Supreme Court of India issued notice on PIL seeking revenue judicial service and legal qualifications. Bench of Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi heard plea by Ashwini Upadhyay.
The Supreme Court asked the Centre to file an affidavit on a plea seeking regulatory guidelines to control unpredictable fluctuations in airfare. The bench questioned the delay, stating, “What is this? What prevents you from filing an affidavit.”
Supreme Court of India granted relief to elderly cancer patient in decade-old pension dispute, directing Allahabad High Court for urgent hearing. Bench of Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi stressed compassion.
The Supreme Court objected to AIIMS plea seeking reversal of its order allowing a 15-year-old rape survivor to terminate a 30-week pregnancy. It urged the Centre to amend abortion laws, stressing no time limit in rape cases and calling for a responsive, evolving legal framework.
Today, On 30th April, The Supreme Court on Tuesday reserved its verdict on Congress leader Pawan Khera’s anticipatory bail plea in a defamation and forgery case lodged by the Assam Police. Senior Advocate A.M. Singhvi said, “Dr. B.R. Ambedkar would turn in his grave…”
Supreme Court of India ordered lookout notice against Satinder Singh Bhasin in Grand Venice fraud case. Bench of Sanjay Karol and N Kotiswar Singh directed authorities to secure his presence urgently.
The Supreme Court strongly criticised the Allahabad High Court for refusing bail to a man who has spent almost nine years in jail as an undertrial in a murder case, calling the High Court’s order “shocking and very disappointing.”
Indira Jaising invoked Shabari before Supreme Court of India Constitution Bench to stress inclusivity in worship. Arguments arose in ongoing challenge to gender restrictions at Sabarimala Temple concerning women’s entry rights.
Supreme Court of India refused to release passport of Teesta Setalvad without specific travel plans, permitting fresh plea later. Bench of Dipankar Datta, Satish Chandra Sharma, and Alok Aradhe heard matter.
A nine-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court asked how the law should treat a non-believer seeking entry to a religious place, noting it must assess whether the claimant is a devotee or non-devotee while examining petitions on Sabarimala.
