India News

Judicial propriety debate reignites in Supreme Court

Published

8 years ago

February 22, 2018

A three-judge bench headed by Justice Madan B Lokur stays implementation of a verdict delivered by a bench of similar strength headed by Justice Arun Mishra

A month after the famous “mutiny” by four senior-most judges of the Supreme Court stunned the nation and brought to fore a debate over judicial discipline, the issue of breach of propriety seems to have rocked the top court again.

On Wednesday (February 21), in an unusual turn of events, a three-judge bench of the top court comprising Justices Madan B Lokur, Kurian Joseph and Deepak Gupta stayed the implementation of a verdict delivered on February 8 by a bench of similar strength which comprised Justices Arun Mishra, AK Goel and MM Shantanagoudar. The Bench headed by Justice Lokur also restrained all high courts from entertaining or passing any order on land acquisition matters on the basis of the February 8 verdict delivered by the bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra.

The interim order by the bench headed by Justice Lokur came during proceedings in a special leave petition related to land acquisition. The State of Haryana (petitioner) and M/s GD Goenka Tourism Corporation Limited (respondent) were the parties in this case. The February 8 verdict was delivered on another land acquisition case (related to Indore Development Authority) which had effectively overturned a judgment delivered by a three-judge bench of Justices RM Lodha (now retired), Madan B Lokur and Kurian Joseph on January 24, 2014 (this case was about land acquisition carried out by the Pune Municipal Corporation) terming it “per incuriam” (decision rendered without taking care of facts and law).

As per judicial convention, the court doesn’t adjudicate on the validity of a verdict delivered by a bench of identical strength and instead refers such a case to be heard by a larger bench.

The bench headed by Justice Lokur, will on March 7, conduct further proceedings in the matter to decide whether a reference should be made over the sustainability of the February 8 verdict to a larger bench of the Supreme Court.

It is pertinent to recall that Justices Lokur and Kurian Joseph were among the four senior SC judges – the other two being Justices Jasti Chelameswar and Ranjan Gogoi – who had, on January 12, addressed an unprecedented press conference to attack Chief Justice Dipak Misra and warn that all was not well in the apex court. Besides the Chief Justice of India, Justice Arun Mishra was the other target of the four judges. The ‘rebelling four’ were peeved at the fact that CJI Dipak Misra, in his capacity as ‘master of the roster’, had assigned some crucial cases – including the controversial petition seeking an investigation into the mysterious death of CBI Judge BH Loya – to the bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra, who is among the junior-most judges in the apex court hierarchy.

On February 8, the bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra had held that that once the compensation amount for land acquired by a government agency has been unconditionally tendered but the land owner refuses it; this would amount to payment and discharge of obligation on part of the agency. The verdict had added “the claimants/landowners after refusal, cannot take advantage of their own wrong and seek protection under the provisions of section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013” to reclaim land on the ground that they were not paid compensation within five years.

The verdict authored by Justice Arun Mishra was in stark contrast to the January 2014 judgement which had held that “deposit of compensation amount in the government treasury is of no avail and cannot be held to be equivalent to compensation paid to the landowners/persons interested… Under Section 24(2) land acquisition proceedings initiated under the 1894 Act, by legal fiction, are deemed to have lapsed where award has been made five years or more prior to the commencement of 2013 Act and possession of the land is not taken or compensation has not been paid.”

On Wednesday, as proceedings began in the State of Haryana v/s GD Goenka Tourism Corporation Limited land acquisition case, before the bench headed by Justice Madan B Lokur, counsel for the State of submitted that the matter is covered by the February 8 verdict “of a Bench of 3 learned Judges of this Court”. This triggered some other counsels present in the courtroom – including senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi – to urge the bench to hear their submissions too as they had been engaged in some similar matters and that the February 8 verdict had “unsettled a long standing statement of law and had very serious repercussions on land acquisition cases.”

Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi provided the spark that reignited the “discipline” and “propriety” debate when he submitted: “when a Bench of three learned Judges does not agree with the decision rendered by another Bench of three learned Judges, the appropriate course of action would be to refer the matter to a larger Bench” while adding that even one of the three judges who presided over the Indore Development Authority case (the February 8 verdict) had held this same view but was overruled as the other two judges decided to pass a judgment overturning the conclusions of the January 2014 verdict.

Rohatgi added: “A Bench of three 3 learned Judges cannot hold another decision rendered by a Bench of three learned Judges as per incuriam,” even as he informed the court that “some cases have already been decided on the basis of the judgment rendered in the case of Indore Development Authority (February 8 verdict), without the matter being referred to a larger Bench… some similar matters are listed tomorrow as well and it is possible that in the next couple of days similar matters may be listed before various High Courts.”

The submissions by Rohatgi led to Justice Kurian Joseph remark that it was his “painful concern” that “if this court is to remain as one, it should be one and you have to make it one. You have to have proper judicial discipline for that”.

Justice Joseph – fifth in the hierarchy of Supreme Court judges – then added: “Be very clear, this is a matter of judicial discipline, judicial propriety and consistency. Can a three-judge bench over rule a three-judge bench verdict? It has to be referred to a larger bench in case of difference of opinion… correctness of judgement can be doubted but the bench of similar strength of judges cannot hold that the judgement rendered by the earlier one was wrong. Such a system works on hierarchy and it needs to be preserved.”

The top court can now refer the two conflicting verdicts (that of February 8 and the one delivered in January 2014) to the Chief Justice, urging him to set up a larger five-judge bench to hear the matter. The bench headed by Justice Lokur will decide on March 7 on how to proceed further with this piquant judicial situation.

“We are not going into the merits or correctness of the decision by Justice Mishra’s bench. We are only concerned with judicial discipline,” Justice Joseph remarked while adding that the well-settled principle of the Supreme Court “is that you can’t tinker with the system”.

The bench noted in its interim order of February 21 that: “we are of the opinion that it would be appropriate if in the interim and pending a final decision on making a reference (if at all) to a larger Bench, the High Courts be requested not to deal with any cases relating to the interpretation of or concerning Section 24 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.”

The Bench also directed the Secretary General to “urgently communicate this order to the Registrar General of every High Court so that our request is complied with” and added that “insofar as cases pending in this Court are concerned, we request the concerned Benches dealing with similar matters to defer the hearing until a decision is rendered one way or the other on the issue whether the matter should be referred to larger Bench or not.”

Up Next

India falls in Corruption Index, report links high corruption to low press freedom

Don't Miss

Army chief statement on planned immigration and rise of AIUDF in Assam sparks row

India News

IPS Officer Nupur Prasad gets Medal for Meritorious Service after Sushant Singh Rajput probe

IPS officer Nupur Prasad, who led the CBI investigation into Sushant Singh Rajput’s death, has been selected for the Medal for Meritorious Service this year.

Published

23 hours ago

August 15, 2026

APNLive Desk

IPS officer Nupur Prasad, who led the CBI investigation into actor Sushant Singh Rajput’s death, has been recognised with the Medal for Meritorious Service (MSM) this year.

A 2007-batch AGMUT cadre officer, Ms Prasad recently returned to the Delhi Police after completing her tenure with the CBI. She is currently serving as Joint Commissioner of Police in the Economic Offences Wing (EOW), where she oversees investigations involving financial and economic crimes.

The award is part of this year’s recognition for police personnel for distinguished and meritorious service. Such honours recognise contributions in areas including investigation, crime prevention, public service, law and order and administration.

Nupur Prasad’s role in Sushant Singh Rajput case

Ms Prasad came into national focus during the CBI investigation into the death of Sushant Singh Rajput, who was found dead at his Mumbai residence on June 14, 2020.

The case was transferred to the CBI in August 2020 following a complaint by the actor’s family and a legal dispute over jurisdiction.

During her tenure with the agency, Ms Prasad supervised key aspects of the investigation, including the examination of witness statements, forensic evidence and medical records.

In 2025, the CBI filed closure reports, saying its investigation found no evidence of foul play, abetment to suicide or criminal conspiracy in the actor’s death.

Career across Delhi Police, CBI

Ms Prasad has served in several positions during her career, including assignments in the Delhi Police, CBI, Arunachal Pradesh and West Bengal.

Before joining the CBI, she held senior positions in the Delhi Police and became the first Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) of Shahdara. During her tenure, she worked on establishing the district’s policing framework following its creation.

She also led operations targeting drug networks and illegal gambling activities while focusing on crime-prevention measures.

Later, as DCP of North Delhi, she oversaw security arrangements for major events, including Independence Day celebrations at the Red Fort and Delhi University elections.

Community-focused policing initiatives

Beyond investigations, Ms Prasad has been associated with community-focused programmes involving women’s self-defence, youth development, cyber safety and drug de-addiction.

During her CBI tenure, she was also associated with several prominent investigations. Media reports have linked her to cases concerning businessman Vijay Mallya and the AgustaWestland helicopter deal.

Current role in Delhi Police

After completing her assignment with the CBI, Ms Prasad returned to the Delhi Police and took charge as Joint Commissioner of Police in the Economic Offences Wing.

The latest recognition adds to her career spanning investigations, policing and public service across several challenging assignments.

India News

Kharge, Rahul Gandhi skip Independence Day event for 2nd straight year

Congress chief Mallikarjun Kharge and Rahul Gandhi skipped the 80th Independence Day celebrations at the Red Fort for the second consecutive year.

Published

23 hours ago

August 15, 2026

APNLive Desk

Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge and Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi skipped the 80th Independence Day celebrations at Delhi’s Red Fort for the second consecutive year.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi led the Independence Day celebrations at the historic venue on Saturday.

The absence of the two senior Congress leaders comes amid strained relations between the ruling party and the Opposition, which further deteriorated during the Monsoon Session of Parliament that concluded on Thursday.

2024 seating controversy

Rahul Gandhi had attended the Independence Day celebrations in 2024 but his seating arrangement triggered a controversy. The Congress leader, who holds the status of a Cabinet minister as Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, was seated in the second-last row during the ceremony at the Red Fort.

The Opposition had criticised the seating arrangement, calling it an insult to the people. The Defence Ministry, which organised the event, said the arrangement had been modified to accommodate Olympians at the venue.

According to protocol, the Leader of the Opposition is seated in the front row during ceremonial events.

Opposition-ruling party tensions

Relations between the government and the Opposition remained tense during the Monsoon Session, which ended on Thursday.

The session saw repeated clashes between the two sides, with both the Opposition and the ruling party blaming each other for the low productivity of Parliament.

The session began on July 20, with students marching towards Parliament on the first day. Twelve bills were passed during the session, while detailed discussion took place on only one legislation, concerning paper leaks.

The Congress, along with the Trinamool Congress and Samajwadi Party, also boycotted the customary tea party hosted by Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla after the House was adjourned sine die.

India News

PM Modi’s Saptadhara Vision: 7 streams driving India’s next growth phase

PM Modi outlined “Shakti Ki Saptadhara”, identifying seven streams including manufacturing, farming, technology, defence, green energy and soft power.

Published

23 hours ago

August 15, 2026

APNLive Desk

Prime Minister Narendra Modi, in his Independence Day address from the Red Fort on Saturday, outlined “Shakti Ki Saptadhara”, describing seven key streams that he said can drive India’s next phase of growth and strengthen its journey towards self-reliance and development.

The seven streams identified by the Prime Minister are manufacturing, farming, technology, Gatishakti, Raksha Shakti, green and blue economy, and soft power.

Calling on the country to focus on these areas, PM Modi said the seven streams represent India’s strength and can help the country become more self-reliant.

Manufacturing as the engine of growth

PM Modi called manufacturing the first stream of Saptadhara and stressed the need to significantly strengthen the sector.

He said India needs to produce both components and complete products and should emerge as a key destination in global supply chains.

The Prime Minister highlighted cost, quality and scale as important factors for Indian manufacturers to compete globally. He also stressed the importance of attractive packaging and precision in manufacturing.

Farming and food processing

Agriculture and food processing were identified as the second stream.

PM Modi said global markets are increasingly accessible to Indian farmers and called for greater efforts to take agricultural products from farms to international markets.

He highlighted traditional foods, millets, spices, fruits and vegetables, saying these products should be developed into global brands.

Technology and innovation

Technology and innovation form the third stream of Saptadhara, according to PM Modi.

He highlighted areas such as data centres, robotics and emerging technologies, saying India should aim to become a hub for these sectors.

Referring to the country’s experience with UPI and Digital Public Infrastructure, PM Modi said India has already demonstrated its technological capabilities and must now take the next leap in next-generation communication technology.

He also spoke about the goal of Made-in-India 6G reaching across the country.

Gatishakti and faster connectivity

The fourth stream is Gatishakti, with the Prime Minister stressing the importance of speed and connectivity for India’s growth.

PM Modi called for greater emphasis on roads and expressways to support businesses and said the country needs seamless, high-speed connectivity.

He also highlighted high-speed rail connectivity between cities and port-led development as areas requiring greater focus.

Raksha Shakti and self-reliant defence

Defence is the fifth stream of Saptadhara.

PM Modi called for greater self-reliance in defence manufacturing and highlighted the need to develop advanced technologies in the sector.

He particularly stressed the importance of drone and counter-drone technology, saying India needs to invest in these areas.

The Prime Minister also said India should move beyond being a market for defence equipment and work towards becoming a global supplier by developing next-generation defence technologies.

Green and blue economy

Green energy forms the sixth stream of Saptadhara.

PM Modi called for greater innovation in green energy and said India should aim for global leadership in green hydrogen, renewable energy and energy storage while continuing to contribute solutions to global challenges.

He also highlighted opportunities in the Blue Economy, particularly in fisheries, coastal tourism and ocean technology, saying these areas can create new pathways for India’s growth.

Soft power

Soft power is the seventh stream identified by PM Modi.

He cited Yoga, handicrafts, films, animation, gaming, digital content and the creative sector as examples of India’s soft power.

The Prime Minister also highlighted India’s potential to attract global tourists and called for greater focus on the country’s tourism opportunities, including its national parks and other attractions.

With “Shakti Ki Saptadhara”, PM Modi outlined a broad growth framework covering manufacturing and agriculture, emerging technology, connectivity, defence, sustainable energy, the blue economy and India’s cultural and creative influence.