The Madras High Court Bench of Justice Ibrahim Kalifullah and MM Sundaresh, in a writ petition filed by Elephant G Rajendran against the Bar Council and its chairman for alleged Professional Misconduct and Contempt of Court by Mr. R.K. Chandramohan(State BC Chairman), suspended him and ordered BCI to conduct a detailed enquiry. The Court in an outspoken judgment has reached well beyond its normal jurisdiction exercised under Art 226. Such exercise has far reaching implications and will be discussed in subsequent blogs.
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Reference to Constitution Bench with regard to exercise of discretion under Art 136
A bench consisting of Justice Katju & Lodha made a very important reference to a Consitution bench for determining the scope of Art 136, and to lay down broad principles as to what calegories of SLP's may be entertained. Remarking that from a Court deciding important questions of law and laying down the law of the land, The Supreme Court has become a regular Court of appeal and error corrector; The Supreme Court expressed dissatisfaction in the present system of entertaining SLP's. It layed heavy reliance upon Mr.KK Venugopal's R.K.Jain Memorial Lecture and his recommendations. Adding to his opinion the SC opined that six types of cases must only be entertained by the Apex Court.
(i) All matters involving substantial questions of law relating to the interpretation of the Constitution of India;
(ii) All matters of national or public importance;
(iii) Validity of laws, Central and State;
(iv) After Kesavananda Bharati, (1973) 4 SCC 217, the judicial review of Constitutional Amendments; and
(v) To settle differences of opinion of important issues of law between High Courts.
(v) where the Court is satisfied that there has been a grave miscarriage of justice and
(vi) where a fundamental right of a person has prima facie been violated.
"This matter is of very great importance, hope the bench is constituted and the matter is heard soon"
Thursday, May 6, 2010
Constitutionality of certain Mordern Scientific Investigation Methods
A three Judge Bench of the Supreme Court has held Narco Analysis, Lie Detector (Polygraph) and Brain Mapping Tests which are involuntary as Violative of Art 20(3) and 21. Although on Narco Analysis, the Hon'ble Court's Decision cannot be disputed, with respect to the other two tests the Courts Order has raised a few eyebrows. Distinguishing a major Constitution bench Judgment in State of Bombay v.Kathi Kalu Ohgad AIR 1961 SC 1808, as not applicable in the light of modern Scientific Developments is a view that has to be scrutinised. The Judgment is Selvi v. State of Karntaka - 5/4/2010, available here.
This post will be followed by further posts on the Judgment.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)