Criticising the court may also lead to interference in the course of justice, the bench added.
The contempt petition refers to the February 1 tweets by Bhushan in which he had allegedly said that the government appeared to have misled the apex court and perhaps submitted fabricated minutes of meeting of the high-powered selection committee headed by the prime minister.
The Supreme Court will hear a plea seeking an independent selection process for the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) on March 17. The PIL, filed by the Centre for Public Interest Litigation, argues that the current system of appointment solely by the executive and the prime minister violates the Constitution and undermines the CAG's independence. The petition calls for a transparent process involving the prime minister, Leader of the Opposition, and Chief Justice of India. The PIL contends that the CAG's role as a watchdog over government finances requires a fair and non-arbitrary appointment procedure.
The Supreme Court has agreed to examine a PIL alleging that Arunachal Pradesh Chief Minister Pema Khandu awarded government contracts to his family members. The court has asked the state government to provide details of the beneficiaries and inform if due process was followed. The bench also sought responses from union ministries of home affairs, finance and the Comptroller and Auditor General of India on the issue within five weeks.
The Supreme Court of India has asked petitioners in two Public Interest Litigations (PILs) to make representations to the Election Commission of India (ECI) regarding their demand for uploading polling booth-wise voter turnout data on the ECI website. The PILs, filed by TMC MP Mahua Moitra and NGO Association for Democratic Reforms, seek a direction for the ECI to upload the data within 48 hours of the conclusion of polling in Lok Sabha and assembly elections. The ECI, represented by senior advocate Maninder Singh, expressed willingness to deliberate on the matter and suggested a meeting with the petitioners to address their concerns. The court has adjourned the hearing to the week of July 28.
West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee on Monday pledged to protect the rights of 'eligible candidates' who lost their jobs after a recent Supreme Court verdict, evoking mixed responses from the affected teachers, thousands of whom turned up to hear the leader speak but remained dangling between hope and despair after she finished.
The Supreme Court of India has sought the government's response on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that challenges the appointment process of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG), arguing it's unconstitutional. The PIL, filed by the Centre for Public Interest Litigation, claims the current process, solely through executive appointment by the Prime Minister, undermines the CAG's independence and violates constitutional principles. The court, while acknowledging the importance of institutional trust, questioned the extent to which it should intervene in the appointment process and whether this would constitute rewriting constitutional provisions. The PIL suggests the CAG's appointment should be similar to other independent bodies, with a selection committee comprising the Prime Minister, Leader of the Opposition, and Chief Justice of India. The case has implications for the independence and transparency of India's audit system.
Senior advocate Prashant Bhushan on Tuesday said the Narendra Modi-led Gujarat government stands 'exposed' after it compiled a proposal to amend the state's Lokayukta Commission Bill to leave the Lokayukta powerless, extracting all prosecutorial powers from the position.
The Supreme Court of India has scheduled a hearing on February 19 for pleas challenging the appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners under the 2023 law. The court emphasized the potential consequences if any action is taken before the hearing. The pleas argue that the 2023 law, which excludes the Chief Justice of India from the selection panel, undermines the independence of the Election Commission and allows for undue influence from the executive branch. The court's earlier verdict in March 2023 called for an independent selection panel comprising the Prime Minister, Leader of the Opposition, and the Chief Justice of India to ensure the integrity of the Election Commission. The case highlights concerns about the independence of India's electoral process and the potential for political influence in the appointment of key election officials.
The Supreme Court has sought a report from the Uttar Pradesh Police regarding allegations that Ashish Mishra, son of Union Minister Ajay Mishra, influenced witnesses in the Lakhimpur Kheri violence case. The court directed the Lakhimpur Kheri superintendent of police to file the report after a complaint was made by advocate Prashant Bhushan, representing the complainants. Bhushan claimed to have an audio recording of an attempt to influence witnesses and alleged that Mishra attended a public meeting in violation of his bail conditions. Mishra, through his lawyer, denied the allegations and stated that he was being targeted unnecessarily. The court has also asked for the authenticity of the material presented to be verified.
The Supreme Court will hear on February 19 pleas challenging the appointments of the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners under the 2023 law. The court will take up the matter on a priority basis, after some urgent listed matters. The government has appointed a new CEC and ECs under the new law, which excludes the Chief Justice of India from the selection panel, despite a 2023 Supreme Court verdict directing the inclusion of the CJI in the panel. The petitioners argue that the exclusion of the CJI undermines the independence of the election commission.
Congress leader Rahul Gandhi has criticized the government's decision to appoint Gyanesh Kumar as the new Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) in the middle of the night, arguing that it is "disrespectful" and "discourteous" given the ongoing Supreme Court challenge to the selection process. Gandhi presented a dissent note to the selection committee, stating that the process violates the Supreme Court order and undermines the integrity of the electoral process.
The Supreme Court has adjourned pleas challenging the appointments of the chief election commissioner (CEC) and election commissioners (ECs) under the 2023 law. The court indicated the matter would be listed after the Holi festival break due to a paucity of time. Petitioners, including the NGO Association for Democratic Reforms, argued for an urgent hearing, emphasizing the importance of the issue and the potential impact on democratic processes. The appointment of the new CEC and ECs under the 2023 law, which excludes the Chief Justice of India from the selection panel, has been a point of contention, with petitioners alleging it undermines the independence of the election commission.
The Supreme Court of India has sought a response from the Election Commission of India (ECI) regarding pleas seeking verification of burnt memory and symbol loading units in Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs). The court directed the ECI to refrain from erasing or reloading data during the verification process and to explain the procedure adopted for verification. The bench also expressed concerns over the high cost of verification and directed the ECI to reduce the fee. The court's directive comes following its previous judgement where it allowed aggrieved candidates to seek verification of EVMs.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday deprecated the practice of announcing freebies prior to elections, and said people were not willing to work as they were getting free ration and money.
Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav, an Allahabad High Court judge, is set to appear before the Supreme Court Collegium to explain his controversial statements made at a Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) function. The Supreme Court has sought a report from the Allahabad High Court after news reports surfaced regarding Justice Yadav's remarks, which were widely condemned as "hate speech". The judge's statements, made at a VHP event, sparked outrage from various quarters, including opposition leaders and lawyers. The Bar Association of India has also condemned the judge's remarks and called for an apology.
It will be court's opinion versus the legislative power to enact law, the Supreme Court on Wednesday said as it posted the pleas challenging the appointment of the chief election commissioner and election commissioners under the 2023 law on February 4.
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.
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...".
A PIL has been filed in the Supreme Court seeking a direction to the Centre to cancel licences and not to grant new ones to Indian firms exporting arms and other military equipment to Israel, which is fighting a war in Gaza.
The NGO challenges the validity of a provision of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023.
'He was the best court craftsman that I have ever seen who could modulate his arguments in accordance with the judge and the mood.'
The Supreme Court of India expressed concerns about the long-term sustainability of providing free rations to migrant workers, emphasizing the need for job creation and capacity building instead. The court's remarks came during a hearing on the ongoing issue of providing relief to migrant workers, a matter that gained prominence during the COVID-19 pandemic. The court questioned the government's reliance on freebies and stressed the importance of creating opportunities for migrant workers to become self-sufficient. The debate highlighted the challenges of balancing immediate relief with long-term economic solutions for vulnerable populations.
The bench allowed the rejoinder affidavit to be filed by petitioners in two weeks thereafter and posted the matter for final hearing in January, 2025.
'Young people say they know all this emphasis on Hindu-Muslim differences is politically motivated.' 'If you stop watching TV and turn off social media, you'll find the situation on the ground different.'
The Supreme Court has sought details from the Allahabad High Court regarding controversial statements made by Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav at a VHP function. The development comes amid calls for action against the judge for his remarks, which have been labeled as hate speech by some. The judge's statements were made at a VHP function on December 8, where he spoke about the Uniform Civil Code and the law working according to the majority. Several individuals and organizations, including lawyer Prashant Bhushan and CPI(M) leader Brinda Karat, have called for an inquiry into the judge's conduct and for his removal from judicial duties.
The BJP may win more seats in the February 5 assembly election, but not enough to trump AAP, notes Ramesh Menon.
Delhi faces a severe financial crunch and the deficit is largely due to numerous welfare schemes without adequate revenue flowing in. The success of welfare schemes and electoral promises will need careful financial planning and out of the box thinking to whip up additional revenue, notes Ramesh Menon.
The Supreme Court on Monday referred to a five-judge Constitution bench a batch of pleas challenging the validity of the electoral bond scheme for political funding of parties.
The Supreme Court on Friday asked the Centre to provide information about the numbers and names reiterated by the apex court Collegium for appointment as judges in higher judiciary with reasons why they were not considered so far and at what level they were pending.
The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to hear on May 17 a plea of an NGO seeking a direction to the Election Commission to upload polling station-wise voter turnout data on its website within 48 hours of conclusion of polling for each phase of the Lok Sabha elections.
Prashant Bhushan's bashing up and Ra One mania
The top court said it cannot order a roving inquiry into purchase of electoral bonds on the assumption that it was quid pro quo for award of contract.
A bench comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra said Indian firms, involved in the export of arms and equipment to Israel, may be sued for breach of contractual obligations if they are stopped by it from supplying.
'We are living in an undeclared Emergency.' 'Declared Emergency was easier to handle.' 'Nobody knows where an undeclared Emergency will take the country.'
On Monday, Attorney General R Venkataramani, appearing for the Centre, mentioned an interim application before a bench of Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justice J B Pardiwala.
Senior advocate Prashant Bhushan, who appeared for the petitioners in the court, said at least 30 shell companies purchased electoral bonds worth over Rs 143 crore.
The Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear in March a plea seeking direction to the government to release Rohingya refugees who have been 'illegally and arbitrarily' detained in jails and detention centres across the country.
"The voter turnout data for the first two phases of the ongoing 2024 Lok Sabha elections published by ECI on April 30 has been published after 11 days of the first phase of polling... on April 19 and four days after second phase of polling... on April 26.
The Supreme Court Registry is learnt to have refused to accept the Centre's plea seeking modification of its 2012 verdict in the 2G spectrum case which had said the State was duty bound to adopt the auction route while transferring or alienating the country's natural resources.
