Yesterday, On 28th September, Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Mohan Yadav highlighted the government’s dedication to safeguarding intellectual property rights (IPR) amidst future challenges. He announced plans for comprehensive strategies and collaboration with the judiciary to address complexities in protecting research and inventions, emphasizing the importance of adaptive measures in a changing technological landscape.
On September 23, Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud began construction on a new Bombay High Court complex, while the Supreme Court directed Maharashtra’s chief secretary to arrange a meeting about redeveloping an annexe building. Urgent repairs are needed, and plans for temporary relocation of court facilities are in motion, reflecting the court’s historical importance.
The Supreme Court Collegium recommended appointing nine advocates as judges of the Bombay High Court and Justice Narendar G as Chief Justice of the Uttarakhand High Court. The recommendations followed evaluations of candidates’ merits, addressing current judicial vacancies, and ensuring representation from the Karnataka High Court among Chief Justices.
The Allahabad High Court dismissed advocate Arun Mishra’s plea alleging bias against Gujarat HC Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal, deeming it frivolous and without merit. The Court emphasized that contempt proceedings require Advocate General consent and clarified that Mishra’s claims did not constitute criminal contempt, underscoring the need to prevent frivolous petitions.
The Union government appointed Chief Justices to eight High Courts, as announced by Union Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal. Key appointments include Justice Manmohan at Delhi, Justice Rajiv Shakdher at Himachal Pradesh, and Justice Suresh Kait at Madhya Pradesh. This follows earlier recommendations from the Supreme Court Collegium.
The Allahabad High Court criticized trial judges for convicting innocent individuals out of fear of higher court actions. The court reassured the trial judge in a dowry death case, affirming no errors in his acquittal decisions, except for an unwarranted conviction. The High Court emphasized judicial independence to prevent wrongful convictions.
Today, On 17th September, The Supreme Court issued a notice in response to a plea by the Association of Healthcare Providers challenging price control under the Clinical Establishments (Central Government) Rules, 2012. The petitioner argues that these caps hinder healthcare providers from offering quality treatment, posing a threat to public health and the financial sustainability of healthcare providers.
The Jharkhand government petitioned the Supreme Court over the Central government’s delay in approving the appointment of a new Chief Justice for the state’s High Court. The plea cites the extended delays in previous appointments and highlights concerns about the impact on judicial independence. The intervention of the Supreme Court is sought to address this issue.
Today, On 6th September, the Supreme Court ruled that limited judicial scrutiny of Collegium decisions is permitted to ensure proper consultation among members. The decision allows review of consultation process but not the suitability of candidates. The Court emphasized collective decision-making in judicial appointments and directed a reconsideration of two District Judges’ candidacies for elevation.
Today, On 3rd September, The Gujarat High Court criticized the state for a 5-year appeal delay and ordered an inquiry to hold officials accountable. The court warned against casual approaches, emphasized the importance of acknowledging indefensible orders, and advised advocates on discretion in court. (Word count: 43)