Declare Sena-NCP-Congress post poll alliance unconstitutional says plea in SC

ncp-congress-ssNew Delhi, Nov 15: A plea has been filed in the Supreme Court seeking the declaration of the post-poll alliance between the Shiv Sena, Congress and NCP as a fraud on the electorate.

The petition which would be heard in the next couple of days alleges that the stance taken by the Shiv Sena after the elections is nothing but a betrayal of the peoples’ mandate.

The petitioner, Pramod Pandit Joshi also sought a direction to the Centre and the State to refrain from appointing a chief minister from the alliance that is likely to emerge.

Read more 

Advertisements

Inclusive approach, over a lakh volunteers: How Centre ensured India remained safe after Ayodhya Verdict

ajit-doval-SC-mnThe Supreme Court delivered its historic verdict on the Ayodhya case on November 9. One of the key concerns was the security situation. The job of ensuring that the nation remained peaceful was entrusted to National Security Advisor Ajit Doval.

One of the key concerns ahead of the Ayodhya verdict that was delivered on Saturday was the security situation. Prime Minister Narendra Modi was insistent that there ought to be a closure to this issue and he had even said before the verdict that the judgment should not be seen as a victory or loss to anyone.

Post the verdict too, the PM addressed the nation and compared the scenario to the fall of the Berlin Wall, which acted as a unifying factor. The job of ensuring that the nation remained peaceful was entrusted to National Security Advisor Ajit Doval.

Read more

Bill on Ayodhya Temple Trust likely to be tabled in Parliament

ramtempleNew Delhi, Nov 14: A bill which would give legislative backing to the Trust which would oversee the construction of the Ram Temple at Ayodhya will soon be introduced in Parliament.

The Bill is likely to be introduced in the winter session of Parliament set to commence in December.

Read more 

Rafale deal is clean reiterates Supreme Court while rejecting review petitions

Photo courtesy: defenseindustrydaily.com
Photo courtesy: defenseindustrydaily.com

New Delhi, Nov 14: The Supreme Court upheld its earlier verdict in the Rafale case, while rejecting a batch of petitions that sought review of December 2018 judgment.

A review petition had been filed challenging the clean chit given to the NDA government in the purchase of 36 fully loaded Rafale jets from France under the inter-governmental deal.

Read more

Chowkidar Chor Hai remark: SC closes contempt case against Rahul Gandhi with a word of caution

rahulgandhiNew Delhi, Nov 14: The Supreme Court has closed the contempt case against Rahul Gandhi in which he attributed his remark, Chowkidar Chor Hai to the Rafale judgment of the Supreme Court.

The court said that Rahul Gandhi needs to be more careful in future for attributing to the court his remarks. While closing the contempt case against Rahul Gandhi, the SC said that he should be more careful in future. He uttered the words, Chowkidar Chor Hai, without even reading the Rafale judgment of the Supreme Court dated December 2018.

Read more

In a 3:2 verdict, SC refers Sabarimala matter to a 7 Judge Bench

sabrimalaNew Delhi, Nov 14: The Supreme Court has referred the Sabarimala matter to a larger Bench. In a 3:2 verdict, the Bench said that the matter will now be heard by a seven-judge Bench of the Supreme Court.

Chief Justice of India, Ranjan Gogoi, Justices A M Khanwilkar and Indu Malhotra in a majority verdict said that the matter should be heard by a larger Bench. Justices R F Nariman and D Y Chandrachud in their dissenting view maintained that matter not be referred to a larger Bench.

Read more 

Sabarimala: What the two judges said in their dissenting verdict

nariman-chandrachud
Justice RF Nariman, Justice DY Chandrachud

New Delhi, Nov 14: Two judges on the 5 Judge Bench of the Supreme Court recorded dissenting views in the Sabarimala case today. While Chief Justice of India, Ranjan Gogoi, Justices R Khanwilkar and Indu Malhotra referred the matter to a larger Bench, Justices R F Nariman and D Y Chandrachud recorded a dissenting note. Justice R F Nariman said that these are issues for the future Constitution Benches.

He said that the original judgment in the Sabarimala case was based on a bona fide PIL, which raised issues of women discriminated against for their entire period of puberty due to a physiological feature.

Read more 

No stay on Sep 28 verdict: Women of all ages can enter Sabarimala until larger Bench decides

devotees-sabrimalaNew Delhi, Nov 14: With the Supreme Court referring the Sabarimala matter to a larger Bench, there was no clarity at first whether the earlier judgment of the court would remain in force.

Many had expected a subsequent order that would spell out whether the September 28 2018 verdict of the Supreme Court allowing entry of women of all ages into Sabarimala would remain in force or not. The temple opens on November 16.

Read more 

Not just Sabarimala, larger Bench will take account of women’ entry into other religious places too

sabrimala33New Delhi, Nov 14: The Supreme Court gave out its reasoning before referring the Sabarimala matter to a larger Bench. In a 3:2 verdict, the court said that the matter would be heard by a 7 judge Bench.

The majority on the Bench were of the view that the entry of Muslim women inside a Mosque, Parsi women into the Tower of Silence and the Dawoodi Bora case are all similar to the Sabarimala case.

Read more 

Sabarimala: Justice Indu Malhotra who recorded dissent in 2018, today delivered majority verdict

indumalhotra
Justice Indu Malhotra

New Delhi, Nov 14: Justice Indu Malhotra who was the sole dissenting member on the Bench that delivered the original Sabarimala order was today part of the majority that referred the matter to a larger Bench.

Chief Justice of India, Ranjan Gogoi, Justices A M Khanwilkar and Indu Malhotra were of the view that the matter be heard by the larger Bench. Justices R F Nariman and D Y Chandrachud were however recorded a dissenting verdict.