“Diwali is the festival of lights, this Diwali there won’t be air pollution due to crackers,” the CM is seen pledging along with his deputy and a room full of students repeating the vow. A video of Maharashtra Chief Minister Eknath Shinde along with his deputy Devendra Fadnavis swearing an... The post appeared first on .

Supreme Court on Friday issued notice to the Centre on a plea seeking direction to Centre and State governments to take stringent steps to control fraudulent religious conversion. New Delhi:  Supreme Court on Friday issued notice to the Centre on a plea seeking direction to Centre and State governments to... The post appeared first on .

Supreme Court on Friday issued notice to the Centre on a plea seeking direction to Centre and State governments to take stringent steps to control fraudulent religious conversion. New Delhi:  Supreme Court on Friday issued notice to the Centre on a plea seeking direction to Centre and State governments to... The post appeared first on .

New Delhi Mar 28 PTI The Supreme Court Monday did not appreciate the manner in which the Bombay High Court had dealt with and disposed of some petitions without passing any reasoned order and said it was the duty cast upon the court to deal with the issues raised and thereafter pass a reasoned orderThe apex court set aside the cryptic and non-speaking orders passed by the high court on some pleas challenging the reopening of assessment proceedings under Section 148 of the Income Tax ActWhen the Constitution confers on the high courts the power to give relief it becomes the duty of the courts to give such relief in appropriate cases and the courts would be failing to perform their duty if relief is refused without adequate reasons a bench of Justices M R Shah and B V Nagarathna saidThe top court delivered its judgement on a batch of appeals against the January this year orders of the high court which had dismissed the petitionsWe have gone through the respective orders passed by the high court dismissing the writ petitions Having gone through the orders passed by the high court dismissing the writ petitions it can be seen that the said orders are cryptic non-speaking and non-reasoned orders the bench saidIt said when a number of issues or grounds were raised in the writ petitions it was the duty cast upon the court to deal with the same and thereafter to pass a reasoned orderThe bench said the manner in which the high court has dealt with and disposed of the writ petitions without passing any reasoned order is not appreciated by this courtIt said none of the grounds raised in the petitions were dealt with or considered by the high court on meritsThe division bench of the high court has dismissed the writ petitions in a most casual manner which is unsustainable Except stating that we are not inclined to entertain writ petition nothing further has been stated by the high court giving reasons for the disinclination to entertain the writ petitions the apex court saidIt said the high court in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution was required to have independently considered whether the question of reopening of the assessment could be raised in a writ petition and if so whether it was justified or notWhile referring to an earlier decision of the apex court the bench noted that while emphasising the reasons to be given by the high court while exercising powers under Article 226 of the Constitution it was observed and held that the reasons constitute the soul of judicial decision and how judges communicate in their judgment is a defining characteristic of judicial process since quality of justice brings legitimacy to the judiciarySince we cannot countenance the manner in which the orders have been passed by the high court which has compelled us to remand the matter to the high court for deciding the writ petitions afresh on merits we do so in light of the aforesaid observations the bench said while allowing the appealsThe top court set aside the high court orders and remanded the matters back to the division bench of the high court for deciding the writ petitions afresh in accordance with law PTI ABA SA

New Delhi Feb 18 PTI The Supreme Court has upheld a Gujarat High Court order directing the state government to pay pensionary benefits to a man who retired after rendering more than 30 years of service A bench of Justices M R Shah and B V Nagarathna said the State cannot be permitted to take the benefit of its own wrongTo take the services continuously for 30 years and thereafter to contend that an employee who has rendered 30 years continuous service shall not be eligible for pension is nothing but unreasonable the bench saidThe top court said as a welfare State the State ought not to have taken such a standIn the present case the High Court has not committed any error in directing the State to pay pensionary benefits to the respondent who has retired after rendering more than 30 years service the bench said PTI PKS TIR TIR

New Delhi Feb 18 PTI The Supreme Court Friday turned down a plea seeking quashing of FIRs registered over the use of firecrackers during Diwali A bench of Justices M R Shah and B V Nagarathna dismissed the plea saying how can a PIL be filed for quashing of FIRs The present Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India is filed to quash the FIRs lodged by all the states in the country in respect to selling purchasing or bursting green crackers No such relief quashing the FIRs can be granted in exercise of powers under Article 32 of the Constitution of India If any accused is aggrieved in that case he may initiate appropriate proceedings before the appropriate High CourtCourt the bench said while dismissing the plea The apex court was hearing a plea filed by Sanjeev Newar and others seeking to quash the FIRs registered against them for using green firecrackers on Diwali The counsel for the petitioner contended that the apex court in its order dated October 29 2021 had made it clear that there was no blanket ban on firecrackers and use of green-crackers was permitted PTI PKS SA

New Delhi Jan 25 PTI A high court under its powers of revision cannot convert a finding of acquittal of an accused into conviction the Supreme Court said on Tuesday A bench of Justices M R Shah and Sanjiv Khanna said the high court has power to examine whether there is manifest error of law or procedure etc however after giving its own findings it has to remit the matter to the trial Court andor the first appellate Court If the order of acquittal has been passed by the trial Court the High Court may remit the matter to the trial Court and even direct retrial However if the order of acquittal is passed by the first appellate court in that case the High Court has two options available i to remit the matter to the first appellate Court to rehear the appeal or ii in an appropriate case remit the matter to the trial Court for retrial the bench said The top court was hearing an appeal filed against an order of the Madras High Court which in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction under Section 401 CrPC set aside the order of acquittal passed by the first appellate Court and convicted the accused The apex court also said the right provided to the victim to prefer an appeal against the order of acquittal is an absolute right PTI PKS SA

New Delhi Jan 25 PTI The Supreme Court said on Tuesday that driving under the influence of alcohol a truck carrying the Provincial Armed Constabulary PAC personnel is a very serious misconduct and such indiscipline cannot be tolerated and that too in the disciplined Military A bench comprising Justices M R Shah and B V Nagarathna said merely because there was no major loss and it was a minor accident cannot be a ground to show leniency It was sheer good luck that the accident was not a fatal accident It could have been a fatal accident When the employee was driving a truck carrying the PAC personnel the lives of those PAC personnel who were travelling in the truck were in the hands of the driver Therefore it can be said that he played with the lives of those PAC personnel who were on duty and travelling from Fatehpur to Allahabad on Kumbh Mela duty the bench said The apex court was hearing an appeal filed by a PAC driver since deceased challenging the order of dismissal passed by the Disciplinary Authority which had held him guilty for causing an accident under the influence of alcohol The top court further said that even otherwise driving a vehicle under the influence of alcohol is not only a misconduct but also an offence Nobody can be permitted to drive the vehicle under the influence of alcohol Such a misconduct of driving a vehicle under the influence of alcohol and playing with the life of others is a very serious misconduct There are also other misconducts earlier committed by the employee the bench said It said considering the statement of the employee that he had consumed the liquor after the accident with the objective to suppress the fear the punishment of dismissal can be said to be too harsh and may be treated one for compulsory retirement In view of the above and for the reasons stated hereinabove and in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case the award of punishment of dismissal can be said to be too harsh the punishment of dismissal is directed to be converted into compulsory retirement of the employee As the employee has since died and on converting the punishment of dismissal to that of compulsory retirement death-cum-retirement benefits as also the benefit of family pension if any shall be paid to the legal heirs of the deceased employee in accordance with law and bearing in mind that punishment of dismissal has now been converted into one of compulsory retirement The present appeal is partly allowed to the aforesaid extent the bench said PTI PKS SA

New Delhi Jan 19 PTI The Supreme Court on Wednesday pulled up state governments for failing to disburse claims to the next of kin of COVID-19 victims and issued a show cause notice to the Andhra Pradesh chief secretary as to why contempt action be not initiated against him The apex court asked the chief secretaries of Andhra Pradesh and Bihar to remain present virtually at 2 PM on Wednesday and explain why disbursals -- Rs 50000 ex gratia for COVID-19 death -- have been so few in their states A bench of Justices M R Shah and Sanjiv Khanna said that it will pass orders at 2 PM and asked the state legal service authorities SLSA to reach the families who have lost their near and dear ones to COVID-19 to facilitate registration and disbursal of claims like it was done during the 2001 Gujarat earthquake The top court said that it rejects the COVID-19 death toll given by Bihar and said that these are not actual but government figures We are not going to believe that only 12000 people died in the state of Bihar due to Covid We want your chief secretary to be here virtually at 2 PM the bench told the counsel appearing for the Bihar government The court was hearing a batch of pleas by advocate Gaurav Kumar Bansal and intervenors represented by advocate Sumeer Sodhi seeking ex-gratia assistance to family members of COVID-19 victimsOn December 13 last year the top court had slammed states for not giving wide publicity about a portal developed for disbursal of ex-gratia compensation for COVID-19 deathsIt had said that unless wide publicity is given people will not be able to know the portal address on which they can make online applicationsThe court had noted that some states have not given wide publicity by giving full details of the portal in advertisements in newspapers particularly in vernacular ones and local channelsThe court had earlier asked the Centre to gather information from states on the progress made on disbursal of ex-gratia compensation of Rs 50000 to the kin of COVID-19 victims and pulled up the Gujarat government for issuing notification constituting a scrutiny committee contrary to its directionsOn November 18 last year the top court had pulled up the Gujarat government for issuing a notification which was just contrary to the directions given regarding ex-gratia to the next of kin of those who died due to COVID-19 and said an attempt has been made to overreach the directions issued by the apex courtIt had said on October 4 last year that no state shall deny ex-gratia compensation of Rs 50000 to the next of kin of the deceased due to COVID-19 solely on the ground that the death certificate does not mention the virus as the cause of deathThe top court had also said that the ex-gratia is to be disbursed within 30 days from the date of applying to the district disaster management authority or the district administration concerned along with the proof of the death of the deceased due to coronavirus and the cause of death being certified as died due to COVID-19It had said that its directions for payment of compensation to the family members of the persons who died due to COVID-19 are very clear and there was no requirement at all of constituting the scrutiny committee to award compensation PTI MNL SA

New Delhi Dec 30 PTI Observing that a child should not be made to suffer due to a dispute between a husband and wife the Supreme Court has asked an Army officer to look after the maintenance of his 13-year-old son till he attains the age of majorityWhile dissolving the officers marriage a bench comprising Justices M R Shah and A S Bopanna directed him to pay Rs 50000 as maintenance to the wifeConsidering the fact that both the appellant-wife and the respondent-husband are not staying together since May 2011 and therefore it can be said that there is irretrievable breakdown of marriage between them It is also reported that the husband has already re-married Therefore no useful purpose shall be served to further enter into the merits of the findings recorded by the courts below on cruelty and desertion by the appellant-wife the bench said In view of facts and circumstances of the case and in exercise of powers under Article 142 of the Constitution the decree passed by the Family Court is not required to be interfered with on account of irretrievable breakdown of marriage the apex court saidHowever at the same time the husband cannot be absolved from his liability and responsibility to maintain his son till he attains the age of majority Whatever be the dispute between the husband and the wife a child should not be made to suffer The liability and responsibility of the father to maintain the child continues till the childson attains the age of majority the bench saidThe top court noted that the mother is not earning anything and therefore a reasonablesufficient amount is required for the maintenance of her son including his education etc which shall have to be paid by the husbandIn view of the above and for the reasons stated above the present appeal stands disposed of by confirming the decree of divorcedissolution of the marriage between the appellant-wife and the husband However the husband is directed to pay Rs 50000 per month with effect from December 2019 to the wife towards the maintenance of son it said in a recent orderThe marriage between the Army officer and his wife was solemnised on November 16 2005 The wife had filed a number of complaints against the husband before Army authorities including those pertaining to alleged extra-marital affairs of the respondent-husband An enquiry was initiated by the Army authorities against the officer in which he was exoneratedThe Army officer filed a case against the wife before the Family Court Jaipur in 2014 seeking a decree of divorce and dissolution of marriage on the grounds of cruelty and desertion by the wife The Family Court passed a decree for dissolution of marriage between the appellant and the respondent on grounds of cruelty and desertion by the wife PTI PKS DV DV