R. Sai Spandana's Posts

Bench states there is no objective data to prove the High Court Committee cannot continue monitoring exams

Bench to decide if Section 6A of the Citizenship Act 1955 suffers from any “constitutional infirmity.”

Supreme Court to decide the validity of the constituent powers of amendment to extend the prescribed reservation period

Time to relook Narasimha Rao v State since it concerns a question that affects “morality of polity”, says Supreme Court

In recent years, PIL has become an extension of the political theatre while voices from the ground, stay silent still.

There’s been an unprecedented increase in the number of petitions in recent years, but experts suggest that the SC is less PIL-friendly

Top Court extends protection to members of Editors Guild till 15 September 2023, when it will consider transfer of case to Delhi High Court

The final day of arguments began with tempers running high over lead petitioner’s Mohammad Lone’s affidavit and his “allegiance” to India

After submissions by 18 advocates in support of the abrogation of Article 370, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal began rejoinder arguments.

Senior Advocate Dwivedi contended that the recommendation of the J&K Constituent Assembly was never meant to be binding on the President

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta informed the Court that the Union couldn’t commit to a date for restoring statehood for J&K

Union argues that the President had untrammelled power to repeal Art. 370 as part of larger goal of national integration.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argues that people of J&K were wrongly convinced that Article 370 was a boon.

The Constitution Bench heard the Unions opening arguments in support of the abrogation of Article 370.

On Days 8 and 9, 12 counsels appearing for the petitioners in the challenge to Article 370 argued before the Supreme Court.

The Union advanced the view that Article 370 promoted a “psychological duality” that was being taken advantage of by forces against India.

Petitioners conclude arguments; counsel dig deep into constitutional history to argue against revocation.

Article 370 represented a constitutional promise to protect a religious minority, argues P.C. Sen.

Senior Advocates Dave, Naphade and Dwivedi highlighted the adverse consequences of the abrogation of Article 370.

Petitioners argued Constitution does not allow the President to permanently abrogate Article 370 when J&K was under President’s Rule.

DESK BRIEF: New Bill proposes a three-member committee with two members of the ruling party to nominate members of the Election Commission.

By applying select parts of the Indian Constitution to itself, J&K showed that they retained autonomy under Art. 370 even after accession.

Sr. Adv. Gopal Subramanium argued Art. 370 is a manifestation of the federal structure envisaged for J&K.

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal completed 3 days of arguments on why Parliament had no power to repeal Article 370.

Adv. Shobha Gupta submitted that the convicts did not qualify for early release as the crimes they committed against Bilkis Bano were grave.

The Bench held that the two-year jail term awarded to Rahul Gandhi for his Modi remark was excessive and devoid of reason.

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal argued abrogation of Art. 370 cannot be done following the dissolution of the J&K Constituent Assembly in 1957.

In July, the top Court returned from summer vacation and continued to hear Constitution Bench cases and delivered key judgements.

Constitution Benches assembled 55 times in the first half of 2023. None of them were seven and nine-judge Benches.

The Supreme Court will decide the extent of the Union’s powers to make laws for Jammu and Kashmir and abrogate Article 370.

The Bench clarified Mishra would seize to be the ED’s Director at midnight on September 15, 2023.

The Supreme Court heard and decided several five-Judge Constitution Bench cases this year, leading to a drop in the number of pending cases.

The Supreme Court to decide if Mr. Rahul Gandhi’s conviction for defamation must be stayed and his disqualification from Parliament quashed.

The challenge to the Delhi Ordinance will be heard after the Court completes hearing the challenge to the abrogation of Art. 370.

The Bench heard various proposals from petitioners on how to ensure that rules during the appointment process are not altered arbitrarily.

The Bench de-tagged cases from different High Courts, and began to address the question of the reference Order.

The Supreme Court reverted the case challenging the Manipur HC’s 2015 Resolution about District Judge appointments to a 3-Judge Bench.

The Supreme Court held that the Administrative Tribunal of the Kerala High Court was wrong to impose a cut-off for the viva interview.

Constitution Bench decides to hear the case on merits from August 2nd, 2023.

Supreme Court to consider the plea seeking stay on the Union’s Ordinance on July 17th, 2023.

Justice Krishna Murari authored over 60 judgements in his 3.75-year tenure at the SC.

With hardly any senior women judges in India's High Courts, gender diversity at the Supreme Court will take a hit.

Justice Ramasubramanian authored 102 judgements during his 3.75-year tenure at the SC.

Justice Ramasubramanian has authored judgements in 32.6% of the benches he was part of.

Justice V. Ramasubramanian retires after a 3.75-year tenure, having written over 100 Judgments.

If the seniority principle is followed, these 8 Judges will lead the Supreme Court of India as Chief Justice till 2031.

Only 2 out of the upcoming 8 Chief Justices will serve a tenure of more than 1 year.

If the seniority principle is followed, these 8 Judges will lead the Supreme Court of India as Chief Justice till 2031.

A 5-Judge Constitution Bench unanimously held that a public servant could be convicted for bribery based on circumstantial evidence.

Justice K.M Joseph was the fifth highest judgement contributor at the SC at the time of his retirement.

We trace the evolution of the rights for Queer persons across 4 landmark judgments, and a 5th pending case before the SC.

The 4th senior most Judge of the SC, Justice Rastogi, has authored 158 judgements.

Justice K.M. Joseph has authored judgements in 33% of the Benches he was part of.

Who should have the power to govern Delhi? In this episode of SCO Explains, we dive into the clash over control, and try and understand why

Justice K.M Joseph retires after a 4.75-year tenure, having written over 130 Judgments.

The SC has conducted a remarkable 55 Constitution Bench hearings in just 5 months. Why does this matter? SCO investigates.

After a long time, the Court is abuzz with Constitution Bench activity, with hearings in 16 cases and Judgements in 13.

Mr. Kiren Rijiju replaced as Law Minister after a tenure of nearly two years.

Since the launch of the live transcription project, only 36% of Constitution Bench hearings have been transcribed.

What were the issues and the arguments raised on both sides in the plea for marriage equality?

The petitioners concluded their rejoinder arguments and the Bench reserved judgement.

The petitioners concluded arguments in response to the submissions against the recognition of the right to marry.

The respondents reiterated that Parliament was the only competent authority to recognise marriage equality.

Respondents cite the welfare of children and the impact of marriage on society to argue against LGBTQIA+ marriages.

As the arguments in the plea for marriage equality reach the finish line, the Bench deliberates if there is a fundamental right to marry.

The Bench pondered over a broader question: Does a fundamental right to marry exist?

Has the Gujarat HC breached the ‘merit-cum-seniority’ rule in its recent Judicial appointments?

As the focus of the Marriage Equality hearings shifts to the ancillary rights of marriage, SCO examines the way forward.

Union informed the Bench that it would consider making administrative changes to grant certain rights to LGBTQIA+ couples.

A 5-Judge Constitution Bench held the SC could, as a Court of first instance, grant divorce on the grounds of ‘irretrievable damage.’

DESK BRIEF: Union argues that the right to sexual autonomy does not include the right to compel the State to recognise LGBTQIA+ marriages.

The Union argued that the SC could not address the marriage equality issue without delving into personal law issues.

Union argued that recognising the right to marry for all classes of persons in the LGBTQIA+ spectrum would lead to legal complications.

Can the SC deny marriage equality to the queer community to avoid practical difficulties that may arise out of the law?

SC recommends restricting the petitions seeking recognition of same-sex marriage to the Special Marriage Act, of 1954.

Attorney General R. Venkataramani assured the Court that the Digital Data Protection Bill, 2022 would be introduced in Parliament in July.

DESK BRIEF: Five must-reads that will help you understand the debate surrounding the legalisation of same-sex marriage.

SCO consolidates everything you need to know about the Shiv Sena Conflict

The Bench heard arguments stating that tenure extensions compromised CBI/ED independence.

A 5-Judge Constitution Bench will decide the validity of same-sex marriages in India. SCO breaks down the case here.

Supreme Court dismissed the Union’s curative petition seeking additional compensation for Bhopal Gas Tragedy victims.

The Constitution Bench will begin hearing arguments on the case from April 18th, 2023.

DESK BRIEF: Two recent decisions by the SC aim to decrease the Executive's interference in the functioning of autonomous bodies.

The SC delivered two Constitution Bench decisions while also introducing significant infrastructural initiatives.

Sr. Adv. Harish Salve argued that it is not permissible for the SC to decide matters of defection based on Assumptions of fact.

SCO takes a glance into the use of AI in legal spaces around the world.

The Uddhav Thackeray faction argued that they must be reinstated as the Maharashtra government since they were wrongfully ousted.

DESK BRIEF: The Union cleared 7 SC judge appointments within a week returning the SC to its full sanctioned strength of 34 Judges.

The SC questioned the Gujarat government on its 8-year delay in carrying out judicial appointments and infrastructure development.

The Court decided to hear the case after Parliament considers the Digital Data Protection Bill, 2022

The Bench will hear the matter after the Digital Data Protection Bill, 2022 is introduced in the Parliament to avoid overlap with it.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta claimed the Personal Data Protection Bill, 2022 would resolve the petitioner’s issues.

The Constitution Bench observed that the Joseph Shine Judgment was not relevant to cases under the Armed Forces Enactments.

The SC will decide if the emergence of new facts justifies the Union's plea to increase compensation granted to Bhopal Gas Tragedy victims.

Parties from both sides argued that the Bench should transfer all the pending challenges to anti-conversion laws to the SC.