The Supreme Court has agreed for constituting a bench for hearing plea raising concerns the appointment of judges in the Supreme Court and Higher Judiciary through collegium system.

As per a media report the matter has been listed before the Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud for urgent listing by a lawyer.

The lawyer stated that as per an interview given to a media agency, the recently retired judge Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul had highlighted ‘faults’ in the present collegium system.

The CJI agreed to constitute a bench after noting the point mentioned by the lawyer.

In his interview Justice S.K. Kaul tlked about how the highlighted how the collegium system at present suffers from internal ‘frictions’.

Justice Kaul,mentioned how the striking down of the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act by the Apex Court in 2015 led to angst amongst the political circles who had unanimously passed the law which is now being effected in the ‘smoothness’ of the working of the collegium.

Justice Kaul had also added that pending appointments of the names as recommended by the collegium to the Government are a ‘reflection’ of this present friction

The Supreme Court on Wednesday expressed its dissatisfaction over the delay by the Central government in framing guidelines to govern the search and seizure of personal digital devices by police and central agencies.

The Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju informed the bench comprising of Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia that the Central government would require more time to formulate the guidelines as a committee has been formed.

Justice Kaul was not very appreciative of this and questioned on the two-year delay by the government since the filing of the petition before the apex court seeking such guidelines.

Justice Kaul said that when did we issue notice? Some timeframe has to be followed. Two years have passed, Mr Raju!” 

On November 10, the Supreme Court said that there should be some set guidelines for the search and seizure of digital devices belonging to individuals, particularly journalists or media personnel.

A bench comprising of Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia said that t is important to know that the journalists have confidential information about their sources and other confidential material in their device, which cannot be made public.

Justice Kaul orally said that there needs to be some guidelines for seizure of devices of media professionals as they have contacts on their phones sources, and this is serious.

Justice Dhulia weighed in by pointing out, they are supposed to give you the hash value (of the seized device).

Central Government was represented by Additional Solicitor General SV Raju who stated that the replied the authorities cannot be shut out from examining such devices.

The ASG contended that the chances of there being some anti-nationals among the media professionals who may harm cannot be ruled out

THE ASG clearly said that Media cannot be above the law.

The Court, still maintained that it would be dangerous if the government is given overarching powers on such issues in the absence of any guidelines.

The Central Government has been given a months time by the Apex Court to give the Central government a month’s time to suggest what guidelines could be put in place to govern such seizures of digital devices.

The Court added that the matter cannot be treated as an adversarial one, and that the government has to play a role in shaping the necessary guidelines.

The Court said this while it was hearing a PIL filed by the Foundation for Media Professionals who sought for guidelines to be put in place for the search and seizure of digital devices by law enforcement agencies.

Another such petition was placed before the top court filed by a group of five academicians and researchers.

The petition by the Academicians and Researchers had said that the investigating agencies are exercising unbridled powers when it comes to seizing digital devices that contain “much, if not all, of a citizen’s personal and professional life.

The petitioners added that such seizures must be done in a civilised by way, guided by the directives of the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court saw another twist during the hearing in the PMLA matter as the Court has now deferred hearing by 2 months.

The bench that was looking to matter was headed by Justice Kaul who stated that the Solicitor General seeks deferment, which would leave no time for this bench to pen down an order.

Justice Kaul added that the CJI would have to reconstitute the bench in view of one of us demitting office.

As per the reports available, the new bench will be hearing the matter. Justice Kaul who was hearing the matter would demit office on December 15, 2023 and will no more be a part of case.

The Apex Court after hearing the matter for 2 days has allowed the Centre time to respond to amended pleas by petitioners challenging at least 5 sections of PMLA other than original Sec 50 and Section 63.

The Supreme Court on September 26 constituted a special bench to hear the petitions challenging its 2022 verdict, which upheld the constitutional validity of provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) relating to arrest, seizure, presumption of innocence and stringent bail conditions.

The special bench of Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Bela M. Trivedi decided to hear the revision petitions on October 18.  

While hearing a case related to the Enforcement Directorate (ED), Justice Kaul revealed the composition of the special bench.

In August 2022, a bench led by the then CJI N.V. Ramana had issued notice on the review petition. The Bench had observed that two aspects of the judgment prima facie required reconsideration – one, the finding that the copy of the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) need not be given to the accused; two, reversal of the presumption of innocence.

Earlier in May 2023, a two-judge bench had refused to refer the verdict in the Vijay Madanlal Choudhary case to a larger bench on the grounds that it was bound to follow it as it was rendered by a larger bench consisting of three judges.

The Supreme Court bench  of Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice AS Oka has criticised the new system of listing of cases on non-miscellaneous days (Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays) in the Apex Court. 

The bench said that with the new system of listing the cases, the afternoons become extremely packed as there are many matters to be heard. The bench said that this eventually leads to little or no time left for the matters which are due for final disposal.

The bench said,

“The new listing system is not giving adequate time to take up matters fixed for hearing like the present case as there are number of matters within the span of ‘Afternoon’ session.”

After taking charge as Chief Justice of India, CJI UU Lalit made a major change regarding hearing of cases in Supreme Court on non-miscellaneous days (Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays).

Also Read: No power to derecognize a party on grounds of hate speech: Election Commission of India to Supreme Court

With the new change in order on non-miscellaneous days, the Supreme Court will hear regular matters in the morning session (10.30 am to 1 pm) and miscellaneous and after notice matters in the afternoon session (2 pm to 4 pm).

The norm earlier was to take up miscellaneous matters first and then proceed to the regular hearings.

The only point of contention raised by the Justice Kaul-led bench is that this has led to very little time to consider regular final disposal matters. 

The bench headed by Justice Kaul, who is in also the Supreme Court Collegium, has now posted the case for November 15, 2022.

Also Read:

• Social media users fail to differentiate between oral remark and actual order: Justice DY Chandrachud
• 103rd Constitution amendment is an assault on the constitution: Dr Mohan Gopal
• Supreme Court quashes plea related to Rajya Sabha elections with cost of Rs 1 lakh

The Chief minister of Tamil Nadu MK Stalin on Sunday has asked for making Tamil the official language of the Madras High Court.

Also,CM Stalin has requested the Apex court to establish a regional bench of the top court in Chennai.

In his request the CM said “I request the honourable Supreme Court judges to ensure establishment of its regional bench in Chennai, and also allow Tamil to be an official language of the Madras High Court.”

He requested the same ,while speaking on an event that was organised at the Madras High Court auditorium for laying the foundation stone of two new buildings within the high court premises which would house subordinate courts in the city and also the new court rooms for the High Court.

The event was also attended by the Madras High Court Chief Justice (CJ) MN Bhandari, the state law minister S Regupathy, Supreme Court judges Justices Indira Banerjee and Sanjay Kishan Kaul along with the CM.

The Tamil Nadu government had sanctioned an amount of ₹500 crore towards the judicial infrastructure in the State.

The Chief Justice Bhandari,along with all the other judges present at the event thanked the State government for sanctioning the amount.

The staff of Madras High Court also extended thanks to the Tamil Nadu government for ratifying the new construction work proposal at “lightning speed.”

Justice Kaul,while speaking at the event,praised the Tamil Nadu government for its effort to help upgrade judicial infrastructure in the State.

Justice Kaul, in his speech , reminded judges and lawyers that a court building, howsoever, glorious, is merely the “hardware” of the judiciary.

“The lawyers and the judges are the software,” he said.
He suggested all the judges to work beyond their ability to reduce pendency of cases.

Justice Kaul added “We judges must work beyond our ability to reduce arrears and the Chief Justice must lead by example.He said that he hopesthatjudges and the Bar will keep the flag of Madras High Court flying very high.”

Justice Kaul said it is sad how at least 20 percent matters in every court are infructuous.

He said that judiciary has to innovate and should figure out a way.He added that mere addition of the number of judges doesn’t work towards delivery of speedy and quality justice.”

He suggested judges to keep their judgments crisp and brief.

Justice Kaul said an important point that “Litigants are interested only in getting justice and not in the thesis which judges write,” while he stressed upon the need for quality judgement

A two-day international conference on mediation (virtual mode) got underway on Saturday. The event will see participation of more than 6,000 judges from all over the country, including judges from the Supreme Court.

Organised by the Faculty of Law, University of Delhi and the Delhi School of Public Policy and Governance, in association with the Mediation and Conciliation Project Committee of the Supreme Court of India, the event will culminate on April 10.

The inaugural session will be addressed by chief guest Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Judge, Supreme Court of India, and the presidential address will be given by DU Vice-Chancellor Prof Yogesh Singh.

Justice Kaul is also a Member of the Mediation and Conciliation Project Committee of the Supreme Court.

The valedictory session will have Supreme Court judge Justice P.S. Narasimha as the chief guest. Former CJI and Delhi School Of Public Policy & Governance Governing Body Chairperson Justice Dipak Misra will deliver the presidential address.

The two-day event has India Legal and APN among the media sponsors.

The speakers and guests include: Prof Satya Pal Singh Baghel, Union Minister of State, Ministry of Law and Justice; Brajesh Pathak, Deputy Chief Minister, Uttar Pradesh, Patna High Court Chief Justice Sanjay Karol, Madhya Pradesh High Court Chief Justice Justice Ravi Malimath, NHRC Member Justice M.M. Kumar and national Judicial Academy Director Justice Amreshwar Pratap Sahi.

The first day of the conference witnessed four sessions, on topics as varied as Community Mediation, Mediation as Indigenous Form of Dispute Settlement In Indian Perspective, Online Mediation :Challenges and Opportunities, Pre Litigation Mediation in the context of Ease of Doing Business and Role of Mediation in Family and Matrimonial Dispute.

Day 2 will witness sessions on topics such as Role of Mediation in Commercial and IPR Dispute, Role of Mediation in Environment and Infrastructure Dispute, Role of Mediation in Insurance, Banking and Financial Services, Cross Border Dispute and International Mediation : In present International Perspective, and Mediation Bill : It’s Prospects.

The second and last day of the conference will conclude with a Valedictory Session, scheduled to be held at 5:00 pm.