charge sheet.
Imam: What would I do with a soft copy in jail? We can't access soft copy. It may be handed to my counsel.
Adv Surabhi Dhar requests Court that both chargesheet and supplementary charge sheet should be provided.
Court: Don't worry, all of you will get an order from the court in the next hour.
Safoora Zargar, who was granted bail earlier, Ishrat Jahan, Meeran Haider, Tahir Hussain, Gulfisha, Shafi-Ur-Rahman, Tasleem, Natasha Narwal, Saleem, Athar Khan also among those present during the virtual hearing today.
Meeran Haider: Is this option of getting soft copy available to us as well?
Court: It was given to the counsel, at this stage please consult your lawyer.
Court says on Dec 22 it will be providing it to the Jail superintendent to provide it to Umar and to Sharjeel's counsel.
Court says it is posting the matter on December 22 for scrutiny.
Court to SPP Amit Prasad: Since all the accused are linked, we will provide it to everybody
SPP agrees.
Court: Is softcopy prohibited to be inside jail?
Jail official: Pendrives are not allowed in jail for security reasons.
Sowjhanya Shankaran, appearing for Asif Iqbal says that pen drives have been allowed in Jail no. 6 where women are lodged, but not in the jails where the men are lodged.
Shankaran: In the jails where the men are, neither are emails been responded to nor are they allowed to be given a pen drive, nor are they given access to a computer which is there in the library.
Shankaran: Nor are we allowed to print pages of the chargesheet and send to them.
So effectively, there is no manner in which they can effectively read the chargesheet, except through screenshare when we talk to them once or twice a week.
Shankaran: They may clarify why it is allowed in some jails and not in others
Jail official: I am not aware of Jail no. 6. I have not seen pen drives allowed in Jail 2 because of security reasons. There is every chance of getting it misused.
"We are proud as members of Bar to be stakeholders in judicial system which protects rights of people. Supreme Court has played a stellar role on the sentinels of democracy."
During a hearing before Bench of Justices SS Shinde and MS Karnik they indicated that they will begin physical hearing of matters from December 1, 2020.
Justice Shinde: We will hear for 4 hours everyday. We also have fundamental rights!
Justice Shinde added that they have been facing various issues with virtual hearings.
Shinde: From morning to evening we only hear sound. Advocates do not have proper system we cannot hear them properly. We understand there are atrocities committed everyday.
A CJI SA Bobde led bench to shortly deliver judgment on the Skoda Volkswagen India’s appeal seeking quashing of an FIR registered in Uttar Pradesh over alleged emission cheat devices installed in its cars. @SkodaIndia @volkswagenindia #SupremeCourt
The Allahabad High Court had in October dismissed the Volkswagen India’s plea for quashing of an FIR dated July 10 registered against it in Noida for installing “cheat devices” in its vehicles. #SupremeCourt
Senior Adv A M Singhvi, appearing for @volkswagenindia had stated that directions of NGT slapping a fine on the manufacturer over the cheat devices had been stayed by the Supreme Court earlier in 2019 and the new FIR is also based on similar allegations. @DrAMSinghvi
#SupremeCourt bench led by Justice AM Khanwilkar to shortly take up plea demanding a judicial inquiry into an incident from Aurangabad, Bihar in which a District Judge, Dr. Dinesh Kumar Pradhan was allegedly threatened, abused and chased by a police sub-inspector.
The petition has drawn a parallel between the 1989 Nadiad incident of Gujarat with that of the current one. The Nadiad case dates to 1989 when the Chief Judicial Magistrate was beaten, handcuffed, paraded and molested by police @BiharPoliceCGRC
The plea states that the sub-inspector was accompanied by paramilitary personnel on a flag march when he attacked Dr Pradhan when he was out on an evening walk.