Supreme Court hears a suo motu plea on the rise in child rape cases and a corresponding delay in the probe and trial of these cases.
Bench: Justice Pankaj Mithal and
Justice Prasanna B Varale
ASG Aishwarya Bhati: 2019-2023 lot of developments have taken place including (the accused have been convicted)
ASG: This family is in Dehli.
Justice Pankaj Mithal: What about victim?
ASG: Victim is still getting CRPF security.
Justice Pankaj Mithal: If threat perception is there, the security has to be given. Merely the accused are in custody doesn't mean that security threat is gone.
Justice Pankaj Mithal: If there is threat perception...you have right to go to local police for security...if they don't provide then you have remedy to approach this Court.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Delhi High Court is hearing the petition filed by banned organisation Popular Front of India (PFI) challenging the order passed by Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) Tribunal declaring PFI as an unlawful association.
The matter is before the Bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela.
Additional Solicitor General S. V. Raju is appearing for the Centre. He has opposed the petition on the issue of maintainability.
Supreme Court hears plea by journalist @abhisar_sharma challenging FIR over YouTube video criticizing Assam govt’s “communal politics” and questioning the allotment of 3,000 bighas tribal land to a private entity.
Bench: Justices MM Sundresh and NK Singh
#SupremeCourt
The FIR has been filed in Assam under section 152 BNS (endangering sovereignty of the nation) among other sections.
Sr. Adv. Kapil Sibal: my lords this 152 is now an omnibus provision.
Justice Sundresh: FIR you challenge before the high court. Why are you bypassing the High Court? We’ll give you protection you go to the High Court. Just because you’re a journalist…
Sibal: some uniformity has to be there. They will lodge another FIR.
Justice Sundresh: even if we entertain they’ll lodge another FIR
Book launch: [In] Complete Justice ? The Supreme Court at 75
Justice AS Oka to speak shortly
Editor of the Book, Sr Adv Dr S Muralidhar: Earlier there was a court of virtual hearings, courts willing to adopt the technological mode...What I miss is a court with It's a more rushed court, more chaotic, more miscellaneous work and new players are law researchers and law interns. One law researcher was asked to draft two drafts of judgments one allowing and one dismissing the appeal... For Milord to choose from
Justice AS Oka: Cartoons speak more than the reading material in this book. Celebrations started after we completed 75 years of constitution.. for legal fraternity celebration was not required.. introspection was needed as to where the course correction was needed.
Justice Oka: The biggest mistake we did was to ignore the trial judiciary on such platforms for over 75 years and we discussed only Supreme Court and High Court. I agree with Sr Adv Jaising when she says that it is a myth that woman judges address best the issues faced by woman. I believe this book triggers a debate which is required. .. Do we have judges anymore who tells their wife that my dissent will cost my Chief Justiceship. Another facet which needs to be looked at is the case listings.. if we spend 6 hours in reading files everyday and then on cases, how do we deliver judgments?
Supreme Court heara a PIL seeking a media gag order in the case of Malayali nurse Nimisha Priya, who faces the death penalty in Yemen.
Bench: Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta
On August 22, the Court issued notice to Attorney General of India and orally observed that it would pass an order, if any, on Monday (today).
J Nath to Dr. KA Paul: What do want? Do you want nobody should come out and say anything to media....Leaned Attorney has said so that government of India will make nobody brief media. What else you want?
Supreme Court hears the Ranveer Allahabadia case where applications seeking respect for the dignity of disabled
AG R Venkataramani: I called for a meeting of all the stakeholders. There is some affidavit on apology etc. but the difficulty in a meeting of . .
Sr Adv Aparajita: Your lordships all the respondents have apologised.
Justice Kant: Respondent No 6 tried to portray himself as very innocent and then apologised. Anyways are you contemplating some guidelines ?
AG: some are in place we are examining. There cannot be a complete gag and that shall be difficult.
Justice Kant: It cannot be a reaction to a some incident. Policy is for future challenges. That's why we said even if you have some policy regime.. we will get some answers from experts as well.
Justice Kant: We are not shying away from taking strong steps