Channel
The first half: A Court under strain
As the Court's strength rises to 38, old cases, open questions and new controversies crowd its attention
Transcript:
With the Supreme Court on Partial Working Days this month, several defining matters from the first half of the year remain unfinished — with judgements reserved and larger benches yet to take shape. Let’s take a look at the notable proceedings so far.
In this time, the Supreme Court reserved its judgement in two nine-judge bench cases– the definition of “Industry” under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and the Sabarimala Reference, to decide the correctness of the 2018 judgement that struck down the ban on entry of women to the Sabarimala Temple as unconstitutional.
The Court also focused on the Special Intensive Revision of Electoral Rolls in Bihar and West Bengal. Upholding the exercise, it affirmed the ECI’s power to purify electoral rolls and assess citizenship for electoral purposes.
Bail jurisprudence was heavily featured, with 13 notable decisions in the first six months.
The Court maintained judicial restraint by denying bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam while granting bail to five other accused in the 2020 Delhi Riots conspiracy case.
In a significant development however, it referred questions on whether Article 21 can override the strict bail conditions under the UAPA to a larger bench.
On the environment front, the Court took definitive stances by restructuring two long-pending litigations —the M.C. Mehta and the T.N. Godavarman cases. It also drew curtains on the stray dogs matter, holding that animal rights cannot compromise public safety under Article 21.
In matters involving freedom of speech and expression, the Court shifted uncomfortably in its seat and refrained from any concrete intervention.
For instance, hearing a petition seeking restraint against release, screening and broadcasting of a film previously titled “Ghooskor Pandat”, the Bench appeared to be batting for both sides. It observed that “sensibilities are fragile”, that viewers cannot be “over-sensitive” while simultaneously noting that the title offended “morality and public order”.
The docket is packed, the stakes are high, and we’ve got you covered for the rest of the year. On that note, look out for more mid-year reviews on insolvency, arbitration and more on our Analysis page!