CJ: First of all, tell us is it within our jurisdiction? you are asking High Court to frame rules and guidelines to ban something. HC being an organ of the state cannot state what is to be enacted.
It is for the legislation to decide.
CJ: there are two ways of looking at it, an ordinary man would say switch off the TV.
But we would look at it from the point of law. What you are asking has to be provided by law, here there is no such law which is why you are asking us to frame the law.
Petitioner: but there is also fundamental duty have compassion for living beings.
There is some order which has been paseed but I have not annexed it, I am seeking leave to amend.
Court: First day you come and ask for leave to amend. You filed this petition in July.
Why don’t you incorporate all orders, and now you seek to amend.
CJ: You think you can amendment just for asking? You file petition, then you seek leave to amend after court says PIL not maintainable?
You withdraw petition and file a fresh petition.
Petitioner withdraws petition.
CJ: Dismissed as withdrawn.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
#Breaking
Delhi High Court holds that AAP and its leaders' allegations that Delhi LG Vinai Kunar Saxena was involved in corruption of nearly Rs 1400 crore during demonetisation is "completely unsubstantiated". #DelhiHighCourt@LtGovDelhi@AamAadmiParty
In his order passed today, Justice Amit Bansal holds that there is no material to substantiate the allegation that LG Saxena paid nearly Rs 80 crore to his daughter for renovating the KVIC lounge. #DelhiHighCourt @LtGovDelhi@AamAadmiParty
On the allegations of cash payments to weavers in Bihar, the court says that there is nothing in the Patna HC that personally indicts Saxena.
AG KK Venugopal: From the earliest year, the committee recommended that there should be an examination and i find that consistently acts after acts have been passed, committees, the law commission report have said that exam is necessary.
Constitution Bench headed by Justice DY Chandrachud to hear the #MaharashtraPoliticalCrisis matter between Eknath Shinde and Uddhav Thackeray
Bench will first hear whether EC can continue hearing proceedings to decide who would control party symbol, party name and identity
Sr Adv Kapil Sibal: How can the hearing proceed if this application is not decided now..
Sr Adv NK Kaul: this applications is about how EC is stonewalled from proceeding in the matter and has no connection with the main matter which larger domain of exercise powers by speaker
Kaul: disqualification of a member of a political party has no relation to the election symbol proceedings before the election commission. Such disqualified ones are even allowed to vote #MaharashtraPolitics
Constitution Bench headed by Justice DY Chandrachud to begin hearing the legal issue concerning scope of legislative and executive powers of the Centre and Delhi government over control of services in the national capital @AamAadmiParty@LtGovDelhi#SupremeCourt
Constitution Bench of #SupremeCourt led by CJI UU Lalit to continue hearing pleas challenging the validity of the 103rd Constitutional Amendment, which provides for 10% reservation for EWS, on the ground that economic classification cannot be the sole basis for reservation.
Adv Rahul Chitnis for Maharashtra says he has filed written submissions.
Counsel: I will add to AG Venugopal's submissions. Dr Ambedkar said that poverty should be the foundation for reservation. Now what's happening is instead of caste-less we're going...
#SupremeCourt is hearing a plea against illegal seizure of properties and the amendment which now gives power to police to release the properties
CJI: You have to come on a case basis.
Adv: our 8 brand new cars were seized, pesticide was taken
CJI: Come in that case
The PIL in this case is by the All India Transports Welfare Association
PIL says Section 102(3) CrPC is not being followed
Justice JB Pardiwala: then why cannot you invoke powers of the magistrate.
CJI: You do not want to dot that
Adv: police is not taking responsibility
CJI: grievance raised is that at times certain acts are committed by the police which are not clearly consistent with 102 CrPC and properties keep languishing under police custody causing anguish to transporters.