Prashant Bhushan
The Supreme Court has today issued notice to Central Government on a petition filed on behalf of well-known public interest lawyer, Prashant Bhushan regarding non-issue of full-validity passport to him. (Prashant Bhushan v Union of India & Anr). The Supreme Court has asked the government to file its reply within three weeks.
The Supreme Court was urged today to initiate contempt of court proceedings against three lawyers who were caught in an India Today sting operation claiming that they had beaten JNU Students Union president Kanhaiya Kumar for three hours in police custody and would inflict more harm on him.
Just before noon on 17 February, when the bench comprising justices J Chelameswar and AM Sapre was hearing ND Jayaprakash’s petition against the Ministry of Home Affairs and Delhi Police, seeking protection to the accused, his counsel and journalists in the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) sedition case at the Metropolitan court, advocate Rajiv Yadav shouted the beginning of the “national song” vande mataram (I praise thee, mother), disturbing the court proceedings.
The Supreme Court today appointed a team of six senior lawyers to go to Patiala House court to observe the situation there and report back.
The Supreme Court on Monday directed the government to consider the matter of passive euthanasia and made it clear that pendency in the apex court should not come in the way of authorities to take a decision on the matter.
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.
A Division Bench of the Delhi high court comprising the chief justice G Rohini, and Justice Jayant Nath today set aside the order of the Single Judge of the High Court directing the Supreme Court registry to comply with the Central Information Commission’s directive to maintain records regarding the judgments pending, after being reserved by the benches.
Retired Supreme Court judge and former Law Commission chairman PV Reddy will re-evaluate the controversial 2014 Delhi Judicial Services exam, ruled a Supreme Court bench of justices Dipak Misra and Prafulla C Pant today (14 December).
Senior advocate Shanti Bhushan and advocate Prashant Bhushan have dubbed the proposed draft Jan Lokpal Bill 2015 as the “Jokepal Bill”, and have alleged that it is a ‘maliciously’ weakened draft of the original Lokpal Bill of 2011 by Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal and his Aam Aadmi Party (AAP). If at all the centre passes the bill it will be an instrument in the hands of the Delhi government to save its own legislative assembly members, allege the Bhushans.
In a setback to the Arvind Kejriwal government, the Delhi high court on Friday quashed the executive decision to get the books of accounts of the three private power distribution companies (discoms) in the city-capital scrutinised by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG).
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.
On certain days, the Indian litigant knows better than to hold the courts to their official calendar of working days: at least 100 days have already been lost this year across various Indian courts to strikes by advocates.
The Gujarat government on Wednesday told the Supreme Court that sacked state cadre IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt, accused of hacking the email of its former law officer, could not ask which agency would undertake an investigation and how it would do so.