In a more than welcomed judgment pertaining to Indira Jaising v. Registrar General of Supreme Court commonly known as the “live streaming” case, Chief Justice Dipak Misra, and Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud conceded to the demand of the petitioner-in-person, Senior Advocate Indira Jaising to allow the live-streaming of court proceedings. Justices Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud authored two separate judgments with Chief Justice Misra siding with Justice Khanwilkar.
In their plea, advocates R P Luthra and Satyaveer Sharma had said they were seeking adjudication of the question of law relying on the contents of the press conference of January 12, called by four senior judges (Justices Chelameswar (since retd), Ranjan Gogoi, Madan B Lokur and Kurian Joseph) of the apex court.
Though the Court refused to declare that a candidate with criminal antecedents stands disqualified for contesting an election upon framing of criminal charges, has issued slew of direction with regard to the disclosure of the antecedents of the candidates and the responsibilities of the political parties.
In a response to an RTI application filed by one Paras Nath Singh on May 30, 2018, the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) cum Under Secretary in the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) after being directed by the First Appellate Authority (FAA), informed Singh on September 19, 2018, that no such proposal was under consideration by the Union Government at present.
A bench consisting of Justices Kurian Joseph and Sanjay Kishan Kaul of the Supreme Court has today permitted a total of 208 candidates to participate in the main examination for the post of the Madhya Pradesh Additional District Judge. Grievance of the candidates was that they had qualified the preliminary examination, but was debarred from appearing in the main examination on the ground that their applications did not reach the High Court on or before August 25, 2018.
The entire basis of the FIR against those arrested is that Sudhir Dhawale sang a song whose words were a call to bring down the State — he explained how these words are actually a translation of a poem in a play by Bertolt Brecht, The Good Person of Szchewan. He quoted CJI Dipak Mishra’s judgments rejecting the ban on the Malayalam novel Meesha where there SC upheld freedom of expression particularly cultural, artistic expression of a poet.
People are often caught in this kind of situation, individually or as a group. Their greatest problem is that there is nobody they can go to in order to complain or seek justice. Instead of helping them, the government often takes advantage of the situation (for instance, by using people’s discontent to recruit SPOs) and creates further danger for the villagers. We hope that the government will refrain from doing this in Phulpad and we demand from the Maoists that they not repeat such incidents and allow villagers the freedom to choose how they want to live
The bench led by the CJI while modifying the said direction passed in Rajesh Sharma case held that ‘...there is introduction of a third agency which has nothing to do with the Code and that apart, the Committees have been empowered to suggest a report failing which no arrest can be made. The directions to settle a case after it is registered is not a correct expression of law’.
In response to a PIL, the Government of India in an affidavit has said that it is looking at only four of the eight vacancies, and has also not committed any specific timeframe within which to fill in all the vacancies should be filled. The affidavit has also revealed that Modi Government has been intending to amend the RTI Act, 2005 since 2016 itself to change the very nature of the posy of Information Commissioners.