The Delhi High Court will hear the Centre’s objections on July 14 regarding the Popular Front of India (PFI)’s challenge of a UAPA Tribunal decision that upheld a five-year ban on the organization for alleged terrorism links. The PFI seeks judicial review after multiple hearing delays.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed a Public Interest Litigation seeking ‘martyr’ status for victims of the Pahalgam terrorist attack, emphasizing that such matters are for the government to decide, not the judiciary. The court suggested the petitioner approach the government regarding the request for naming the attack site.
The Supreme Court of India directed Advocate Vishal Tiwari to withdraw his petition concerning violence in Murshidabad related to the Waqf Amendment Act and to file a new one with clear facts. Justice Surya Kant emphasized the need for honesty and suggested Tiwari present the issue more factually and responsibly.
The Supreme Court stayed the demolition notice issued to a Dargah in Nashik, granting interim relief to the petitioner. The Court also sought a report from the Bombay High Court on why the plea was not listed for urgent hearing.
Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave Today (April 15) clashed with the Supreme Court bench over promotion of Civil Judges (Senior Division) to the cadre of District Judge in the State of Gujarat. He insisted Article 32 protects fundamental rights and slammed the system as unfair.
The Allahabad High Court has declined a request for live streaming court hearings, citing the matter as administrative rather than judicial. This decision follows a Public Interest Litigation from Raj Vikram Singh. The court noted ongoing efforts to digitize proceedings and emphasized the need for transparency in the justice system.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India today, 7th March, heard a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the Telangana government’s decision to allow Muslim employees, including teachers and public sector staff, to leave work early at 4:00 PM during the month of Ramzan.
The Supreme Court ruled that the existence of a disputed question of fact does not bar the High Court’s jurisdiction under Article 226. If the State raises disputes merely to justify rejecting a writ petition, the court must dismiss such objections. The ruling reinforces the High Court’s power to intervene in cases of constitutional rights violations. This ensures that legal remedies are not denied on technical grounds.
Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has revolutionized the Indian judicial system by enabling ordinary citizens to approach courts for the greater good of society. PIL serves as a powerful tool to uphold justice, protect fundamental rights, and address issues that impact large sections of the population. Whether it’s environmental protection, human rights violations, or accountability in governance, PIL ensures that justice reaches even the most marginalized communities.
On December 2, the Supreme Court temporarily released YSRCP social media in-charge Sajjala Bhargava Reddy, allowing him to approach the High Court regarding multiple FIRs alleging derogatory online posts about Andhra Pradesh CM Chandrababu Naidu. The court granted him two weeks of protection from arrest while emphasizing the importance of High Courts.
