•  •  Dark Mode

Your Interests & Preferences

I am a...

law firm lawyer
in-house company lawyer
litigation lawyer
law student
aspiring student
other

Website Look & Feel

 •  •  Dark Mode
Blog Layout

Save preferences
17 October 2015
SCOI Reports

Justice J Chelameswar, who joined the Supreme Court on 10 October 2011, has so far given four dissenting judgments, including the NJAC verdict delivered on 16 October.

16 October 2015
SCOI Reports

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.

15 October 2015
SCOI Reports

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£££

13 October 2015
SCOI Reports

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.

13 October 2015
SCOI Reports

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.

13 October 2015
SCOI Reports

SetalvadAs 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.

12 October 2015
SCOI Reports

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.

09 October 2015
SCOI Reports

Arguments in Rajbala vs State of Haryana] began in Court No.6 before justices J Chelameswar and AM Sapre on Wednesday, 7 October with petitioners’ counsel, Kirti Singh making her submissions first. She was followed by senior advocates, Sanjay Parikh and Indira Jaising on 8 October. Indira Jaising, who began her arguments at 2 p.m. was on her legs, when the Court rose for the day at 4 p.m.

07 October 2015
SCOI Reports

Heated exchanges were witnessed in Court No 6 of the Supreme Court between 2 and 4 pm in the hearing of the case of Nagrik chetna manch vs UOI The attorney general, Mukul Rohatgi, who argued in favour of modification of the Court’s 11 August order clashed with SA Shyam Divan, who represented the petitioners in the main case, and opposed the modification plea.

06 October 2015
SCOI Reports

In the Extra-Judicial Execution of Victim Families Association vs Union of India, which came up before the bench of justices Madan B Lokur and UU Lalit at Court 9 on Monday at 2.30 p.m., the amicus curiae, Menaka Guruswamy, proposed the setting up of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe the six fake encounters involving seven victims in Manipur, as a result of action by the security forces.

02 October 2015
SCOI Reports

A Supreme Court bench comprising justices Dipak Misra and Prafulla C Pant today invoked Sir Winston Churchill through late Justice VR Krishna Iyer, to direct the High Court of Manipur at Imphal to decide expeditiously the election petition against Mairembam Prithviraj, elected from the Moirang assembly constituency of Bishnupur district, Manipur, in the election held on 28 January 2012.

30 September 2015
SCOI Reports

In Arjun Gopal vs UOI filed in the Supreme Court, the three infants, all residents of Delhi, have sought the immediate intervention of Supreme Court against the inevitable and upcoming widespread use of firecrackers and fireworks and other products of the same classification, especially during the festivals of Dussehra and Diwali. The Supreme Court, their petition says, is bound under Article 32 to take interim steps in effectuating the people’s right to clean, healthy and breathable air under Article 21.

29 September 2015
SCOI Reports

The reported comments of the Chief Justice of India, Justice HL Dattu, while refusing to entertain a petition from a journalist from Chennai seeking a ban on the sacrifice of animals during religious festivals across the country, have led to considerable consternation.

29 September 2015
SCOI Reports

In a significant order, the social justice bench of the Supreme Court Justice Madan Lokur and Justice UU Lalit on Monday, 28 September, dismissed an application filed by the Government of Madhya Pradesh (GoMP) / Narmada Valley Development Authority (NVDA) seeking a ‘modification / clarification’ of the apex court’s previous judgements of 2000 and 2005, thereby denying right to land of a few thousand adult sons of the Sardar Sarovar Project (SSP) affected farmers.

28 September 2015
SCOI Reports

When the BJP formed the Government at the Centre in 2014 with an absolute majority of its own, it was widely expected that judicial activism, which was on the rise in the 1990s and 2000s when coalition governments with bare majorities were in power at the Centre, might well be on its decline.

25 September 2015
SCOI Reports

When the petition filed by Delhi Grameen Samaj and others against the Central Government’s Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (Amendment) Ordinance came up in court No.4 on Thursday, 24 September, it was a foregone conclusion that Justice JS Khehar, and Justice R Banumathi who heard it, would consider it infructuous, as the ordinance had already lapsed.