1. Justice Hima Kohli: A Trailblazer Bids Farewell to the Supreme Court
Justice Hima Kohli, appointed as an Additional Judge in the Delhi High Court on 29-05-2006 and made Permanent Judge on 29-08-2007, leaves behind a legacy of impactful judgments. Her notable rulings include protecting juvenile identities, investigating unlawful detentions, and advocating for visually challenged students. At the Supreme Court, she championed gender equality, environmental awareness, and mediation as dispute resolution. Justice Kohli's balanced approach and seniority have solidified her as a role model in the legal profession.
2. Former RG Kar College Principal Sandip Ghosh Challenges High Court's CBI Probe Order in Supreme Court
Sandip Ghosh, former Principal of RG Kar College, has approached the Supreme Court to contest the Calcutta High Court's decision to transfer the investigation into alleged financial irregularities and mismanagement to the CBI. The High Court, on August 13, had also transferred the probe into the brutal rape and murder of a junior doctor at the hospital on August 9 to the CBI. Ghosh argues that the High Court's order was made without allowing him a chance to be heard and expresses concern over the court’s linking of corruption allegations to the hospital incident. The case, involving accusations of illegalities and mismanagement, is set for an admission hearing before the Supreme Court bench led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud on September 6.
3. Calcutta High Court Orders CBI to Investigate 'Nasty' Social Media Posts on RG Kar Rape-Murder Case
The Calcutta High Court has directed the CBI to investigate and report by September 18 on derogatory social media posts concerning the rape and murder of a trainee doctor at RG Kar Medical College and Hospital. The posts, featuring the victim's photograph and offensive comments, were highlighted by the petitioner in a Public Interest Litigation. The court, led by Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, expressed concern over the disturbing nature of these posts and asked the CBI to explore methods to block such content. The CBI, lacking a dedicated cyber crime division, was advised to collaborate with West Bengal's cyber crime unit. The case will be reviewed again on September 18.
4. Supreme Court Reserves Judgment on Arvind Kejriwal’s Bail Petition
On September 5, 2024, the Supreme Court reserved judgment on Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s bail plea in the excise policy case, rejecting the CBI’s argument that granting bail would "demoralize" the Delhi High Court. The Court highlighted the undue delay faced by former Deputy Manish Sisodia in securing bail and emphasized that its decision would not undermine the judiciary's integrity. Kejriwal’s counsel, A.M. Singhvi, argued that the Chief Minister had been in custody for a significant period and was not a flight risk, emphasizing his constitutional role. The CBI, represented by Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju, countered that bail could disrupt ongoing investigations and witness testimonies. The Supreme Court will render its decision after further consideration of the arguments presented.
5. Supreme Court Reaffirms Collaborative Approach to Judicial Appointments
On September 6, 2024, the Supreme Court ruled that judicial appointments to constitutional courts must be a collaborative process, not the sole prerogative of individual Chief Justices. The Court addressed a petition from two senior Himachal Pradesh judges, Chirag Bhanu Singh and Arvind Malhotra, challenging their supersession for High Court elevation. The Court found the Chief Justice of the High Court had acted unilaterally, bypassing the Collegium’s collective decision-making process. Emphasizing the participatory nature of the Collegium system established in 1993, the Supreme Court directed a re-evaluation of the petitioners' candidacy, reinforcing the need for collective deliberation and transparency in judicial appointments.
6. Supreme Court Seeks Bihar's Response to RJD's Appeal Against Reservation Law Quashing
On September 6, 2024, the Supreme Court issued notices to both the Centre and the Bihar government in response to the Rashtriya Janata Dal's (RJD) appeal challenging the Patna High Court's decision to invalidate the state's amended reservation laws. These laws aimed to increase reservations for backward classes, SC/STs from 50% to 65% in public employment and educational institutions. The Patna High Court had struck down the amendments, citing the Supreme Court's 50% cap on reservations established in the Indra Sawhney case. The Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, has tagged the RJD's plea with similar pending cases and requested responses from relevant parties.
7. Supreme Court Rejects Plea to Restrain BJP from Using Lotus Symbol
On September 6, 2024, the Supreme Court dismissed a plea seeking to restrain the BJP from using the lotus ("kamal") as its party symbol. Justices Vikram Nath and Prasanna B. Varale upheld the Madhya Pradesh High Court's decision to reject the suit, criticizing the plea as a publicity stunt. The petition, filed by Jayant Vipat, had been previously dismissed by the District Judge of Dewas and the Madras High Court for lacking merit. Vipat argued that the BJP should not benefit from the symbol under the People's Representation Act, 1951. The Supreme Court found no grounds to overturn the lower court's dismissal.
8. Supreme Court Dismisses Former RG Kar Principal's Plea to Join Financial Irregularities Case
On September 6, 2024, the Supreme Court dismissed a plea by former RG Kar Medical College and Hospital principal Sandip Ghosh challenging the Calcutta High Court's decision to reject his petition for impleadment in a case of alleged financial irregularities. The High Court transferred the probe to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and dismissed Ghosh's plea, ruling that he lacked standing as an accused. The Supreme Court concurred, stating Ghosh, as an accused, had no right to intervene in the PIL or influence the ongoing investigation. The CBI is investigating the case involving allegations of financial misconduct during Ghosh's tenure.
9. Supreme Court Considers Guidelines to Address Delays in Death Penalty Execution
The Supreme Court expressed concern over delays in executing death penalties, comparing them to a “sword hanging over one’s head.” This observation came during a case involving Maharashtra’s challenge to the Bombay High Court's decision to commute the death sentences of Purushottam Borate and Pradeep Yashwant Kokade to 35 years for the 2007 rape and murder of a Pune BPO employee. The Court is considering guidelines to ensure timely execution and address potential delays in mercy pleas. Justice Oka questioned the long delay by the Governor in deciding on the mercy petitions, highlighting issues under Article 21 of the Constitution.
10. Supreme Court Upholds Conviction of Man for Rape but Reduces Jail Term
The Supreme Court has upheld the conviction of a man for the repeated rape of his stepdaughter but has reduced his life imprisonment sentence to ten years. The Division Bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Ahsanuddin Amanullah maintained the ?2 lakh fine imposed by the lower courts. The reduction in sentence reflects the stepfather’s age and the fact that he has already served over eight years. The Court instructed that the fine be paid within a year, with non-compliance resulting in an additional year of imprisonment. The case involved repeated assaults on the stepdaughter in a forest and at home.
