Justice Hrishikesh Roy, who retired from the Supreme Court, openly admitted that ruling governments have “undoubtedly” used legal machinery to target opposition leaders. He emphasized the need for judicial independence, addressed rising religious cases, and dismissed claims of political pressure on judges. He also spoke on the Kanwar Yatra case and warned leaders that no government stays in power forever. His strong statements on media influence and judiciary’s role in maintaining democracy are now making waves!
Justice Hrishikesh Roy received an emotional farewell from the Supreme Court, where he was celebrated for his judicial career and diverse talents including theater and music. Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna praised his unique personality, humor, and compassionate judicial approach. Justice Roy reflected on his 19-year journey, emphasizing the gradual pursuit of justice, inspiring future legal minds.
Supreme Court judge Justice Hrishikesh Roy emphasized the urgent need for judicial reforms due to the “docket explosion” impeding timely justice in India during a conference in Srinagar. Proposed solutions include Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) to alleviate court burdens and enhance accessibility, particularly for marginalized groups. The conference aims to improve court efficiency and equity in the legal system.
The Supreme Court ruled that government entities cannot include clauses for unilateral arbitrator appointments in public-private contracts, as these violate Article 14 of the Constitution, undermining fairness. The decision, led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, applies to three-member arbitration panels, emphasizing equal treatment and impartiality in the arbitration process.
![[NLSIU 25% Domicile Reservation] Karnataka Withdraws Appeal Before Supreme Court](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/image-19-3.png?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
The Karnataka Government today withdrew its plea challenging the 25 percent domicile reservation for Karnataka students at NLSIU. The High Court’s ruling against the Amendment Act led to this decision. NLSIU had independently implemented the reservation, rendering the plea unnecessary. The Supreme Court refused to stay NLSIU’s decision, leading to the withdrawal of the appeal.