The Uttar Pradesh government has informed the Supreme Court that the disputed "private well" near the Mughal-era Jama Masjid mosque in Sambhal was situated on public land. The state government said the petitioner failed to disclose there was a well within the boundary walls of the mosque known locally as "yagna koop". The committee, in a spot inspection, found that the well was situated outside the mosque boundary wall, the report said. The report said the state was committed to ensuring peace and harmony in the region and any restraint on the use of such public wells by the community at large may not help in achieving that goal.
Samajwadi Party leader and Kairana MP Iqra Choudhary has moved the Supreme Court seeking effective implementation of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991. This move comes amidst several petitions challenging the law's validity, including those filed by the Akhil Bhartiya Sant Samiti and lawyer Ashwini Upadhyay. The Supreme Court, in December 2022, had restrained all courts from examining fresh suits and passing interim orders in pending cases seeking to reclaim religious places. The Act aims to maintain the religious character of places of worship as they existed on August 15, 1947, but the dispute relating to Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid at Ayodhya was kept out of its purview. The court has listed Choudhary's plea with other pending pleas for February 17.
The Mathura Shahi Masjid Eidgah Committee has approached the Supreme Court, requesting the court to prevent the central government from filing a response to a petition challenging the Places of Worship Act's constitutional validity. The committee accuses the BJP-led government of intentionally delaying its response. The court had previously issued a notice to the government in March 2021, but the government has yet to submit its reply despite numerous opportunities. The committee argues that the government's delay is intended to obstruct those opposing the challenge to the Places of Worship Act from filing their own responses. The petition also states that the pleas challenging the law's validity are scheduled for hearing on February 17, and closing the government's right to respond would serve justice. The Supreme Court previously issued a ruling in December 2022 that stopped courts from entertaining new lawsuits or issuing interim or final orders regarding the reclaiming of religious places, particularly mosques and dargahs. The ruling halted proceedings in 18 lawsuits filed by Hindu groups seeking surveys to confirm the original religious character of 10 mosques, including the Gyanvapi Masjid in Varanasi, the Shahi Idgah Masjid in Mathura, and the Shahi Jama Masjid in Sambhal. This decision was made in response to six petitions, including one filed by lawyer Ashwini Upadhyay, challenging various provisions of the Places of Worship Act. The 1991 law prohibits the conversion of places of worship and guarantees the preservation of their existing religious character as it stood on August 15, 1947. Notably, the dispute regarding the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid in Ayodhya was excluded from this law. There are also several cross-petitions advocating for a strict enforcement of the 1991 law to uphold communal harmony and maintain the current status of mosques that Hindu groups seek to reclaim, claiming they were temples before being destroyed by invaders.
The Supreme Court declined to hear a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking directions to the Election Commission and state election bodies to address purported duplication and multiple entries in voter lists. The court suggested the petitioner approach high courts with specific grievances and file representations with appropriate authorities.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar also indicated that it may not take up the pending scheduled petitions, heard earlier by a three-judge bench, during the day as it was sitting in a combination of two judges.
The apex court had decided to hear the pleas related to the IOA and the AIFF together.
The Supreme Court of India has extended its stay on a court-monitored survey of the Shahi Idgah Mosque complex in Mathura, which is located adjacent to the Krishna Janmabhoomi temple. The court deferred the hearing on a plea against the survey to April 1, while the interim order staying the survey will continue to operate. The Hindu side claims that the mosque complex holds signs of a temple that once existed at the site, while the Muslim side contends that the lawsuits filed by the Hindu litigants violate the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act of 1991.
The Supreme Court of India has ruled that the secular nature of the state does not prevent it from interfering with religious practices and attitudes when they impede development and the right to equality in the larger public interest. The court dismissed pleas challenging the 1976 amendment to the Constitution, which added the terms "socialist", "secular", and "integrity" to the Preamble, stating that Parliament's amending power extends to the Preamble as well.
Terming as 'unfortunate' the January 29 stampede at Maha Kumbh where at least 30 people were killed, the Supreme Court on Monday refused to hear a public interest litigation (PIL) for guidelines over safety of devotees and asked the petitioner to move the Allahabad high court instead.
A court in Budaun will decide on December 24 whether to proceed with a hearing in the Jama Masjid Shamsi versus Neelkanth temple case. The dispute arose in 2022 when a Hindu group claimed the temple existed at the mosque site and sought permission to worship. The Supreme Court recently restrained all courts from entertaining and passing any orders on lawsuits seeking surveys of religious places under the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991. The Muslim side argues that the lower court should not proceed with the hearing as it cannot pass any orders, while the Hindu side maintains the Supreme Court order does not stop the hearing. The court will now decide whether to continue the proceedings.
The Supreme Court of India has sought the Indian government's response to a petition filed by a Muslim woman seeking to be governed by the Indian succession law instead of Shariat. The woman, Safiya P.M., argues that she does not believe in Shariat and wants to be governed by secular law, including the Indian Succession Act of 1925. The court has asked the government to file a counter affidavit within four weeks.
Amidst rumblings within the state Bharatiya Janata Party seeking a change of leadership in strife-torn Manipur, Chief Minister N Biren Singh on Sunday tendered his resignation to Governor Ajay Kumar Bhalla at the Raj Bhavan in Imphal.
The Supreme Court of India will hear a plea from the mosque management committee challenging an order rejecting its petition in the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah dispute in Mathura, Uttar Pradesh on January 15. The Allahabad High Court had rejected the mosque committee's plea, stating that the religious character of the Shahi Idgah mosque needed to be determined. The case involves claims that the mosque was built after the demolition of a temple, a claim disputed by the mosque committee. The Supreme Court will now decide on the maintainability of the mosque committee's plea.
Justice Vishwanathan said he was in "the Common Cause (the NGO which had filed the PIL in coal scam cases). This case was of the ED (Enforcement Directorate), but still...".
The Supreme Court of India is scheduled to hear a batch of petitions challenging the validity of certain provisions of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, which prohibits lawsuits to reclaim a place of worship or change its character from what prevailed on August 15, 1947. The pleas, including one filed by Ashwini Upadhyay, argue that these provisions violate the right to judicial remedy and create an arbitrary cut-off date. The matter will be heard in the backdrop of several ongoing cases related to places of worship, including the Gyanvapi Mosque in Varanasi and the Shahi Idgah Mosque in Mathura. The Muslim side has cited the 1991 law to argue that such suits are not maintainable. The Supreme Court had previously sought the Centre's response to Upadhyay's petition, which alleged that the law creates an "arbitrary and irrational retrospective cut-off date" for maintaining the character of places of worship.
The Supreme Court of India has ordered a status quo on a private well located near the entrance of the Sambhal Jama Masjid, prohibiting any action regarding the well without its permission. The order came in response to a plea by the mosque's management committee, which challenged a lower court order that allowed a survey of the mosque, citing concerns over violence and loss of life during previous surveys. The court also instructed the authorities to file a status report within two weeks.
The Indian government has refused to accept recommendations for a 10% pension increase for retired regular Army captains under the One Rank One Pension (OROP) scheme. The Supreme Court heard an appeal by the government challenging an Armed Forces Tribunal order that mandated a decision on pension for retired captains. The government's decision not to accept the recommendations has led to a delay in resolving pension anomalies for these officers. The case will be heard again on December 12, 2023.
The Supreme Court of India has ruled that a wife is entitled to maintenance from her husband even if she refuses to cohabit with him after a decree for restitution of conjugal rights, provided she has valid and sufficient reasons for refusing to live with him. The court stated that the circumstances of each case must be considered individually and a decree for restitution of conjugal rights does not automatically disqualify a wife from receiving maintenance. This landmark ruling clarifies the legal interpretation of Section 125(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) regarding maintenance and emphasizes the importance of considering individual circumstances when determining a wife's right to maintenance.
The Supreme Court on Monday sought the Election Commission's response on a PIL challenging its decision to increase the maximum number of voters from 1,200 to 1,500 at every polling station, saying no elector should be excluded.
A four-member team from the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) conducted a survey of the recently-discovered Shri Kartik Mahadev temple, five pilgrimage sites, and 19 wells in Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh, India. The survey followed the discovery of three damaged idols inside a well of the Bhasma Shankar temple, which was reopened after being shut for 46 years. The Shri Kartik Mahadev temple, also known as the Bhasma Shankar temple, was reopened on December 13 after authorities found the covered structure during an anti-encroachment drive. The temple houses an idol of Lord Hanuman and a Shivling and had remained locked since 1978. The district administration has requested carbon dating of the temple, including the well, from the ASI. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court has restrained courts across India from entertaining new lawsuits or passing any orders in pending ones seeking to reclaim religious places, especially mosques and dargahs, until further notice. This action halts proceedings in approximately 18 lawsuits filed by Hindu parties seeking surveys to determine the original religious character of 10 mosques, including the Gyanvapi at Varanasi, the Shahi Idgah Masjid at Mathura, and the Shahi Jama Masjid at Sambhal, where four individuals died in clashes. The Supreme Court will examine the legality, scope, and boundaries of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, which prohibits the conversion of places of worship and ensures the preservation of their religious character as it existed on August 15, 1947.
Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna has recused himself from hearing pleas related to the alleged illegal felling of hundreds of trees in the Delhi Ridge area. The decision comes after a previous bench, led by former CJI D Y Chandrachud, sought a personal affidavit from Delhi Lieutenant Governor V K Saxena in the case, which also sought contempt proceedings against certain DDA officials. CJI Khanna stated that his prior involvement with the Delhi LG while serving as the NALSA chairman would make it inappropriate for him to hear the plea. The bench has ordered the listing of the pleas before a different bench starting November 27.
Commencing hearing on pleas challenging the constitutionality of the Places of Worship Act, 1991, the Supreme Court asked the Centre to reply to cross-pleas against or seeking implementation of statute.
The Supreme Court on Friday directed a Sambhal trial court to temporarily halt proceedings in the case over the Mughal-era Shahi Jama Masjid and its survey at Chandausi while directing the UP government to maintain peace and harmony in the violence-hit town.
The top court asked the state government to spell out details of its actions taken against the culprits and the encroachers.
The Supreme Court of India has dismissed petitions challenging the 1976 amendment to the Constitution that added the terms "socialist", "secular", and "integrity" to the Preamble. The court ruled that the inclusion of these terms, made through amendments, is valid and does not affect the original adoption of the Constitution in 1949.
The Supreme Court on Friday observed the 1976 amendment to the Constitution adding terms 'socialist', 'secular' and 'integrity' to the Preamble underwent judicial reviews and it cannot say whatever Parliament did during the emergency period was all nullity.
Justice Khanna, who will serve as CJI for a little over six months, will demit office on May 13, 2025.
"If the marriage is not a valid marriage, according to the law applicable to the parties, it is not a marriage in the eyes of law. The 'Saptapadi' ceremony under the Hindu Law is one of the essential ingredients to constitute a valid marriage but the said evidence is lacking in the present case," the court said in a recent order.
A notice, uploaded on the apex court website, said the bench will hear the matter on October 4.
Justice Sanjay Kumar Mishra, acting chief justice of the Uttarakhand high court, and Odisha Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik take a selfie at the joint conference of chief ministers and chief justices of high courts at Vigyan Bhavan, New Delhi.
The top court made the observations in a judgement by which it set aside the conviction of three people, including the two death row convicts, in a case of kidnapping and murder of a 15-year-old boy in Madhya Pradesh.
A division bench of the high Court comprising acting Chief Justice Sanjay Kumar Misra and Justice N S Dhanik posed the question to the EC while hearing a PIL on Wednesday seeking postponement of the upcoming Assembly polls in Uttarakhand in view of the rising cases of COVID-19 and its latest variant Omicron.
The cases are related to gunning down of Indian Air Force personnel and the Rubiya Syed kidnapping.
Based on a petition filed by Palem Srikanth Reddy, president of the Jana Palana Party, a division bench comprising justices G Rohini and T Sunil Chowdary issued notices and posted the matter on April 2 for further hearing.
© 2026 Rediff.com - Investor Information - Advertise with us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy - Sitemap - Feedback - About us - Terms of use - Grievances