Legal News | 03 October

Supreme Court Rejects Plea for Ram Setu Wall Construction and National Monument Status

The Supreme Court dismissed a plea by the Hindu Personal Law Board to construct a wall at the Ram Setu site “in the sea” for public viewing and to declare it a national monument under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958. The petition was filed under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution.

Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia refused to connect this petition with Dr. Subramanian Swamy’s pending plea for National Heritage Status for Ram Setu, deeming it an administrative matter. The court questioned the need for a new petition when Swamy’s plea was already on record. The Ram Setu, a limestone shoal chain off the Tamil Nadu coast, has religious significance in Hindu mythology, believed to have been constructed by Lord Rama.

Supreme Court Questions Privacy Violation in Bail Condition Requiring Google Location Sharing

The Supreme Court has raised concerns regarding a bail condition that mandates an accused person to share their Google location with the investigating officer during the bail period. A division bench comprising Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Pankaj Mithal was hearing the Enforcement Directorate’s challenge to a Delhi High Court decision granting bail to an internal auditor of Shakti Bhog Foods Limited involved in a money laundering case.

The court is now set to examine whether such a bail condition, which tracks an individual’s location, is permissible under Article 21 of the Constitution, emphasizing potential violations of the right to privacy. The matter has been scheduled for further consideration on December 12, 2023.

Bihar Government Introduces 10% Reservation for EWS in Judicial Services and Law Colleges

The Bihar government, led by Chief Minister Nitish Kumar, has declared a significant move by introducing a 10% reservation for the Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) in both judicial services and law colleges. This progressive step aims to promote inclusivity and provide greater opportunities for EWS individuals to pursue careers in the legal field and legal education.

The decision comes as part of ongoing efforts to ensure equitable representation and access to opportunities within the state’s judicial system and legal education institutions. This development is poised to make a substantial impact on widening access to legal careers and education for underprivileged sections of society in Bihar.

Supreme Court Adjourns Chandrababu Naidu’s Plea, Issues Notice in Skill Development Scam Case

The Supreme Court has postponed the hearing of the petition filed by former Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister N. Chandrababu Naidu, who seeks to quash an FIR related to the skill development scam case. The case will now be heard on October 9. Justices Aniruddha Bose and Bela M. Trivedi, presiding over the bench, have issued a notice on the petition and ordered the State of Andhra Pradesh to provide all documents filed before the High Court.

During the 50-minute hearing, the court discussed the applicability of Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act to the case, particularly when the offense occurred before the 2018 amendment that introduced Section 17A. The court also deliberated whether 17A applied when the FIR mentioned both offenses under the PC Act and the Indian Penal Code.

Naidu’s counsel argued that 17A was applicable when the inquiry began post-2018 amendment, even if the offenses were committed before it. However, the State’s counsel claimed the inquiry started before 2018.

Chandrababu Naidu had filed a special leave petition challenging the Andhra Pradesh High Court’s refusal to quash the FIR, in which he was named as one of the accused in the skill development scam case. Naidu was arrested by the Andhra Pradesh Police’s crime investigation department on September 9 and has been in custody since then.

Senior Advocate Harish Salve, representing Naidu, argued that Section 17A should not be applied retrospectively and had no relevance to this case, which involved decisions made by the Chief Minister in the discharge of official duties. Salve termed the High Court’s interpretation of Section 17A as incorrect and criticized it as a “political act.” The case revolves around allegations related to a corporation’s establishment and other decisions made by the Chief Minister.

Supreme Court to Hear Challenges Against Bihar’s Caste Survey and Findings Publication on October 6

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a series of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of Bihar’s caste-based survey and the publication of its findings on October 6. Petitioners informed the bench, led by Justice Sanjiv Khanna, that Bihar’s government had recently released the caste census results. The counsel for one petitioner requested that the matter not be deleted from the hearing list, and the bench assured that it would be heard on the scheduled date. The court declined to issue a stay order, stating that it would consider it after a detailed hearing.

Previously, on August 1, the Patna High Court had upheld the legality and validity of Bihar’s caste-based survey, dismissing petitions challenging the survey’s validity and the notification regarding it. The survey aims to provide scientific data for welfare schemes for weaker sections of society. The matter has raised questions about the right to privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution, considering the release of only cumulative data and not personal data. The Supreme Court will further examine these issues during the upcoming hearing.