CJI NV Ramana led bench to hear the public interest litigation (PIL) seeking probe against the hates speeches targeting Muslim community at the Haridwar Dharam Sansad
The plea has been filed by former Patna High Court judge, Justice Anjana Prakash, seeking directions for an independent, impartial and credible probe into the matter by a Special Investigation Team (SIT)
CJI: it appears some other bench is hearing this matter
Sibal: there are no similar petitions.
CJI: Do you know how many other petitions are there and how many IAs will be filed.
Jaisingh: it was our plea of 2019 when guidelines were issued
Sibal: there was a matter which was sent to you by Justice AM Khanwilkar led bench
Adv Kaleeswaram Raj: there is a hate speech issue pending before Justice DY Chandrachud led bench
Sibal: this is Dharam Sansad issue and we dont want it tagged. please hear this
Sibal: if no quick steps are taken such dharam sansads will be held in Una, Dasna, Kurukshetra and these events vitiate the entire country's atmosphere. it will erode the ethos of this democracy
Jaising: if the 2019 judgment would have been followed these dharam sansads would not have been organised
CJI: There are laws and there is a judgment of this court too. so now this is the first case on which law has to be laid down but she says 2019 case is there
Jaising: that issue was related to mob lynching due to cattle smuggling. Here there is an open call to exterminate Muslims #dharamsansad
CJI: There is an office report citing Skand Bajpai case before Justice Khanwilkar bench which was to be listed before appropriate bench. what is this?
Sibal: this was before any dharam sansads were held, these november pleas have nothing to do
CJI: The question is .. counsels are saying other judgments are there and implementation is needed. We are issuing notice and we will list it after 10 days. we will see if its connected then we will tag
Sibal: but the next dharam sansad is on January 23, pls have it on Monday
CJI: We allow the petitioner to bring the case before the notice of the authorities and how it is against certain penal provisions
Jaising: relevant provisions of the IPC are not being invoked. that is the issue
SEBI commenced its investigation in 2021 after several complaints where the admins purchased small cap stocks in bulk quantities, thereafter recommended the stock on the social media groups. Once the stock price jumped, they took a contrary view after selling the shares at profit
A Telegram Group "Bull Run Investment Educational Channel" had 51,980 subscribers and described themselves as “We are team of 4 Research Analysts with combined experience of 40 years.
SEBI used Telegram + WhatsApp + Truecaller to unearth details in this investigation.
#SupremeCourt to deliver order on the constitution of a Committee headed by a retired top court judge to probe into the security lapse during Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Punjab visit on January 5 @PMOIndia#PMSecurityBreach
CJI NV Ramana led bench to deliver orders now #SupremeCourt
CJI: we are of the opinion that this question cannot be decided by one sided enquiry and it has to be by a judicially trained mind.
Kerala High Court is hearing the anticipatory bail plea moved by Malayalm Actor Dileep in the fresh case against him for allegedly conspiring to kill police officers investigating the sexual assault case against him #Dileep#ActressAttackCase
Dileep, his brother P Sivakumar and brother in law TN Suraj have approached the court after FIR was registered against them by the Crime Branch of Kerala Police.
[Future-Amazon] #SupremeCourt to hear pleas by #Future Coupons & Future Retail against Delhi High Court’s order directing attachment of assets of Future group companies and its promoters for breach of Emergency Award. #Amazon#Reliance
CJI: There are lot of issues in the matter. One SLP is against Delhi HC’s order, that may not be relevant now. The other are two SLP’s filed by future group against J Midha’s order. Earlier we had passed an order.
What’s the relevance now Mr Salve ?
Sr Adv Harish Salve: Accordinv to us the order has to be vacated. Till the order is vacated directions will continue.
We had agreement about arbitration. They invoked arbitration based on agreement they had with Mr Rohatgi’s client (FCPL).
#SupremeCourt is hearing the plea by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) law makers, led by Ashish Shelar, challenging its resolution suspending 12 BJP Members of Legislative Assembly (MLAs) for a year @BJP4India
Adv Rahul Chitnis: I am led by Sr Adv Aryama Sundaram. an application has been made by them before the chairman of the assembly. yesterday hearing was given to them. we have also filed a counter
Matter passed over as petitioners counsel Senior lawyers Mukul Rohatgi and Harish Salve are appearing before other courts
#SupremeCourt is hearing a case in reference with the Delhi High Court Guidelines on the protection of vulnerable witnesses wherein, Section 3 of these guidelines define a vulnerable witness as a child who has not yet completed 18 years of age
Adv Vibha Dutta Makhija: I have spoken to Justice Gita Mittal and she has some suggestions, The bench may issue directions now. the vulnerable witness scheme deposition may be placed under NALSA. There can be a vulnerable witness deposition centre
Makhija: every high court should have such a kind of vulnerable witness deposition centre. There also needs to be continuous training which will be an ongoing subject
Justice DYC Chandrachud: Brother Justice Surya Kant, do you have the suggestions, we can read it together