English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Judiciary and Executive spar in open court over judges’ appointments

Published

on

Judiciary and Executive spar in open court over judges' appointments

A case relating to judges’ vacancies in high courts of states of Manipur, Meghalaya and Tripura on Friday, May 4, witnessed an open clash between the judiciary and the executive in a manifestation of the tension that has built up between the two branches of the State over appointment of judges.

The Supreme Court bench of Justices Madan B Lokur and Deepak Gupta, hearing a transfer plea of a litigant from Manipur, pulled up the Centre for not clearing the names recommended by the Supreme Court Collegium for appointment as judges, causing undue harassment to litigants. Terming it “an unfortunate situation”, the SC had issued notice to the Centre on April 17.

On Friday the Attorney General KK Venugopal assured the court that appointments to high courts in the northeast would be made soon, but said that will not resolve the problem of vacancies in all high courts. “Collegium has to look at the future. Recommendations need to be made keeping in mind vacancies that will arise six months later,” Venugopal said, pointing out that though some High Courts had 40 per cent vacancy, only a few names were being recommended for appointments. “Collegium doesn’t send us the names and the government is told it is being tardy in processing,” he said.

“Why is the Collegium recommending fewer names when there are so many vacancies in high courts?” asked Venugopal.

The bench told Venugopal that this did not give the government the liberty to sit over names sent long back.

The two-judge bench asked the AG: “Tell us, how many names (recommended by the Collegium) are pending with you.”

The AG replied: “I will have to find out”.

The bench shot back: “This is the problem with you (the government). When it comes to attacking (the) judiciary, you have the data. But when it comes to the government then you say you don’t have the figures.”

The petitioner wanted the Supreme Court’s permission to challenge an order of a single judge of the Manipur High Court before the Gauhati High Court. He claimed he could not file an appeal in the Manipur High Court since it had only two judges, one of whom had given the order. The Supreme Court had sought the Attorney General’s assistance in the matter.

Venugopal said that on April 19, the Collegium recommended a name for appointment as Chief Justice of the Manipur High Court. He said he had spoken to the authorities and they had promised that the appointment would be notified “shortly”.

“Your shortly… can be several months. What are you doing?” the bench asked the AG.

Venugopal replied the government was serious about the appointment and that the same would be done in 10 days, said a report in The Hindustan Times (HT).

The bench said the situation in the North-East was ‘critical’. “In Meghalaya, there is only one judge against four. Even Tripura has just two against four. Recommendation was also made for Meghalaya. What happened to that?… People of North-East are suffering… What are they supposed to do? Should they come here to get their cases transferred to other High Courts and spend money to hire lawyers there?” the bench said.

The Attorney General remarked, in a lighter vein, that the National Judicial Appointments Commission — the NJAC Act was invalidated by the Supreme Court in 2015 — may have been more suitable for dealing with the appointment of judges.

Justice Lokur said the bench was only concerned with appointments to High Courts in the North-East and asked the Attorney General to file an affidavit explaining the position in the next 10 days.

Justice MB Lokur is one of the senior-most judges of the Supreme Court and a member of the collegium that nominates judges to the apex court. This was the first time a member of the collegium has spoken out over the stand-off between the collegium and the government on the appointment of judges, said the HT report.

Last week, while the Centre cleared the appointment of Indu Malhotra as a judge of the Supreme Court, it asked the Collegium to reconsider the recommendation that Justice KM Joseph from the Uttarakhand high court be elevated to the top court. The Collegium had recommended names of both judges together, in the first week of January.

India News

Om Birla likely to move motion to revoke suspension of 8 opposition MPs today

The Lok Sabha is likely to revoke the suspension of eight opposition MPs today, with a motion expected to be moved by the government following consensus on maintaining discipline.

Published

on

Om Birla

The suspension of eight opposition Members of Parliament in the Lok Sabha is expected to be revoked on Tuesday, with Speaker Om Birla likely to initiate the process, according to sources.

The MPs, including seven from the Congress and one from the CPI(M), were suspended on February 3 for unruly conduct during the first phase of the Budget session after a resolution was adopted by the House.

Motion to be moved in Lok Sabha

Congress leader K Suresh said that Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju is expected to move a motion around noon seeking revocation of the suspensions.

Although the suspension was initially imposed for the entire session, scheduled to conclude on April 2, opposition parties have consistently demanded reconsideration since the second phase of the session began on March 9.

Agreement on maintaining decorum

At a recent meeting convened by the Speaker, both ruling and opposition sides reportedly agreed on maintaining discipline in the House.

Key understandings include:

  • No member will enter the well of the House to protest
  • Papers will not be torn or thrown toward the Chair
  • MPs will not climb onto officials’ tables

The Lok Sabha Secretariat has also reminded members to keep areas within the Parliament premises obstruction-free to ensure smooth movement.

Speaker raises concern over conduct

Earlier, Om Birla had expressed concern over the use of banners, placards, and inappropriate language by some MPs. In a letter to party leaders, he stressed the need to uphold the dignity and traditions of parliamentary democracy.

He had also indicated that actions like suspension are taken in cases of serious misconduct, such as climbing onto tables during proceedings.

Suspended MPs

The suspended MPs include Gurjeet Singh Aujla, Hibi Eden, C Kiran Kumar Reddy, Amarinder Singh Raja Warring, Manickam Tagore, Prashant Padole, Dean Kuriakose (Congress), and S Venkatesan (CPI-M).

Continue Reading

India News

Maharashtra passes freedom of religion bill with jail term up to 10 years

Maharashtra passes anti-conversion bill with strict jail terms and fines, aiming to curb unlawful religious conversions.

Published

on

Maharashtra faces freedom of bill

The Maharashtra Assembly has passed the Freedom of Religion Bill 2026, introducing stringent penalties to curb religious conversions carried out through coercion, fraud, inducement or marriage.

The bill was cleared by voice vote late Monday, with the government asserting that it aims to protect individuals from unlawful conversions while safeguarding constitutional rights.

Under the provisions, individuals found guilty of conversion through marriage or deceit can face up to seven years in prison along with a fine of Rs 1 lakh. In cases involving minors, women, persons of unsound mind, or those belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, the punishment increases to seven years’ imprisonment and a fine of Rs 5 lakh.

Mass conversions will also attract a jail term of up to seven years and a fine of Rs 5 lakh. Repeat offenders could face imprisonment of up to 10 years.

Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis said the law is not aimed at any particular religion but seeks to prevent conversions through illegal means. He emphasised that the right to freedom of religion under Article 25 of the Constitution does not include conversion through coercion or fraud.

He also noted that several states, including Odisha, Gujarat, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Haryana, Karnataka and Jharkhand, have enacted similar laws.

The bill allows complaints to be filed by the affected individual or close relatives, while police can also initiate action in certain situations. The government said this provision is necessary as victims may not always be in a position to approach authorities.

Minister of State for Home Pankaj Bhoyar said the legislation ensures that conversions take place voluntarily and transparently. He addressed concerns over the requirement of giving a 60-day prior notice to the district magistrate, stating that the provision is meant to verify free consent.

The law also mandates informing authorities within 21 days after conversion, failing which it may be treated as invalid. The government described this as a measure for administrative record-keeping and to avoid disputes.

During the debate, members from the opposition raised concerns over possible misuse and vigilantism. Congress MLA Aslam Shaikh argued that the bill could affect constitutional rights, including privacy and equality. Some legislators also demanded that the bill be sent to a joint select committee for further scrutiny.

However, the opposition Shiv Sena (UBT) extended support. MLA Bhaskar Jadhav said the bill does not target any religion and is aimed at preventing unethical practices.

The government maintained that the law does not restrict an individual’s right to change religion voluntarily but is intended to curb unlawful practices and maintain law and order.

Continue Reading

India News

Mamata Banerjee writes to poll chief over officers’ reshuffle, calls move arbitrary

Mamata Banerjee has written to the Chief Election Commissioner, calling the reshuffle of senior Bengal officials arbitrary and raising concerns over constitutional norms.

Published

on

mamta banerjee

West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee has written to Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, raising strong objections to the recent reshuffle of senior bureaucrats in the state ahead of the assembly elections.

In her letter, Banerjee described the move by the Election Commission of India as “arbitrary” and expressed “deep concern” over what she termed a unilateral decision. She urged the Commission to refrain from adopting such measures in the future.

The Chief Minister pointed out that while the Election Commission does have the authority to make administrative changes during elections, past practice has involved consultation with the state government. According to her, the Commission would typically seek a panel of officers from the state and make its selections from that list, maintaining what she called constitutional propriety and administrative convention.

Banerjee warned that bypassing this process could undermine the institutional credibility and long-standing legacy of the poll body, and may also affect the foundational principles of the constitutional framework.

The controversy stems from the Commission’s decision, taken soon after announcing election dates, to remove several top officials from election-related duties. These include the state’s Chief Secretary, Director General of Police, Kolkata Police Commissioner, and Home Secretary.

The Commission has maintained that the reshuffle was aimed at ensuring a peaceful and violence-free electoral process.

Reacting sharply, Banerjee alleged bias in the decision-making, claiming that the removal of the Chief Secretary indicated an anti-women stance. She also accused the Commission of selectively targeting officers, suggesting that the move favoured individuals aligned with the Bharatiya Janata Party.

Meanwhile, the Trinamool Congress escalated its protest, staging a day-long walkout from the Rajya Sabha earlier in the day.

Responding to the criticism, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said the Election Commission is a constitutional authority, adding that questioning its decisions in Parliament is inappropriate and unproductive.

The Commission has appointed a new Chief Secretary in place of the outgoing official as part of the reshuffle.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com