This article is written by Shubhangi Zite, a student at ILS Law College, Pune

Over remission policy SC questions Haryana.

The Supreme Court has questioned the Haryana government over a policy of granting remission to life-term convict aged 75 years or above, mentioning it appeared to be in ‘conflict’ with a provision of law.

The Supreme Court asked the Haryana government to respond within 2 weeks on whether such a policy that appeared counter to section 433-A of CrPC could be framed under article 161 of constitution.

The issue was addressed by the bench of Justices U U Lalit and Dinesh Maheshwari who was hearing an appeal in a criminal case. The bench was acquainted with the fact that on August 15, 2019 governor of Haryana had granted remission to certain prisoners who were undergoing sentence. The bench further mentioned that policy appears to be in conflict with section 433-A of Code of Criminal Procedure,1973. The bench further asked if the facts of individuals were considered by the authority before granting remission and to give a response within two weeks.

A special committee set up by SC on J&K internet restrictions.

On Monday SC appointed a special committee led by Union Home Secretary and consisting of Secretary of Department of Communication and the J&K Chief Secretary to determine the necessity of continuing the internet restrictions in J&K.

The court asked the panel to examine the appropriateness of the petitioners and suggestions regarding areas that need restricted internet and those where faster internet can be allowed on a trial basis.

SC will have single bench hearing from Wednesday.

For the very first time SC will have single bench hearing for cases of bails and anticipatory bail petitions for cases that involves offense liable for punishment of not more than 7 years. The new system is introduced to dispose of piled up pending cases.

Earlier SC bench had at least 2-3 judges and the abovementioned cases were heard by 2 judge benches. In September 2019, Supreme Court amended its rules to allow a single judge to hear bails, anticipatory bails, and transfer petitions. This bench will start functioning from May 13.

Law Minister – over zealous PIL to be dealt with effective response to top law officers.

The Union Minister of Law and Justice Ravi Shankar Prasad asked his top law officers to respond effectively to ‘ overzealous Public Interest Litigations (PIL)’  being filed during the lockdown.

Law Minister on Sunday had a meeting via video conferencing with top law officers of the country including Attorney General K K Venugopal and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Secretaries of Department of Legal Affairs and Justice and others.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta explained the nature of cases being filed and the orders being passed by the SC which upheld guidelines issued by the government and action taken.

Prasad highlighted that during this challenging time overzealous PILs need to be avoided. Though one cannot stop anyone from filing cases there must be an effective response to these types of interventions.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here