The Supreme Court upheld Naima Khatoon’s appointment as AMU’s first woman Vice-Chancellor, dismissing a challenge over alleged conflict of interest. The Allahabad High Court had earlier cleared her selection.
In 2024, India’s Supreme Court dealt with numerous landmark rulings, focusing on personal liberty, places of worship disputes, and electoral reforms. Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna emphasized efficiency, reforming case backlogs. Notable cases included prohibitions on religious site surveys, striking down electoral bonds, and addressing environmental pollution. The court’s decisions significantly influenced legal frameworks and societal issues.
Justice Dipankar Datta, born on August 10, 1960, assumed office in the Supreme Court on December 12, 2022, after serving as Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court. With 81 authored judgments, notable cases include media influence in investigations and challenges against restrictive IT Rules. He retires on February 8, 2030.
Justice Surya Kant criticized a 1981 Supreme Court reference questioning the Chief Justice’s authority regarding Aligarh Muslim University’s minority status, labeling it “bad in law.” He emphasized judicial integrity, asserting that a two-judge bench cannot challenge larger bench rulings, and highlighted the Chief Justice’s role in maintaining judicial clarity and authority within the system.
![[BREAKING] "Statutory Creation Doesn't Nullify Minority Status Of AMU': Supreme Court](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/AMU.jpeg?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
In a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court of India, led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, overturned the 1967 Azeez Basha decision, affirming that statutory incorporation does not negate an institution’s minority status. The Court emphasized the founders’ identity and intent, stating that AMU’s status requires examination of its establishment by minority community members.
Today, the Delhi High Court addressed Sharjeel Imam’s bail plea in a case involving charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and sedition over his inflammatory speeches. The court has sought a response from the Delhi Police within two weeks and scheduled another hearing for April. Imam’s speeches at Aligarh Muslim University and in Delhi were perceived to instigate opposition to the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA). Despite arguing that he should be granted statutory bail, the trial court refused Imam’s plea, emphasizing the disruptive impact of his speeches on the 2020 riots in the national capital. He faces severe charges under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the UAPA. The statutory bail in the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) allows for a maximum detention of 90 days, which can be extended to 180 days in terror-related cases under the UAPA. If the investigation is not complete at the end of this period, the court can release the person on default bail.
The Supreme Court of India On Day 8 has reserved its verdict on the status of AMU Aligarh Muslim University as a minority institution. The case raises fundamental questions about minority rights and the interpretation of Article 30 of the Constitution. The decision is anticipated to set a precedent for minority educational institutions in India and has far-reaching implications for minority rights in the country.
The Centre emphasized to the Supreme Court the need for national reflection in institutions of national significance like Aligarh Muslim University. Solicitor General highlighted the absence of reservation and the institution’s importance. The case revolves around AMU’s minority status, with ongoing deliberation by a seven-judge constitution bench. The hearing continues on Wednesday.