The Week That Was: The Supreme Court of India

The Supreme Court’s week began on Monday, after a short hiatus last week and sailed through a (relatively) calm week. The entry tax hearing resumed the past week; however the Nirbhaya appeal was not listed this week. .Here are some of the highlights of the past seven days right from the Supreme Court of India. .Monday, August 22.Pollution monitoring to go hi-tech with introduction of RFIDs.In a case filed by MC Mehta to take account of rising air pollution levels and concerns over its ineffective monitoring, the apex court has allowed the introduction of Radio Frequency Identification Devices (RFID) to monitor commercial vehicles and the pollution caused by their emissions. The cost of Rs. 50 crore for the same will initially be borne by the collections of the Environment Compensation Charge (EEC)..Can hotel room charge qualify as rent? .The Court stayed the judgment of the Delhi High court which had held that any part of the payment received by hoteliers from persons other than individuals and HUFs, can be construed as ‘rent’, within the meaning of Section 194-I of the Income Tax Act..In an appeal filed by the Federation of Hotel and Restaurant Association of India (petitioner), a Bench comprising Justices Anil R Dave and L Nageswara Rao issued notice to the Central government and the Income Tax Department and stayed the judgment of the Delhi High Court..Impleadment of tribunal to be limited to certain cases .The Supreme Court held that it is not necessary to implead a tribunal, whose order is being challenged, as a party to the proceedings unless required by the law. The decision was rendered by a 3-judge Bench comprising Chief Justice TS Thakur and Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud..Tuesday, August 23.Supreme Court washes its hands off J&K issue, advises political recourse.The Supreme Court, while denying plea for Governor’s rule in Jammu and Kashmir, requested Jammu and Kashmir National Panther’s Party (JKNPP) president to participate in political consultations with the Prime Minister. He explained that the situation currently prevailing was not one that could be solved with a simple judicial order..The case has already seen a status report from the Attorney General about the situation, and has seen lengthy discussions about the strife in the State..Air India grilled for taking 21 adjournments.The country’s top court seemed to be on a warpath against unreasonable adjournments, with Air India being the latest in the line of fire. The court came down heavily on national carrier Air India for repeatedly seeking adjournments in a case involving the service dues of pilots and cabin crew..It was brought to the notice of the Court by the petitioners that Air India has already sought 21 adjournments citing Attorney General (AG) Mukul Rohatgi’s absence. The Court responded by asking the national carrier to “put its house in order”..Wednesday, August 24.Rahul Gandhi’s denies ever denouncing the RSS.The Rahul Gandhi defamation case, which generated much brouhaha with comments from the Supreme Court of India, finally reached a (plausible) closure after Rahul submitted that he never actually denounced the RSS, but merely pointed out the act of some RSS members, and that his words were twisted by the media..The matter was heard by a bench of Dipak Misra and Rohinton Nariman, JJ. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal appeared for Rahul Gandhi while Senior Advocate UR Lalit appeared for RSS activist and the complainant Rajesh Kunte..Friday, August 26.Jammu & Kashmir could get a State Bar Council.The State of Jammu & Kashmir may very well get its State Bar Council soon, after the Bar Council of India told the Supreme Court that the BCI had approved the Jammu & Kashmir State Bar Council Draft Rules..The BCI’s lawyer, AK Prasad, also told the Bench of Chief Justice TS Thakur, and AM Khanwilkar, DY Chandrachud JJ. that these draft rules would now be forwarded to the Central government for publication in the gazette. The court recorded the same in its order and listed the matter after six weeks..Punishment for reckless driving must get harsher.A Bench of Dipak Misra and C Nagappan JJ said that the punishment under Section 304-A of the IPC for reckless driving was “absolutely inadequate”; it requested the Attorney General of India to communicate to the court, the views of the government on making the penal provision stricter. However, the court did recognize that the aspect of ‘law-making’ was the Legislature’s prerogative, and that it has no intention of encroaching upon it..Currently, Section 304-A entails a maximum punishment of two years in jail, with or without fine..Another petition to declare ‘triple talaq’ unconstitutional.Ishrat Jahan has sought a declaration from the apex court, saying that Section 2 of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937 was unconstitutional, as it violated fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution..The Supreme Court on Friday issued notice to the Central Government pursuant to the hearing and tagged the petition with similar petitions filed earlier.