NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday (28th March) criticized the Gujarat Police for filing a First Information Report (FIR) against Congress MP Imran Pratapgarhi over a poem he had posted on social media. The Court ruled in his favor, stating that freedom of speech and expression is more important than the restrictions that can be imposed on it under the law.
NEW DELHI: On February 10, 2025, the Supreme Court of India declared the 2010 recruitment process conducted by the Jharkhand government for Class-IV employees to be “illegal” and “unconstitutional”. The Court quashed the entire recruitment process, ordering the state government to issue new advertisements for these positions within six months.
The Supreme Court of India acknowledged the significant pressure on judges, leading to inevitable errors, during a ruling on adverse remarks made against a Delhi judicial officer. Despite a target to raise the judge-to-population ratio to 50 per million by 2024, it remains below 25, highlighting the burden on the judiciary.
Today, On 26th September, the Supreme Court ruled that the Enforcement Directorate cannot use Section 45 of the PMLA to detain individuals without trial. While granting bail to former Tamil Nadu minister V Senthil Balaji, the court emphasized the right to a speedy trial under Article 21, highlighting concerns over prolonged incarceration.
Today, On 2nd August, The Supreme Court reasserted its stance that it cannot compel High Courts to resolve cases within specific timeframes, emphasizing the independent status of High Courts. During a plea hearing, a woman’s request for timely disposal was declined, with the court clarifying that High Courts are not subordinate to the Supreme Court. High Courts’ autonomy has been reaffirmed in previous rulings.
On Monday(22nd July), the Supreme Court expressed concern over the Patna High Court’s directive to conclude a criminal trial within one year, citing it as unrealistic due to Bihar’s trial court backlog. Justices Abhay S Oka and Augustine George Masih noted that the order lacked consideration of the extensive case pendency.
Today(18th March),The Gujarat High Court, led by Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Aniruddha P Mayee, clarified its non-investigative role in PILs related to the assault on foreign students at a government hostel. The court emphasized its commitment to judicial responsibilities and distinct role from law enforcement, declining to directly intervene despite advocate Koshti’s concerns.
![[Breaking] 'Mystery Lawyer' Case: Supreme Court Orders CBI Inquiry, Seeks Status Report within Two Months](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/image-55.png?resize=290%2C174&ssl=1)
