Supreme Court is set to hear today a case stemming from the Hathras incident, focusing on the relocation and rehabilitation of the victim’s family.
Bench: Justices PS Narasimha and Alok Aradhe
Bench: Justices PS Narasimha and Alok Aradhe
Counsel for Petitioner: pursuant to my lords order rejoinder has been filed.
Counsel: This was that hathras matter. It concerns SC/ST Act. Rule 15 says you need to have contingency plan dealing with victim protection.
Is the matter over in High Court?: Court
Counsel: No it’s pending.
Court: why is this continuing when it’s pending.
High court order has rejected three parts. It has rejected relocation of family from UP: Counsel
Counsel: No it’s pending.
Court: why is this continuing when it’s pending.
High court order has rejected three parts. It has rejected relocation of family from UP: Counsel
How are you simultaneously proceeding two jurisdictions?:Court
Court is going through the order passed by the High Court.
Petitioner: Mylords may have page 66, what I’m attempting to bring to my lords attention is that when they had not entertained our plea seeking transfer to Delhi.
State counsel; after this we had passed another order where we said we will transfer you to Aligarh or Kasganj.
State counsel; after this we had passed another order where we said we will transfer you to Aligarh or Kasganj.
State counsel: this issue is pending and very much alive. The high court was not happy with our stand.
State counsel reads high court order.
Advocate Mehmood Pracha: kindly hear me my lords.
Court: what we propose to do is that we will say govt order is subject matter to the high court. High court will take it over.
Pracha: we approached this court because high court said they can’t pass resident order due to jurisdiction difficulty . (Transferring to Delhi)
Pracha: we approached this court because high court said they can’t pass resident order due to jurisdiction difficulty . (Transferring to Delhi)
Court dictates order.
We don’t need to actually hear anybody for the reason that this a case where high court is following the matter: Court
Order: The present SLP is against an interlocutory order passed by the High Court on 27.06.2022. This order was issued by the High Court as an interim measure, and it is also evident from the record that the High Court has, in fact, been monitoring the case from time to time.
Order: It has been brought to our notice that a Government Order has been issued, and in this order, the Government has taken the following decisions: […]
This order is also the subject matter of proceedings before the High Court. The High Court has called for a response from the Government regarding the correctness of the order, on the basis of the challenge raised by the petitioner booked in: Order
We are of the opinion that it would not be proper for this Court to consider the order dated 22.02.2025 for two reasons: Order
Firstly, the present SLP is limited to the interim order dated 27.06.2022, and much time has passed since its issuance: Order
Order: Secondly, the subsequent order is presently under review before the High Court. We request the High Court to take up the challenge to the said order and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
Order: The Court accordingly disposed of the matter and requested the High Court to dispose of the application expeditiously.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
