•  •  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

Kapil Sibal

08 February 2016

The before the Constitution bench at court number 3 at 2 pm began on a serious note with the Attorney General, Mukul Rohatgi asking the bench whether it was at all required to copy thousands of pages of official correspondence at the chief minister’s office on various trivial matters, when what the petitioners want access to, is something else. The AG also claimed that the chief minister’s office in Itanagar is not sealed, and the petitioners have not yet made any attempt to claim access to the documents which they want.

02 February 2016

It's happening?The Supreme Court has referred the section 377 curative petition to a Constitution Bench for further examination.

21 January 2016

Court No 7 of Supreme Court was witness to a suspenseful hearing on 20 January as counsel after counsel told the Bench comprising justices Ranjan Gogoi and Prafulla C Pant that it had been misled by the Uttar Pradesh Government that Justice Virendra Singh, a former judge of the Allahabad high court, whom it appointed as the Lokayukta of Uttar Pradesh under Article 142 of the Constitution, which gives the Court extraordinary powers to do complete justice in a case, was in the list of names being considered by the selection panel. 

15 January 2016

History was made today, with three Constitution benches sitting at the same time in the Supreme Court at 2 pm.

15 October 2015

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

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

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.

09 October 2015

The Supreme Court on Thursday sought response from the central and Delhi governments on a plea filed by three lawyers seeking ban on the sale and bursting of firecrackers during the festival of Dussehra and Diwali because it further aggravates the already dangerous level of air pollution.

28 August 2015

Arguments in the Kerala liquor case Kerala Bar Hotels Association vs State of Kerala came to an end yesterday (August 27) at 12:30 pm after the bench comprising justices Vikramajit Sen and Shiva Kirti Singh heard as many as five counsel and reserved their judgment, while asking them to give the court written submissions, if any, during next week.

26 August 2015

The Kerala Government’s senior counsel, Kapil Sibal, who resumed his arguments at 10.30 a.m. yesterday (August 25) in Court No.11 of the Supreme Court, completed his arguments at 2.30 p.m. As the justices Vikramajit Sen and Shiva Kirti Singh queried him about the basis of classification of four star and five star hotels for the purpose of grant of licences to the latter, Sibal asked what is so irrational about classification.

22 August 2015

Yesterday (August 21) senior advocate Kapil Sibal continued his arguments before the Supreme Court bench hearing the challenges to the Kerala Government’s liquor policy, making it clear that he did not want to whittle down Article 14.

11 August 2015

In Indian National Congress vs UOI, which came up before the Supreme Court’s Chief Justice Bench today, the counsel for the Association for Democratic Reforms, Prashant Bhushan, alleged that both the Congress and the UOI suffer from conflict of interests in the case, in the face of a clear finding by the Delhi high court that both the Congress and the BJP had received crores as funding from foreign sources, and that there is not even an iota of doubt that the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 1976 was violated by both.

19 June 2015

The Supreme Court on Friday gave 18 months to Sahara to repay Rs.36,000 crore of the investors money which its two companies, SIRECL and SHFCL, had collected in 2007-08 through OFCDs.