•  •  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

Shanti Bhushan

08 February 2018

The former JGLS Sonepat students, who were convicted of raping and blackmailing a fellow student had until now refused to share the password of an iCloud online storage account in which they had allegedly stored the victim's nude photos, but the Supreme Court has now finally ordered them to disclose it, reported the Indian Express and others.

28 August 2017

Justice Dipak Misra took oath today as the 45th Chief Justice of India (CJI), succeeding CJI JS Khehar. Misra's suitability for India's highest judicial office was questioned before CJI Khehar and in the media, since last year when his name surfaced in allegations of misrepresentation from 1979.

01 December 2015

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.

15 July 2015

Legally India research (Graphic by Subrata Jana / Livemint)The process of appointing senior advocates is broken and no one has bothered to fix it, until now.

10 April 2015

PTI reported that Supreme Court justices Dipak Misra and Prafulla C Pant rejected a PIL filed by Prashant Bhushan with his father, senior counsel Shanti Bhushan, appearing:

seeking registration of an FIR against former apex court judge and Press Council of India Chairman Justice C K Prasad for allegedly passing some inappropriate orders in a civil appeal during his tenure as a judge, saying if such pleas are taken up it will “open dangerous doors”.

The bench found that the Lalita Kumari guidelines - requiring police to compulsorily register an FIR in certain cases - should not apply on the present facts to judges. The Bhushans alleged that:

Justice Prasad, during his tenure as Supreme Court judge, passed an order directing listing of a civil appeal before him which was previously pending before another bench.

18 February 2013

Supreme Court judges KS Radhakrishnan and Dipak Misra said they might have to open both doors of their courtroom during proceedings, after senior advocates Shanti Bhushan and Rajiv Dhawan pointed out that courtrooms were so crowded that they were an extreme discomfort to “old lawyers”. [Indian Express]

Bhushan, whose matter was called out by the bench, said:

It seems it is in public interest that all elderly lawyers, especially those above 70-80 years in age, should be crushed to death in the Supreme Court. Some day some old lawyers will die in a stampede in the Supreme Court.

Dhawan who was also present in the same courtroom at that time added:

I am in complete agreement with my learned friend. In fact I have broken my leg in the Supreme Court due to this problem.

04 February 2013

Supreme Court Breaking: Alleged proclaimed offender and Andhra Pradesh high court (HC) judge NV Ramana will continue as a judge in that HC, after the Supreme Court (SC) today dismissed the petition challenging his appointment and imposed costs on each of the petitioners.

22 January 2013

Proclaimed offender and Andhra Pradesh High Court (AP HC) judge N Venkata Ramana may continue as judge even after his recommended removal by the Chief Justice of India, if the Parliament does not initiate his removal, attorney general GE Vahanvati told the Supreme Court.

An arson case was filed against Venkata Ramana prior to his appointment at the AP HC, and he was declared a proclaimed offender. A petitioner, through senior advocate Shanti Bhushan, approached the SC for quashing his appointment, in light of the pending criminal case against him.

Vahanvati told a bench of Justices Aftab Alam and Ranjana P Desai that once a Judge has been appointed, the parliament is the sole authority to initiate his removal as:

The Constitution makers were clear that Judges of higher judiciary needed to be protected to uphold the higher principle of judicial independence.

Removal is the only process recognized by the Constitution to maintain independence of judiciary. Hard cases and harsh facts involving a particular person make no difference to the higher principle.

Venkata Ramana’s name was dropped twice from being considered by the collegium of judges appointing high court justices. It was on erstwhile law minister Ram Jethmalani’s insistence that the collegium was persuaded to reconsider his name. [TOI]

Legally India Supreme Court Postcard writer Courtwitness tweeted: “An appointment which is invalid (say eligibility criteria like citizenship found not fulfilled) can always be quashed by courts. Removal is only for valid appointment upon finding of "misbehaviour". A. 124 for SC/217 for HC judges.”

19 May 2012

clip_image001DSK Legal won in the Delhi high court for power trading solutions provider PTC India in its petition challenging an arbitral award in favor of infrastructure conglomerate Jaypee group’s power company Jaiprakash Power Ventures (JPVL) which was represented by senior advocate Shanti Bhushan, on 15 May 2012.

11 April 2012

Shanti Bhushan Senior counsel Shanti Bhushan submitted to Chief Justice (CJI) Kapadia’s constitutional bench yesterday, that even incorrect statements do not justify restrictions on the media, and even half-truths and misinformation should not warrant punishment for contempt regardless of concern for the reputation of courts.

Latest comments