JS Khehar
In a clear message to senior lawyers that they could not take liberty with the court by making a last minute request for pass-over or adjournment of a matter listed for hearing, a Supreme Court bench on Tuesday withdrew from hearing the matters for an hour after in four of the first five matters, as junior lawyers sought pass-overs repeatedly.
What could have been a complicated case before the Supreme Court, turned out to be a much simpler affair, with the bench comprising of justices JS Khehar and Arun Mishra reading out the report submitted by the Medical Board of seven doctors who examined the rape survivor, who is in her 24th week of pregnancy.
Solicitor General Ranjit Kumar today told a Supreme Court bench of justices JS Khehar and Arun Mishra that the government would constitute a medical board to examine a rape survivor tomorrow, who has challenged section 3(2)(b) of Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, 1971 that prohibits abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy, even if there is a risk of death to the mother or foetus.
The Supreme Court’s five-judge Constitution bench judgment of 13 July, quashing president’s rule in Arunachal Pradesh, was a massive judgment in every way, and not just because it set off a series of dramatic events loaded with suspense.
The much awaited Delhi-Centre turf war case was finally heard today at court No 4 around noon as item 64, with the bench of justices Dipak Misra and UU Lalit giving the Delhi Government's counsel, Indira Jaising, enough opportunity to make her submissions, but without compromising its position that it would not direct the high court to first decide the jurisdiction issue.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday admitted a plea by the Maharashtra government challenging the acquittal of Hindi film star Salman Khan in a 2002 hit-and-run case.
Item 72, listed as the last case before justices JS Khehar and Arun Mishra at Court No.3, was the one which everyone was waiting for.
Senior advocate, Indira Jaising, amicus curiae in the case of Nipun Saxena v Union of India, was elated when Justice JS Khehar and Justice C Nagappan asked her and the UOI counsel on 2 May whether they would have time to attend to the case, if listed during the vacation.
At 11:15 am today, the Supreme Court began its proceedings for the last day of the current term. It was 45 minutes behind its usual schedule.
At Court No 3 before noon today, the going was tough for the special leave petitions (SLPs), in direct proportion to the persistence of the counsel with their pleas.
Shortly before lunch the matter of the Central Vigilance Commissioner (CVC) appointment came up in Court 3 with Prashant Bhushan, counsel for petitioner, making the submissions of why the CVC's appointment was dubious.
As news of the Uttarakhand high court quashing President’s rule in the state reached the Supreme Court, suspense was building up whether the Centre would seek an immediate stay by mentioning the matter before Court No.1, where the Chief Justice of India (CJI) TS Thakur and Justice R Banumathi were hearing the pollution matter.
Maverick lawyer from Mumbai, Mathews J Nedumpara, had two of his writ petitions listed before two different benches at courts 3 and 4 on Wednesday, 13 April.
Item 9 before the bench of Supreme Court Justices JS Khehar and C Nagappan turned out to be an interesting hearing yesterday (13 April) when counsel for Tata Motors, Sidharth Luthra, persisted that there was a case of defamation against the Sunday Indian magazine, edited by the appellant IIPM-Supremo Arindam Chaudhuri, who has been no stranger to strategic litigation against public participation (SLAPP) against publishers.
The Supreme Court today granted bail to Delhi University professor GN Saibaba, accused of being associated with a front organisation of a banned Maoist outfit.
As reported on Legally India in February, Saibaba requires constant and expensive medical attention, which the Mahrashtra government was unlikely to have been able to provide in Nagpur jail.
The apex court bench, headed by Justice JS Khehar, granted bail to Saibaba noting that all the material witnesses in the case have already been examined and there was no basis for keeping him confined.
The court was not moved as counsel for Maharashtra expressed the apprehension that Saibaba would propagate his views if he is set free.
The court said that does not hold as he would be doing so even if he was released later.
Granting bail to Saibaba, the court said his release would be subject to the conditions by the trial court as he would make himself available as and when he was required.
The BJP and the Congress today both found defending themselves as appellants in a case before the Supreme Court, which is likely to hear it in detail after the summer vacation.
A Supreme Court bench comprising justices JS Khehar and C Nagappan today restrained the media from reporting the proceedings of the hearing of the SLP filed by the Patidar leader, Hardik Bharatbhai Patel against the dismissal of his bail petition by the Gujarat High Court and seeking quashing of FIR lodged against him.
Former Madras high court judge Justice CS Karnan, who had objected to his transfer to the Calcutta high court earlier this month by vowing to pass a suo motu order staying his own transfer, with the Supreme Court then effectively stripping him of judicial powers, has struck conciliatory tones.
In a two-page letter sent to the Chief Justice of India (CJI) TS Thakur, with whom he met on 16 February, the two apex court judges who’d ruled against him, justices JS Khehar and R Banumathi, and several politicians, according to a number of reports, he wrote:
Justice Karnan admitted that the order was a result of his “mental frustration resulting in the loss of his mental balance”. He cited two incidents that had actually disturbed him and resulted in passing of the judicial order. “One was an incident that occurred during a marriage reception when a brother judge kicked me and later apologised. In another incident, the same judge allegedly removed the armchair reservation slip on my chair, threw it on the ground and trampled it with his feet. The same was noticed by a brother and sister judge who silently ridiculed me.”
“Now I am constrained to point out these past unfortunate happenings only because I maintain a very social outlook in the mainstream of the society and owe my allegiance to the high reputation of our prestigious court.”
“Hereinafter, I will still continue to foster a harmonious attitude to one and all, and will appreciate your kind reciprocation and oblige.”
The Maharashtra Government may well regret its decision to seek custody of alleged Maoist activist, Prof G Saibaba – who is suffering from 90 per cent disability and moves in a wheel chair due to post polio paralysis - at the Nagpur Central Jail during the trial against him.
The Supreme Court today cleared the decks for the revocation of President’s Rule in Arunachal Pradesh as it vacated its own order of status quo that it had passed yesterday.