The Karnataka High Court sought responses from Lokayukta police, Enforcement Directorate and Chief Minister Siddaramaiah on a plea challenging closure of the MUDA corruption case. The petition contests a trial court’s acceptance of the closure report.
The Delhi High Court said Asif Iqbal Tanha’s plea on alleged disclosure statement leak has “nothing left,” with Justice Saurabh Banerjee noting five-year delay and near infructuous status.
Supreme Court of India stayed the Delhi High Court order directing a retrial in a matrimonial dispute. The case involved a family court granting divorce under a non-existent statutory provision, prompting the Supreme Court to intervene halt proceedings.
The Delhi High Court sought the Central Bureau of Investigation response on Rabri Devi plea challenging a trial court’s refusal to provide documents the prosecution did not rely upon in the land-for-jobs case, saying such records were vital for her defence preparation.
The Central Bureau of Investigation filed caveats in the Supreme Court of India on pleas by Arvind Kejriwal and Manish Sisodia in the Delhi excise policy case, seeking to be heard before any interim relief is granted.
Surya Kant recused himself from hearing petitions challenging the law on appointment of Election Commissioners. A Bench including Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi was scheduled to hear the matter.
Today, On 20th March, The Chief Justice of India asked the lawyer to move the Delhi High Court after a runaway couple’s protection plea was mentioned before the Supreme Court of India. He questioned, “Why this step-motherly treatment to Article 226 jurisdiction?”
The Punjab & Haryana High Court said litigants cannot backtrack or blame their lawyer after withdrawing a case. It added that “a counsel is an officer of the court and not merely a mechanical agent of the litigant” while rejecting such excuses.
The Allahabad High Court heard a petition challenging Rahul Gandhi’s citizenship, directing inclusion of the Centre. Citing confidential Ministry of Home Affairs records, the judge held in-camera proceedings and reviewed submitted documents.
The Supreme Court sharply criticised a Dehradun lawyer for trying to block the Sainya Dham war memorial project. CJI Kant said, “You must have taken possession…those who sacrificed their lives for the nation deserve respect,” from us today.
