Latest news with #ApexCourt
India Today
5 days ago
- Politics
- India Today
Next Vice President likely to be from BJP, strongly aligned with party's ideology
The Supreme Court has issued a notice on the Maharashtra government's plea challenging the Bombay High Court's acquittal of all accused in the 2006 Mumbai terror bomb blasts case. In an interim order, the Apex Court stayed the High Court judgment, but only to the extent that it cannot be treated as a legal precedent for other cases, particularly those under the MCOCA law. The court clarified that the acquitted individuals, who have already been released, will not be sent back to jail. The Bombay High Court, in its ruling, had stated that the prosecution "utterly failed to prove the charges" and noted that investigators appeared to have been under pressure. The 2006 blasts resulted in the deaths of 189 people. The Supreme Court has previously remarked that a stay on an acquittal is the "rarest of rare," setting a high bar for the state's appeal.
India Today
5 days ago
- Politics
- India Today
PM Modi's visit to UK; Tejashwi Yadav threatens Bihar election boycott
5:20 The Supreme Court has issued a notice on the Maharashtra government's plea challenging the Bombay High Court's acquittal of all accused in the 2006 Mumbai terror bomb blasts case. In an interim order, the Apex Court stayed the High Court judgment, but only to the extent that it cannot be treated as a legal precedent for other cases, particularly those under the MCOCA law. The court clarified that the acquitted individuals, who have already been released, will not be sent back to jail. The Bombay High Court, in its ruling, had stated that the prosecution "utterly failed to prove the charges" and noted that investigators appeared to have been under pressure. The 2006 blasts resulted in the deaths of 189 people. The Supreme Court has previously remarked that a stay on an acquittal is the "rarest of rare," setting a high bar for the state's appeal.
Hans India
22-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Hans India
Fan murder case: SC adjourns hearing on plea challenging bail to Darshan to July 24
Bengaluru: The Supreme Court on Tuesday adjourned the hearing of the plea challenging the grant of bail to Kannada actor Darshan to Thursday (July 24). The hearing has gained significance after the Apex Court raised objections over the Karnataka High Court's decision to grant bail to the actor. A bench comprising Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan adjourned the hearing after Darshan's counsel, senior advocate Siddharth Dave, informed the court that senior counsel Kapil Sibal -- who was supposed to argue the matter -- was engaged in another trial where his presence was essential. Dave requested a day, stating that he received the case only on Monday night and would not be able to prepare and present arguments on such short notice. Dave also clarified that he would not argue about the reasons behind Darshan's arrest but would focus on the merits of the case. Earlier, the bench had expressed strong reservations about the manner in which the Karnataka High Court exercised its discretion in granting bail to the actor in connection with the fan murder case. The court had told senior counsel Kapil Sibal, "To be very honest, we are not convinced with the manner in which the High Court exercised its discretion. We will very honestly say this." The Karnataka government has filed a plea seeking cancellation of bail granted to Darshan and other accused in the case. Senior counsels Siddharth Luthra and Anil C. Nishani are representing the state government and presenting their arguments. Darshan, Pavithra, and 15 others were arrested on June 11, 2024, on charges of kidnapping and brutally murdering Renukaswamy, a fan from Chitradurga. Renukaswamy had allegedly sent derogatory and obscene messages to Pavithra, angry over Darshan's continued relationship with her despite being married. Sources close to Darshan revealed that Pavithra competed with Darshan's wife, Vijayalakshmi, over jewellery and luxury cars. She allegedly pressured Darshan to make public appearances with her after he had been seen with his wife. Pavithra and Vijayalakshmi also had public spats through social media, leading Darshan's fanbase to split into factions. Renukaswamy, who supported Vijayalakshmi, had criticised Pavithra -- a move that ultimately led to his brutal murder, according to police findings. Darshan is busy shooting for his upcoming film 'Devil'. Sources confirmed that he is in Thailand currently. Since his release from prison on October 30, 2024, after spending 131 days in custody, he has been participating in shoots. In a major relief to Darshan earlier, the Karnataka High Court on February 28 allowed him to travel across the country. Previously, he had been restricted to Bengaluru and the jurisdiction of the sessions court.
The Citizen
18-07-2025
- Politics
- The Citizen
MK party takes Ramaphosa to ConCourt over Mchunu special leave decision
MK party has approached the Apex Court to challenge Ramaphosa's decision to place Police Minister Mchunu on special leave. The uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) party has approached the Constitutional Court seeking to have President Cyril Ramaphosa's decision to place Police Minister Senzo Mchunu on special leave set aside. The party made the announcement on Friday afternoon after intensifying its call for the president to fire Mchunu by leading marches in Pretoria. The marches were in support of KwaZulu-Natal Police Commissioner Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi following his explosive media briefing earlier in July, where he alleged a connection between Mchunu and crime syndicates. MK party escalates challenge against Ramaphosa in ConCourt The president placed Mchunu on special leave and appointed two acting police ministers in the space of four days. Ramaphosa first appointed Firoz Cachalia as acting police minister, then named Minister of Mineral Resources Gwede Mantashe to fill the role for the next two weeks until Cachalia formally takes office. ALSO READ: Mandela Day marches: Avoid these streets in Tshwane as traffic congestion expected In the court documents shared with the media, the MK party said the president's decision to place Mchunu on social leave and appoint Cachalia as acting minister was 'irrational', 'invalid', and inconsistent with obligations in the Constitution and Presidential Oath of Office. 'Declaring that the conduct or decisions of the president to establish the Judicial Commission of Inquiry is irrational and/or inconsistent with the obligations in section 83(b) of the constitution and/or the Presidential Oath of Office, read with sections 84(2)(f), 177, 178(4) and/or 180 of the constitution and is invalid,' the court papers read. The party calls for each to be set aside with immediate effect. 'Mchunu must be fired' MK party MP David Skosana told broadcasters that the party has made it clear that Mchunu must be fired. 'We want Ramaphosa to resign, and we want Senzo Mchunu to be fired,' Skosana said. ALSO READ: 'Cyril must fall': Organisations march against Ramaphosa to Union Buildings on Mandela Day Meanwhile, the party's move comes after it issued an ultimatum to the president demanding that he resign by 8am on Friday, Mandela Day. The party warned that if Ramaphosa misses the deadline, it will respond with a motion of no confidence, nationwide mass action, and constitutional litigation. Party 'disappointed but not surprised' that president didn't resign on Mandela Day Ramaphosa did not resign by 8am on Friday morning. The party spokesperson Nhlamulo Ndhlela told the media on Friday that MK party was disappointed but not surprised that the president didn't resign. [BREAKING NEWS] MK Party approaches the Constitutional Court seeking to have President Cyril Ramaphosa's decision to place Police Minister Senzo Mchunu on special leave set aside.#Newzroom405 — Newzroom Afrika (@Newzroom405) July 18, 2025 'We believe that Ramaphosa is not fit to lead this country and must do the honourable thing, as comrade Nelson Mandela would have done. He would have told him to resign,' stated Ndhlela. Ndhlela accused Ramaphosa of using commissions of inquiry as political tools to avoid accountability and called for immediate action against those implicated in corruption. ALSO READ: 'Where's the proof?': Calls for Ntshavheni to answer for coup claims 'When crime is exposed, we say crime must be dealt with effectively immediately,' he said. The spokesperson also accused the president of violating the constitution by bringing in Cachalia 'through the back door'. Phala Phala and CR17 Ndhlela also called out the president for the Phala Phala scandal and mentioned the CR17 bank statements. 'Ramaphosa must also have his day [in court] like President Zuma,' he said. Ndhlela concluded by reinforcing that MK party has approached the Apex Court and confirmed that marches will continue throughout the country, as well as the motion of no confidence against the president. NOW READ: MK party gives Ramaphosa until Mandela Day to resign
New Indian Express
14-07-2025
- Politics
- New Indian Express
Centre in SC opposes Kerala's move to withdraw plea against Governor over bill assent delay
NEW DELHI: The Centre on Monday reiterated its stand and opposed Kerala government's plea to withdraw its petition against the Governor over the delay in approving bills passed by the state assembly. Senior advocate and former Attorney General (AG) of India, K K Venugopal, appearing for the Kerala government, sought to withdraw the plea from the top court by saying that the issue had become infructuous in view of the recent judgment passed in the Tamil Nadu Governor case on April 8. This was vehemently opposed by the Centre through its top law officer, the AG of India, R. Venkataramani, and Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta, as they urged the court to await the Apex Court's decision on the reference of the President under Article 143 of the Constitution over the grant of assent to bills. "Kerala government's petition could also be referred to be tagged along with the presidential reference," Mehta argued before the apex court. Venugopal continued to plead before the top court, questioning how his plea could be opposed. Finding no rationale in the Centre's arguments, he submitted, 'Why my lords are hesitant for the state to withdraw the petition?' The former top law officer said that the issues raised in this case will be further dealt with by the Supreme Court when hearing the 14 questions raised in the Presidential Reference on the assent of state bills by a Governor and the President under Articles 200 and 201 of the Constitution.
