Supreme Court Round-Up for Jan 25

Important matters heard by the Supreme Court on Thursday, January 25:

* SC sought a response from the Uttar Pradesh government and others on a plea challenging the notification prohibiting manufacture, storage, sale and distribution of food products with halal certification within the state, except for items produced for export.

* SC sought response of the Tamil Nadu government on a plea of the Enforcement Directorate seeking transfer of the probe in a case against its officer, arrested by the Tamil Nadu Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption on charges of bribe, to the CBI.

Play button

* SC stayed criminal proceedings against Samajwadi Party (SP) leader Swami Prasad Maurya in the case where he has been accused of having made “objectionable” remarks about ‘Ramcharitmanas’, a sacred text in the Awadhi language based on the epic Ramayana.

READ ALSO  SC Starts Hearing on Whether Its 2017 Verdict on Guidelines for Sr Advocate Designation Rneeds Tweaking

* SC granted protection from arrest to Umar Ansari, son of gangster-turned-politician Mukhtar Ansari, in a criminal case registered against him during the 2022 assembly elections for alleged violation of the model code of conduct.

* SC refused to entertain a plea by realtor Sanjay Chhabria against an order of the Bombay High Court which refused to grant him default bail in the Yes Bank money laundering case.

* SC sought responses from the Centre and others on a plea by 13 doctors seeking directions for a third round of National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET) Super Specialisation counselling and permitting them to participate in it so they could get seats in better institutions and pursue courses of their choice.

READ ALSO  Supreme Court Criticizes Uttar Pradesh for ‘Colonial Mindset’ in Assigning Ex-Officio Posts to Bureaucrats’ Wives

* SC sought a response from the Centre on a PIL assailing the procedure for appointment of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) on grounds that it is “not independent, fair and transparent” and violated the constitutional mandate.

* “We are not monsters,” the SC said as it allowed a petitioner to withdraw a controversial PIL which sought the court’s ruling to declare the fundamental rights provided to citizens under Articles 20 and 22 as ‘ultra vires’, or beyond the powers, of Part III of the Constitution.

READ ALSO  यूपी मदरसा शिक्षा अधिनियम पर इलाहाबाद हाईकोर्ट के फैसले के खिलाफ सुप्रीम कोर्ट में SLP दायर
Ad 20- WhatsApp Banner

Related Articles

Latest Articles