Today, On 16th January, The Supreme Court slammed a petitioner for misusing Article 32, dismissing a plea while a related case was pending in the Bombay High Court. “Article 32 is being misused…for everything, one adjournment, file Article 32 here,” it said.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday, 3rd March, refused to entertain a petition seeking contempt action against Gujarat authorities for allegedly disobeying its orders regarding demolition of properties. The petitioner alleged that authorities in Ahmedabad demolished houses without following the Supreme Court’s directions.
NEW DELHI: On Friday(31st Jan), the Supreme Court decided not to entertain a petition that challenged the senior designation of 70 advocates by the Delhi High Court. This petition was filed by Advocate Sanjay Dubey, who had applied for the senior designation but was not granted it by the Delhi High Court.
![[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 13th November, the Supreme Court condemned “bulldozer justice,” stating that legal actions should not imply guilt before a fair trial. It ruled demolishing properties of accused individuals is unlawful, emphasizing due process, accountability, and the protection of family homes from arbitrary state action, regardless of accusations or convictions.
Madhya Pradesh CM Mohan Yadav defended ‘bulldozer justice’ as per Constitutional principles, stating no one is above the law. Congress leader Priyanka Gandhi Vadra criticized the practice, advocating for judicial determination of guilt. The controversy stems from alleged anti-Islamic remarks, leading to violent protests and the subsequent demolition of Shahzad Ali’s house.
The Delhi High Court today criticized X Corp for not complying with the order to remove Congress leaders’ posts alleging journalist Rajat Sharma used foul language. The court emphasized the need for neutrality and due process. X Corp’s resistance was questioned, and the court accepted an ad interim request, while the interim relief application will be heard on July 11.
Today (24th May): The Supreme Court of India emphasized the finality of bail decisions at the High Court level, expressing reluctance to intervene in bail matters. Justices Bela M. Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal advocated for resolving bail issues without the apex court’s interference, aiming to streamline the legal process and reduce the burden on the Supreme Court.