Justice Farhan Dubash and Justice Savitri Ratho clinched top honours at the Judges’ National Badminton Championship in New Delhi. The inaugural event saw 70+ judges compete in a spirited display of fitness, camaraderie, and sportsmanship.
The Allahabad High Court dismissed a lawyer’s demand for a Rs.1 crore fee from the government for a case he filed on his own. The court noted that the petitioner was never officially engaged by the government. The Centre clarified that it has a dedicated panel of advocates representing its interests in the Supreme Court. The ruling reinforces that self-filed cases do not warrant government compensation.
US President Donald Trump stayed the enforcement of a US law that bans bribery in foreign countries. This decision could affect global corruption investigations, including any potential scrutiny of Indian billionaire Gautam Adani. The law, known as the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), is crucial in holding multinational corporations accountable. If enforcement remains weak, cases involving overseas financial dealings may face reduced oversight.
Shri Arjun Ram Meghwal highlighted the importance of constitutional awareness at the 3rd regional Hamara Samvidhan, Hamara Samman event at IIT Guwahati. The initiative emphasized Assam’s contributions to the Indian Constitution, particularly by women members. The event featured the launch of relevant products aimed at making legal concepts accessible, celebrating the Constitution’s impact and rights awareness.
The Supreme Court of India dismissed a petition requesting a separate National Judicial Data Grid for tribunals, reiterating that the existing NJDG covers only district courts, high courts, and the Supreme Court. The bench advised the petitioner to contact the Department of Justice regarding their concerns about including tribunals in the existing framework.
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 Madhya Pradesh High Court upheld the appointment of seven judges, dismissing a petition against the appointments. The court found no merit in the arguments presented, reinforcing the validity and lawfulness of the judicial appointments. The Division Bench rejected the challenge based on various grounds, including lack of advertisement and representation, stating that the appointment process adhered to constitutional procedures.
The Union Government Proposes Mandatory Annual Asset Declaration for Supreme Court and High Court Judges, Seeks Social Status Data for Diversity Assessment in Judiciary Union Government is contemplating the introduction of stringent regulations that would require judges from both the Supreme Court and High Courts to annually declare their assets and liabilities. This initiative is […]
