The Supreme Court today (21st October) stayed the Uttar Pradesh government’s directive to shift students from unrecognized madrasas to government schools, following a challenge from Jamiat Ulama Hind. The Court also halted actions stemming from the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights’ communication regarding admissions, pending further examination of related petitions.
![[Bulldozer Justice] "Wrongful Demolitions Warrant Compensation; Officials Should Not Be Shielded from Accountability": Supreme Court](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Watch-What-is-Bulldozer-Justice-And-Why-Does-the-SC-Want-Guidelines-Against-It_-on-News9-Plus.png?resize=447%2C348&ssl=1)
Today, On 1st October, The Supreme Court reserved its judgment in the “bulldozer justice” case, highlighting public safety’s primacy. It mandated the removal of any religious structures, such as temples or dargahs, that encroach on essential infrastructure. The court’s directives ensure equitable application of anti-encroachment measures, reinforcing India’s secular principles and addressing unauthorized constructions uniformly.
![[BREAKING] SC Grants Bail to Ex-TN Minister V. Senthil Balaji in Money Laundering Case](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/image-2024-09-26T102520.872.png?resize=300%2C168&ssl=1)
![[Breaking] Enrolment Fees for Lawyers Cannot Exceed Rs. 600: Supreme Court Mandates For All State Bar Council](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/WhatsApp-Image-2024-01-27-at-3.05.14-PM.jpeg?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
The Supreme Court today has mandated that State Bar Councils and the Bar Council of India cannot charge lawyers more than Rs 600 for enrolment fees, in accordance with Section 24(1)(f) of the Advocates Act. This decision aims to make the enrolment process accessible and affordable, consistent with the Act. The ruling allows charges for legal aid services, but not during enrolment.
The Supreme Court Today (July 10th) reserved its verdict in petition by a journalist claiming that prison manuals in several States encourage caste discrimination in jails. During the hearing today, CJI Chandrachud highlighted the importance of altering what happens on the ground since instructions by States to not indulge in such practices are not always followed.
The Delhi High Court emphasized that trial courts must have the conviction judgment prepared before declaring an accused guilty. This ruling came after a case where two men were ordered into custody before the judgment was ready. The court directed District and Sessions Judges to ensure proper procedures to safeguard the rights of the accused.
![[EVM-VVPAT Case] SC Dismissed PIL of Sikh Chamber Over Voter Secrecy](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/MicrosoftTeams-image-85-1.png?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
The Supreme Court of India dismissed today a PIL petition from the Sikh Chamber of Commerce, citing an absence of a compelling case and reiterating their previous judgment on EVMs and VVPAT. Justices Khanna and Datta emphasized that polling officers cannot discern voters’ choices from VVPAT slips, addressing concerns about voter secrecy in Indian elections.
Today (29 Feb) the Supreme Court overturned a 2018 judgment regarding the duration of interim stay orders in civil and criminal cases. The Court emphasized that stay orders should not automatically expire after six months and that time-bound decisions should only be made in exceptional circumstances. The ruling highlighted the importance of allowing each court to prioritize cases based on their unique circumstances.