The Supreme Court expressed its satisfaction with UPSC’s decision to publish the provisional answer key after the civil services preliminary exam, calling it a “very positive development.” UPSC’s move ensures transparency, benefiting aspirants awaiting clarity on their performance.
Today, On 14th October, Supreme Court questioned the Rajasthan government over missing CCTV cameras in police station interrogation rooms, stressing that the interrogation room is the main place where cameras should be installed. The Court criticized lapses in surveillance and monitoring systems.
A PIL in the Delhi High Court seeks to include transgender women under rape laws, challenging Section 63 BNS and Section 18 of the Transgender Rights Act. Senior Advocate N Hariharan has been appointed as Amicus Curiae to assist the Court.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court refused to close the 2017 Dera Sacha Sauda violence PIL, despite initial inclinations. Senior Advocate Anupam Gupta, Amicus Curiae, stressed state accountability and judicial responsibility.
The Supreme Court will hear a case on the statutory age of consent for adolescents on November 12. The bench emphasized that the matter should be discussed continuously rather than addressed in a piecemeal manner.
Today, On 8th September, Supreme Court has raised concern over Kerala High Court hearing anticipatory bail pleas directly, bypassing the sessions court. The bench observed, “This does not happen in any other High Court,” highlighting a worrying deviation from standard practice.
Ecological imbalance in Himachal Pradesh has reached alarming levels, prompting the Supreme Court to appoint an amicus curiae. The Court stressed expert guidance is essential to address environmental concerns, climate change, hydropower impact, deforestation, and sustainable development challenges.
The Supreme Court dismissed a public interest litigation challenging Manubhai Parmar’s appointment as BPSC chairman, deeming it factless and publicity-driven. The bench criticized petitioner Brajesh for lacking seriousness and proper grounds, emphasizing that PILs must serve genuine public interest. The matter remains under review as responses are awaited.
Supreme Court questions legality of plea demanding FIR against Delhi HC judges, calls it a publicity stunt. Appoints Dr. S Muralidhar as amicus to examine the matter.
Advocate Shwetasree Majumdar has retracted her consent for a judgeship at the Delhi High Court due to the Central Government’s unexplained year-long delay in processing her appointment, despite recommendations from the Supreme Court Collegium. This situation raises concerns about transparency in judicial appointments amid her notable legal background and contributions.
