English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Indu Malhotra to be first woman to be promoted from Bar to SC judgeship

Published

on

Indu Malhotra to be first woman to be promoted from Bar to SC judgeship

Supreme Court Collegium also recommends elevation of Uttarakhand Chief Justice KM Joseph as judge of the apex court

In a first, the Supreme Court Collegium has decided to elevate a woman lawyer – Indu Malhotra – straight from the Bar Council to be made a judge of the apex court.

Indu Malhotra to be first woman to be promoted from Bar to SC judgeshipThe Collegium, comprising senior-most judges of the Supreme Court – Chief Justice Dipak Misra, Justices Chelameswar, Ranjan Gogoi, Madan B Lokur and Kurian Joseph – has, according to media reports, recommended unanimously the appointment of Malhotra and Uttarakhand Chief Justice KM Joseph as judges of the apex court.

It is pertinent to note that in the first 39 years of its existence, the Supreme Court’s judiciary had no woman member. The glass ceiling was broken in 1989 with the appointment of Justice Fathima Beevi as a judge of the Supreme Court. Justice Beevi was not just the first woman judge of the Supreme Court but also the first Muslim woman to have made it to India’s higher judiciary. The other women judges of the Supreme Court have been Justice Sujatha Manohar,  Justice Ruma Pal, Justice Gyan Sudha Misra and Justice Ranjana Desai.

With Malhotra’s appointment, the Supreme Court will now have two sitting women judges, the other being Justice R Banumati. Malhotra would be one of only seven women judges that the apex court has had so far since independence.

However, this won’t be the first time that the apex court will have two sitting women judges. Speaking to India Legal, Justice (retired) Gyan Sudha Misra said: “Little after Justice Ruma Pal retired I was elevated to the Supreme Court and was the only lady judge for a while before Justice Ranjana Desai was elevated to the SC. Justice Desai and I served as judges of the Supreme Court together for a while.”

However, when asked for her views on the direct elevation of a lawyer to the SC judgeship, Justice (retd) Misra said: “It is the Collegium’s decision and I would not like to comment on it”.

Malhotra had, in 2007, become the second woman to be designated as a Senior Advocate by the Supreme Court. A expert on arbitration, Malhotra has authored the third edition of The Law and Practice of Arbitration and Conciliation, 2014 and has appeared in various domestic and international commercial arbitrations. She has also served as a member of the Centre-appointed High Level Committee (HLC) in the Ministry of Law and Justice to review ‘Institutionalization of Arbitration Mechanism in India’.

Daughter of the late Om Prakash Malhotra, a legal luminary himself with pioneering work in the legal disciplines of industrial disputes and arbitration, Indu Malhotra had enrolled as a lawyer in the Bar Council of Delhi in 1983. Then, in 1988 she qualified as an Advocate-on-Record (AoR) in the Supreme Court and also served as Standing Counsel for the State of Haryana and represented statutory bodies like the Securities Exchange Board of India (Sebi), Delhi Development Authority (DDA), Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), Indian Council for Agricultural Research (ICAR), before the Supreme Court.

The Collegium’s other pick for the Supreme Court judiciary – Uttarakhand Chief Justice KM Joseph – is also an interesting one. It was Justice Joseph who had, in 2016, struck down the imposition of President’s Rule in Uttarakhand by the Narendra Modi-led government and allowed Congress’ Harish Rawat to prove his strength in the state assembly. The decision had paved the way for Harish Rawat to return as Uttarakhand chief minister following the controversial defections to the BJP that had been orchestrated by his predecessor and then party colleague Vijay Bahuguna. A month after he delivered this verdict, the Supreme Court Collegium had recommended Justice Joseph’s transfer to the joint high court for Andhra Pradesh and Telangana in Hyderabad. However, the Modi government refused to clear the transfer, instead choosing to keep the Chief Justice’s post vacant. The high court at Hyderabad still does not have a full-time Chief Justice.

The Collegium has also regularised Chief Justices of five High Courts which currently had acting chief justices. Justice J Bhattacharaya, who is presently chief justice of Calcutta High Court, will be the new chief justice of Delhi High Court, taking over from Justice Gita Mittal who has been serving as the acting chief justice of the court for several months now.

Chief Justice of the Chattishgarh High Court, Justice TB Radhakrishnan, has been transferred to the Andhra Pradesh High Court which Justice Abhilasha Kumari of the Gujarat High Court has been transferred to Manipur as chief justice. The Collegium has also appointed Justice A Dominic as chief justice of the Kerala High Court while Justice Ajay Rastogi has been transferred to the Tripura High Court. Justice Surya Kant of the Punjab and Haryana High court will be the new chief justice of Himachal Pradesh.

India News

Rahul Gandhi, Rajnath Singh clash in Lok Sabha over ex-Army chief’s unpublished book on Ladakh

Lok Sabha proceedings were disrupted after Rahul Gandhi cited an unpublished book by former Army chief General MM Naravane on the Ladakh stand-off, drawing objections from Rajnath Singh and other BJP leaders.

Published

on

Rahul Gandhi

A sharp confrontation unfolded in the Lok Sabha on Monday after Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi referred to an unpublished book by former Army chief General MM Naravane while speaking on the 2020 India-China Ladakh stand-off, prompting strong objections from treasury benches.

Rahul Gandhi began his address by holding a printout of a magazine article that carried an essay on General Naravane’s yet-to-be-published memoir, Four Stars of Destiny. The reference immediately drew an intervention from Defence Minister Rajnath Singh, who objected to the citation, saying quoting an unpublished book violated parliamentary rules.

Objections from treasury benches

Rajnath Singh demanded that the Leader of Opposition place the book before the House, arguing that since the memoir had not been formally published, its contents could not be cited during proceedings. The objection was echoed by Home Minister Amit Shah, who questioned how references could be made to material that was not publicly available.

Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju went a step further, suggesting that the House should deliberate on action against members who do not comply with the Speaker’s rulings.

As Rahul Gandhi persisted, repeatedly referring to “Chinese tanks” while discussing the eastern Ladakh situation, the opposition from BJP members intensified, leading to sustained disruptions.

Opposition support and continued disruptions

Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav backed Rahul Gandhi, stating that issues concerning China were sensitive and that the Leader of Opposition should be allowed to present his views in the House.

Responding to the objections, Rahul Gandhi questioned the resistance to his remarks, asking what in the book was causing such concern. He maintained that both the article and the contents he was quoting were “100 per cent authentic.”

The Congress leader also said he had not intended to raise the issue but felt compelled to do so after BJP MP Tejasvi Surya questioned the patriotism of the Congress and its leadership.

Government, Congress trade charges

Government sources accused Rahul Gandhi of setting a dangerous precedent by citing material from an unpublished book, alleging that such references could be misused to make unverified claims on the floor of Parliament.

Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi defended her brother, saying he was not attempting to defame the Army and was merely reading an excerpt attributed to the former Army chief. She accused the ruling party of resisting discussion whenever uncomfortable issues surfaced.

House adjourned amid chaos

The repeated interruptions forced Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla to adjourn the House till 3 pm. When proceedings resumed, similar scenes played out as Rahul Gandhi again attempted to speak on the subject, leading to further disruptions and another adjournment.

Continue Reading

India News

P Chidambaram avoids commenting on Trump’s dead economy remark echoed by Rahul Gandhi

Chidambaram stays silent on Trump’s ‘dead economy’ remark echoed by Rahul Gandhi as Congress critiques Union Budget 2026.

Published

on

P Chidambaram

Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman on Sunday presented her ninth consecutive union budget, stopping just short of Morarji Desai’s record of ten.

Congress MP P Chidambaram, however, avoided commenting on the ‘India is a dead economy’ statement made by former US President Donald Trump last July, which was later echoed by Rahul Gandhi.

Speaking to reporters after reviewing the budget, Chidambaram said he could not respond as he lacked the full context of Trump’s original remarks.

The comment by Trump followed India’s continued purchase of Russian crude oil, which the US had criticized as indirectly funding military action in Ukraine. Trump imposed a 25 per cent penalty tariff on Indian imports and added: “I don’t care what India does with Russia. They can take their dead economies down together, for all I care.”

Rahul Gandhi later supported the statement, saying, “He is right, everybody knows this except the Prime Minister and Finance Minister. I am glad President Trump stated a fact…”

The remark sparked a political debate, with BJP leaders criticizing Gandhi, while some Congress members, including Rajya Sabha MP Rajiv Shukla, called the statement “completely wrong.”

Ahead of the budget, Gandhi had highlighted the impact of US tariffs on small textile businesses, noting on X: “50 per cent US tariffs are badly hurting textile exporters. Job losses, shutdowns… are reality of our ‘dead economy’.”

The debate gained traction following the budget announcement, which did not offer immediate relief to middle-class taxpayers and saw markets react sharply, with the Sensex closing 1,500 points lower on Sunday.

Chidambaram, as usual, led Congress’ critique of the budget, pointing to a decrease in capital expenditure as a percentage of GDP from 3.2 per cent in FY25 to 3.1 per cent, despite the proposal of Rs 12.2 lakh crore for capex. He added, “Revenue receipts short by Rs 78,086 crore… total expenditure short by Rs 1,00,503 crore… revenue expenditure short by Rs 75,168 crore… capex was cut by Rs 1,44,376 crore… not a word was said to explain this…”

Rahul Gandhi echoed the criticism, highlighting issues such as unemployment, farmers’ distress, declining household savings, and low investment. “A budget that refuses course correction and is blind to India’s real crises,” he said on X.

Responding to the criticism, Finance Minister Sitharaman said, “With due respects, I don’t know what course correction he is referring to. The economy and its fundamentals are strong.”

Continue Reading

India News

Earthquake of 4.6 magnitude hits Andaman and Nicobar Islands

A 4.6 magnitude earthquake struck the Nicobar Islands at 10 km depth, highlighting the region’s seismic activity and potential risks from shallow tremors.

Published

on

earthquake-tremors

An earthquake measuring 4.6 on the Richter scale struck the Andaman and Nicobar Islands early Monday at around 3:30 am, the National Center of Seismology (NCS) reported.

According to the NCS, the tremor occurred at a shallow depth of 10 km. The earthquake’s epicenter was located at a latitude of 9.03° North and a longitude of 92.78° East, placing it in the Nicobar Islands region.

In a post on X, the NCS confirmed the details: “EQ of M: 4.6, On: 02/02/2026 03:31:12 IST, Lat: 9.03 N, Long: 92.78 E, Depth: 10 Km, Location: Nicobar Islands.”

The Andaman and Nicobar Islands fall under Seismic Zone V, according to India’s seismic zoning map (1893-1984), making them one of the most earthquake-prone regions in the world. Historically, the islands have experienced several major earthquakes, including the devastating tremor on December 26, 2004, which caused significant land displacement and triggered tsunami waves, resulting in heavy loss of life and property.

Experts note that shallow earthquakes, like the one recorded on Monday, can be more hazardous than deeper ones. Seismic waves from shallow quakes travel a shorter distance to the surface, causing stronger ground shaking and posing higher risks to structures and human safety.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com