Interesting observations from the #DelhiHighCourt today in a criminal contempt case filed by Delhi High Court Bar Association against one Kapil Kakkar who claimed on social media that the May 30 Saket building collapse was not just a civic failure but also involved judicial complicity.
During the hearing, Justice Neena Bansal Krishna noted that courts are increasingly facing "scandalous allegations" against judges on social media platforms.
#DelhiHighCourt
Justice Krishna questioned why intermediaries should wait for court orders before taking down content that makes such allegations against judges.
"Public memory is short. By the time the truth emerges, the damage is already done," Justice Krishna observed.
"We can only hope that the public doesn't pay any attention to such allegations," Justice Krishna said.
#DelhiHighCourt
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
In Supreme Court before Justice Vikram Nath and V. Mohana-
Petitioner appearing in person: Good Morning. Sir, the petition is maintainable, the prayers are maintainable and there is an extreme urgency.
J. Nath: Why don’t you go to the High Court?
Petitioner: Sir, because of the urgency of the case.
J. Nath: Acha, why? The High Court will not entertain urgent matters?
Petitioner: The prayers sought in the present writ petition are invoking the plenary powers of the Supreme Court.
J. Nath: High Courts have wider powers than Supreme Court.
J. Nath: Do you know that?
Petitioner appearing in person: Yes
Court: Dismissed as withdraw, with liberty to approach the High Court for appropriate orders.
Petitioner: Please do not dismiss this case. Even if i file the petition in High Court, the respondents would certainly move the Supreme Court through a Special Leave Petition if an order is passed in my favour.
J. Nath: Thank-you very much. Next case.
Petitioner appearing in person: No sir
J. Nath: This way, no petition should be filed in the trial court and high courts then. Everyone should come straight to the Supreme Court… the entire hierarchy should be finished?
Supreme Court to shortly pronounce its verdict in the batch of petitions challenging the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls in Bihar.
CJI Surya Kant begins reading from the judgment.
CJI: SIR is NOT IN CONFLICT with the Representation of the People Act, 1950 and the Rules framed thereunder. The impugned SIR does not supplant the Representation of the People Act and the Rules. Rather, it breathes life into the constitutional mandate under Article 324 within the precise statutory contours provided by Section 21(3). Therefore, it cannot be said that the Commission has acted in excess of its statutory powers.
🚨In Delhi High Court today: Justice Manoj Jain to hear the CBI’s plea challenging the discharge of Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia and all accused in the liquor policy case.
The matter was reassigned after Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma initiated contempt proceedings against them and transferred the case.
Matter taken up.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appears for CBI.
Advocate Zoheb Hossian appears for ED.
Court: Taking note of the counsels who are present for the respondents. There is no representation for Respondents 3, 8, 18, 19.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta: We have filed an affidavit stating that the notice of March 9 is served on all the respondents. Parties had appeared, filed an application and argued. Not going into merits of the case. This is a case of serious allegations, chargesheet was filed. Respondents filed discharge applications.
Judges of the Supreme Court of Bhutan along with other court officials to attend hearing in courtroom 1 today.
Senior Adv Jaideep Gupta: As far as social welfare and reform are concerned, I only wish to make one submission. Why are these concepts located within the constitutional provisions dealing with religion at all?
Gupta: The reason is that many social rules and practices historically came to be sanctified as religious customs. Therefore, if the State wishes to undertake social reform, it may inevitably have to engage with religion itself. That is why Constitution grants power to the State.
BREAKING: After Arvind Kejriwal, now Manish Sisodia (@msisodia) writes to Delhi High Court Judge Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, says HE WILL NOT PARTICIPATE further in PERSON OR THROUGH COUNSEL in CBI’s appeal challenging discharge in the Excise Policy case, citing “conscience” and concerns over appearance of impartiality.
🚨Manish Sisodia backs Arvind Kejriwal’s stand, says he is in “respectful agreement” with his Satyagraha-based refusal. Flags concerns over judge’s association with ABAP and children’s engagement with Union Govt panels linked to Solicitor GeneralTushar Mehta.
"I wish to state that two aspects of this case trouble me a lot. The first is the issue arising from Your Ladyship's repeated public attendance of the Akhil Bharatiya Adhivakta Parishad, a lawyers' organisation publicly understood to belong to the RSS. The second is the issue arising from the professional engagement of Your Ladyship's children on multiple Union Government panels, and the resulting appearance of closeness to the very law officers who now appear against me on the other side. Mr. Kejriwal's letter factually sets out the professional dependence of your children on Mr. Tushar Mehta who is solely responsible for marking the large number of case dockets to them, particularly your son,” Manish Sisodia’s letter reads.
Supreme Court lambasts West Bengal government over indefinite delay in completing Kolkata Metro’s Orange Line.
State of WB: Please give us time till May. Now elections are there.
CJI: Do not politicise everything.. this is a development issue.
Justice Joymalya Bagchi: For you festival is more important than development! You told High Court that you have festivals to take care of. Festival is more important than construction of transport. We do not expect democratically elected government to knock on our doors for this. We will not allow the state to use this to stall development again.
CJI: This was a fit case where your Chief Secretary, DGP should have been subjected to action. This shows complete deriliction of your constitutional duty. This is just an attempt to politicise an issue..