Supreme Court Constitution Bench Tracker: January-February 2023

The year 2023 has had a good start at the Supreme Court as most of its various benches, including the 5-judge-benches hearing constitutional matters, lost no traction after the top court reopened its gates post its winter break. .The benches have heard and reserved or delivered verdicts in most of the matters that were listed before it at the end of September 2022. While the Supreme Court's official statistics show that the needle has definitely moved positively from the December 2022 figures, and will reflect more change once the figures are adjusted for the progress made in March..However, while it may seem that there are very few 5-judge bench matters pending at the moment, it is pertinent to note that several cases were assigned to other benches that were dissolved as the judges leading the benches retired. Those cases are yet to be reassigned. .Developments in January-February 2023 in a nutshell.Benches - A total of 4 Benches were active, led by CJI DY Chandrachud, and Justices SK Kaul, S Abdul Nazeer and KM Joseph. The bench led by Justice Nazeer was dissolved on January 4 upon the judge's retirment..Cases - Verdicts were delivered in the following cases: Vivek Narayan Sharma v. Union of India - Challenge to the Central government's 2016 decision to demonetise the ₹500 and ₹1,000 banknotes;Kaushal Kishor v. State of Uttar Pradesh - Questions of the freedom of speech and expression of law makers;Common Cause v. Union of India - Modification of law relating to passive euthanasia and living will/advance directives;Joseph Shine v. Union of India - Dealing with adultery in the armed forces post 2018 Joseph Shine judgment;Bar Council of India v. Bonnie Foi Law College - Questions regarding the validity of the All India Bar ExaminationCentral Board of Dawoodi Bohra Community & Anr v. State of Maharashtra & Anr - Questions regarding the right of religious communities to excommunicate dissidentsVerdicts have been reserved (or remain reserved) in the following cases:Delhi govt. Vs. LG; who has administrative control on transfers and postings of bureaucrats/officers in Delhi;Adequacy of compensation to Bhopal gas tragedy victims;Validity of arbitration agreement embedded in unstamped document;Challenge to current system of appointments to Election Commission of India;Extent of Supreme Court's power under Article 142 to grant a divorce decree; andRetrospective application of immunity against arrest.Other developments - In a first, the complete transcript of the February 21 hearing in the Maharashtra politics case before the CJI led bench was published on the Supreme Court website. .Bench wise case updates.Bench: CJI DY Chandrachud, and Justices MR Shah, Krishna Murari, Hima Kohli, PS NarasimhaHeard and reserved verdict in one 1 of 4 cases listed before it since September 2022.1. Citizenship ActQuestion of law: Challenge to Section 3(1)(a) of Citizenship Act, 1955 and 6A of Citizenship Act, 1985 that provides a framework for regularising or expelling migrants, based on their date of migration.Cause title: Assam Sanmilita Mahasangha v. Union of IndiaRegistered: December 20, 2012 | Admitted: November 5, 2015| Last listed: January 10, 2023.Status: Pending. .2. Maharashtra Political Crisis vis-à-vis Eknath Shinde, Uddhav Thackeray and Shiv Sena splitQuestion of law: Challenge to the formation of the Eknath Shinde-led BJP government in Maharashtra, whether rebel MLAs should be disqualified, and the right over the Shiv Sena's bow-and-arrow symbol.Reconsideration of decision in Nabam Rebia v. Deputy Speaker, with regard to the power of the Deputy Speaker to initiate disqualification proceedings.Cause title: Subhash Desai v. Principal Secretary, Governor of Maharashtra & Ors.Registered: July 9, 2022 | Admitted: September 7, 2022| Last listed: February 28, 2023Status: Pending. Next hearing on March 1, 2023.The Court opined that the letter written by the Governor of Maharashtra in June 2022 asking then Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray to undergo a floor test to prove his majority in the State assembly, had lot of extraneous and irrelevant grounds.Earlier in February, the bench had decided to not immediately refer to a larger bench the question of whether Nabam Rebia needs to be reconsidered. .3. Delhi government v. Lieutenant GovernorQuestion of law: Tussle between the Central and Delhi governments over the administrative control on transfers and postings of bureaucrats/ officers in Delhi.Cause title: Government of NCT of Delhi v. Union of IndiaRegistered: September 5, 2016 | Admitted: September 9, 2016 | Last listed: January 18, 2023.Status: Heard. Verdict reserved. .4. Extending Legislative Assembly reservation for more than 10 yearsQuestion of law: Challenge to the Constitution (79th Amendment) Act, 1999 which extends the reservation of seats in the Lok Sabha and Legislative Assemblies of the States to Anglo Indians, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes communities.Cause title: Kumar Jain v. Union of IndiaRegistered: October 17, 2000 | Admitted: February 26, 2016 | Last listed: November 1, 2022Status: Pending..Bench: Justices SK Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, Abhay S Oka, Vikram Nath, JK MaheshwariDelivered judgment in one case and issued a reference order in another matterHeard and reserved verdicts on all the rest of the matters listed before it since September 2022. .1. Validity of All India Bar Exam (AIBE)Question of law: Are Rules 9 to 11 of the Bar Council of India Rules violative of Section 16, 24 and 30 of the Advocates Act and Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution?Cause title: Bar Council of India v. Bonnie Foi Law CollegeRegistered: September 4, 2009 | Admitted: September 9, 2022 |Status: Judgment delivered on February 10, 2023.The Court upheld the validity of AIBE and held that it is upto the Bar Council of India to decide whether it is to be held pre or post enrollment..2. Bohra community's right to excommunicate dissidentsQuestion of law: Do religious communities have the right to excommunicate dissidents under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India?Cause title: Central Board of Dawoodi Bohra Community & Anr v. State of Maharashtra & AnrRegistered: February 28, 1986 | Admitted: October 1, 2019 |Status: Judgment on whether to refer to a larger bench delivered on February 10, 2023. The Court noted that the primary questions to be considered that deal with the balancing of Article 26(b) and Article 21, are similar to those in the Sabarimala case. Therefore, it referred the matter to the nine-judge bench that will be considering the Sabarimala reference. .3. Compensation paid to Bhopal Gas tragedy victimsQuestion of law: Was the settlement arrived at in 1989 for the lethal gas leak from the Union Carbide Corporation Plant, adequate?Cause title: Union of India v. Union Carbide CorporationRegistered: January 31, 2011 | Admitted: January 28, 2020 | Last listed: January 12, 2023Status: Heard. Verdict reserved..4. Retrospective application of immunity against arrestQuestion of law: Would the removal of immunity to Central government employees at the Joint Secretary level under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act apply retrospectively?Cause title: CBI v. RR KishoreRegistered: March 12, 2007 | Admitted: November 3, 2015 | Last listed: November 2, 2022Status: Heard. Verdict reserved..5. Court's power under Article 142 of ConstitutionQuestion of law: What is the extent of the Supreme Court's powers under Article 142, to dissolve marriage by granting a decree of divorce when one or more parties are not consenting to the same?Cause title: Shilpa Sailesh v. Varun SreenivasanRegistered: August 19, 2014 | Admitted: March 24, 2021 | Last listed: September 29, 2022Status: Heard. Verdict reserved..Bench: Justices S Abdul Nazeer, BR Gavai, AS Bopanna, V Ramasubramanian, BV Nagarathna Delivered verdicts in 4 of the 5 cases that were listed before it since September 2022. Bench dissolved after Justice Nazeer's retirement on January 4, 2023.Remaining case yet to be reassigned. .1. Validity of 2016 DemonetisationQuestion of law: Challenge to the Central government's 2016 decision to demonetise the ₹500 and ₹1,000 banknotes.Cause title: Vivek Narayan Sharma v. Union of IndiaRegistered: November 10, 2016 | Admitted: September 28, 2022 |Status: Judgment delivered on January 2, 2023The bench, by a 4:1 majority, held that demonetisation and the manner in which it was carried out was lawful. Justice Nagarathna dissented but stated that status quo cannot be restored now since over 6 years have passed..2. Freedom of speech and expression of law makersQuestion of law: Questions on restrictions on the right to freedom of speech, the duty of the State to affirmatively protect its citizens, and whether an exercise of the right by a minister could be held attributable to the State.Cause title: Kaushal Kishor v. State of Uttar PradeshRegistered: August 20, 2016 | Admitted: October 23, 2019 |Status: Judgment delivered on January 3, 2023.The Court held that greater/ additional restrictions cannot be imposed on the fundamental right of free speech of Ministers, Members of Parliament or Members of Legislative Assemblies. In a separate judgment, on the question of whether the right to free speech can be exercised against non-State actors, Justice Nagarathna dissented from the majority and held that the remedy for the same cannot be through writ jurisdiction when comon law remedies exist. .3. MLAs' immunity from prosecution for briberyQuestion of law: Does the immunity conferred on Members of the Legislative Assembly (MLAs), under Article 194(2) of the Constitution in respect of any vote given by them in the legislature, include immunity against prosecution for bribery?Cause title: Sita Soren v. Union of IndiaRegistered: March 7, 2019 | Admitted: December 4, 2018 | Last listed: December 6, 2022Status: Pending. To be reassigned to different bench. .Bench: Justices KM Joseph, Ajay Rastogi, Aniruddha Bose, Hrishikesh Roy, CT RavikumarHeard and reserved verdicts in 3 of the 6 cases listed before it since September 2022. Judgment delivered in 3 cases.1. WhatsApp's privacy policyQuestion of law: Does WhatsApp's privacy policy (introduced in January 2021) violate the right to privacy which is a facet of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India?Cause title: Karmanya Singh Sareen v. Union of IndiaRegistered: January 9, 2017 | Admitted: February 25, 2020 | Last listed: February 1, 2023Status: Pending. Next hearing on March 1, 2023,The Court directed WhatsApp to publicise its stand taken in a letter addressed to the Central government that users who do not accept its 2016 privacy policy will not be restrained till the Data Protection Bill, 2022 is deliberated in Parliament..2. Appointments to Election Commission of India (ECI)Question of law: Challenge to the current system of appointing members of the ECI on the ground that the executive enjoys the power to make appointments in violation of Article 342(2) of the Constitution of India.Cause title: Anoop Baranwal v. Union of IndiaRegistered: February 25, 2015 | Admitted: February 25, 2020 | Last listed: November 24, 2022.Status: Heard. The judgment was delivered on March 2. The next edition of the Constitution Bench tracker will have more on the judgment..3. Jallikattu - bull taming sportQuestion of law: Challenge to validity of amendments made by the Tamil Nadu government to the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act (PCA Act), thereby permitting Jallikattu.Cause title: Animal Welfare Board of India v. Union of IndiaRegistered: January 11, 2016 | Admitted: September 29, 2022 | Last listed: December 8, 2022Status: Heard. Verdict reserved..4. Euthanasia and right to die with dignityQuestion of law: The matter was decided by a five-judge Constitution Bench in 2018 when it recognised and gave sanction to passive euthanasia and living will/advance directive. However, it has been listed again to address some legal questions surrounding euthanasia.Cause title: Common Cause v. Union of IndiaRegistered: August 21, 2019 | Admitted: November 26, 2019 |Status: Judgment delivered on January 24, 2023. The Court modified the directions in its 2018 judgment and specified that the document expressing the living will/ advance directive would need to be attested only by a notary or a gazetted officer to record their satisfaction that the same was signed willingly. .5. Validity of arbitration agreement in unstamped contractQuestion of law: Is an arbitration agreement embedded in an unstamped document valid and enforceable?Cause title: Global Mercantile Private Ltd v. M/s Indo Unique Flame LimitedRegistered: November 23, 2020 | Admitted: November 23, 2020 | Last listed: January 25, 2023Status: Heard. Verdict reserved..6. Adultery in the armed forcesQuestion of law: can the armed forces continue to enforce disciplinary proceedings for adultery after a Constitution Bench unanimously struck down Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) that penalised adultery, in 2018.Causetitle: Joseph Shine v. Union of IndiaRegistered: December 3, 2020 | Admitted: September 29, 2022 |Status: Judgmen delivered on January 31.The Court held that its 2018 judgment would not come in the way of the armed forces initiating disciplinary proceedings against personnel indulging in extramarital affairs.