A two-judge bench of the Supreme Court comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Ranjan Gogoi and Justice Sanjiv Khanna today, February 11, 2019 dismissed a petition filed by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) challenging a notification issued by the West Bengal government in 2013 thereby use of loudspeakers in residential areas and near educational institutions from three days before the secondary and higher secondary examinations till they last has been prohibited.
After hearing Attorney General for India K K Venugopal and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta on February 6, 2019, in a contempt petition against advocate Prashant Bhushan initiated by the former and the Central Government, a bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra of the Supreme Court is all set to decide “whether in a matter which is sub-judice, it is open to criticise the court proceedings to affect the public opinion by litigants and lawyers and protection of various other rights of the litigants are also involved; what are the rights of the litigants and what may amount to interference in the course of administration of justice”.
Along with the review petitions, a plea seeking contempt action against the head priest of the Sabarimala temple was also filed for his alleged role to order the cleaning of the premises after some women had visited the temple. A total of 56 review petitions, 4 writ petitions, 2 Special Leave Petitions, along with 2 transfer petitions filed by Kerala Government, and a petition filed by Travancore Dewaswom Board, seeking time to implement the judgment, were listed before the five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court.
A two-judge bench comprising Justices Arun Mishra and Navin Sinha of the Supreme Court issues notice on a Contempt petition filed by Attorney General and Central government against advocate Prashant Bhushan. Court says it will decide larger issue of making comments in sub-judice matter. The next hearing in the matter in on March 7, 2019.
Attorney General for India K K Venugopal and Secretary to the Government of India Dr. C. Chandramouli on behalf of the Central government have filed two separate contempt petition respectively against advocate Prashant Bhushan for his tweet of February 1, 2019, alleging that the government had misled the Supreme Court about the appointment of M Nageswara Rao as interim CBI Director.
A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court comprising Chief Justice of India Rajan Gogoi, Justices Deepak Gupta and Sanjiv Khanna has directed Kolkata Police Commissioner Rajeev Kumar to appear before the CBI and cooperate with the investigation. The Supreme Court has also made it clear that no coercive action including arrest will be made by CBI. On the contempt petition filed by the CBI, Supreme Court has issued notice to Police Commissioner of Kolkata, the Chief Secretary and the DGP of West Bengal. They have been asked to file reply by February 20, 2019.
“Any injunction would also be in violation of Article 21 of the Constitution. The right to life with human dignity of a person is a fundamental right of every citizen for pursuit of happiness and excellence,” the court order read, adding that “Liberty aims at freedom not only from arbitrary restraint but also to secure such conditions which are essential for the full development of human personality.”
CJI Gogoi remarked that he had read the application filed by the CBI, but could not find anything substantial to show that the evidence are being destroyed. However, CJI asked SG Mehta to place the evidence on record to substantiate that West Bengal authorities are tampering with evidences. At the same time, CJI Gogoi also made it clear that even if Police Commissioner Kolkata is remotely thinking to destroy the evidence, court will come down so heavily on him that he would regret. The application filed by the CBI would be listed tomorrow at 10:30 AM, said CJI Gogoi.
While Anand Teltumbde has protection order till February 11, 2019, the arrest made by the Pune police was illegal and was in gross violation of Supreme Court order, the Special Judge added. The Pune police are guilty of contempt of court for disdaining the order of the apex court, the Special Judge noted.
Hours after the claim made by the AG, one of the members of the High Powered Committee, Mallikarjun Kharge, contradicted the statement of the Attorney General and told counsel for the petitioner Prashant Bhushan that issue of the appointment of M Nagaswara Rao as interim director CBI was never discussed in the meeting.
Persons who are not covered under the scheme of reservation for SCs, STs and OBCs and whose family has gross annual income below Rs 8,00,000 are to be identified as EWSs for benefit of reservation. Income shall also include income from all sources i.e. salary, agriculture, business, profession, etc. for the financial year prior to the year of application.
This discloser has come to the light during a course of hearing of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by the NGO Common Cause and noted RTI activist Anjali Bharadwaj who have approached the Supreme Court of India seeking quashing of the appointment of IPS officer M Nageswara Rao as the interim Director CBI. Rao was given charge of the office of the Director CBI by an order dated January 10, 2019 issued by the Appointment Committee of the Cabinet.