English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

SC dismisses petition challenging CJI’s role as master of roster

Published

on

SC dismisses petition challenging CJI’s role as master of roster

Bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra rules that allocation of cases and constitution of benches is the exclusive prerogative of the Chief Justice

Putting to rest the debate over the role of the Chief Justice as the master of the roster, the Supreme Court, on Wednesday (April 11), summarily dismissed a petition that challenged his powers of allocation of cases to various benches while asserting that there cannot be a “presumption of mistrust” against the head of the apex judicial institution.

The verdict, passed by a three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra himself and comprising Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud, came against a petition filed by Allahabad-based lawyer Asok Pande. The bench, which had heard the plea for less than five minutes on Monday before reserving its order in the matter, termed the petition as “scandalous” while cautioning the petitioner to be “more responsible for the manner in which he seeks to draft pleadings in the future.”

The Supreme Court’s verdict that reaffirms that the Chief Justice is “primus inter pares: the first among equals” and that “in the allocation of cases and the constitution of benches… has an exclusive prerogative”, comes months after the infamous ‘mutiny’ by four of the top court’s senior-most judges who had raised grave doubts on the manner in which Chief Justice Dipak Misra had been allocating cases to certain benches of the Supreme Court. The unprecedented press conference by the four judges, followed by controversial averments by Justice J Chelameswar – the senior-most judge in the apex court after the CJI – had cast a shadow of doubt in the public’s mind over the manner in which the apex court was adjudicating on important cases, including the petitions on the Aadhaar-linking matter and the one seeking an independent SIT probe in the mysterious death of CBI judge BH Loya.

However, Wednesday verdict, authored by Justice DY Chandrachud, effectively puts to rest any possibility of the Supreme Court breaking from its time-tested tradition of vesting in the Chief Justice the powers of constituting benches and the allocating cases to them.

The 16-page verdict by the three-judge bench says: “the petitioner is not entitled to seek a direction that Benches of this Court should be constituted in a particular manner or, as he seeks, that there should be separate divisions of this Court. The former lies exclusively in the domain of the prerogative powers of the Chief Justice.”

On the issue of how judges must be selected for various benches and to hear different kinds of cases that come before the apex court, the verdict says: “the petitioner seems to harbour a misconception that certain categories of cases or certain courts must consist only of the senior-most in terms of appointment. Every Judge appointed to this Court under Article 124 of the Constitution is invested with the equal duty of adjudicating cases which come to the Court and are assigned by the Chief Justice. Seniority in terms of appointment has no bearing on which cases a Judge should hear… every Judge of the Court is entitled to and in fact, duty bound, to hear such cases as are assigned by the Chief Justice…”

“To suggest that any Judge would be more capable of deciding particular cases or that certain categories of cases should be assigned only to the senior-most among the Judges of the Supreme Court has no foundation in principle or precedent. To hold otherwise would be to cast a reflection on the competence and ability of other judges to deal with all cases assigned by the Chief Justice notwithstanding the fact that they have fulfilled the qualifications mandated by the Constitution for appointment to the office,” the verdict adds.

The verdict concludes by saying: “Underlying the submission that the constitution of Benches and the allocation of cases by the Chief Justice must be regulated by a procedure cast in iron is the apprehension that absent such a procedure the power will be exercised arbitrarily. In his capacity as a Judge, the Chief Justice is primus inter pares: the first among equals… Article 146 reaffirms the position of the Chief Justice of India as the head of the institution… As a repository of constitutional trust, the Chief Justice is an institution in himself… The ultimate purpose behind the entrustment of authority to the Chief Justice is to ensure that the Supreme Court is able to fulfil and discharge the constitutional obligations which govern and provide the rationale for its existence. The entrustment of functions to the Chief Justice as the head of the institution is with the purpose of securing the position of the Supreme Court as an independent safeguard for the preservation of personal liberty. There cannot be a presumption of mistrust. The oath of office demands nothing less.”

India News

PM Modi accuses Congress of anti-Sikh bias over Rahul Gandhi’s ‘traitor’ remark

Prime Minister Narendra Modi accused Rahul Gandhi of targeting BJP MP Ravneet Singh Bittu with a ‘gaddar’ remark because of his Sikh identity while speaking in the Rajya Sabha.

Published

on

PM Modi

Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Wednesday launched a sharp attack on Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi, alleging that his “traitor” remark against BJP MP Ravneet Singh Bittu reflected the Congress party’s animosity towards the Sikh community.

The Prime Minister made the remarks in the Rajya Sabha while replying to the motion of thanks on the President’s address. Referring to an incident in the Parliament complex a day earlier, Modi said Gandhi’s comment had crossed all limits of political decency.

The controversy stems from a protest by suspended Opposition MPs, during which Ravneet Singh Bittu — a former Congress leader who joined the BJP ahead of the 2024 Lok Sabha elections — allegedly made a remark suggesting the protesters were behaving as if they had won a war.

In response, Rahul Gandhi was heard saying, “A traitor is walking by, look at his face,” before approaching Bittu and extending his hand. Gandhi then reportedly added, “Hello, brother. My traitor friend. Don’t worry, you will come back.”

Bittu refused to shake hands with the Congress leader and instead described him as an “enemy of the country” before walking away from the scene.

While the Congress later clarified that Gandhi’s remark was aimed at Bittu for leaving the party, the BJP seized upon the comment, calling it an insult to the Sikh community. Protests were subsequently held by members of the Sikh community outside the Congress headquarters and at other locations.

Addressing the House, Prime Minister Modi said that many leaders had quit the Congress in the past and that the party itself had split multiple times, but none of those leaders had been labelled a traitor. “He called this MP a traitor because he is Sikh,” the Prime Minister alleged, as treasury bench members raised slogans condemning the remark.

Continue Reading

India News

Manipur Assembly to meet at 4 pm today, floor test likely under new chief minister

The Manipur Legislative Assembly will convene at 4 pm today, with a floor test likely as the new chief minister seeks to prove his majority in the House.

Published

on

Manipur assembly

The Manipur Legislative Assembly will convene at 4 pm on Thursday in Imphal, a day after Yumnam Khemchand Singh was sworn in as the chief minister. A floor test is likely to be held on the first day of the session to establish the majority of the newly formed government.

In the 60-member Assembly, the BJP holds 37 seats, while its ally National People’s Party has six members, giving the ruling combine a clear majority in the House.

Singh chaired the first Cabinet meeting of his government late Wednesday evening, shortly after taking oath as the 13th chief minister of Manipur. The meeting marked the formal start of administrative functioning under the new Council of Ministers.

His appointment came nearly a year after the resignation of former chief minister N Biren Singh, who stepped down following months of ethnic violence between the Meitei and Kuki communities in the state.

After taking oath, Singh thanked Prime Minister Narendra Modi and said he would work with “utmost diligence to advance development and prosperity in Manipur,” aligning the state’s efforts with the vision of Viksit Bharat.

He said the government’s focus would be on inclusive economic growth while preserving Manipur’s cultural heritage, adding that he would discharge his responsibilities with sincerity and dedication, mindful of the trust placed in him.

The summoning of the 12th Manipur Legislative Assembly by Governor Ajay Kumar Bhalla, along with the first Cabinet meeting, signals the resumption of legislative and administrative processes in the state, officially bringing President’s rule to an end.

The sixth session of the 12th Manipur Legislative Assembly was last held from July 31 to August 12, 2024.

Continue Reading

India News

PM Modi skips Lok Sabha reply as protests force repeated adjournments

PM Modi did not deliver his Lok Sabha reply today after sustained Opposition protests led to repeated adjournments over a dispute involving Rahul Gandhi’s proposed speech.

Published

on

PM Modi

Prime Minister Narendra Modi did not deliver his scheduled reply to the Motion of Thanks on the President’s address in the Lok Sabha today after sustained Opposition protests led to multiple adjournments of the House.

The disruption followed an escalation of tensions linked to Congress leader Rahul Gandhi’s proposed speech and the suspension of eight Opposition MPs a day earlier. The situation worsened after remarks made by BJP MP Nishikant Dubey during the proceedings.

Dispute over references to books sparks fresh ruckus

The controversy intensified when Nishikant Dubey responded to Rahul Gandhi’s demand to speak on national security and references to the unpublished memoirs of former Army chief General MM Naravane. Dubey said that while Gandhi wanted to quote from an unpublished book, he himself had brought several books that, according to him, made claims about the Gandhi family.

As Dubey began listing these books and their contents, strong protests erupted from Opposition members. Krishna Prasad Tenneti, who was presiding over the House at the time, cited Rule 349, which restricts members from reading out books, newspapers, or letters unless directly related to parliamentary business. Despite repeated warnings, the matter remained unresolved, leading to another adjournment.

Rahul Gandhi accuses government of silencing debate

Earlier in the day, Rahul Gandhi alleged that he was being prevented from speaking on an issue of national importance. He claimed the government was uncomfortable with references to General Naravane’s memoirs, which he said discussed the handling of the 2020 China border crisis.

In a social media post, Gandhi said he intended to present the Prime Minister with a book authored by the former Army chief, adding that some cabinet ministers had even questioned the existence of the book. He also wrote to Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla after the suspension of eight Opposition MPs, alleging that parliamentary debate was being curtailed.

After it became clear that the Prime Minister would not speak in the House today, Gandhi posted that PM Modi had avoided Parliament because he was “scared” to face the truth. Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra echoed the allegation, claiming the Prime Minister was unwilling to enter the House.

Proceedings disrupted throughout the day

Lok Sabha proceedings were first adjourned until 2 pm amid loud protests over the issue linked to Naravane’s memoirs. Even after the House reconvened, disruptions continued, preventing normal business from resuming.

Later, Congress MPs staged a demonstration outside the Parliament complex, demanding that Rahul Gandhi be allowed to speak on the President’s address.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com