Court's On Thursday
Shashank Pandey
Book Curator | Bi-Weekly Newsletters ( 7 oct 2024) | Helping You Find Your Next Great Read | Data Science Enthusiast | Math Background | Driven by Curiosity, Resilience
In a significant legal development, the Supreme Court has granted an extension to the tenure of the current Director of Enforcement Directorate (ED), Sanjay Kumar Mishra, until September 15, 2023. This decision comes after the Central government filed a plea seeking modification of the Court's earlier verdict, which had set a deadline of July 31 for the appointment of a new ED Director.
The apex court, comprising Justices BR Gavai, Vikram Nath, and Sanjay Karol, partially allowed the government's plea but sternly stated that no further extensions would be granted beyond the new deadline. This move follows the Court's previous ruling in July 2021, where it struck down the initial extension granted to Mishra on the grounds of violating the Court's 2021 judgment.
The Union government had argued for Mishra's continued tenure, stressing the crucial need for his expertise during the Financial Action Task Force's (FATF) review of India's money-laundering probe operations, set to conclude in November 2023. The Court considered larger public interest and granted the extension to facilitate a smooth transition during the FATF review. However, the Court made it clear that this was an exception and no further applications for extension would be entertained.
Notably, Mishra's initial appointment as ED Director for a two-year term in November 2018 was extended to three years in November 2020 by the Central government. This extension faced legal challenges before the Supreme Court, and in September 2021, the Court upheld the modification but ruled against granting additional extensions to Mishra.
In response, the Central government amended the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) Act to grant itself the authority to extend the ED Director's tenure for up to five years. Nevertheless, the apex court, in its July 2023 ruling, put a stop to any further extensions and mandated that Mishra vacate the position by July 31.
During the recent proceedings, the Court questioned the necessity of depending solely on one individual and emphasized the importance of fostering a competent and resilient institution. However, considering the significance of the FATF review, the Court allowed the extension for a limited period to ensure continuity.
Critics, including senior advocates representing the petitioner, raised concerns about the reliance on a single individual and suggested alternative arrangements for the FATF review. Nonetheless, the Court's decision, granting the extension until September 15, 2023, highlights the delicate balance between institutional continuity and the promotion of a strong, multifaceted system.
This legal development sheds light on the complexities of governance and underscores the need for sustainable and robust institutions. As we await the conclusion of the FATF review, it remains vital to observe how this extension will impact India's standing in the international community and its efforts to combat financial malpractices. We will continue to monitor this situation closely and provide updates as events unfold. Stay tuned for more insights in our next newsletter!
New Delhi, [Date] - Representing the interests of Kashmiri Hindus, the organisation "Youth 4 Panun Kashmir" has lodged an Intervention Application (IA) before the Supreme Court, voicing their support for the Central government's decision to abrogate Article 370 of the Constitution in 2019.
In their application, the organisation urged the apex court to dismiss all pending petitions challenging the government's move to revoke Article 370, which previously bestowed special status upon the erstwhile State of Jammu and Kashmir. According to them, Article 370 and 35A hindered the psychological integration of the region with the rest of India, providing a breeding ground for separatist ideologies that led to the tragic ethnic cleansing of innocent Kashmiri Pandits.
Filed through advocate Siddharth Praveen Acharya, the IA also sought the recognition of the atrocities committed against Kashmiri Pandits and the inaction of both Central and State governments in addressing these grave issues. The organisation pointed out that since the abrogation of Article 370, targeted killings of Hindus in Jammu and Kashmir have escalated.
The application argued that Article 370 had infringed upon the fundamental rights of Kashmiri Pandits, as they risked losing their permanent residency benefits if they married outside the State under the previous regime. It also highlighted discrepancies between the Ranbir Penal Code (RPC) applicable in Jammu and Kashmir and the Indian Penal Code, affecting various aspects of law and governance.
Drawing attention to a previous Supreme Court judgment decriminalising gay sex, the applicant asserted that the verdict had not been welcomed in Jammu & Kashmir because the Indian Penal Code was not applicable there.
The IA stressed that the abrogation of Article 370 was entirely lawful and within constitutional bounds, and hence, the petitions challenging this decision should be dismissed.
A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court is scheduled to commence the hearing on the batch of petitions pertaining to Article 370's abrogation from August 2, with daily hearings except on Mondays and Fridays.
This development comes nearly four years after the abrogation of Article 370, which resulted in the revocation of Jammu and Kashmir's special status and the subsequent bifurcation of the region into two Union Territories.
It remains to be seen how the Supreme Court will address the arguments put forth in the intervention application and the subsequent hearings on the contentious issue of Article 370's abrogation.
In a recent development, a magistrate court in Mumbai dropped the extortion charges against renowned lyricist Javed Akhtar in a criminal complaint filed by actress Kangana Ranaut. However, the court issued a summon against Akhtar for offences under Sections 506 (criminal intimidation) and 509 (insulting modesty of woman) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and asked him to appear before the court on August 5.
Ranaut's complaint alleged that Akhtar had invited her to his place in 2020 to mediate an ongoing dispute with actor Hrithik Roshan. During the meeting, Ranaut claimed that Akhtar threatened and insulted her when she refused to apologize to Roshan, leading to the extortion allegations.
After recording Ranaut's statement on July 6, the court took cognizance of the complaint on July 24. However, the magistrate, in the order, observed that the allegations of extortion did not hold, as asking for a written apology does not fall under the definition of valuable security, as per the IPC.
It's worth noting that Ranaut had filed her complaint against Akhtar after he lodged a criminal defamation complaint against her, claiming that her statements aired on Republic TV amounted to criminal defamation.
In response to the court's summoning order, Akhtar's lawyer, Advocate Jay K Bharadwaj, stated that he would be filing a revision application.
领英推荐
The legal battle between Ranaut and Akhtar has drawn significant attention, and it remains to be seen how the case will unfold during the upcoming court proceedings on August 5.
The Calcutta High Court has issued an order directing the West Bengal Police to regulate the playing of drums during the upcoming Muharram festival. The court observed that continuous drum beating to celebrate the festival is impermissible and goes against religious tenets.
A division bench, comprising Chief Justice TS Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, rejected the State government's argument that drum beating is a part of the religious activities during Muharram. Instead, the court emphasized that unabated drum beating is illegal and contrary to relevant rules.
In reference to a Supreme Court judgment (Church Of God vs KKR Majestic Colony Welfare), the court stressed that no religion prescribes prayers to be performed by disturbing the peace of others through loudspeakers or drumming. It highlighted the need to strike a balance between the right to enjoy religious practices and the right to life.
The court was addressing a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by Shagufta Sulaiman, who raised concerns about the continuous drum beating throughout the day and night during the Muharram festival, scheduled for July 29.
The bench advised the State authorities to consider the Supreme Court's stance that everyone, including infants, children, the elderly, and the sick, has the right to live in a peaceful environment.
The State counsel informed the court that drums were played only between 6 AM and 10 PM. However, the Chief Justice remarked that 6 AM is too early, and the drumming should not be allowed even at 8 AM, considering school-going children and others.
The court also noted that a State notification already prohibits the use of loudspeakers after 10 PM. Nevertheless, it observed that Police authorities seemed unaware of this, indicating a need for improved communication about relevant rules.
The Chief Justice pointed out that while pollution laws are robust, their implementation often falters due to a lack of adequate mechanisms. The bench directed the authorities to regulate drum beating time during the Muharram celebrations, ensuring that noise decibel levels stay within permissible limits.
Furthermore, the court ordered the authorities to develop a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) to regulate congregations and the musical instruments used during religious events, guaranteeing that noise decibel levels adhere to permissible limits.
This court order aims to strike a balance between religious practices and safeguarding the right to a peaceful environment for all citizens, particularly during festive occasions. The move also underscores the need for effective implementation of pollution control laws and public awareness about relevant rules and guidelines.
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) will conduct a thorough investigation into the disturbing incident involving two Manipuri women from the Kuki tribe who were seen being paraded naked and molested. The Central government, in response to a suo motu case registered by the Supreme Court after the video of the incident went viral on social media, assured that it has zero tolerance towards crimes against women and will take this heinous offence seriously to ensure justice is served.
The government submitted an affidavit to the Supreme Court, expressing its commitment to conducting a fair investigation and ensuring a time-bound trial. To maintain impartiality and prevent any potential influence, the Central government requested the court to direct the transfer of the probe to a state other than Manipur. The incident, which occurred on May 4, led to outrage and widespread condemnation.
The affidavit filed by the Ministry of Home Affairs highlighted that at least seven suspects have been arrested in connection with the incident and are currently in police custody. They have been booked for various offenses, including rape and murder.
The current clashes and violence in Manipur have arisen from the opposition of certain tribes to the demand by the majority Meitei community to be granted Scheduled Tribes status. The situation has led to clashes between tribal and non-tribal communities, exacerbating the tense environment in the region.
The Supreme Court, headed by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justices PS Narasimha and Manoj Misra, sought responses from both the Central and State governments on the actions taken to apprehend the perpetrators and address the issue.
The CBI's involvement in the investigation is seen as a step towards ensuring a transparent and impartial inquiry into this deeply distressing incident. The government's commitment to holding the perpetrators accountable and delivering justice serves as a deterrent against such crimes and reinforces its resolve to protect women's safety and rights.
Note : I need your help to grow my newsletter , please share with your friends suggest any changes you want to see or any thing I can improve . It is in early day's , your valuable suggestion will help me to understand my area of improvement . Thanks
Follow me?Shashank Pandey