Chief Justice of India BR Gavai urged Indian students in the UK to return home after their studies and contribute to nation-building. Speaking at Oxford, he emphasized India’s need for its bright youth to play a vital role in shaping the future. His appeal reflects the government’s “Viksit Bharat” vision.
The Supreme Court Today (Nov 26) dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) petition seeking the reintroduction of the physical/ paper ballot voting system in elections, along with several other electoral reforms. A Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and PB Varale found little weight in the petitioner’s argument that even leaders like Chandrababu Naidu and YS Jagan Mohan Reddy had questioned Electronic Voting Machine (EVM) tampering.
Senior Advocate Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi remarked that judicial independence in politically sensitive cases, describing it as a “mixed bag.” Singhvi emphasised that outcomes in such cases often hinge on bench composition. “So you get from draw of lots where decisions will vary in 10 ways among the 17 benches,” he stated. He further highlighted the judiciary’s tendency to avoid decisive rulings in some instances, remarking, “There is a tendency to take a decision to not decide, and another way is: operation successful, but the patient dies. This has happened in some recent cases.”
The Supreme Court, concerned with the menace of unlicensed arms and ammunition, has ordered the constitution of a committee headed by the Chief Secretary in each state and Union Territory to formulate an action plan for the implementation of the Arms Act and Rules. In its Order, the Court notes that despite the existence of laws and rules, there is a proliferation of factories and workshops manufacturing unlicensed arms and ammunition and the use of such weapons to commit crimes is on the rise.
![[LawChakra] How to Kickstart Your Career as a Lawyer: Free Webinar with Senior Advocate Narender Hooda](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/webinaar-Sm-2-1.png?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
LawChakra is hosting a free webinar, “How to Kickstart Your Career as Lawyer,” on 16th November from 5:00 PM to 6:00 PM IST with Senior Advocate Narender Hooda as the guest speaker. Known for his experience in the Supreme Court of India, including his work on the NEET 24 Case, Hooda will provide valuable insights into the legal profession, essential skills, and courtroom strategies. This event is ideal for aspiring lawyers looking to gain practical knowledge from a seasoned professional. Register now via QR code or Law Chakra’s social media channels to secure your spot.
The Supreme Court expressed extreme displeasure over the Delhi High Court’s decision to a discharge order passed by the trial court in a murder case. A Bench of Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih opined that such an approach in a revision plea moved by the State was completely unheard of.
The Delhi High Court Today (Nov 11) allowed Wikipedia to serve summons on the users accused of adding allegedly defamatory statements on the wiki page about Asian News International (ANI). A Bench of Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela passed the order while disposing of an appeal moved by Wikipedia against a single-judge’s order directing it to disclose the identity of the users.
The Supreme Court Today (Nov 11) took critical note that the governments in Punjab and Haryana remained reluctant to act against farmers who resort to stubble burning in the fields, leading to a rise in air pollution. A Bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Augustine George Masih also asked how the stubble burning incidents had seen a rise on the day of Diwali recently.
Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud served his last judgement at the Supreme Court, before officially stepping down from the post, making way for his successor-Justice Sanjiv Khanna. The judgment, delivered on November 6 by a bench headed by CJI DY Chandrachud and comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, directly challenged the state’s use of demolitions as a means of reprisal, a practice that often sidelines established legal procedures.