The top court issued notice to trial court petitioner Shailendra Vyas on the mosque side’s plea against worship in the basement.
Tag: Supreme court
-
Chandigarh Mayoral Polls: SC Declares AAP Candidate Kuldeep Kumar Mayor Of Chandigarh, Quashes Previous Results |
NEW DELHI: In a major victory for the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), the Supreme Court on Tuesday quashed the result of the recently conducted mayoral election in Chandigarh and declared its candidate Kuldeep Kumar as the validly elected Mayor of Chandigarh Municipal Corporation. ”8 votes which were treated as invalid, were validly passed in favour of AAP candidate Kuldeep Kumar and the counting the eight votes for him will make him have 20 votes,” said the Supreme Court. ”We direct that the election result by the presiding officer is quashed,” it added.
Chandigarh Mayor Election matter | Supreme Court orders that AAP candidate is declared to be the validly elected candidate for the post of Mayor of Chandigarh Municipal Corporation. pic.twitter.com/QMWkJUMij4
— ANI (@ANI) February 20, 2024
The top court also slammed the Returning Officer, Anil Masih, saying that he altered the election process in violation of law. The Supreme Court also issued a show cause notice to him over his alleged intervention in the mayoral polls. “A fit case is made out for the initiation of proceedings under Section 340 CrPC against Anil Masih, Returning Officer of Chandigarh Mayor poll,” said the Supreme Court. It also directed the Registrar Judicial to issue a notice to him to show cause as to why steps should not be initiated against him.
The top court earlier observed that all ”invalidated” eight ballots have votes been cast in favour of the AAP’s candidate Kuldeep Kumar in the recently conducted Chandigarh Mayoral Polls. Hearing the plea filed by AAP’s mayoral candidate Kuldeep Kumar, the Supreme Court said that the votes cast during the poll shall be recounted and these eight shall be treated as valid. The Supreme Court made these observations in response to a plea filed by AAP Mayor Candidate Kuldeep Kumar, whose votes were invalidated by the Returning Officer Anil Masih.
Today’s Supreme Court’s ruling holds big political significance since the AAP and the Congress – which contested the Chandigarh mayoral election in alliance with each other – have recorded the opposition INDIA bloc’s first electoral win as they prepare to defeat Prime Minister Narendra Modi-led BJP in the upcoming 2024 Lok Sabha elections.
Chandigarh mayoral polls: Supreme Court says that it will direct that the votes at the poll shall be recounted and these eight shall be treated as valid. Thereafter, results be declared based on that, Court observes.
— ANI (@ANI) February 20, 2024
Court Orders Recounting Of Votes
During the hearing, the Chief Justice of India (CJI) showcased the ballots to the legal representatives, highlighting that all eight ballots were stamped in favour of AAP’s Kuldeep Kumar. Expressing scepticism over the justification provided by the Returning Officer for invalidating these votes, the top court emphasized the need for a recount and declared that the results would be based on the revised count.
Chandigarh mayoral polls: Supreme Court takes into note that all invalidated eight ballots have votes cast in favour of the AAP Mayor Candidate Kuldeep Kumar. https://t.co/Eg3WDMRiPJ
— ANI (@ANI) February 20, 2024Concerns Over Electoral Integrity and ‘Horse Trading’
The bench, comprising CJI DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, expressed grave concerns over the integrity of the electoral process, condemning what they termed as “horse-trading.” They criticized the actions of the Returning Officer and emphasized the necessity of upholding the democratic principles of fair elections.
Call for Prosecution and Preservation of Electoral Records
The Court’s scrutiny extended beyond the immediate issue, with sharp criticism directed at Anil Masih for allegedly defacing ballot papers. Masih’s actions were deemed as a threat to electoral democracy, prompting calls for prosecution. Additionally, the Court ordered the preservation and production of all relevant electoral materials, including ballot papers and video recordings, for further examination.
Legal Battle Over Election Outcome
The legal battle surrounding the Chandigarh mayoral election intensified, with AAP’s Kuldeep Dhalor challenging the BJP’s victory in court. Despite the BJP candidate Manoj Sonkar securing the mayoral position, questions regarding the validity of the electoral process persist, prompting demands for fresh polls under judicial supervision.
Supreme Court’s Intervention
The Supreme Court’s intervention underscores the importance of safeguarding the electoral process and ensuring transparency and fairness in democratic elections. As the legal proceedings continue, the spotlight remains on upholding the principles of democracy and protecting the sanctity of the electoral mandate.
-
BREAKING: Chandigarh Mayoral Election: Returning Officer Anil Masih Should Be Prosecuted, Says SC |
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday slammed Returning Officer Anil Masih for his role in the alleged defacement of ballot papers during the Chandigarh mayoral election and said that he should be prosecuted. The top court also proposed that results for the Chandigarh mayoral polls be declared by counting the present ballot papers, disregarding the marks made by Returning Officer Anil Masih instead of holding fresh elections.
Chandigarh Mayor poll | Supreme Court remarks that Anil Masih, returning officer in Chandigarh Mayor election, has to be prosecuted as he was interfering with the election process.
— ANI (@ANI) February 19, 2024
The top court, while hearing a petition on the alleged irregularities in the Chandigarh mayoral election, also expressed concerns over alleged horse-trading after the mayoral polls. “We are deeply concerned about the horse-trading which is taking place…” the SC bench led by CJI DY Chandrachud said.
The apex court also directed the administration to provide security to the judicial officer and safeguard the records. It also asked the HC registrar general to depute a judicial officer to bring ballot papers, and videos for its perusal on Tuesday.
Earlier during the hearing, the Supreme Court grilled Masih over his conduct regarding his conduct during the controversial Mayoral elections in Chandigarh. Responding to the Supreme Court, Masih admitted that he put an ‘X’ mark on 8 ballot papers. Masih said that he was separately marking ballot papers which were defaced by the voters, so that they wouldn’t get mixed up.
On February 5, the bench of CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra heard a petition filed by the AAP candidate and slammed Masih for his conduct and directed him to explain his conduct as presiding officer in the Chandigarh Mayor elections to the top court in person in next hearing. The CJI had called what transpired in mayoral elections a “murder of democracy”.
“It is obvious that he defaced the ballot papers. Is this the way he conducts the elections? This is a mockery of democracy. This is a murder of democracy. This man should be prosecuted! Tell him the Supreme Court is watching him,” CJI Chandrachud said while passing orders. The court had expressed dismay over the videos that surfaced from the elections and asked why Masih was looking at the CCTV camera while counting ballot papers.
The AAP and Congress have accused Masih of tampering with ballots to favour BJP candidate Manoj Sonkar. It is alleged by the INDIA bloc candidate Kuldeep Kumar that Masih rejected 8 votes as invalid while counting by forgery and BJP won elections by fraud.
On January 30, Manoj Sonkar, the Mayor candidate from BJP was declared the Mayor after winning 16 votes against the 12 votes received by the Congress-AAP candidate Kumar.
On February 18, just one day before the next hearing in the Supreme Court, the BJP candidate Manoj Sonkar resigned from the Mayor’s office. In another key development before the hearing, three Chandigarh AAP Councillors Gurcharan Kala, Punam Devi and Neha Musawat joined the BJP.
-
Supreme Court Strikes Down Electoral Bond Scheme, Terms It `Unconstitutional` | 10 Points
The Supreme Court has ordered SBI to reveal the names of the donors and the amounts received by political parties through the Electoral Bond scheme.
-
Chandigarh Mayoral Polls: Supreme Court Says `Won`t Allow Murder Of Democracy`
The apex court also ordered the preservation of the entire record of the election process including ballot papers, videography and other material through the Registrar General of Punjab and Haryana High Court.
-
Strong Judicial System Part Of Viksit Bharat Says PM Modi As Supreme Court Turns 75 |
New Delhi: Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Sunday said the government was modernising laws keeping in view the present context and in line with the best practices. Addressing the 75th anniversary celebrations of the Supreme Court here, he said that with the enactment of three new criminal justice laws, India’s legal, policing and investigative systems have entered a new era.
“It is important to ensure that the transition to new laws from the ones dating back to hundreds of years is smooth. In this regard, we have already started training and capacity building work for government employees,” the prime minister said. PM Modi urged the Supreme Court to come forward to work towards the capacity building of other stakeholders.
“An empowered judicial system is a part of Viksit Bharat. The government is working continuously and taking many decisions to form a trusted judicial system. The Jan Vishwas Bill is a step in this direction. In the future, this will reduce the unnecessary burden on the judicial system,” the prime minister said.
He said the Supreme Court has strengthened India’s vibrant democracy and given many important verdicts on individual rights, freedom of speech which have given new direction to the country’s socio-political milieu.
“Today’s economic policies of India will form the basis of tomorrow’s bright India. The laws being made in India today will further strengthen tomorrow’s bright India,” the prime minister said.
“Laws made today will brighten the future of India. With changes happening globally, the world’s eyes are set on India, as the world’s faith is growing stronger in India. In such times, it is important for India to take advantage of every opportunity given to us,” Modi said.
He also noted that last week the government had approved ₹ 800 crore for expansion of the Supreme Court building.
-
Hearing on petitions related to ‘Electoral Bond’ scheme will begin in the Supreme Court from October 31.
New Delhi: A five-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court is scheduled to begin hearing from October 31 on petitions challenging the validity of the ‘Electoral Bond’ scheme for political funding of parties. The ‘Electoral Bond’ scheme was notified on January 2, 2018. It was introduced as an alternative to cash donations to parties as part of efforts to bring transparency in political funding.
As per the provisions of the scheme, electoral bonds can be purchased by a person having Indian citizenship or an institution established in India. A person can buy it alone or jointly with other persons. Chief Justice D.Y. A bench headed by Chandrachud is scheduled to hear four petitions, including those filed by Congress leader Jaya Thakur and the Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M).
Other members of the bench were Justice Sanjiv Khanna, Justice B. R. Gavai, Justice J. B. Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Mishra. The Supreme Court had on October 16 said, “In view of the importance of the issues raised, and in the light of Article 145(4) of the Constitution (Rules relating to the business of the Supreme Court), the matter is referred to a bench of not less than five judges.” Will be placed before…”
On October 10, the court had taken note of the arguments of senior advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the NGO ‘Association for Democratic Rights’ (ADR), that the issue needed to be decided before the launch of the bond scheme for the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. Is. Bhushan had said that anonymous funding through electoral bonds promotes corruption and violates the rights of citizens of a corruption-free nation.
He had argued, “Since the source of funding remains anonymous, it encourages corruption.” This violates Article 21 of the Constitution and the problem will escalate rapidly if no decision is taken in the matter. Four PILs are pending on this issue. One of these petitioners had said in March that Rs 12,000 crore has so far been paid to political parties through electoral bonds and two-thirds of this amount has gone to a major political party.
The apex court had on March 21 said it would consider whether the petitions could be referred to a Constitution bench for an acceptable decision.
(This news has not been edited by the NDTV team. It is published directly from the syndicated feed.)
-
Delhi CM residence renovation case: Shock to 6 PWD engineers from Supreme Court
After the order of Delhi High Court, PWD engineers had approached the Supreme Court. (file)
New Delhi :
6 PWD engineers arrested in CM residence renovation case in Delhi Supreme Court There has been a shock from (Supreme Court). The Supreme Court has refused to cancel the show cause notice of Vigilance. The Supreme Court has asked to approach the Central Administrative Tribunal in this matter. Earlier, Delhi High Court had also rejected his petition. Show cause notice was issued to 6 PWD engineers by the Vigilance Directorate of Delhi Government.
-
Case of abortion of 26 weeks fetus: Supreme Court said – will get the investigation done to see if there is any abnormality in the fetus.
ASG Aishwarya Bhati said, “Leave aside the determination of law. This case can be decided separately. It is still sensitive. India has a pro-choice law. The whole world is pro choice and pro life. Pro life Countries ban abortion completely. Pro life countries strongly protect women’s autonomy and then some countries are on the fence. In 1971 the law came with 12 weeks. Then 20 weeks and then after 2020 it is 24 weeks. Till gone.”
CJI DY Chandrachud said, “Parliament has made a law. It reflects the balance between pro choice and pro life. When Parliament gave the cut off, it was aware of all the things. The cut off of 24 weeks reflects this aspect. It was meant to balance. And our aspect is primarily pro choice, because it gives unfettered discretion. Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain files an intervention petition against U Stalin, A Raja in the case of giving hate speech against Sanatan Dharma Demanded to register FIR.
Apart from this, a demand has been made in the application to direct contempt action against DCP South for not taking any action on the complaint given regarding hate speech.
Along with this, there has also been a demand to order Stalin to remain a minister in the Tamil Nadu cabinet and to stop Raja from remaining an MP.
In fact, while seeking intervention in the petitions filed regarding hate speech, it has been said that Stalin and Raja have expressed hatred against Sanatan Dharma by giving statements like eliminating dengue, malaria and leprosy.
– This falls in the category of hate speech, for this action should be taken against them.ASG Aishwarya Bhati said that the question here is whether someone’s choice can be allowed to end one’s life? Section 3 of the law deals with termination of pregnancy up to 20 weeks by a registered medical practitioner. When it is more than 20 and not more than 24 weeks. At least two medical practitioners must be of the opinion that pregnancy will be the cause.
On this CJI Chandrachud said…
– What happened in Ireland…? The Indian-origin woman had to undergo an abortion and Irish law did not allow it. Ultimately he died.
– In our law, if the pregnancy threatens the life of the mother, it can be terminated even at the eleventh hour. Our law allows this and no deduction applies. Abortion is also allowed in case of fetal abnormality.
– So if you have to save a woman’s life, you can finish it. Our law keeps woman’s life paramount.
– As happened in Ireland, a woman of Indian origin died because she could not get an abortion and then the Irish law was amended.
– In case of fetal abnormalities more than 24 weeks, a board is made. If the woman’s life is in danger then you do not need a medical board. Obviously because this will be done in an emergency.
– A child born with a fetal abnormality – This will also affect the quality of life of the parents. And second, it will affect the quality of life of the child.
– This case does not even involve the fetus being abnormal.
– In case of sexual harassment victim, our law says 24 weeks. Let’s say there is a victim, a young minor, she may not even know that she is pregnant. She may realize this and keep it a secret from the family. And then when it comes to court, the court may take a different approach.Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati argued that the opinion of the medical board should be given priority. The medical board clearly states that MTP should not occur as there is a viable and reasonable chance of the child’s survival.
On this the CJI said- So the Medical Board initially said no and then we gave that order. And the doctor had an ethical dilemma and wrote the mail
The government has responsibility in this matter. Register our undertaking. When will the government take steps for the child? She was undergoing treatment for postpartum psychosis since October 2022. That’s why she was undergoing treatment during this pregnancy. Should we seek a report from AIIMS on whether the treatment she has taken has caused any abnormality in the fetus?ASG said that ultrasound sonography shows that the fetus is normal, there is no abnormality in it.
After this the CJI raised questions on the woman’s doctor’s prescription and said that there is doubt in it. It was not even written about the disease and what the medicine was for. Should the Supreme Court trust them? We will ask AIIMS to investigate the woman’s depression. They will also check whether there is any abnormality in the fetus.
-
Uber and Rapido get a shock from the Supreme Court, ban on bike taxis remains intact
Uber and Rapido, which provide bike taxi services through the app, got a big blow from the Supreme Court on Monday. The Supreme Court has stayed the High Court order in which these bike taxi operators were allowed to continue service in Delhi. The High Court had directed the Delhi government not to take any action against these firms until a new policy is made. The vacation bench of Justices Aniruddha Bose and Rajesh Bindal has given liberty to both these firms to request the Delhi High Court to hear their petition immediately. This bench has stayed the order of May 26 of the High Court. Along with this, the information of Delhi Government’s lawyer to give notification of the final policy before the end of July has been recorded. Two separate petitions were being heard in the Supreme Court. These petitions were to challenge the High Court order of May 26 of the AAP Aadmi Party government in Delhi. Last week, the court had sought answers from the central government in this regard. The Delhi government had approved the Motor Vehicle Aggregator Scheme last month. In this, cab aggregators and delivery service providers were regulated in the capital. The scheme included having emergency buttons in taxis, integration with the emergency number ‘112’ and phase wise shift to electric vehicles (EVs). The Motor Vehicle Aggregator Scheme will apply to such entities, a person who engages a driver for carrying passengers or for the delivery of a product, courier, package or parcel of a seller, e-commerce firm or a consignor, through electronic, digital or any other means. Are connected with. Earlier this year, Rapido had challenged the Bombay High Court’s order to shut down services in Maharashtra in the Supreme Court. Rapido did not have a license to provide bike taxi or autorickshaw services in Maharashtra. The Bombay High Court had asked Roppen Transportation Services, which operates Rapido, to immediately stop services in Maharashtra as the firm had not obtained a license from the state government.