#SupremeCourt hears matter where the Court ordered that any application filed before any court seeking default bail on the basis of Ritu Chhabaria judgment should be deferred
SG : one Mr X files 32 petition saying husband is in jail allow me send home cooked food, then chabaria also says my husband is also in jail, therefore tag the matter, the issue in both is whether homecooked food be allowed
SG: this gets dismissed, he files an application- chargesheet is pending, the DB takes the view that once you file chargesheet even with 170(a), he will get default bail .....all over India people began filing default bail application- incomplete chargesheet entitled me for default bail
SG: another case was challenged in Delhi HC, HC says Iam bound by the SC decision .....therefore Iam requesting that mylords may take up SLP, and be kept in a bench of three judges, let the first SLP be on board and the law be settled
SG: this is the problem, Iam not against an individual, whether recall is maintainable, the recall is not
CJI: we can examine the issue, but where is the question of recalling the judgment ?
SG: I will show how the law is misused, somebody filed a pilot petition, on homecooked food, in that they file for default bail, simply read between the lines mylords
CJI: the other matter?
SG: its listed before mylords, pls see item 36
SG refers to the following order on deferring default bail applications :
Supreme Court Asks All Courts To Defer Applications For Default Bail Based On 'Ritu Chhabaria' Judgment Which ... livelaw.in/top-stories/su…
SG: the moment this order goes, 1000s of applications will be filed for default bail saying that 60-90 days have gone and chargesheet had to be filed
Counsel for the respondents submit that IA was filed prior to the notice being issued in the writ petition
SG: 100s for default bail started coming, therefore we had to pray for stay
SG: kindly call for records, some serious fraud being played
CJI: we will place before a 3 judges bench
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
#SupremeCourt hears pleas seeking restoration of statehood to Jammu&Kashmir
Sr Adv Gopal S appears for the applicants seeking directions for restoration
Gopal S refers to the decision in In Re Article 370 of the Constitution of India
The court directed that steps shall be taken by the Election Commission of India to conduct elections to the J&K assembly by September 30. Further, it stated that the restoration of statehood shall take place as soon as possible.
Telangana MLC Nominations | #SupremeCourt modifies its interim order dated August 14, 2024 that stayed the judgement of the High Court quashing the recommendation and nomination of Konda Ram and Amer Ali.
The Court deleted the sentence ordering a stay on the impugned judgement.
In that order, the Court had also stated that the nomination of the members will be subject to the outcome of the present petition challenging the High Court judgement.
The present petitions have been filed by BRS leaders Dasoji Sravan Kumar and Kurra Satyanarayana, who were recommended by the government in 2023 under the Governor's quota, but the recommendation was refused by the Governor.
#SupremeCourt hears plea filed by #Kerala Governor (Chancellor of APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University) against HC order which upheld quashing of 2 temporary appointments to the post of Vice-Chancellor made by the former #Governor
Bench: Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan
The Kerala Government has moved a fresh application challenging the notification issued by the Chancellor (Governor) re-appointing Dr. K. Sivaprasad as the temporary Vice-Chancellor of the APJ College.
Attorney General for India R Venkataramani, appearing for the Chancellor and Senior Advocate Jaideep Gupta, for the State Government.
#SupremeCourt hears writ petition filed by 'Foundation for Independent Journalism' (a non-profit which runs #TheWire) and The Wire's Founding Editor Siddharth Varadarajan challenging Section 152 of BNS (which is stated to have brough back the #sedition law)
Bench: Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi
Sr Adv Nitya Ramakrishnan (for petitioners): This Court recently passed an order issuing notice on another petition challenging S.152...the new provision is vague but same in effect
J Bagchi: Is the potentiality of abuse a ground to declare a law unconstitutional? Show us an authority on that. There's difference between implementation and power to legislate
Ramakrishnan: Vagueness is an accepted ground
Court: There has to be a clear threat to national sovereignty, otherwise section is not attracted
Nityakrishnan: S. 152 a sheer expression without anything more.
J Kant: How can it be statically defined that what will be an act of endangering sovereignty? For instance, one can argue that political dissent can't endanger sovereignty...Inviting legislature to define 'endangering sovereignty' is a big danger
SG Tushar Mehta highlights that now there is a new explanation
#SupremeCourt to hear today petitions challenging the Election Commission of India’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in #Bihar.
Bench : Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Baghci.
Follow this thread for live updates.
#ElectionCommissionOfIndia #BiharSIR2025
On July 28, the Court had refused to stop ECI from publishing draft electoral rolls for Bihar on August 1
On this date, Justice Kant said that ECI was merely scheduled to publish a "draft" list and that the Court can ultimately strike down the entire process if any illegality is found
The bench orally told ECI to consider at least the statutory documents of Aadhaar and EPIC
Justice Kant impressed upon ECI that instead of "en masse exclusion", there should be, "en masse inclusion"
#SupremeCourt #BiharSIR
On July 29, responding to the apprehensions that 65 lakh voters are going to be excluded from the draft list to be published by ECI, the Court orally said that if there is any mass exclusion, then it will step in.