Supreme Court of India.For Judgment.Rajbala & Ors. v. State Of Haryana & Ors..[Item 1A in court 5 – Writ Petition (Civil) 671/2015].Bench: Jasti Chelameswar, AM Sapre JJ. .A challenge to the validity of the Haryana Panchayati Raj (Amendment) Act, 2015 which, fixes minimum educational qualifications for candidates to contest Panchayat polls. The Supreme Court had stayed the operation of the Act whereupon the Panchayat polls had been deferred in Haryana. The Court had the heard the matter reserved its judgment on October 28. You can read more about the case here..Today in court: The Court upheld the validity of the Act and dismissed the petition. Read the full report here..1. Extra Judl. Exec.Victim Families Assn & Anr v. Union of India & Anr.[Item 1 in court 8 – Writ Petition (Crl.) 129/2012].Bench: Madan B Lokur, UU Lalit JJ..Case pertaining to extra judicial killing in Manipur. Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi is making his submissions. The hearing will continue today. Meanwhile, the Court issued show cause notice to certain media organisations yesterday on why contempt action should not be initiated against them for misreporting court proceedings. You can read more about the case here..Today in court: The hearing will continue tomorrow. Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi will resume his arguments at 2 pm..2. Verhoeven, Marie-Emmanuelle v. Union of India and Anr..[Item 1 in court 13 – SLP (Crl) 8931/2015].Bench: Kurian Joseph, Arun Mishra JJ..A habeas corpus petition for the release of French national Marie Verhoeven..The Court had refused to release Verhoeven in the interim and said that it will hear the case and dispose it expeditiously. “It involves relations between two countries and we cannot do something which might have consequences. Terrorists are striking at will these days”, Justice Thakur had remarked..Additional Solicitor General PS Patwalia is appearing for the Central government while Senior Advocate TR Andhyarujina is representing Verhoeven..Delhi High Court.1. MC Mehta Vs Union of India & Ors..[Item 24, Court 1- W.P.(C) 3221/2014].Bench: Chief Justice G Rohini, Jayant Nath J. .Check evening updates..Today in Court: This matter was not taken up. It will now be heard on February 9..Bombay High Court.The State of Maharashtra V. Mirza Himayat Inayat Baig.[ Item 1 in Court 11 – CONF (criminal) /4/2013 ].Bench : Justice Naresh H. Patil and Justice S.B. Shukre.Today in Court: Rehan Shaikh, one of the witnesses in the case claimed that he was illegally detained for five days and was intimidated into testifying that Baig had a ‘jihadi mentality’. Gaus Shaikh, another witness, also claimed that he was tutored to falsely state before the trial court that Baig had a ‘jihadi mentality’..Yesterday, the defence advocate, Mahmud Pracha had concluded his arguments against Baig’s conviction.The intervenors in the case are Ashish Khetan and two prosecution witnesses. Ashish Khetan is represented by senior counsel Mihir Desai, who made his submissions yesterday..The matter will be further heard in court tomorrow..2. Salman Salim Khan Vs The State of Maharashtra.[Item 1 in court 14 – APEAL (criminal) /572/2015].Bench : Justice A.R. Joshi.Today in Court: The Bombay High Court today acquitted Salman Khan of all charges against him. Justice A.R. Joshi read the verdict in the presence of Salman Khan and his lawyer, senior counsel Amit Desai. The Judge read –.“The decision of the trial court is set aside. Salman Khan is acquitted of all charges..…the court has come to conclusion that the prosecution has failed to bring material on record to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant (Salman Khan) was driving and under the influence of alcohol, also, whether the accident occurred due to bursting (of tyre) prior to the incident or tyre burst after the incident …”.The judge also said that there were “unexplained and glaring anomalies” in the evidence. Earlier the court had said that Ravindra Patil, now deceased, was a “wholly Unreliable” witness. The Judge pointed out that the decision to not examine singer Kamaal Khan went against the prosecution’s case. The chief public prosecutor, Sandeep Shinde has not officially confirmed whether the state would file an appeal in the apex court..3.Meera Bhaindar Municipal Corporation V. Nagri Hakka Sangharsh Samiti.[Item 1 in Court 1 – CAW (Civil)/3184/2015].Bench: Acting Chief Justice Vijaya Kamlesh Tahilramani and Justice Shalini Phansalkar.Check evening updates.
Supreme Court of India.For Judgment.Rajbala & Ors. v. State Of Haryana & Ors..[Item 1A in court 5 – Writ Petition (Civil) 671/2015].Bench: Jasti Chelameswar, AM Sapre JJ. .A challenge to the validity of the Haryana Panchayati Raj (Amendment) Act, 2015 which, fixes minimum educational qualifications for candidates to contest Panchayat polls. The Supreme Court had stayed the operation of the Act whereupon the Panchayat polls had been deferred in Haryana. The Court had the heard the matter reserved its judgment on October 28. You can read more about the case here..Today in court: The Court upheld the validity of the Act and dismissed the petition. Read the full report here..1. Extra Judl. Exec.Victim Families Assn & Anr v. Union of India & Anr.[Item 1 in court 8 – Writ Petition (Crl.) 129/2012].Bench: Madan B Lokur, UU Lalit JJ..Case pertaining to extra judicial killing in Manipur. Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi is making his submissions. The hearing will continue today. Meanwhile, the Court issued show cause notice to certain media organisations yesterday on why contempt action should not be initiated against them for misreporting court proceedings. You can read more about the case here..Today in court: The hearing will continue tomorrow. Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi will resume his arguments at 2 pm..2. Verhoeven, Marie-Emmanuelle v. Union of India and Anr..[Item 1 in court 13 – SLP (Crl) 8931/2015].Bench: Kurian Joseph, Arun Mishra JJ..A habeas corpus petition for the release of French national Marie Verhoeven..The Court had refused to release Verhoeven in the interim and said that it will hear the case and dispose it expeditiously. “It involves relations between two countries and we cannot do something which might have consequences. Terrorists are striking at will these days”, Justice Thakur had remarked..Additional Solicitor General PS Patwalia is appearing for the Central government while Senior Advocate TR Andhyarujina is representing Verhoeven..Delhi High Court.1. MC Mehta Vs Union of India & Ors..[Item 24, Court 1- W.P.(C) 3221/2014].Bench: Chief Justice G Rohini, Jayant Nath J. .Check evening updates..Today in Court: This matter was not taken up. It will now be heard on February 9..Bombay High Court.The State of Maharashtra V. Mirza Himayat Inayat Baig.[ Item 1 in Court 11 – CONF (criminal) /4/2013 ].Bench : Justice Naresh H. Patil and Justice S.B. Shukre.Today in Court: Rehan Shaikh, one of the witnesses in the case claimed that he was illegally detained for five days and was intimidated into testifying that Baig had a ‘jihadi mentality’. Gaus Shaikh, another witness, also claimed that he was tutored to falsely state before the trial court that Baig had a ‘jihadi mentality’..Yesterday, the defence advocate, Mahmud Pracha had concluded his arguments against Baig’s conviction.The intervenors in the case are Ashish Khetan and two prosecution witnesses. Ashish Khetan is represented by senior counsel Mihir Desai, who made his submissions yesterday..The matter will be further heard in court tomorrow..2. Salman Salim Khan Vs The State of Maharashtra.[Item 1 in court 14 – APEAL (criminal) /572/2015].Bench : Justice A.R. Joshi.Today in Court: The Bombay High Court today acquitted Salman Khan of all charges against him. Justice A.R. Joshi read the verdict in the presence of Salman Khan and his lawyer, senior counsel Amit Desai. The Judge read –.“The decision of the trial court is set aside. Salman Khan is acquitted of all charges..…the court has come to conclusion that the prosecution has failed to bring material on record to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant (Salman Khan) was driving and under the influence of alcohol, also, whether the accident occurred due to bursting (of tyre) prior to the incident or tyre burst after the incident …”.The judge also said that there were “unexplained and glaring anomalies” in the evidence. Earlier the court had said that Ravindra Patil, now deceased, was a “wholly Unreliable” witness. The Judge pointed out that the decision to not examine singer Kamaal Khan went against the prosecution’s case. The chief public prosecutor, Sandeep Shinde has not officially confirmed whether the state would file an appeal in the apex court..3.Meera Bhaindar Municipal Corporation V. Nagri Hakka Sangharsh Samiti.[Item 1 in Court 1 – CAW (Civil)/3184/2015].Bench: Acting Chief Justice Vijaya Kamlesh Tahilramani and Justice Shalini Phansalkar.Check evening updates.
