Latest news with #NKSingh
Time of India
3 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
SC to hear plea against Maratha quota in July
New Delhi: The Supreme Court will take up a plea seeking stay on the Maratha quota law in July. A plea has been filed in the top Court challenging the Bombay High Court 's interim order, which refused to stay the Maratha quota law and allowed the community to provisionally avail the 10% reservation , subject to the result of the petitions challenging it. A division bench comprising Justices KV Viswanathan and NK Singh Thursday allowed the listing of the plea on the week commencing July 14 (when the Supreme Court reopens after summer break). The plea was mentioned by a lawyer seeking urgent listing of the matter. The counsel argued that the Bombay High Court refused to stay the Maratha reservation and allowed its operation on a provisional basis. A three-judge bench of the High Court passed the order on June 11 allowing the Maratha community to avail 10% reservation in education and employment, subject to the final outcome of the petitions challenging the 2024 Maratha quota law. The High Court also proposed to hold special Saturday sittings to hear the challenge, pursuant to a Supreme Court direction to decide the matter expeditiously. Economic Times WhatsApp channel )
Indian Express
4 days ago
- Indian Express
‘Liberty…can't be bartered on technicalities': SC directs judicial probe into delay in releasing prisoner who got bail
Underlining that 'liberty is a very valuable and precious right guaranteed to a person', the Supreme Court Wednesday asked the Principal District Judge, Ghaziabad, to inquire into jail authorities' delay in releasing a prisoner to whom it had granted bail. The jail authorities had allegedly cited the technical ground that the bail order did not mention the sub-clause of the provision under which the man was charged. Directing the inquiry, a bench of Justices K V Viswanathan and N K Singh said, 'While episode is unfortunate. Each one of the stakeholders was aware what the offence was, what the crime number was, what the sections the applicant was charged with. In spite of this, the applicant has been sent on a spin and notwithstanding the order of this Court on April 29 (2025) and the release order of May 27 (2025), which to our mind was clear as daylight, the applicant has been released only on June 24 (2025).' 'Liberty is a very valuable and precious right guaranteed to a person. It cannot be bartered on these useless technicalities,' the bench said. It also directed the state of Uttar Pradesh to pay provisional compensation of Rs 5 lakh to the petitioner, Aftab, for loss of liberty due to the delay in releasing him. 'The authorities knew what the concerned section was and they themselves moved for correction. The net result is on this non-issue, the applicant has lost his liberty for at least 28 whole days. The only way we can remedy the situation is to order ad hoc monetary compensation… We order that the State of Uttar Pradesh pay a sum of Rs 5 lakh and report compliance on June 27,' the Supreme Court ordered. The bench made it clear that the compensation already ordered 'will be provisional in nature' and that the final compensation amount would be calculated after the inquiry, and if any official is held responsible, the court would decide what portion of it should be paid by the official. The court said, 'We only hope that no other convict/undertrial is languishing in jail on account of a similar technicality.' It added that the 'Director General (Prisons) has assured enquiry would be conducted on this aspect and it would be made sure that nobody suffers on this count.' The accused was arrested for offences under section 366 (kidnapping or inducing woman to marry) of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3/5(i) of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act. He approached the apex court, saying that he was not released as clause (1) of section 5 of the 2021 Act was not mentioned in the order, and sought modification of the April 29 order. Hearing the matter on Tuesday, the Supreme Court asked the superintendent jailer of Ghaziabad district prison to appear before it in person, and the Uttar Pradesh director general of police (prisons) to appear through videoconferencing to ascertain what exactly happened. On Wednesday, UP Additional Advocate General (AAG) Garima Prashad said the petitioner was released on Tuesday evening. Justice Viswanathan, however, asked, 'Is sub-section not mentioned a valid ground to be taken by officers who are manning our prisons?' The court said that what needs to be looked into is the 'substance of the order' and not 'minor and irrelevant errors'. 'When there is no difficulty in identifying the prisoner and offences, nitpicking on court orders and on that pretext not implementing them and keeping the individual behind the bar would be a serious dereliction of duty,' the bench said in its order. 'If you keep people behind bars for this reason, what message are we sending?,' Justice Viswanathan asked, and wondered, 'What is the guarantee that many other people are not languishing for this reason?' The DG (prisons) assured the court that prison officials would be sensitised so that such instances would never recur. Prashad, meanwhile, referred to an Allahabad High Court judgment which said that release orders must be issued only after verifying the particulars. But the bench pointed out that the judgment dealt with an issue of forged orders. The AAG said DG (prisons) has instituted an enquiry at the level of deputy inspector general (DIG) of police, Meerut. However, the court said that a judicial enquiry would be more appropriate.
Scroll.in
4 days ago
- Politics
- Scroll.in
SC directs Uttar Pradesh to pay Rs 5 lakh for not releasing man two months after bail
The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed the Uttar Pradesh government to pay Rs 5 lakh as compensation to an accused whose release was delayed by Ghaziabad District Jail authorities in a case under the state's anti-conversion law, Live Law reported. The bench, comprising Justices KV Viswanathan and NK Singh, also ordered a judicial inquiry into the lapses that led to the delayed release. The man had been booked under sections of the Indian Penal Code pertaining to kidnapping, abducting, or compelling a woman to marry against her will, in addition to provisions of the 2021 Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act. He was granted bail by the top court on April 29. On Tuesday, the man told the court that he had not been released two months after getting relief because a sub-section of the provision under which he was booked was not mentioned in the bail order. The top court had called it a ' travesty of justice '. The accused was released from jail on Tuesday evening following the court's observations. On Wednesday, the court observed that personal liberty 'cannot be denied on useless technicalities and irrelevant errors', especially when the case and offence details were clear from the bail order. The bench also asked the chief justice of the Allahabad High Court to appoint the principal district and sessions judge, Ghaziabad, to conduct the judicial inquiry, Bar and Bench reported. The court said that the inquiry must determine if there was negligence or gross negligence in the case for the delay and fix responsibility for it. The matter will be heard next on August 18.
Hans India
29-05-2025
- Politics
- Hans India
DDA guilty of contempt in Delhi tree felling case
New Delhi: The Supreme Court held the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) guilty of contempt in a case pertaining to tree-felling in the Ridge area for a road-widening project. While categorising the authority's act in the scope of criminal contempt, the top court asked the DDA to carry out compensatory afforestation, according to NDTV report. A bench of Justices Surya Kant and NK Singh said the deforestation revealed a 'troubling pattern' of 'institutional missteps and administrative overreach'. 'Permission was not obtained, orders were ignored and environmental damage was inflicted,' Justice Kant said. The Bench passed the verdict on contempt plea alleging violation of the 1996 and March 4, 2024, ban on tree felling and deliberate non-compliance of orders on the part of the Delhi LG and IAS officer Subhasish Panda as DDA chairman and vice-chairman respectively. It acknowledged the intent of cutting the trees, given that the road was being widened to allow seamless transportation to the CAPFIMS hospital. 'The hospital (for which road widening was carried out) was to cater to needs of paramilitary jawans. Ensuring access to quality medical care is not a privilege, but necessity. It is imperative to recognise the importance of such institutions for military personnels and their families. Such individuals remain voiceless,' it said. The Bench also directed the formation of a three-member committee to oversee Delhi Ridge area afforestation plan and ensure thick tree cover on both sides of approach road. Further, an environmental fee of Rs 25,000 was imposed on officials, other than the DDA chairman and vice-chairman.
Scroll.in
28-05-2025
- Politics
- Scroll.in
SC closes contempt case against development body officials over tree-felling in Delhi Ridge
The Supreme Court on Wednesday closed contempt proceedings against officials of the Delhi Development Authority over the large-scale felling of trees in the national capital's Ridge area for a road widening project in February 2024, Bar and Bench reported. A bench of Justices Surya Kant and NK Singh held that the officials had committed contempt by failing to seek the top court's approval, as mandated under a 1996 ruling, before allowing the tree-felling. 'This is a case of institutional missteps and administrative overreach,' Bar and Bench quoted the court as having said. However, citing ' overwhelming public interest ', the bench refrained from initiating contempt proceedings against the Delhi Development Authority officials and its former Vice Chairperson Subhashish Panda, The Hindu reported. The trees in the protected ecological area in Delhi were chopped to construct a broader access road to the Central Armed Police Forces Institute of Medical Sciences, a new tertiary hospital primarily for paramilitary personnel, their families, pensioners and the public, according to the newspaper. The contempt proceedings had been initiated when the matter was being heard by benches led by Justice BR Gavai, who is now the chief justice, and Justice AS Oka, who has retired, Bar and Bench said. The ruling on Wednesday also comes as a relief for Delhi Lieutenant Governor VK Saxena. Although he was not a party to the contempt proceedings, a bench previously led by Oka had expressed concern about his alleged involvement in the unauthorised tree-felling. The case revolved around allegations that the Delhi Development Authority allowed the cutting of more than 600 trees in the Delhi Ridge forest area without securing mandatory approval from the court. In October, Saxena, who is also the chairperson of the Delhi Development Authority, told the court that he did not know that its permission was needed to carry out large-scale tree cutting in the area. He was responding to a court's order seeking an affidavit from him in connection with the case. During the hearing on Wednesday, the court issued directions on remedial measures to be taken by the Delhi government and the development authority in the matter. The directions include setting up of a three-member committee to examine the compensatory afforestation plan and the submission of periodical progress reports to the court. The development authority was also directed to finish the construction of the approach road to the hospital promptly and explore the possibility of ensuring thick coverage of trees on both sides of the road, Bar and Bench said. The bench also issued a fine of Rs 25,000 on all the officials of the Delhi Development Authority who were found responsible for the unauthorised tree felling. 'This is in addition to any other penalty imposed by an internal inquiry committee,' the court said. Further, the bench ordered that a due identification exercise had to be carried out to find out if there were affluent persons who benefitted from the road construction and may be made to pay as well.
