LawLoveLegal

What Is Justice Yashwant Varma Challenging Before the Supreme Court? Introduction The controversy surrounding the alleged recovery of burnt cash and the initiation of removal proceedings against Justice Yashwant Varma , Judge of the Allahabad High Court (formerly of the Delhi High Court), has now entered a crucial constitutional phase. Two weeks after a three-member Joint Inquiry Committee issued a notice seeking his response to corruption allegations, Justice Varma has approached the Supreme Court of India , challenging the very legality and constitution of the Inquiry Committee . The matter is scheduled for hearing on January 7 , just days before the Committee is expected to receive Justice Varma’s response, making the outcome of this challenge institutionally significant. Background of the Removal Proceedings Removal proceedings against Justice Varma were triggered after motions for impeachment were submitted in both Houses of Parliament on the same day , under the Judges (Inquiry)...

Supreme Court judge Justice B.V. Nagarathna delivered a significant address at the international convention titled “The Independence of Judiciary: Comparative Perspective on Rights, Institutions and Citizens” held at O.P. Jindal Global University, Sonipat. Her remarks highlighted the core elements that safeguard the rule of law in a constitutional democracy—judicial independence and supremacy of the law. Judicial Independence and Supremacy of Law: The Twin Guarantees of Rule of Law Justice Nagarathna emphasised that judicial independence and the supremacy of law function together to ensure that the rule of law remains insulated from political pressures. According to her, insulating judges from extraneous and political influences is essential to preserve the integrity of judicial decision-making. She reiterated that these two principles form the foundation of a democratic legal system and must never be taken for granted. Faith in the Constitution and Faith in the Courts Justice ...

Introduction: Judicial Scrutiny Over the Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021 The Supreme Court of India has raised serious concerns over the Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021 , questioning whether the reintroduction of previously struck-down provisions amounts to legislative overreach . The Court emphasized that while Parliament has the authority to enact reforms, such changes must respect prior judicial pronouncements. The case was heard by a Bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Bhushan R. Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran , who were responding to petitions challenging the constitutional validity of certain provisions in the 2021 Act. Background: The Contested Provisions and Their History The Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021 was enacted barely four months after the Supreme Court had struck down similar provisions in the Tribunal Reforms (Rationalization and Conditions of Service) Ordinance, 2021 . The main points of contention include: Tenure : The Act prescribes a four-year tenure ...

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has issued a stern warning to the Sukhvinder Singh Sukhu-led state government for failing to release essential judicial funds, threatening to initiate contempt proceedings if ₹10 crore is not deposited with the High Court by November 13, 2025 . Judicial Reprimand Over Financial Neglect A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice G.S. Sandhawalia and Justice Ranjan Sharma took serious note of the non-release of funds since September 2025 , observing that the continued financial neglect is “disrupting the normal functioning of the courts” . The Bench directed the Finance Secretary to personally appear before the Court with a bank draft of ₹10 crore payable to the Registrar General of the High Court . The order explicitly warned that failure to comply would result in the issuance of a contempt notice . The court stated: “Let the Secretary (Finance) come present in this Court along with necessary draft of ₹10 crore, in favour of the Registrar Ge...

Supreme Court Reinforces Due Process: Curbing “Bulldozer Justice” with Strict Guidelines Background In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court of India has set out guidelines to curb arbitrary demolitions, commonly referred to as "bulldozer justice." This term has emerged from instances where properties of individuals accused of crimes have been demolished without following due legal process. The ruling responds to several petitions highlighting the destruction of residential and commercial properties without prior notice, which, according to petitioners, targets marginalized and minority communities. Key Principles Addressed The Supreme Court’s decision rests on critical constitutional principles, particularly the rule of law, separation of powers, and protection of individual rights . The Court emphasized that no person should be punished without due process and that arbitrary action by the executive undermines citizens’ trust in the justice system. Justice Gavai, in del...

Supreme Court Grants Bail to Arvind Kejriwal in  Delhi Excise Policy Case, Upholds Legality of Arrest In a recent Supreme Court decision, the appeals in Criminal Appeal Nos. 3816 and 3817 of 2024 involving Arvind Kejriwal versus the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) were addressed. These appeals arise from a Special Leave Petition challenging Kejriwal's arrest by the CBI in relation to alleged irregularities and conspiracy surrounding the Delhi Excise Policy 2021-22. Background of the Case 1. FIR and Allegations: The CBI filed an FIR on 17 August 2022, accusing officials in the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD) of engaging in conspiracy and corruption while implementing the Excise Policy 2021-2022. This policy allegedly involved undue benefits to certain liquor wholesalers and retailers. Though Kejriwal’s name was not initially mentioned in the FIR, his arrest came after further investigation by the CBI and the Directorate of Enforcement (ED).   ...