Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed, without giving any reason, a PIL seeking direction for the FTII students to end their three-month-long agitation against naming Gajendra Chauhan as the institute’s direction and for transparent policies for the appointment.

A bench headed by Chief Justice HL Dattu dismissed the PIL after letting advocate JP Dhanda argue for about 10 minutes without seeking any clarification.

The petition said various parties were trying to gain political mileage by exploiting the sentiments of students of the Pune-based Film and Television Institute of India (FTII) without any concern for their career.

It also sought a directive to the central government to frame transparent policies for the appointment of chairpersons of such institutions and the students to end their strike.

The government has rejected the students’ demand for replacing Chauhan with a prominent personality as FTII chief.

The bench also dismissed another PIL for ensuring smooth and orderly functioning of parliament.

Despite suffering from adjournments and not having been able to close a single case since starting nearly a year ago, as reported last week by SCOI Reports, on Friday (September 4) the social justice bench continued its work with justices Madan B Lokur and UU Lalit hearing six cases in 40 minutes after 2 pm.

In my experience of filing RTI requests with multiple public authorities, no government body comes close to the SC in terms of contempt towards RTI applications. This attitude seems to be pervasive in the higher judiciary. The summary denials, fighting ordinary applicants before the CIC, and even hauling them before the Delhi HC suggests that as far as India’s higher judiciary is concerned, transparency is good for others, not for itself.

writes Aniket Aga in The Wire.

Yesterday (September 1) in Court No 8 of the Supreme Court, before justices Ranjan Gogoi and NV Ramana, a case of civil contempt against the Central Government was argued unsuccessfully by the petitioner in the main case of National Federation of the Blind vs Sanjay Kothari, Secy Deptt Of Personnel and Training.

Journalists will not be allowed to enter the space between Supreme Court judges’ dais and the arguing counsel, commonly known as the “well” of the court, reported LiveLaw.

The Supreme Court’s Press Accreditation Panel has taken this decision, according to Justice Ranjan Gogoi who, just before dictating the court’s order in a disability reservation case chastised a journalist for entering the well, according to the LiveLaw report.

“Don’t rush to the well,” Gogoi told a journalist who got close to the dais, asking for the journalist’s name and organisation. Gogoi later admitted that the press panel’s decision may not have reached the journalist or his organisation.

Gogoi also said in open court that journalists must exercise restraint in reporting the exchange between arguing counsel and judges in court.

Chief Justice of India HL Dattu and Justice Amitava Roy yesterday (31 August) granted a stay on the Rajasthan high court’s judgment delivered on August 10 criminalising the Jain community’s practice of Santhara – meaning abstinence from food and water by a person, who awaits death – and issued notice to the respondents in the case.

The Supreme Court today dismissed a petition seeking cancellation of bail of film star Salman Khan who was convicted and sentenced in a hit and run case.

The apex court bench headed by Chief Justice HL Dattu declined the plea by one of the alleged victims associated with the case and belonging to Mumbai Police.

The petitioner had challenged the Bombay high court order granting bail to Salman.

Salman was granted bail by the Bombay high court on the very day he was convicted and sentenced by the sessions court.

On May 6, Khan was found guilty in the September 28, 2002 hit and run case and sentenced to five years’ jail for various charges, including ‘culpable homicide not amounting to murder’.

One person was killed and four injured when the actor’s car ran over them while they were sleeping on a pavement.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday stayed the new Bar Council of India’s (BCI) Certificate and Place of Practice (Verification) Rules 2015 that it had passed in January 2015.

The Supreme Court’s social justice bench comprising justices Madan B Lokur and UU Lalit heard seven cases between 2 and 4.15 p.m on Friday, August 28 but has failed to dispose of a single petition since it was set up in 2014.

Yusuf Mohsin Nulwala, a convict in the 1993 Mumbai blast case, on Friday moved the Supreme Court with his writ petition (WP (CRL) 150/2015) seeking a reduction in his jail term of five to three years. His plea was that he was wrongly sentenced to five years imprisonment for possessing a prohibited automatic AK-56 assault rifle while he was shown in possession of a non-prohibited semi-automatic AK-56.

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.

A court here on Thursday held four December 16, 2012 gang rape convicts guilty in a robbery case that took place on the same night.

Additional Sessions Judge Reetesh Singh convicted them in the robbery case and posted the matter for September 2 for arguments on quantum of sentence.

The four gang rape convicts -- Vinay Sharma, Akshay Thakur, Mukesh and Pawan Gupta -- are being tried for allegedly beating up and robbing carpenter Ram Adhar, before raping and assaulting a 23-year-old physiotherapist in a moving bus here December 16, 2012.

They have been sentenced to death in the rape case by a trial court, which was confirmed by the Delhi high court. The matter is now pending in the Supreme Court.

Today (27 August) on the second day of the hearing in the Supreme Court, the bench comprising justices Dipak Misra and Prafulla C Pant asked counsel representing the Gujarat Government and the respondent, Islamic Relief Committee Gujarat (IRCG), to come up with answers for two questions, during the next hearing on September 23.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday stayed the Gauhati High Court order directing a CBI probe against Arunachal Pradesh Chief Minister Nabam Tuki for alleged corruption in awarding state contracts to his family members.

An apex court bench headed by Chief Justice HL Dattu also issued notice to the Arunachal government and the private party on whose PIL the high court had directed the Central Bureau of Investigation probe.

The court’s order came as senior counsel Harish Salve, appearing for Tuki, sought to question the high court’s August 20 order.

It has been alleged that Tuki awarded contracts without inviting tenders when he was the minister for works.

Court No 4 witnessed interesting arguments concerning the scope of India’s secularism before justices Dipak Misra and Prafulla C Pant, in the case of The State of Gujarat and others vs Islamic Relief Committee, Gujarat (IRCG) and another.