Abhishek Manu Singhvi argues that the SC on August 21 had ordered for a hearing on Friday, August 23. Prosecution should not have acted in a way (by arresting Chidambaram on August 21) to render a judicial order ineffective.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta was present in the Court when an order for hearing was passed. His client (CBI) should not have acted in this way then, Singhvi.
#Breaking: Supreme Court dismisses SLP filed by Chidambaram against Delhi High Court order denying him protection from arrest as far as CBI case is concerned. Court says matter is now infructuous.
Chidambaram granted liberty to move appropriate Court for regular bail
Supreme Court now hears the SLP filed in relation to the cases filed by ED against P Chidambaram.
Sibal questions the handing over of certain documents in a sealed cover to the Delhi High Court. He says that P Chidambaram was not aware of these documents/notes.
If they discovered some material between the time FIR was filed and I was arrested, they should have summoned me and interrogated me. They cannot spring it like a surprise in the Court, Sibal.
The Will that was spoken about by SG in the earlier hearing is in public domain. The attachment of properties is known. They cannot just make statements like this. ED's only case is that he is not cooperating. This is not fair, this is media trial, Sibal
SG has contended discovery of large number of mails, bank accounts, among other things. All this was never out to Chidambaram. He was examined by ED thrice and only once by the CBI. Neither agencies put any of this before him.
They have to clarify when these documents and notes were discovered. If it was before questioning, why didn't they confront him and if it was after questioning, then why was he not called again, Sibal
SG says Chidambaram is being evasive but the Court should peruse the questions that were put to him and the responses given by him to ascertain if he was being evasive.
The case is that Karti Chidambaram used his relationship with P Chidambaram to influence public servants to secure ex-post facto FIPB approvals for the downstream investment in INX media, Sibal
The CA Bhaskar Raman got bail, Karti Chidambaram got bail, Indrani and Peter Mukherjea are on default bail and no sanctions have been sought for the six government secretaries till now, Sibal
P Chidambaram is being made vicariously liable. The ED's case seems to be that since he's Karti's father, he must be involved... There is no chargesheet filed naming him so prima facie no offence has been committed, Sibal.
Sibal cites the judgment of a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of Gurbaksh Singh on the issue of right of an accused for anticipatory bail.
If there is a money trail, there must be documents and the source of the monies traceable. What are they trying to find out? First probe, find out and then seek custody, Sibal
If something is found after probing documents, it should be put before the accused for him to give an explanation. Here it's a one way street where documents are produced in Court but not put before accused, Sibal
Great ignominy and humiliation is attached to an arrest. The moment someone is arrested, you destroy that man. You make believe that the man js guilty. That is what is happening here, Sibal
On the Delhi High Court, Sibal says what is the application of mind of the Judge when certain paragraphs are a word for word, comma for comma copy of the note submitted by the SG?
That is exactly my objection that while he (SG) can put whatever he wishes before the Court but it should be put before me first. These are the procedural issues that need to be addressed in a case which involves personal liberty, Sibal
There is also another serious issue that why was the order reserved for seven month? It took him (Justice Sunil Gaur of the HC) 7 months to decide that there was gravity in the matter, Sibal
Their case is, and it is mentioned in the judgment, that Chidambaram has been evasive during questioning, then Your Lordships must ask for transcripts and decide if he was being evasive, Sibal
They (investigating agencies) are saying that they have cogent evidence against the petitioner and at the same time they say that evidence is yet to be unearthed. Then what is this cogent evidence then? - Sibal
They are claiming that there is apprehension of tampering of evidence. Tampering of what? Properties situated outside? Or bank accounts? If that tampering is possible, my arms must be really long, Sibal
Supreme Court to continue hearing the case tomorrow at 12 noon. P Chidambaram to file a rejoinder to the ED's affidavit. Interim protection from arrest granted to Chidambaram in the ED case to continue till tomorrow.
Supreme Court resumes hearing case where it recently pulled up 2 senior IAS officers from UP for not following court orders and halting the demolition of unauthorised commercial structures due to "public hue and cry."
Bench: Justices JB Pardiwala and KV Viswanathan
The court noted that schools, banks, hospitals etc were being run from the unauthorised buildings and ordered immediate sealing.
It also said that if any untoward incident happens in any of the illegal buildings till demolition takes place, the IAS officers would be held personally liable.
Sr. Adv. Rajiv Shakdher (for Chairman, UP AEVP): we have shifted the students out of the schools, hospitals, the banks have also moved. We have sealed all of it.
Day 3 before the nine-judge Bench in the Supreme Court in the Sabarimala reference is set to resume shortly
In the last two hearings, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta outlined the Centre’s framework on essential religious practices, denominational rights and the limits of judicial review.
Senior Advocate CS Vaidyanathan to begin submissions today
#Sabarimala #SupremeCourt
SG: There are instances of temples where men are not allowed. Because it is a Devi Bhagwati temple, there are certain faiths and beliefs attached.
There are temples, details of which I have mentioned, where male priests are under a religious mandate to wash the feet of female devotees. There are temples like the Pushkar temple, the only Brahma temple in the country, where married men are not allowed.
There is also a temple in Kerala where the practice is that men enter dressed as women. As I have read in detail, they go to beauty parlours, and their female family members help them dress in sarees and other attire. Only males go there.
So it is not a question of male-centric or female-centric religious beliefs. In the present case, it happens to be woman-centric.
Secondly, there was a question regarding Articles 25 and 26 and their interpretation. The day before, I had substantially argued on this. Yesterday, when I began, I had said that I would take that up at the end; otherwise, I would not be able to finish the other issues. I could not get the time for that.
I am not re-arguing. Substantially, I have answered it. The rest is in my written submissions. That is all.
ASG KM Nataraj: Religious rights under the Constitution are well-linked, protected and regulated under the scheme of Articles 25 and 26. There is a three-tier mechanism to protect, connect and regulate these rights.
The first part of Article 25(1) guarantees an individual right. The second part, Article 25(2), provides the regulatory mechanism. Article 26 relates to institutional rights.
Thus, Articles 25(1) and 26 are interconnected. Article 26 is embedded in Article 25, and vice versa. When Article 26 is enforced, it essentially relates back to Article 25(1). Therefore, Articles 25 and 26 form interconnected mechanisms..granting rights to individuals under Article 25(1) and institutional rights under Article 26.
“You can’t deprive a voter of the right to exercise a franchise, even if he is a polling officer.” says Kerala HC
while hearing a plea by Kerala NGO Union alleging that many officials on election duty were not given postal ballots, despite applying on time.
Petitioner says several officials went to facilitation centres but had to return without voting as ballot papers were not available.
Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas refers to Rule 18A of the Conduct of Election Rules 1961, noting that a voter on election duty is entitled to receive a postal ballot, record their vote, and return it at the facilitation centre specified by the Returning Officer.
CJI: Let committee not be confined only to the class 8 chapter.. but let all aspects be considered up and down also.
ASG KM Natraj: Yes all areas
CJI: compliance affidavit has been filed. By this a three member committee comprising Justice Indu Malhotra, sr Adv KK Venugopal and Mr Prakash Singh Vc of Garhwal University has been appointed. The committee shall collaborate with NJA Bhopal to finalise the curriculum of class 8 and higher grades in compliance with NCERT syllabus dealing with legal studies. NCERT has also issued notification on April 2 whereby a high powered committee for prepration of national syllabus and teacher learning committee has been reconstituted. The details of the 20 distinguished members including Mr MC Pant being the chairman, has been constituted. We take both the orders/notification on record as well as compliance affidavit.
Sr Adv Gopal Sankarnarayanan for Alok Prasanna Kumar: We want to show what process was followed..they are not fly by night authors. They are respected. Now new committee is formed.
Sr Adv Arvind Datar appears for Prof Michael: we have given detailed submission
Sr Adv J Sai Deepak: I appear for Suparna Diwakar..this was a collective process and no individual had a sole say
CJI: affidavits have been filed by the three on whom reference has been made in our order dated March 11 where certain directions were issued in respect of them. These applications are not listed today. After curing of defects let the case be listed on so and so date.
Sr Adv Kapil Sibal: I got a report from the Telegraph now
CJI Surya Kant; I don't want to politicise it. But we got reports since 2 am. 5 pm they gheraoed the officers and till 11 pm there was no one
Sibal: it is unfortunate.
Sr Adv Menaka Guruswamy: Most of the officers have been transferred out of the state
#SupremeCourt @MamataOfficial
Sr Adv DS Naidu: Earlier judicial officers were being threatened. Now it is becoming physical. If its mobocracy no one can help
Justice Bagchi: Top most civil servant was contacted by the Chief justice of high court. It makes no good case by saying we are not associated. All leaders need to condemn this in one voice. We are here to protect the special officers. Their orders are deemed to be orders of our court
SG: now state cannot be entrusted with the security of judicial officers.
Justice Bagchi: we leave it to ECI to get forces from anywhere and ensure security of judicial officers.
Sr Adv Sankarnarayanan: These villagers are.sayonf they will continue to protest...we will all co-operate. CAPF or anything.
Justice Oka is giving the 45th JP Memorial Lecture organised by PUCL India.
Justice Oka: Remembering Jayaprakash Narayan today, I go back to my first brush with his movement — I was 14, reading one Marathi and one English newspaper a day, without fully grasping the moment that would define a generation. JP, a committed Gandhian and colleague of leaders like N.G. Ranga, emerged as the leader of the youth in the 1970s; only later did I realise how much my generation underestimated the depth of his ideas.
#JusticeOka
Justice Oka: From his writings and speeches, one thing stands out: his unwavering faith in non-violence. For JP, non-violence was not a tactic, but a way of resisting evil with moral strength. He reminded us that negotiations, arbitration, friendship or mediation may succeed or fail — but for those who truly accept non-violence and are prepared to resist evil non-violently, there is no failure. That single idea has stayed with me: those who accept non-violence, and prepare themselves to resist whatever evil may come non-violently, discover a strength that no defeat can erase.
When I revisited JP’s life, I felt his active public role was cut short. Had he remained in public life for another 10–14 years perhaps we would have seen a different India.
#JusticeOka
Justice Oka: Let me now turn to today’s theme: where do we see the judiciary today, within the framework of our Constitution, which promises justice – social, economic and political – to every citizen. Our courts have, in many instances, delivered substantive and even spiritual justice, and I say this as someone who has seen the system from within. Yet I have consistently said: when the Constitution, the government and the citizens placed great expectations on the justice system, we did not fully live up to those expectations.