Supreme Court of India .1. Vishaal Shripati Jogdand v. Union of India & Ors..[Item 58 in court 1 – Writ Petition (Civil 729/2015.Bench: Chief Justice HL Dattu, C Nagappan., Amitava Roy J. .A fresh PIL petition..Today in court: The Court refused to entertain this petition which pertained to pollution of rivers. It asked the petitioner to approach the National Green Tribunal..2. Yogesh Gupta v. Election Commission of India & Anr..[Item 47 in court 2 – Writ Petition (Civil) 422/2014].Bench: TS Thakur J., V Gopala Gowda J. .A petition filed by advocate Yogesh Gupta seeking the stoppage of ward-wise counting of votes on the ground that the declaration of result of every polling booth violates the right to privacy attached to voting. The alternative that has been proposed is that the result of every parliamentary constituency be declared as a whole and not through ward-wise counting of votes of every electronic voting machine (EVM). The Court had issued notice in this case on May 12, 2014. In accordance with the directions of the Court, the Centre had submitted the report of the Law Commission on April 27..On July 3, ASG Neeraj Kishan Kaul had said that the Ministry of Law has been intimated about the issue. Time for discussion with stakeholders was sought. Hence, the Court adjourned the case for 3 months..Today in court: This case could not be tracked. Any update/ information would be appreciated..3. Teesta Atul Setalvad and Anr. v. State of Gujarat.[Item 8 in court 3 – CRLMP. 10424/2015 in CRL.A. NO. 338/2015].Bench: Anil R Dave J., AK Goel J. .Case pertaining to investigation of activist Teesta Setalvad for allegedly misappropriating funds collected for building a museum of resistance at Gulbarg Housing Society where over 60 persons were killed during the riots of 2002..Check evening updates to know more about this case..Today in court: Since the case is to be heard by a 3-judge Bench, the Court directed that the matter be listed before an appropriate Bench. It also clarified that the interim relief granted by the Supreme court will continue only till October 15. The Court remarked that the grant of interim relief by a 2-judge Bench earlier was a mistake since the case is to be heard by a 3-judge Bench..4. Sujoy Mitra v. State of West Bengal.[Item 54 in court 4 – SLP (Crl) 8157 of 2015].Bench: JS Khehar J., R Banumathi J..An appeal challenging the examination of an Irish rape victim through Skype. The petitioner had submitted that the examination could be done in the BSNL studio in Kolkata, and he has no objection to the evidence which has already been recorded but no further evidence should be recorded using Skype and webcams since it is not proper, authentic or acceptable.The Court had issued notice to the State of West Bengal and posted the matter for today..Read more about the case here..Today in court: The respondents circulated a letter seeking time to file counter affidavit. The same was allowed and the case was adjourned. It will now be heard on October 30..HT to advocate Rohit Adlakha for the update..5. Harsh Mander v. Union of India & Ors.[Item 10 in court 6 – Writ Petition (Crl.) 158/2015].Bench: Jasti Chelameswar J., AM Sapre J..A petition seeking a court-monitored investigation into the allegations made by NIA’s Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) that she was asked to go “soft” on certain accused in the 2008 Malegaon blasts case. When the matter was last heard, Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi had sought time to file counter affidavit which was allowed by the court..Today in court: This case was adjourned..6. Justice VS Dave President, The Association of Retd. Judges of Supreme Court and High Courts v. Kusumjit Sidhu and Ors..[Item 10 in court 8 – Conmt. Pet. (C) 425-426/2015 in Writ Petition (Civil) 523 & 524/2002].Bench: Ranjan Gogoi J., NV Ramana J. .Check evening updates..Today in court: This petition pertains augmenting pension and post-retirement benefits of retired judges of High Courts and Supreme Court. Since the pension part was taken care of by the Central government pursuant to the 2014 judgment of the Supreme Court, the Court had issued notice only with respect to the prayers relating to post-retirement benefits. When the matter came up for hearing today, the Court granted States additional two weeks time to file their replies and listed the case for October 27..7. Anindita Pujari v. Supreme Court of India thr. the Secretary General and Anr.[Item 48 in court 8 – Writ Petition (Civil) 509/2015].Bench: Ranjan Gogoi J., NV Ramana J. .This case pertains to creche facilities in Supreme Court. Check evening updates..Today in court: The Court issued notice in this case..8. Common Cause & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors..[Item 304 in court 9 – Writ Petition (Civil) 463/2012].Bench: Madan Lokur, Kurian Joseph, AK Sikri JJ. .A plea by former CBI Special Director ML Sharma who is investigating ex-CBI head Ranjit Sinha’s role in the coal scam. Sharma has requested for the original of the entry register/ log book of Ranjit Sinha’s residence to be handed over to him for the purpose of investigation..Today in court: The Court today heard Senior Advocate Vikas Singh, counsel for Ranjit Sinha, and rejected his submissions. The Bench then reiterated its earlier order of placing the request before the Chief Justice’ Bench. The matter will now come up before the Chief Justice for the second time..9. Mahendra Singh Dhoni v. Jayakumar Hiremath.[Item 8 in court 11 – SLP(CRL) 7403/2015].Bench: PC Ghose J., RK Agarwal J. .The petition filed by MS Dhoni assailing the Karnataka High Court order whereby the High Court had refused to quash criminal proceedings pending against him before a court in Bengaluru. You can read more about the case here..Today in court: This case was adjourned as service was not complete..10. State of Karnataka v. Selvi J Jayalalitha & Ors..[Item 71 in court 11 – SLP(CRL) NO. 6117-6120/2015].Bench: PC Ghose J., RK Agarwal J..The appeal against the judgment of the Karnataka High Court acquitting Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalaithaa. One of the parties has circulated a letter seeking adjournment..Today in court: Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave, appearing for Karnataka government, sought time to complete pleadings. He urged the court to list the case in February 2016. The Court, however, granted the parties six weeks time to complete their pleadings and listed matter for November 23. You can read more about the case here..Delhi High Court.1. Jignesh Prakash Shah Vs State of National Capital Territory of Delhi and Anr..[Item 19, 20 & 21, Court No. 36- Bail Appln No. 1902/2015].Bench: Siddharth Mridul J..Bail application filed by Jignesh Shah, the main accused as director of NSEL (National Spot Exchange) and promoter of Financial Technologies (FTIL)..Today in Court: The Respondents sought an adjournment on the grounds that their counsel was unavailable. Senior Counsel Dayan Krishnan appeared for Jignesh Shah. The Bench was categorical that it would not ‘entertain petitions for quashing of FIRs’..Justice Mridul stated that in NESL matters, FIRs should not be quashed easily as it entailed a possibility that the persons in question could run away with crores of rupees of investors. However, after both the sides arrived at a consensus for an adjournment, the matter stood adjourned to November 6..2. Tata Power Delhi Distribution Ltd Vs Comptroller & Auditor General of India and Anr. .[Item 1, Court 1- WP (C) 9667/2015].Special Bench- Chief Justice G Rohini & RS Endlaw J. .Check evening updates..Today in Court: Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal appeared for Tata Power and submitted before the Court that the CAG exit conference scheduled to begin today, maybe postponed for the company till after the judgment on the CAG-Discoms dispute was pronounced. This, he said was necessary so as to enable the Bench to decide on the ‘exact contours of the CAG’s jurisdiction’..Senior Counsel Paras Kuhad appearing for the CAG submitted before the Bench that a postponement could not be possible, though they were ready to be bound by ‘further orders of the Court’ before taking any steps in this regard such as finalizing the CAG report etc..The Bench took into Sibal’s arguments of Tata Power not wanting the process to be ‘closed’ to them once the exit conference was over. It then directed that the exit conference may go on as scheduled but any steps taken by the Respondents post the conference, would be subject to ‘further orders of the Court.’
Supreme Court of India .1. Vishaal Shripati Jogdand v. Union of India & Ors..[Item 58 in court 1 – Writ Petition (Civil 729/2015.Bench: Chief Justice HL Dattu, C Nagappan., Amitava Roy J. .A fresh PIL petition..Today in court: The Court refused to entertain this petition which pertained to pollution of rivers. It asked the petitioner to approach the National Green Tribunal..2. Yogesh Gupta v. Election Commission of India & Anr..[Item 47 in court 2 – Writ Petition (Civil) 422/2014].Bench: TS Thakur J., V Gopala Gowda J. .A petition filed by advocate Yogesh Gupta seeking the stoppage of ward-wise counting of votes on the ground that the declaration of result of every polling booth violates the right to privacy attached to voting. The alternative that has been proposed is that the result of every parliamentary constituency be declared as a whole and not through ward-wise counting of votes of every electronic voting machine (EVM). The Court had issued notice in this case on May 12, 2014. In accordance with the directions of the Court, the Centre had submitted the report of the Law Commission on April 27..On July 3, ASG Neeraj Kishan Kaul had said that the Ministry of Law has been intimated about the issue. Time for discussion with stakeholders was sought. Hence, the Court adjourned the case for 3 months..Today in court: This case could not be tracked. Any update/ information would be appreciated..3. Teesta Atul Setalvad and Anr. v. State of Gujarat.[Item 8 in court 3 – CRLMP. 10424/2015 in CRL.A. NO. 338/2015].Bench: Anil R Dave J., AK Goel J. .Case pertaining to investigation of activist Teesta Setalvad for allegedly misappropriating funds collected for building a museum of resistance at Gulbarg Housing Society where over 60 persons were killed during the riots of 2002..Check evening updates to know more about this case..Today in court: Since the case is to be heard by a 3-judge Bench, the Court directed that the matter be listed before an appropriate Bench. It also clarified that the interim relief granted by the Supreme court will continue only till October 15. The Court remarked that the grant of interim relief by a 2-judge Bench earlier was a mistake since the case is to be heard by a 3-judge Bench..4. Sujoy Mitra v. State of West Bengal.[Item 54 in court 4 – SLP (Crl) 8157 of 2015].Bench: JS Khehar J., R Banumathi J..An appeal challenging the examination of an Irish rape victim through Skype. The petitioner had submitted that the examination could be done in the BSNL studio in Kolkata, and he has no objection to the evidence which has already been recorded but no further evidence should be recorded using Skype and webcams since it is not proper, authentic or acceptable.The Court had issued notice to the State of West Bengal and posted the matter for today..Read more about the case here..Today in court: The respondents circulated a letter seeking time to file counter affidavit. The same was allowed and the case was adjourned. It will now be heard on October 30..HT to advocate Rohit Adlakha for the update..5. Harsh Mander v. Union of India & Ors.[Item 10 in court 6 – Writ Petition (Crl.) 158/2015].Bench: Jasti Chelameswar J., AM Sapre J..A petition seeking a court-monitored investigation into the allegations made by NIA’s Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) that she was asked to go “soft” on certain accused in the 2008 Malegaon blasts case. When the matter was last heard, Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi had sought time to file counter affidavit which was allowed by the court..Today in court: This case was adjourned..6. Justice VS Dave President, The Association of Retd. Judges of Supreme Court and High Courts v. Kusumjit Sidhu and Ors..[Item 10 in court 8 – Conmt. Pet. (C) 425-426/2015 in Writ Petition (Civil) 523 & 524/2002].Bench: Ranjan Gogoi J., NV Ramana J. .Check evening updates..Today in court: This petition pertains augmenting pension and post-retirement benefits of retired judges of High Courts and Supreme Court. Since the pension part was taken care of by the Central government pursuant to the 2014 judgment of the Supreme Court, the Court had issued notice only with respect to the prayers relating to post-retirement benefits. When the matter came up for hearing today, the Court granted States additional two weeks time to file their replies and listed the case for October 27..7. Anindita Pujari v. Supreme Court of India thr. the Secretary General and Anr.[Item 48 in court 8 – Writ Petition (Civil) 509/2015].Bench: Ranjan Gogoi J., NV Ramana J. .This case pertains to creche facilities in Supreme Court. Check evening updates..Today in court: The Court issued notice in this case..8. Common Cause & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors..[Item 304 in court 9 – Writ Petition (Civil) 463/2012].Bench: Madan Lokur, Kurian Joseph, AK Sikri JJ. .A plea by former CBI Special Director ML Sharma who is investigating ex-CBI head Ranjit Sinha’s role in the coal scam. Sharma has requested for the original of the entry register/ log book of Ranjit Sinha’s residence to be handed over to him for the purpose of investigation..Today in court: The Court today heard Senior Advocate Vikas Singh, counsel for Ranjit Sinha, and rejected his submissions. The Bench then reiterated its earlier order of placing the request before the Chief Justice’ Bench. The matter will now come up before the Chief Justice for the second time..9. Mahendra Singh Dhoni v. Jayakumar Hiremath.[Item 8 in court 11 – SLP(CRL) 7403/2015].Bench: PC Ghose J., RK Agarwal J. .The petition filed by MS Dhoni assailing the Karnataka High Court order whereby the High Court had refused to quash criminal proceedings pending against him before a court in Bengaluru. You can read more about the case here..Today in court: This case was adjourned as service was not complete..10. State of Karnataka v. Selvi J Jayalalitha & Ors..[Item 71 in court 11 – SLP(CRL) NO. 6117-6120/2015].Bench: PC Ghose J., RK Agarwal J..The appeal against the judgment of the Karnataka High Court acquitting Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalaithaa. One of the parties has circulated a letter seeking adjournment..Today in court: Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave, appearing for Karnataka government, sought time to complete pleadings. He urged the court to list the case in February 2016. The Court, however, granted the parties six weeks time to complete their pleadings and listed matter for November 23. You can read more about the case here..Delhi High Court.1. Jignesh Prakash Shah Vs State of National Capital Territory of Delhi and Anr..[Item 19, 20 & 21, Court No. 36- Bail Appln No. 1902/2015].Bench: Siddharth Mridul J..Bail application filed by Jignesh Shah, the main accused as director of NSEL (National Spot Exchange) and promoter of Financial Technologies (FTIL)..Today in Court: The Respondents sought an adjournment on the grounds that their counsel was unavailable. Senior Counsel Dayan Krishnan appeared for Jignesh Shah. The Bench was categorical that it would not ‘entertain petitions for quashing of FIRs’..Justice Mridul stated that in NESL matters, FIRs should not be quashed easily as it entailed a possibility that the persons in question could run away with crores of rupees of investors. However, after both the sides arrived at a consensus for an adjournment, the matter stood adjourned to November 6..2. Tata Power Delhi Distribution Ltd Vs Comptroller & Auditor General of India and Anr. .[Item 1, Court 1- WP (C) 9667/2015].Special Bench- Chief Justice G Rohini & RS Endlaw J. .Check evening updates..Today in Court: Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal appeared for Tata Power and submitted before the Court that the CAG exit conference scheduled to begin today, maybe postponed for the company till after the judgment on the CAG-Discoms dispute was pronounced. This, he said was necessary so as to enable the Bench to decide on the ‘exact contours of the CAG’s jurisdiction’..Senior Counsel Paras Kuhad appearing for the CAG submitted before the Bench that a postponement could not be possible, though they were ready to be bound by ‘further orders of the Court’ before taking any steps in this regard such as finalizing the CAG report etc..The Bench took into Sibal’s arguments of Tata Power not wanting the process to be ‘closed’ to them once the exit conference was over. It then directed that the exit conference may go on as scheduled but any steps taken by the Respondents post the conference, would be subject to ‘further orders of the Court.’
