English हिन्दी
Connect with us

Latest world news

Justice Chelameswar refuses to hear PIL on allocation of cases in SC, says “reasons are too obvious”

Published

on

Justice Chelameswar refuses to hear PIL on allocation of cases in SC, says “reasons are too obvious”

A Supreme Court Bench led by Justice Jasti Chelameswar on Thursday, April 12, turned down an urgent mentioning to list for hearing a petition seeking clarification on the role of Chief Justice of India (CJI) as ‘master of the roster’ and specify that the CJI’s authority as such should not be reduced to an absolute, singular and arbitrary power.

This comes a day after a bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra ruled that constitution of benches of the top court allocation of cases is exclusive prerogative of the CJI.

Justice Chelameswar – the senior-most judge after the Chief Justice – refused to hear the PIL filed on behalf of former Union minister Shanti Bhushan, commenting: “There is nothing much I can do in this. I am sorry. You please understand my difficulty… With two months left, I don’t want to hear that I am trying to grab some office. I do not want another reversal of my order in 24 hours. This is why I can’t do it. Let the nation decide its own course.”

Justice Chelameswar was referring to his earlier order which was quashed on November 10, 2017 by a Constitution Bench headed by CJI in the Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms (CJAR) case.

Justice Chelameswar, who has been critical of Chief Justice Dipak Misra’s handling of the roster and had, along with three other senior judges, held an unprecedented press conference to slam CJI’s allocation of important cases to benches headed by junior judges, said that reasons for him not hearing Shanti Bhushan’s petition were “too obvious”.

A report by news agency PTI quoted Justice Chelameswar as saying: “someone is running a relentless tirade against me that I am up to grab something (sic)… Please understand my difficulty.”

The former law minister’s son and advocate Prashant Bhushan, however, persisted with the request to have the petition heard, claiming that the plea had been filed 10 days ago but the Supreme Court registry was yet to list it before a bench.

A report in The Hindu said that it was then that Justice Chelameswar’s puisne judge, Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, to say that retirement is looming for his senior brother judge and Justice Chelameswar should be spared from being dragged into controversy.

Prashant Bhushan was then forced to move to the court of Chief Justice Dipak Misra with his request to have his father’s petition heard. It may be recalled that while filing the PIL, the Bhushans had urged the Supreme Court registry to not list the plea before a bench headed by the Chief Justice.

In Court No. 1, as Prashant Bhushan urged the judges to list the petition for hearing, Justice DY Chandrachud asked: “have the defects (in the petition) been removed?” With Prashant Bhushan replying in the affirmative and adding that he had earlier urged the court of Justice Chelameswar to hear the matter but that his bench conveyed to him that “it could not do anything about it”, Chief Justice Dipak Misra said: “we will look into it.”

The petition by the Bhushans seeks a ruling by the apex court on the administrative authority of the Chief Justice in his capacity as the apex court’s master of roster and for laying down the principles and procedure to be followed while allocation of cases to various benches.

The Wednesday (April 11) verdict delivered by a bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra himself against a petition filed by Allahabad-based lawyer Asok Pande ruled that constitution of benches of the top court allocation of cases is exclusive prerogative of the CJI.

Several jurists and former judges of the Supreme Court and various high courts have criticised the verdict, arguing that the CJI should have recused himself from hearing the petition filed by Pande as the petition directly concerned him.

The April 11 verdict, delivered by the bench that also comprised of Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud, reaffirms that the Chief Justice is “the first among equals” and “in the allocation of cases and the constitution of benches… has an exclusive prerogative.”

The 16-page verdict, authored by Justice Chandrachud, had dismissed Pande’s plea terming it as “scandalous” and said: “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.”

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 had said: “the petitioner (Asok Pande) 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 said.

—With inputs from India Legal Bureau and agencies

Latest world news

Amid India-Canada diplomatic tensions, Justin Trudeau shares video of his Diwali celebrations

This comes a day after India expressed its concern over the reports of cancelled Diwali celebrations in Canada.

Published

on

Amid the ongoing diplomatic tensions between Canada and India over the killing of Khalistani terrorist Hardeep Singh Nijjar, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on Sunday shared a video of his Diwali celebration on social media platform X.

Sharing a 44-second video of his Diwali celebrations on social media, the Canadian Prime Minister wrote, “Happy Diwali! So many special moments shared celebrating with the community this week.”

This comes a day after India expressed its concern over the reports of cancelled Diwali celebrations in Canada.

The Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal on Saturday, while addressing the media over Canada’s serious allegation against Union Home Minister Amit Shah’s involvement in the killing of Khalistani terrorist Nijjar, said it was unfortunate that the prevailing atmosphere in Canada has reached high levels of intolerance and extremism.

In the video, Prime Minister Trudeau showed off some colorful religious threads on his wrists, explaining that he received them during visits to three Hindu temples in Canada recently. He called them symbols of “good luck” and “protection,” adding with a smile, “I’m not taking them off until they fall off”.

Trudeau was also seen interacting warmly with the community, celebrating the festival, and enjoying delicious Indian sweets like jalebis, which he jokingly said he would “save for the team.”

On November 1, Trudeau posted on X, “Happy Diwali! Today, Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, and Jain families will celebrate the triumph of light over darkness with festivities, candles, diyas, and fireworks. Wishing you all joy and prosperity during this special time.”

Addressing a press conference in Delhi, Jaiswal said India condemns the recent allegations made by the Canadian government against Shah that he was purportedly involved in the killing of Nijjar and called it “absurd and baseless”.

Jaiswal also said that India had summoned the Canadian High Commissioner on Friday to protest in the strongest terms for the references made to the Union Home Minister of India before the Committee by Canada’s Deputy Foreign Affairs Minister David Morrison.

On Tuesday, Morrison claimed that Shah orchestrated a campaign of violence, intimidation, and intelligence-gathering aimed at Sikh separatists on Canadian soil. He informed members of Canada’s national security committee in Parliament that he had confirmed Shah’s name to The Washington Post, which was the first to report the allegations. However, Morrison did not provide details on how Canada became aware of Shah’s alleged involvement.

Continue Reading

India News

India, China complete disengagement in Depsang, Demchok at LAC after 4 years standoff

The Indian Army said that coordinated patrolling will start soon by both sides, and the ground commanders will continue to hold talks.

Published

on

India, China complete disengagement in Depsang, Demchok at LAC after 4 years standoff

In a significant development, India and China have completed the disengagement exercise in the Depsang and Demchok friction points at the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in eastern Ladakh. The troops of both the countries are now verifying the vacation of positions and removal of infrastructure.

Reportedly, the Indian Army said that coordinated patrolling will start soon by both sides, and the ground commanders will continue to hold talks. The two sides will exchange sweets for Diwali tomorrow.

Earlier, Foreign secretary Vikram Misri announced that New Delhi and Beijing reached an agreement to disengage in the remaining friction points at LAC in eastern Ladakh. After the agreement, the two countries began troops disengagement at the two friction points at Demchok and Depsang plains on October 23.

India-China relations worsened because of the Chinese troops’ aggression along the Line of Actual Control, the de facto border, in April 2020. It further deteriorated on June 15, 2020, after 20 Indian soldiers died in the line of duty thwarting the Chinese offensive in the Galwan Valley. New Delhi had said India’s bilateral relations with China will normalise only after the situation at the LAC returns to what it was before May 2020.

Reports said that the Indian Army and the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) have pulled back their forward-deployed troops and equipment from the two flashpoints, and have also dismantled temporary structures that had been built during the four-year-long standoff.

The Indian soldiers will resume their patrolling in areas that had been cut off because of the PLA’s presence. Nonetheless, the disengagement in Depsang and Demchok will not lead to the creation of buffer zones.

Both the countries had disengaged from Galwan Valley, Pangong Tso, Gogra (PP-17A) and Hot Springs (PP-15) areas and created buffer zones. Speaking to a newspaper publication, Lieutenant General Vinod Bhatia (retd), a former director general of military operations said that the disengagement at Depsang and Demchok will facilitate patrolling by both sides in a coordinated manner, and in the agreed upon frequency and strength of the patrolling parties.

Continue Reading

Latest world news

Iran says 2 soldiers killed in Israeli air strikes

Emphasising Iran’s right to self-defense under the UN Charter, the Iranian Foreign Ministry highlighted its obligation to counter foreign aggression.

Published

on

The Iranian Army said on Saturday that two of its soldiers were killed in Israeli air strikes that targeted military bases.

Iran stated that its air defenses effectively countered the attack, resulting in the unfortunate deaths of two soldiers and some areas suffering limited damage.

The Israeli military conducted strikes on Iranian military sites after 2 am on Saturday, responding to what they cited as ongoing attacks by Iran and its allies in the region.

Following the strikes, the Israeli military announced they had successfully completed the mission and achieved their objectives.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) confirmed the precise targeting of military sites in Iran to neutralize immediate threats to Israel.

“I can now confirm that we have concluded the Israeli response to Iran’s attacks against Israel. We conducted targeted and precise strikes on military targets in Iran — thwarting immediate threats to the State of Israel,” the Israel Defence Force posted on X.

Iran’s air defense headquarters acknowledged the hits on bases in Ilam, Khuzestan, and Tehran but asserted that these attacks were effectively repelled, with investigations ongoing to assess damages. Moreover, Iran indicated its readiness to retaliate against any Israeli aggression, stating that Israel would face proportional consequences for its actions.

Iran expressed its intentions to respond to the Israeli attacks on its military bases, condemning the actions as a violation of international law and the UN Charter’s principles on the use of force.

Emphasising Iran’s right to self-defense under the UN Charter, the Iranian Foreign Ministry highlighted its obligation to counter foreign aggression.

Pakistan strongly condemned Israel’s strikes on Iran, attributing the escalation to Israel and urging the UN Security Council to intervene for peace and security.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer emphasised that Iran should refrain from retaliating against Israel, advocating for restraint on all sides to prevent further escalation.

“I am clear that Israel has the right to defend itself against Iranian aggression. I’m equally clear that we must avoid further regional escalation and urge all sides to restrain. Iran should not respond,” the PM said at a Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting.

The United States advised Iran to halt its attacks on Israel to cease the ongoing violence and break the cycle of conflict, underlining the importance of de-escalation.

“We urge Iran to cease its attacks on Israel so that this cycle of fighting can end without further escalation,” U.S. National Security Council spokesman Sean Savett told reporters.

President Joe Biden was briefed on the Israeli operation throughout its development and execution by his National Security Adviser, Jake Sullivan.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com