The Bar Council of India plea comes as CJI Dipak Misra, who has overseen several landmark judgments such as decriminalising homosexuality, retires Tuesday.
In a recent survey of law school admissions officers, 94% said the current political climate in the US played at least a moderate role in the increase.
New CPI series will take 2024 as base year, will provide more accurate measure of inflation, spending on digital services. Expected to enhance representation and reliability, says Saurabh Garg.
The agreement, signed after meeting between Rajnath and US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth on sidelines of ADMM-Plus in Kuala Lumpur, aims to deepen bilateral ties in the critical sector.
On 21 Oct, a buzz went up that the govt had released full list of gallantry award recipients along with Op Sindoor citations. I put an AI caddy on the job. It took me into a never-ending rabbit hole.
Cji is a post and status and holder of post and status should not not give judgement if case is against his own post and status and if he has given judgement or involved in giving judgement then he is dictator and should be punished with out delay to keep democracy alive.
Even if copies of affidavit are sent to 22 judges of SC, are they empowered to enquire into the matter? The full court session was not a hearing and no specific order was passed. The CJI exercised his right of self-defence by denying the charges to his colleagues , as no other form was available him. The author writes on Law and Judiciary. Has she not heard of Article 124(4) of the constitution or the Judges Enquiry Act, 1968? It is only the Parliament of India that can enquire into the matters against high functionaries like the President or the CJI. These high posts are offered immunity and protection against flimsy allegations and conspiracies, as functioning of these posts is vital for existence and continuity of our state. Unwarranted application of the committee approach in such cases amounts to circumventing the laid down constitutional provisions. Internal investigation committee within the SC will have to be appointed by CJI , when he himself is the matter of investigation. There is contradiction here and this provision will not work. It is the privilege of the Parliament only and the Judiciary cannot usurp that privilege. As such the complainant lady and her associates will have to convince 50 members of Rajya Sabha or 100 members of Lok Sabha to initiate impeachment proceedings. Or she will have to wait till the CJI retires. There is no other way.
Lawyers representing the government would be delighted to be of help in such a situation. This complaint is not going away anywhere, any time soon. Those days are long past. An enquiry is non negotiable. Either the ICC or a panel of retired CJIs. It cannot be a whitewash job.
Cji is a post and status and holder of post and status should not not give judgement if case is against his own post and status and if he has given judgement or involved in giving judgement then he is dictator and should be punished with out delay to keep democracy alive.
Even if copies of affidavit are sent to 22 judges of SC, are they empowered to enquire into the matter? The full court session was not a hearing and no specific order was passed. The CJI exercised his right of self-defence by denying the charges to his colleagues , as no other form was available him. The author writes on Law and Judiciary. Has she not heard of Article 124(4) of the constitution or the Judges Enquiry Act, 1968? It is only the Parliament of India that can enquire into the matters against high functionaries like the President or the CJI. These high posts are offered immunity and protection against flimsy allegations and conspiracies, as functioning of these posts is vital for existence and continuity of our state. Unwarranted application of the committee approach in such cases amounts to circumventing the laid down constitutional provisions. Internal investigation committee within the SC will have to be appointed by CJI , when he himself is the matter of investigation. There is contradiction here and this provision will not work. It is the privilege of the Parliament only and the Judiciary cannot usurp that privilege. As such the complainant lady and her associates will have to convince 50 members of Rajya Sabha or 100 members of Lok Sabha to initiate impeachment proceedings. Or she will have to wait till the CJI retires. There is no other way.
Lawyers representing the government would be delighted to be of help in such a situation. This complaint is not going away anywhere, any time soon. Those days are long past. An enquiry is non negotiable. Either the ICC or a panel of retired CJIs. It cannot be a whitewash job.