Articles by "CJI"
Showing posts with label CJI. Show all posts

Hyderabad, Oct 3: Retired Supreme Court judge N Santosh Hegde Wednesday advised the newly appointed Chief Justice of India, Justice Ranjan Gogoi to bring in more transparency in judicial proceedings and promote solidarity between judges to avoid any "misunderstanding".

"Also, he (Justice Gogoi) should give an impression to the public that judges are one when it comes to justice," the former Solicitor General of India told.

Justice Ranjan Gogoi was Wednesday sworn in as the 46th Chief Justice of India (CJI). He succeeds Justice Dipak Misra.

Justice Gogoi was among the four senior-most judges who had in January criticised the then Chief Justice Dipak Misra, especially the manner of allocation of cases to certain benches.

Hegde said Justice Gogoi's primary responsibility would now be to reduce the huge pendency of cases in courts, and he was glad the new Chief Justice of India had already spoken on the issue.

Justice Gogoi said last week that he had a plan to deal with pendency of cases which has been bringing in a lot of "disrepute" to the judicial system.

He said he had a plan to deal with the backlog of cases and he would "unfold" it soon.

Hegde, also former Lokayukta of Karnataka, said, "He (Justice Gogoi) should bring more transparency in the judicial proceedings. They (Supreme Court) have already decided on videographing (live-streaming) of proceedings. That apart, misunderstanding that the judges had in the last regime, should not be repeated".

"That misunderstanding has led to a lot of scenes....

problem with people whose respect (towards Judiciary) is reducing. Once people lose respect of the judicial institution, that is end of democracy," he said.

Hegde said the CJI should take fellow judges into confidence and discuss their views so that they will also develop a confidence in him.

"Probably that lack (of such a practice) has led to some misunderstanding (during the previous regime) which has become a public issue and many things happened thereafter which should not happen," Hegde said.

"He (Justice Gogoi) should bring about transparency in judicial administration and solidarity between the judges.

Administrative solidarity should be there," he noted.

"(Judicial) vacancies should be filled in a timely manner because any delay adds on to the backlog. It is like Hanuman's tail, it goes longer and longer and longer. If he is able to reduce the pendency of cases, that itself would be a great achievement," Hegde added.
 (PTI)

New Delhi, Sep 4: Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Misra Tuesday sent a letter to the Central government recommending Justice Ranjan Gogoi as his successor. 

Justice Gogoi will be sworn in as the next CJI on October 3. 

The CJI has written to the Ministry of Law and Justice endorsing and recommending the name of Justice Gogoi, senior-most judge, as the next CJI.
 (PTI)

New Delhi, Aug 20: The judges of the Supreme Court will contribute to the Kerala flood relief fund, Chief Justice Dipak Misra said today.

A bench comprising CJI and Justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud made the observation during the hearing of a PIL that had sought barring of lawmakers from practising in courts across the country.

"We are also making some contribution. Judges of this court are also making contribution for the flood relief fund," the bench said.

The observation came after Attorney General K K Venugopal referred to the "grave tragedy" that has struck Kerala rendering 10 million people homeless.

The AG had earlier donated Rs one crore to the flood relief fund.

Many other senior lawyers have also contributed significant amounts towards the relief fund.

The south Indian state is facing its worst flood in 100 years with 80 dams opened and all rivers in spate. A body blow has been dealt to the state known for its scenic natural beauty, with its infrastructure, standing crops and tourism facilities getting severely hit.

As per official records yesterday, 7,24,649 lakh people were housed in 5,645 relief camps across the state.

The deadly monsoon rains have so far claimed 210 lives since August 8.
 (PTI)

New Delhi, Jul 6  : The Supreme Court today maintained that the Chief Justice of India (CJI) is "the master of the roster" and has the prerogative and authority to allocate cases to different benches of the apex court.

A bench comprising justices A K Sikri and Ashok Bhushan in their separate concurring verdicts said the CJI occupies the role of "first among equals and is empowered to exercise leadership in administration of court" which includes assignment of cases.

The verdict came on a plea of former law minister Shanti Bhushan challenging the existing roster practice of allocation of cases in the apex court by the Chief Justice of India.

A five-judge constitution bench and a three-judge bench have already held that the CJI is the master of the roster.

In his verdict today, Justice Sikri said, "As far as the role of CJI as master of the roster is concerned, there is no dispute that he is the master of roster and has authority to allocate cases to different benches of the Supreme Court."

Concurring with Justice Sikri's opinion, Justice Bhushan said the CJI has the prerogative to allocate cases and nominate benches to hear them.

Justice Bhushan also said that there are rich conventions and practices of SC which are time-tested and should not be tinkered with.

Justice Sikri said that it would be difficult to accept the submission of the petitioner that the term Chief Justice of India under the Supreme Court Rules should be read as the collegium comprising five senior-most judges for allocating cases.

"The erosion of judiciary in the minds of people is greatest threat to judicial system," he said, adding that CJI, being the senior-most judge of the Supreme Court is the "spokesperson and leader of judiciary".

The bench said that no system is foolproof and there is always scope for improvement in functioning of judiciary.

In his PIL, Bhushan had alleged that "master of roster" cannot be an "unguided and unbridled" discretionary power, exercised arbitrarily by the CJI by hand-picking benches of select judges or by assigning cases to particular judges.




New Delhi, Apr 27: Indu Malhotra was on Friday sworn in as a Supreme Court judge, taking the SC judges strength to 25, still short of six judges.
She is the first senior woman lawyer from the bar to be directly elevated to the Supreme Court as a judge in the 68-year history of the Indian judiciary.
Senior advocate Indu Malhotra was administered the oath of office by Chief Justice (CJI) Dipak Misra in presence of all Judges, except Justice Madan Bhimrao Lokur, who is on leave.
The judges strength in the Supreme Court has risen to 25, including Ms Malhotra, still short of six judges.
Ms Malhotra is the seventh woman judge to be sworn in as a Supreme Court judge. UNI


New Delhi, Apr 21: The Union Cabinet on Saturday approved an Ordinance to amend the POCSO Act 2012 for introducing death penalty in cases of rape of children below 12 years of age, sources said.
The Ordinance, passed at the meeting chaired by the Prime Minister convened by Prime Minister within hours of his return from a five-day foreign tour, seeks to amend existing laws to award the death sentence to those found guilty of raping a child below 12 years of age.
The decision of the Cabinet follows widespread demands to amend the POCSO Act especially after uproar over rape of eight year old girl in Kathua.
The Centre had told the Supreme Court that it was in the process of amending the POCSO Act to award death penalty in all cases involving rape of children under 12.
Additional Solicitor General PS Narasimha on Friday told a three-judge bench led by CJI Dipak Misra that the government was proposing to introduce the necessary amendments in POCSO. UNI


New Delhi, Apr 20: The Supreme Court on Friday expressed concern over politicians making allegations against members of judiciary in media and giving statements to initiate impeachment motion against the CJI.
"We are all disturbed what is happening. It is very unfortunate," Justice A K Sikri said referring to media reports making allegations against judiciary. 
The petitioner has requested the court to restrain media from publishing such scandalous stories. 
However, the Apex Court said it cannot pass order without hearing case, seeks assistance of Attorney General K K Venugopal. UNI


New Delhi, Apr 16: The Supreme Court has decided to hear the plea of Kathua rape victim's father seeking safety and security of his family members and shifting of trial from Jammu and Kashmir to Chandigarh at 1400 hrs on Monday.
The victim's father, this morning, knocked the doors of the Apex Court seeking safety and security of his family members and transfer of the trial from Jammu and Kashmir Court to Chandigarh Court.
Senior Supreme Court lawyer Indira Jaising, appearing for the victim's father, mentioned before the three-judge bench of the Apex Court, headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Misra and also comprising Justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud, that victim's family safety and security was very important and thereby sought it.
The father also sought a direction from the Apex Court for transfer of the trial from Kathua in J&K Court to Chandigarh Court.
After hearing the mentioning by Jaising, the Apex Court bench said, ' We would hear the matter today at 1400 hrs.' UNI



New Delhi, Apr 12: Senior most judge of the Supreme Court Justice Jasti Chelameswar on Thursday refused to hear a plea of former Law Minister and senior Supreme Court lawyer Shanti Bhushan, against Chief Justice of India with respect to assigning the case to apex court's benches.
"Sorry I cannot take up the case otherwise there would be one more reversal of order in the next 24 hours," Justice Chelameswar told Prashant Bhushan, who was appearing for his father, Shanti Bhushan. 
Justice Chelameswar said this while referring to its earlier order on medical scam which was quashed by a bench of the CJI.
"Reasons for not taking up is too obvious.There is a relentless campaign going on against me in the last two months that I somehow want to grab the power. Please understand my difficulty," Justice Chelameswar told Prashant Bhushan. 
After Justice Chelameswar refused to hear the case, Prashant Bhushan rushed to the CJI court saying that grievances raised in the petition should be addressed by court. The CJI said, "We will look into it." 
Bhushan told the apex court that the petition was filed 10 days back but the apex court registry did not list the case for hearing. 
He said the case shouldn't be heard by the CJI as the petition is against him and listing of case should be decided by registry after consulting with other top three judges. UNI



New Delhi, Apr 11: The Supreme Court on Wednesday decided to hear next week the plea filed by the apex court lawyer, Manohar Lal Sharma, seeking a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe and compensation to the victim's family members in connection with the alleged Unnao gangrape and subsequent alleged custodial death case.
The lawyer, Manohar Lal Sharma, mentioned his plea before the apex court's three-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Misra, who said, we would hear the matter next week.
The lawyer sought a CBI inquiry and compensation for the families of the Unnao gangrape victim.
The three-judge bench of the apex court, also comprised of Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud, besides the CJI.
The apex court said, we would hear the petitioner's plea next week. 
The Unnao gangrape case involved BJP MLA Kuldeep Singh Sengar. UNI



New Delhi, Apr 11: The Supreme Court, in its judgement, on Wednesday, dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by an advocate, Ashok Pande, seeking a direction that the Chief Justice of India (CJI) should sit with the two senior-most SC judges in court number one and consult them in allocation of work.
A three-judge bench of the apex court, headed the CJI Misra and also comprising Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud, while dismissing the PIL of Pande, said, the CJI has been entrusted the power to constitute benches and allocate work to different benches as he has been trusted by the Constitution to be at the helm of affairs of the apex court.
"The CJI has been entrusted the power to constitute benches and allocate work to different benches as he has been trusted by the Constitution to do so," the three-judge bench of the apex court today said and dismissed the PIL of Pande," it said.
Dismissing the claims made in the PIL filed by lawyer, Pande, who alleged arbitrary allocation of work by the CJI, the SC in a detailed judgement said: since the CJI is a high constitutional functionary, there cannot be any distrust about the responsibilities he discharges to enable the apex court to carry out the work required under Constitution. UNI



New Delhi, Apr 10: The Supreme Court on Tuesday cleared decks for country-wide release of controversial movie 'Nanakshah Fakir' on April 13.
The apex court criticised Shiromani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committe (SGPC) for attempting to stop the release of the film based on the life and teachings of the first Sikh guru, Guru Nanak Dev.
A three-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Misra and also comprising Justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud, passed the order after hearing from the Producer of the Punjabi movie, and the SGPC and others. 
It said, once the Central Board for Film Certification (CBFC) grants the due permission through issuing a certificate for release of a film in theatres, no one has any right to stop its public screening.
Accepting senior Supreme Court advocate, R S Suri's argument that it infringes the fundamental right of expression of the filmmaker, the bench said no individual or group can assume authority of CBFC to stop or allow screening of a film.
The court asked all states to maintain law and order and ensure smooth release of the film. UNI


New Delhi, Apr 6: Former law minister and senior Supreme Court lawyer, Shanti Bhushan, through his son, Prashant Bhushan, on Friday knocked the doors of the Supreme Court seeking its direction to regulate the CJI's powers as master of roster to allocate hearing of cases to different benches.
Bhushan, in his petition, claimed that the allocation of cases to different benches before the apex court by the CJI (Chief Justice of India) must involve discussion with Collegium members, that is the four other most senior judges of the SC.
Shanti Bhushan in his petition, claimed that since the matter involved CJI's power as master of roster, the CJI-led bench must not hear Shanti Bhushan's petition. 
Shanti Bhushan had approached the top court, after the Congress party had decided to stop the initiation of impeachment motion against the CJI. UNI


New Delhi, Apr 5: The Supreme Court on Thursday disputed the Centre's contention that Aadhaar was the panacea for all ills in the system, including bank frauds.
A five-judge Constitution bench, headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Misra held, Aadhaar was not a solution. 
It observed, 'Hundreds of crores of rupees bank frauds were allegedly done in connivance with bank officials by alleged fraudsters. How is Aadhaar secure? The lender knows whom it is giving loan and it is the bank officials who are hand-in-glove with the fraudsters. Aadhaar can do little to stop it.' 
Justices Arjan Kumar Sikri, Ashok Bhushan, DY Chandrachud and A M Khanwilkar were also on the bench which heard arguments and submissions from petitioners and respondents. 
Multiple appeals had been filed before the apex court challenging the constitutional validity of Aadhaar and the Centre's making it mandatory to link the 12-digit unique identification number with bank accounts, mobile phones and others.
Attorney General K K Venugopal, representing the Central government, submitted to the bench that adequate security measures had been adopted to ensure that data was not leaked out in any form from collection centers.
Through Aadhaar, the AG said, the Union of India was providing food, shelter and employment to those who lived on the fringes and Government had taken precautions that right to privacy was affected at the most minimal way.
The Supreme Court had ruled those downtrodden who need food and shelter also had a right to privacy which could not be violated by the state. UNI



New Delhi, Apr 5: Puducherry State Government on Thursday moved the Supreme Court with an interlocutory application seeking its direction to the Centre to implement the Cauvery verdict in actual true letter and spirit immediately.
Puducherry state government mentioned before the Cauvery water dispute issue before the apex court three-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Misra and also comprising Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud, which said, we would hear it on April 9, Monday. 
"We will hear the matter on April 9, Monday, the plea filed by the Puducherry state government," the three-judge bench of the top court said. 
All the four disputing states -- Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Kerala and Pondicherry - - involving the Cauvery water dispute case and sharing of water, had filed their respective petitions before the court seeking a direction from the top court for a modification of the Cauvery tribunal's final order which was delivered in 2007. 
Kerala Government had also filed a review petition on March 22, before the Supreme Court in the case.
The sharing of waters of the Cauvery river has been the source of a serious and major issue of conflict between many states including -- Tamil Nadu and Karnataka. UNI


New Delhi, Apr 3: The Supreme Court has decided to hear the review petition filed by the central government with regard to the SC/ST judgment at 2 pm on Tuesday in the open court.
The Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Misra on Tuesday decided to constitute a bench after the Attorney-General (AG) KK Venugopal mentioned the matter before the same bench which had passed the judgement on the matter.
Keeping in view the fact that the issue is a sensitive one, Venugopal mentioned before the Supreme Court that the court should hear it today itself.
Amicus Curiae (Friend of the Court), Amrendra Sharan, who is also a senior Supreme Court lawyer, opposed the AG's submission and said that law and order was the responsibility of the government. Judgement should not be stayed on the ground that law and order is not right or stable.
The apex court in its earlier judgement had on March 20 held that a state government official cannot be automatically arrested on a complaint filed under the Act and sanction of appointing authority was must before taking such action against a public servant.
The Supreme Court, in its judgement, had held that there was no absolute bar for granting the anticipatory bail in atrocities matter.
The top court had said that the preliminary investigation by police was a must now and a sanction by the competent authority would be required in cases against public servants.
A public servant can be arrested after grant of approval by the superior officer. In case of registration of any offence, the DSP shall conduct a preliminary enquiry, the bench of the court said in its judgement.
A division bench of the apex court headed by Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel had passed the judgement on March 20. UNI


New Delhi, Mar 27: In a landmark judgement, the Supreme Court today held that any assembly which is intended to scuttle a marriage between two consenting adults would be illegal till a legislation comes into force. 
The Apex Court three-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Misra and also comprising Justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud, said, in its judgement that the punitive measures to deal with such unlawful assembly against the marriage between consenting adults will be in force, until a legislation comes into force.
The Apex Court also laid down a slew of steps or measures to deal with the menace of Khap Panchayat. 
The Top Court disposed off the petition filed by NGO, Shakti Vahini, which had knocked the doors of the Apex Court seeking a direction and detailed guidelines into the Khap Panchayat, which acted against the two consenting adults' marriage. UNI


New Delhi, Mar 26: The Supreme Court on Monday decided to hear on April 2, Monday, the Delhi Government's plea seeking additional 120 cusecs of water from Haryana as certain parts of the city were facing an acute shortage of water due to the onslaught of the summer season. 
Delhi Government on Monday approached the apex court and submitted before it that there was an acute shortage of drinking water in various parts of Delhi and several areas were deprived of water. 
A three-judge bench of the apex court, headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Misra and also comprising Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud, said "we would hear the plea of the Delhi Jal Board on April 2, Monday."
Delhi Jal Board (DJB) had knocked the doors of the apex court seeking a direction from it on the issue of acute shortage of water in Delhi's certain areas. 
Delhi is getting 330 cusecs of water, but it pleaded to the apex court for an additional 120 cusecs of water as it was facing an acute shortage of water at present. 
The DJB in its plea sought a direction from the top court to the Haryana Government for providing additional 120 cusecs of water to Delhi. UNI


New Delhi, Mar 26: The Supreme Court on Monday issued notices to the Union of India (UoI) and other respondents in connection with Polygamy, Nikah-Halala, Nikah-Mutah and Nikah-Misyar and referred the matter to a larger five-judge constitution bench after hearing four petitions in this regard.
The apex court three-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) and also comprising Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud, also issued notice to the Ministry of Law and Justice and the Ministry of Women, Child and Development after hearing the four PILs.
The four petitioners who had moved the apex court are Samina, Mohsin Nafisa and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Ashwini Upadhyay. UNI



New Delhi, Mar23: The Supreme Court on Friday asked the Karnataka, Goa and Maharashtra governments to file detailed affidavits within four weeks in the MM Kalburgi murder case.
Author MM Kalburgi was allegedly murdered in Dharwad in Karnataka in 2015.
A three-judge bench of the apex court, headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Misra and also comprising Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud was hearing the submissions from Krishna Kumar, lawyer appearing for Umadevi Kalburgi, wife of the deceased author, MM Kalburgi.
Umadevi Kalburgi had moved the apex court seeking a Special Investigation Team (SIT) probe into the murder of her husband MM Kalburgi.
Umadevi, in her petition, had alleged that the same organisation's shooters were allegedly involved behind the murders of her husband MM Kalburgi, Pansare and Dabholkar. She said the Karnataka Police probe was in a sorry state.
Kalburgi's widow had in the last hearing, in January, told the top court that it seemed that there was a similar pattern in the alleged murders of her husband, Dhabolkar and Panasare and there has to be a coordinated probe into all the three cases.
Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Pinky Anand, senior law officer representing the central government, told the CJI bench that the NIA (National Investigating Agency) was a specialised agency to investigate national and inter-state terrorism cases and was prohibited by the NIA Act to probe into murder cases.
The case may come up for hearing again after four weeks. UNI