Today, On 26th March, The Supreme Court has put a stay on the Allahabad High Court’s remark that touching a minor’s breasts does not amount to an attempt to rape. The top court expressed deep disappointment over the lack of sensitivity in the High Court’s ruling. It emphasized that such judgments can set a dangerous precedent and weaken child protection laws. The stay ensures that the case is reviewed with the seriousness it deserves, keeping the rights of minors safeguarded.
Today, On 25th March, The Supreme Court initiated a suo motu case against the Allahabad High Court’s ruling that grabbing a minor’s breasts does not amount to an attempt to rape. This move comes after a Bench of Justices Bela Trivedi and Prasanna B Varale had earlier refused to entertain a PIL challenging the same order on March 24. The decision has sparked legal and public debate on child protection laws. The SC’s intervention is expected to bring further clarity on the issue.
Today, On 24th March, The Supreme Court declined to hear a petition challenging the Allahabad High Court’s ruling that certain acts against a minor did not constitute rape. A bench led by Justices Bela Trivedi and Prasanna B. Varale dismissed the plea, stating they were not inclined to intervene. When the petitioner’s counsel mentioned the “Beti Bachao Beti Padhao” scheme, Justice Trivedi interrupted, saying, “No lecture baazi” in court.
Today, On 19th March, The Supreme Court ruled that only the arguing counsel, the advocate-on-record (AoR), and one assisting counsel can have their names officially recorded. Additionally, the Court emphasized that a Senior Counsel cannot appear without an advocate-on-record. This decision aims to maintain procedural discipline in court proceedings. The ruling clarifies the hierarchy and roles of legal representatives before the apex court.
NEW DELHI: On Tuesday, 18th Feb: the Supreme Court dismissed the petition filed by Sukesh Chandrashekhar, an alleged conman, who had asked for a transfer from Delhi’s Mandoli jail to a prison in his home state of Karnataka, or any nearby state. A Bench of Justices Bela Trivedi and PB Varale gave their decision, emphasizing that the accused, in this case, had caused harm to society, and the Court also had to consider the rights of the victims.
The Supreme Court ruled that Advocates-on-Record (AoRs) can mark appearances only for lawyers who actually appear and argue in a case. The Court emphasized that High Courts and District Courts follow a similar practice, disallowing multiple counsel from marking appearances. This reinforces the need for a structured and consistent approach in court proceedings. The ruling aims to maintain procedural discipline and avoid unnecessary representation.
Justice Bela M. Trivedi, born on June 10, 1960, has served as a judge since 1995, assuming her current role on August 31, 2021. With 79 authored judgments, she is noted for her impactful decisions, including significant cases on sexual assault definitions and affirmative action within reserved categories. She retires on May 9, 2025.
![[Breaking]Jharkhand Land Scam Case: "Listed for Tomorrow" SC Continues Hearing ED's Plea Challenging HC's Order Granting Bail to Dilip Ghosh](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/image-2024-08-29T120607.630.png?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
The Supreme Court is hearing the Enforcement Directorate’s challenge today to the Jharkhand High Court’s decision to grant bail to Dilip Ghosh in a land scam case. The ED accuses Ghosh of undervaluing land and involvement in money laundering. Arguments regarding the legality of the arrest and the clarity of evidence were exchanged in court.
Jaswant Singh, an AAP leader, today withdrew his Supreme Court petition challenging his arrest and remand by the Enforcement Directorate in a money laundering case. The Bench granted him the option to apply for bail in the Punjab & Haryana High Court. Singh has been in custody for over six months related to the ED’s investigation into allegations of defrauding banks.
Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud highlighted the importance of increasing the number of women judges in courts at a lecture in the United Kingdom. He emphasized that the need for more women judges goes beyond the belief that they deliver “liberal” verdicts. Chandrachud also discussed LGBTQ issues, reservation versus merit debate, and addressed a controversial remark in a rape case judgment.