The decision by the Supreme Court to revive the 11-year old contempt case against Prashant Bhushan will finally answer long-pending questions about the functioning of the Indian judiciary.
The top court has ruled that Chief Justice of India’s office comes under the ambit of the RTI Act. ThePrint brings you four highlights from the judgment.
Justice Sharad Arvind Bobde will succeed incumbent Ranjan Gogoi, who will retire on 17 November. Bobde will have a tenure of 17 months and would demit office on 23 April 2021.
The chief justices-chief ministers’ conference is a rare forum where the executive and judiciary come together to talk about issues that matter to both.
CJI Ranjan Gogoi said the right to adjudicate the affairs of citizens has an "element of divinity", and this privilege must be exercised with humility.
Taking about the volume of pending cases, Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi said about 90 lakh were civil cases, of which even summons hadn't been served in more than 20 lakh cases.
India cannot be blasé about change in any important capital in the world. Let's look at five key areas where US policy matters for India and how it may vary between Harris and Trump.
In Episode 1544 of CutTheClutter, Editor-in-Chief Shekhar Gupta looks at some top economists pointing to the pitfalls of ‘currency nationalism’ with data from 1991 to 2004.
Troops patrolled up to Patrolling Point (PP) 10 on Monday. Though there are PP 10, 11, 12, 12A & 13 in Depsang Plains, it was decided that only one or two PPs would be patrolled.
While we talk much about our military, we don’t put our national wallet where our mouth is. Nobody is saying we should double our defence spending, but current declining trend must be reversed.
Supreme court wants to prove that it is the most powerful and it can bring anybody down on its knees with its powers. Because of this attitude, it is digging into the worthless case after eleven years but it could not dispose most urgent cases where lives of crores of people are affected. This sort of attitude without any empathy towards suffering of millions clearly shows that there is greater mslgnancy in the institution than what is visible externally by these revival of contempt cases, that too, in vivid lockdown period, when other cases can be disposed off
It is utterly nonsense that a lawyer of this stature was not given an opportunity to prove what he tweeted is prima facie true or false, particularly when he claims to have evidence in his possession and control. If it is proved that what he tweeted was prima facie true, then it was expected of the highest judiciary of the country to institute a high level inquiry, which would have enabled the supreme temple of justice to uphold it’s own reputation. By denying that opportunity, I feel the dignity of the court gone down to the earth.
Some MENTALLY unstable people who are actually a pro china force fighting for maoist causes and are now being identified and tried in courts for their anti INDIA STANCE, are now saying the courts decision against them will be death of DEMOCRACY. Coming from SUPPORTERS of chinese communist party line this is bull sh…t. This PEOPLE who used to identify themselves as left ideologues are now posing themselves as democratic flag bearers which cannot be more further than truth.
So Yogendra Yadav would decide whether the hearing had been full and fair, meaning SC judges and lawyers involved are not competent enough to have a full and fair hearing. This is the typical attitude of Jholawas, left liberals and secularists. If the judgment comes as per their wishes, the hearing was full and fair otherwise it was not.
Every honest Indian wants to highlight corruption in high places but none have the courage to raise it. If someone raises the issue then instead of supporting him/her various insulting names are given. Mr Yadav has only suggested transparency; if that can’t be entertained then why have a trial? Condemned the contemnor and banish him for life, even if there is no such law, for it is the Will of My Lord in haven.
Narasimha Rao, Do you have any comprehension disorder!
Did the author suggest selecting the bench? Why are you putting your imaginations into his mouth? Typical bhakt nentality!
He suggested that the current CJI Justice Arun Mishra should be excluded, as their names are linked to this case. This is the universal standard to avoid conflict of interest, wonder if you heard that phrase before.
Do you want the bench to be like Ranjan Gogoi chairing his own sexual harassment case?
Lament of a leftist to have seen his cosy world of wishful thoughts over his powers go up in smoke.
Supreme court wants to prove that it is the most powerful and it can bring anybody down on its knees with its powers. Because of this attitude, it is digging into the worthless case after eleven years but it could not dispose most urgent cases where lives of crores of people are affected. This sort of attitude without any empathy towards suffering of millions clearly shows that there is greater mslgnancy in the institution than what is visible externally by these revival of contempt cases, that too, in vivid lockdown period, when other cases can be disposed off
It is utterly nonsense that a lawyer of this stature was not given an opportunity to prove what he tweeted is prima facie true or false, particularly when he claims to have evidence in his possession and control. If it is proved that what he tweeted was prima facie true, then it was expected of the highest judiciary of the country to institute a high level inquiry, which would have enabled the supreme temple of justice to uphold it’s own reputation. By denying that opportunity, I feel the dignity of the court gone down to the earth.
Neminiscence of responsibility after 11 years.
Some MENTALLY unstable people who are actually a pro china force fighting for maoist causes and are now being identified and tried in courts for their anti INDIA STANCE, are now saying the courts decision against them will be death of DEMOCRACY. Coming from SUPPORTERS of chinese communist party line this is bull sh…t. This PEOPLE who used to identify themselves as left ideologues are now posing themselves as democratic flag bearers which cannot be more further than truth.
So Yogendra Yadav would decide whether the hearing had been full and fair, meaning SC judges and lawyers involved are not competent enough to have a full and fair hearing. This is the typical attitude of Jholawas, left liberals and secularists. If the judgment comes as per their wishes, the hearing was full and fair otherwise it was not.
What is full and fair? The biases of some of the judges is so apparent. And to top it, they are arrogant about their biases.
Prashant Bhushan has been more useful to this country than some of those judges and many politicians.
Every honest Indian wants to highlight corruption in high places but none have the courage to raise it. If someone raises the issue then instead of supporting him/her various insulting names are given. Mr Yadav has only suggested transparency; if that can’t be entertained then why have a trial? Condemned the contemnor and banish him for life, even if there is no such law, for it is the Will of My Lord in haven.
Yogendraji you cannot select the bench
Narasimha Rao, Do you have any comprehension disorder!
Did the author suggest selecting the bench? Why are you putting your imaginations into his mouth? Typical bhakt nentality!
He suggested that the current CJI Justice Arun Mishra should be excluded, as their names are linked to this case. This is the universal standard to avoid conflict of interest, wonder if you heard that phrase before.
Do you want the bench to be like Ranjan Gogoi chairing his own sexual harassment case?