Today, On 26th February, The Supreme Court criticised India’s tribunals as a burden on the judiciary and a “headache” for the Centre, with CJI Kant saying they have become a “no man’s land” lacking accountability, making the system a government-created liability.
The Delhi High Court refused to restrict media coverage of the Dwarka SUV crash, emphasising that freedom of the press cannot be curbed. It said no court can issue a complete gag order unless a genuine grievance is established.
The Oudh Bar Association has written to CJI Surya Kant seeking expunction of strong Supreme Court remarks against an Allahabad High Court judge. The controversy arose after the top court set aside a bail order in a dowry death case, calling it “one of the most shocking and disappointing” orders.
The Delhi High Court has issued notice to the Centre on a plea challenging multiple provisions of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023. The petition alleges excessive executive control, surveillance powers, and violation of fundamental rights including privacy and judicial independence.
The Supreme Court said public anger in high-profile cases is understandable but cannot control investigations or court decisions. Justice must be based on evidence and impartial inquiry, not media pressure or majority sentiment.
The Supreme Court has asked the Central government to frame a uniform proposal within four weeks to ensure tribunals across India remain functional and independent. The Court stressed that these bodies cannot be allowed to become defunct and called for a holistic reform plan.
The Supreme Court has strongly cautioned against false, anonymous and motivated complaints filed to harass trial judges, saying such acts must invite contempt proceedings. It directed that lawyers involved in engineering such complaints should also face strict disciplinary action by Bar Councils.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed a plea seeking transfer of a 2019 defamation case, holding that unproven allegations against a judge and counsel amount to an “attack on the majesty of law.” The Court imposed a Rs 50,000 penalty on the 89-year-old petitioner and directed the trial court to proceed expeditiously.
The Tamil Nadu DGP informed the Supreme Court that criminal cases have been registered against protesters for allegedly making caste and religion-based defamatory remarks against Justice G R Swaminathan. The action follows the Madras High Court judge’s order allowing the lighting of Karthigai Deepam on Thirupparankundram hill.
Today, On 28th January, The Supreme Court issued notice on a PIL seeking action against protestors who allegedly defamed Justice G.R. Swaminathan of the Madras High Court. The remarks followed his order to light the Karthigai Deepam at Thiruparankundram Temple.
