Supreme Court steps in after a NEET-UG aspirant complains of wrongly stapled question paper. Justices order manual re-evaluation, citing student panic and exam stress.
Supreme Court Today (April 1) declined to accept a new plea questioning the 1947 religious status lock under the Places of Worship Act. Petitioner allowed to apply in ongoing cases but court says, “We are not willing to interfere.”
The Supreme Court will hear a plea Today (April 1) against a part of the 1991 law that freezes religious identity of worship places as of 1947. The petition argues that courts should be allowed to verify original religious character through legal and scientific means.
The Supreme Court Today (Feb 17) expressed concern over excessive intervention applications in the Places of Worship Act, 1991 case, delaying the hearing to April. “Too many petitions filed. There is a limit to interventions being filed.”
The Supreme Court Today (Feb 17) expressed concern over excessive intervention applications in the Places of Worship Act, 1991 case, delaying the hearing to April. “Too many petitions filed. There is a limit to interventions being filed.”
A bench led by CJI Sanjiv Khanna Today (Feb 17) in Supreme Court will hear petitions challenging the 1991 law, which protects the religious character of places of worship as of August 15, 1947.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court will hear multiple petitions related to the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, on February 17. According to the official cause list uploaded on the Supreme Court’s website, a bench led by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna, along with Justices Sanjay Kumar and K V Viswanathan, will oversee the proceedings.
A civil court in Budaun, Uttar Pradesh, will hear a plea regarding the alleged existence of the Neelkanth temple at the Jama Masjid Shamsi site on January 18, 2025. The dispute centers around claims made by Mukesh Patel of the Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha, with significant implications for communal harmony and historical narrative.
The Supreme Court ruled that proving mens rea is essential for abetment of suicide under Section 306 of the IPC. In a case involving a man and his family accused of motivating his wife’s suicide, the court determined insufficient evidence of intent to sustain charges, emphasizing a critical temporal link between instigation and the act.
The Supreme Court, led by Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan, declined to hear a petition regarding the quality of “prasad” at temples, stating it is a matter of state policy. The court encouraged petitioners to seek remedy through appropriate channels if specific incidents occur, rather than broad regulations.
