The Bench and the Bar

The future independence or otherwise of the judiciary will be decided today in the fourth judges case, ruling on the validity or otherwise of the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC).

Chief Justice HL Dattu, who led the five-Judge Constitution Bench, had a surprise in store after hearing rival contentions for and against relaxing the 11 August interim order in order to exempt more schemes from its purview.

Retired Supreme Court judge Markandey Katju has castigated the Supreme Court for its judgment against fired Gujarat police service officer Sanjiv Bhatt on his blog.

The Supreme Court on Thursday stayed the operation of Maharashtra Police Act that prohibited dance performances at eating places, beer bars and restaurants.

Noting that the said provision was brought back in the Maharashtra Police Act in 2014 after being held ultra vires in 2013 by the top court, the bench of Justice Dipak Misra and Justice Prafulla C Pant said that it is “appropriate to stay the provision” that prohibits the dance performances.

However, the court made it clear that the dance performances should not be remotely explicit of any kind of obscenity.

Angry exchanges between senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the social activist Teesta Setalvad and her husband, Javed Anand, and the Solicitor General, Ranjit Kumar, marked the hearing before Court No 3 at 2pm before justices Anil R Dave, Fakkir Mohammed Ibrahim Kalifulla and V Gopala Gowda.£££para£££

The Delhi high court on Tuesday made it clear that it will allow to only CNG-based taxi vehicles to run in the national capital and asked Uber India to inform when it can replace the diesel cabs with these.

The uncertainty surrounding the Supreme Court’s extension of protection from arrest of social activist, Teesta Setalvad and her husband Javed Anand, will be cleared tomorrow, 14 October, as matter has been listed before justices Anil R Dave, Fakkir mohammed Ibrahim Kalifulla and V Gopala Gowda at 2 p.m. at Court 3. The bench will hear the matter till 2.55 p.m.

The composition of the Constitution Bench on Aadhaar, which begins its hearing from 2 pm tomorrow, had led to an uncertainty as to how a five-judge bench could decide the question whether the right to privacy is a fundamental right, when a similar question was decided by a eight-judge bench.

Taxi operator, under fire, fires back as Ola can’t seem to get a break...

The Supreme Court today dismissed the plea by sacked Gujarat cadre IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt seeking an SIT probe into allegations that he had hacked into the email account of the then additional advocate general of Gujarat, Tushar Mehta, and tampered with it.

Mehta is at present the additional solicitor general mainly representing the central government in the Supreme Court.

An apex court bench of Chief Justice HL Dattu and Justice Arun Mishra while rejecting Bhatt’s plea asked the trial court to complete the hearing as expeditiously as possible.

The verdict was pronounced by Justice Mishra.

It also rejected Bhatt’s plea for an SIT probe into the allegation that he had forced his official driver to file an affidavit that he drove him to then chief minister Narendra Modi’s official residence on Feb 27, 2002 where Modi allegedly asked his officers to let people vent their anger in the wake of Godhra train carnage.

Read judgment PDF

As item 8 came up in Court No.3 at 11:30 AM on Monday, 12 October, before justices Anil R Dave and Adarsh Kumar Goel, the principal judge, Dave, showed considerable reluctance to extend the protection given to social activists Teesta Setalvad and her husband Javed Anand from arrest by the Gujarat Police, as sought by their counsel, senior advocate, Kapil Sibal.

Tomorrow, on Tuesday 13 October, the SC delivers will deliver judgment in Narendra Modi-baiter Sanjiv Bhatt’s plea to constitute a SIT to probe his allegations against Gujarat Government’s collusion with the riot-accused, and shield him from harassment.

The Delhi high court heard first arguments on Monday in the infringement claim by the US footwear company against two Indian rivals that have released similar plastic clog-style shoes.

Calling it a case of obvious imitation, Akhil Sibal, […] counsel representing Crocs India said, “I am in the market since 2004 and have a formidable reputation in the market. Uniqueness of the product which is the selling point of the product is the look of the product.”

- via Mint.

A rape-victim progressed to the statement-recording stage before the magistrate in her rape-complaint, 28 years after she filed a police complaint alleging rape, reported The Hindu.

“We got the victim to record her statement in the court of Principal District and Sessions Judge Bandipora on 6 October. The rape case had been filed in 1987,” public prosecutor Shafeeq Ahmad Bhat was quoted as saying in The Hindu’s report.

It was reported that the victim’s statement could not be recorded before the court for nearly three decades as the prime accused in the case was absconding. Two of the accused have died during the course of the trial, the third accused is in custody. Now, the prime accused has been asked to appear before 5 November at the court through a public notice published in newspapers, otherwise the court would attach the property of the accused.

The incident occurred in 1987 when the prosecutrix was 17 years old. She was abducted from her home and confined to a hotel in Srinagar where she was allegedly repeatedly raped by the accused for 12 days.