The Supreme Court has stayed the Allahabad High Court’s order stopping Ram Lila at a school ground in Tundla, Uttar Pradesh. The Court allowed festivities with the condition that children must continue to use the ground for play and sports.
The Supreme Court criticized the Madhya Pradesh High Court for wrongly rejecting a convict’s bail request based on unfounded legal reasoning. The apex court granted bail, highlighting the delays in appeal hearings and stating that established legal principles should guide bail decisions, not arbitrary rules about serving part of a sentence.
NEW DELHI: 4th April: The Supreme Court of India has suggested that the Delhi High Court should reconstitute its committee for Senior Advocate designations and conduct the process again. This new process should also include candidates whose applireconstitute its Senior Advocate design committeecations were rejected or deferred in the last round of selections in November 2024.
The Supreme Court of India upheld the ban on firecrackers in Delhi-NCR due to persistent high air pollution levels. Emphasizing the right to health under Article 21 of the Constitution, the court stated that alternatives like “green crackers” must prove minimal pollution before reconsideration. It recognized the severe pollution crisis as an extraordinary situation warranting the ban.
The Supreme Court criticized the Uttar Pradesh government for demolishing homes in Prayagraj without proper legal procedures, describing the actions as shocking. The court stated that residents were unfairly treated and emphasized the need for due process. It allowed petitioners to rebuild homes, pending appeals, but they must bear future demolition costs if unsuccessful.
The Supreme Court criticized the Punjab government for failing to implement a pension scheme established in 1996, despite repeated assurances. Justices expressed distrust towards state officials due to noncompliance with court orders. The Court threatened to ensure beneficiaries receive monetary benefits if the government continues to neglect its commitments, with the next hearing set for April 1.
NEW DELHI: Today, 18th March: The process of designating Senior Advocates is under review as four High Courts—Delhi, Karnataka, Punjab & Haryana, and Patna—have given their suggestions to the Supreme Court. The current system, which was set by the Supreme Court in the 2017 case of Indira Jaising vs. Supreme Court, is now being reconsidered for improvements.
New Delhi, March 6: The Supreme Court has postponed the hearing on petitions challenging the government’s 2022 decision to allow the limited environmental release of genetically modified (GM) mustard. A bench comprising Justices Abhay S Oka, Sudhanshu Dhulia, and Ujjal Bhuyan deferred the hearing after Attorney General R Venkataramani requested more time to present arguments.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India has ruled that advocates are not required to verify whether a power of attorney (PoA) given to them by a litigant is genuine. This decision was made by a bench comprising Justices AS Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, who clarified that lawyers should only check the document’s authenticity if they have valid reasons to doubt it.
New Delhi: Today, 28th Feb, The Supreme Court of India suggested that the Central government consider appointing an independent expert agency to evaluate whether the Vadhavan Port project in Palghar, Maharashtra, could cause environmental damage. The suggestion was made by a Bench of Justices AS Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan in an interim order while hearing a plea filed by the National Fishworkers Forum.