Supreme Court Observer

☀️ Good morning! Here are SCO’s updates for the day: 👨‍⚖ Today, a 5-Judge Constitution Bench of the SC will hear arguments on the validity of reservations for Economically Weaker Section (EWS) under the 103rd Constitutional Amendment. The Bench will consider key issues on reservation including the validity of the additional 10% EWS reservation above the 50% cap on reservation decided in Indra Sawhney v Union of India, and whether reservation can be prescribed solely based on economic criteria. SCO’s case page tells you more: (https://bit.ly/3erbDjh) ⚖️ Yesterday, the SC agreed to list the dispute between the Delhi government and the Union government over the control of the city's civil servants and it's administration. Arguments will be heard tomorrow by a 5-Judge Constitution Bench led by CJI Lalit. The case is expected to decide the long-pending conflict over the control of administrative postings and transfer of officials in Delhi between the two governments. SCO reports on the case: (https://bit.ly/3CVVBs50) 🗞️ The SC underwent several significant changes in August, most notably, CJI Ramana’s retirement and Justice Lalit’s appointment as the new CJI, institutional changes, and the revival of Constitution Benches. CJI Lalit indicated his intent to prioritise Constitution Bench matters and optimise the listing of cases at the Court. The changes, intended to increase efficiency in the judiciary, appear to be laying the groundwork for a transition in the Court’s structure and functioning. Read more on SCO’s Monthly Reviews: (https://bit.ly/3qeMECI) 📱 Yesterday, the SC began final hearings in the Hijab Ban appeal. The Court also issued notice in petitions uniform divorce and succession laws as well as challenges to Sanjay Mishra’s tenure extension as the Director of the Enforcement Directorate. SCO’s daily video updates capture the highlights: (https://bit.ly/3Bg9qQI)

☀️ Good morning! The groundwork has been laid for some key developments at the Supreme Court this week. 👩🏾‍⚖️ Starting from Tuesday, the Supreme Court is set to begin hearing five Constitution Bench matters. On August 30th, two 5-Judge Constitution Benches led by CJI Lalit and Justice Indira Banerjee respectively assembled briefly to determine which cases the Benches could finish hearing during the month of September. Justice Banerjee will retire this month on September 23rd and CJI Lalit has less than 70 days remaining in his tenure. SCO reported on the five cases the Benches decided to begin hearing on September 6th. (https://bit.ly/3TFhvWp) 🏫 Today, the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear the appeal against the Karnataka High Court’s Judgment upholding the State Government’s Hijab ban in educational institutions. In the last hearing, on August 29th, the petitioners requested the Bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia for more time to prepare their case. The Bench granted them one week instead of the requested two, warning them against ‘forum shopping’ for a more favourable Bench. SCO reported on the proceedings. (https://bit.ly/3CXH9jm) 📄 On September 3rd, CJI U.U. Lalit, speaking at a function organised by the Bar Council of India, said that the Supreme Court had disposed of over 1800 cases in his first week as the Chief Justice. This may represent the ‘maximum efficiency with limited resources’ that CJI Lalit has stated was one of the goals of his term in interviews before he was appointed. Deciding matters promptly at the SC will allow lower courts to follow suit in similar matters, according to him. SCO reported on CJI Lalit’s goals for his relatively short tenure. (https://bit.ly/3BfnaeO)

☀️ Good morning! At the end of CJI Lalit's first week in office, winds of change seem to be blowing over the Supreme Court. 👨🏻‍⚖Marking a discernible shift in the Court's attitude to bail matters, activist Teesta Setalvad secured interim bail yesterday. SG Tushar Mehta, opposing the bail, tried every possible strategy to convince the Bench. He faced tough questions from CJI Lalit and eventually lost his case. Tune in for more! https://youtu.be/yKwmf4HzD-I 🗃️ A troubled Justice Ravindra Bhat commented yesterday that lawyers at the SC routinely file submissions that run not only from 'A to Z, sometimes it is ZZZ'. On average, submissions at the Indian Supreme Court are far longer than submissions at the top Courts in other countries. For instance, the United States Supreme Court prescribes a strict word limit for written submissions. Justice Bhat suggested a similar word limit for Special Leave Petitions, the hearings for which take up most of the SC's time. Read more about how proceedings in the Indian Supreme Court compare to the UK and US Supreme Courts here. https://bit.ly/3cE1WxK 📩 Have you subscribed to SCO Desk Briefs yet? We send discussions on the most important developments at the Supreme Court straight to your inbox. Sign up here! (https://bit.ly/3k9QcCU)

☀️ Good morning! Here are SCO's must-reads for the day: 🗓️ A perplexed Solicitor General, Mr. Tushar Mehta, representing the State of Gujarat, fielded a volley of tough questions from CJI U.U. Lalit during Teesta Setalvad's bail hearing yesterday. The Gujarat High Court earlier gave the State government six weeks to respond to the bail application—an inordinately long time, according to CJI Lalit, during which Ms. Setalvad would stay in jail. Mr. Mehta has a final opportunity to convince the Court that Ms. Setalvad must stay in custody today. SCO’s report on the previous hearing captures the tough questions posed to the Gujarat government, and the tension in Court. (https://bit.ly/3Q3Wj9C) 👨🏻‍⚖The office of the Chief Justice of India comes with a range of crucial administrative and housekeeping responsibilies. SCO studied the judicial output of the last 10 CJIs to conclude that most Judges write much fewer Judgments annually after becoming CJI. (https://bit.ly/3RdoOD0) 📩 Have you subscribed to SCO Desk Briefs yet? We send discussions on the most important developments at the Supreme Court straight to your inbox. Sign up here! (https://bit.ly/3k9QcCU)

☀️ Good morning! Here are SCO’s updates for the day: 👮 Today, a Bench led by CJI U.U. Lalit will hear activist Teesta Setalvad’s bail application. Ms. Setalvad was arrested by the Gujarat police following the SC's Judgment in the Zakia Jafri-Gujarat Riots case, which made adverse comments against Ms. Setalvad. She is accused of fabricating evidence and tutoring witnesses in order to falsely punish several members of the erstwhile Gujarat government. On August 25th, the Court questioned whether Ms. Setalvad’s incarceration was necessary. SCO reported on her arrest: (https://bit.ly/3q0AdtS) 🖥️ The Court will also hear a petition for the implementation of the SC's Judgement in _Shreya Singhal v Union of India_ (2015), which struck down Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000. The Section granted wide powers of arrest to the government and was heavily criticised for endangering civil and political liberties. In 2019, the SC delivered an order directing States to comply with its decision and to drop all pending cases under the provision. However, S.66A continued to be used to file FIRs across the country. The petition seeks the collection of information on pending S.66A cases and directions to police stations to not file cases under the ‘dead’ law. The matter was last heard on July 14th, 2021. SCO explains the petition: (https://bit.ly/3R7o5mM) 👨‍⚖ Former CJI N.V. Ramana, speaking at his farewell event, praised the accomplishments of the SC Collegium. He claimed that the Collegium had successfully appointed 224 Judges to various High Courts across the country under his leadership. Justice Ramana has also been widely praised for ensuring nearly 100 appointments of judicial officers, and members of different tribunals. SCO compared the number of recommendations made for HC appointments by the CJI Ramana-led Collegium with those of his three immediate predecessors. (https://bit.ly/3RlBR54)

☀️ Good morning! Yesterday two 5-Judge Constitution Benches sat to decide the hearing schedule for crucial matters and a Bench led by Justice Chandrachud pronounced a key Judgment on fee scales for arbitrators. 💰 Yesterday, a 3-Judge Bench comprising Justices Chandrachud, Khanna, and Kant delivered an important Judgment on the laws governing an arbitrator’s fee. The Court held that an arbitrator cannot decide their own fee without consulting with the parties in the proceedings. If the parties cannot agree on a fee, the fee model provided in the Fourth Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 will serve as a default option. SCO reported on the key takeaways in the Judgement. (https://bit.ly/3TwpxB1) 👨🏾‍⚖️ Two Constitution Benches led by CJI Lalit and Justice Banerjee respectively decided upon an ambitious schedule to begin final hearings in multiple Constitution Bench cases. The Bench led by CJI Lalit decided to hear final arguments in the challenges to reservations based on economic criteria alone and for Muslims in Andhra Pradesh together from September 13th onwards. The cases will likely require the Bench to examine a common set of precedents. 👩🏾‍⚖️ The Bench led by Justice Banerjee decided to begin hearing final arguments in three cases from September 6th onwards. The challenge to the Delhi Sales tax Act, 1975, deciding whether the criteria for appointment to a public post can be changed once the recruitment process has begun, and whether State governments can frame remission policies that do not require the Governor’s approval. SCO reported on the most important developments in the two Courtrooms. (https://bit.ly/3pUtAcP)

☀️ Good morning! Last night the Supreme Court announced that two 5-Judge Constitution Benches (CB) will sit to hear crucial cases for the first time in over a year. 👨🏻‍⚖👩🏽‍⚖Two Benches led by Chief Justice U.U. Lalit and Justice Indira Banerjee respectively will hear 8 CB cases relating to reservations, establishing regional benches of the SC, taxation, remission and Muslim marriage laws. https://bit.ly/3Rj95C3 🎉 This is an exciting development for two reasons. First, CB hearings have been hard to spot at the SC over the past year. Second, CJI U.U. Lalit's short 74 day tenure might pave the way for long debated judicial reform-a permanent CB. What reforms is the Court considering? https://bit.ly/3AVuvjd ⏩ Yesterday the Court worked at a much faster pace than we've come to expect from the SC in recent years. Multiple Benches heard 50+ cases for admissions, perhaps anticipating an increase in pending cases with multiple CB hearings scheduled to take place. What is this tradeoff and the reasoning behind it? https://bit.ly/3Tp1T9s

☀️Good Morning! As the first working day of Chief Justice Lalit’s tenure begins, here are some crucial cases the Court is set to hear today: *Constitutional Rights of Overseas Citizens of India* On 4th March, 2021, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) issued a notification in exercise of its powers under Section 7 of the Citizenship Act, 1955 to specify the rights and obligations of Overseas Citizens of India (OCIs). It added Section Section 7D, which empowers the Government to revoke the OCI status of a person on certain grounds, including expressing disaffection towards the Constitution, or against the interest of sovereignty and integrity of India. The petitioners argue that this affects their right to freely raise grievances with public officers, even though they reside and pay taxes in India. They argue that the unchecked discretion afforded to the Government by Section 7D is arbitrary. The case was last heard in May 2021. SCO’s case background tells the whole story (https://bit.ly/3QVHkja). *Hijab Ban* On March 15th, 2022, the Karnataka High Court upheld the hijab ban issued by the State Government, stating that wearing a hijab did not qualify as an essential religious practice and the ban did not violate the Freedom of Speech and Expression. The All India Muslim Personal Law Board challenged the Karnataka HC Judgment at the Supreme Court on the same day it was delivered. The SC, however, despite repeated requests, did not list the case until today. As a consequence many Muslim girls have not been able to attend their exams, or were forced to attend the exams without a Hijab. SCO’s case background contains the story so far, and reports of the 12 days of hearings at the Karnataka HC (https://bit.ly/3pUfU1n). For updates on these cases, and other critical developments at the Supreme Court, follow SCO on Twitter (https://bit.ly/3AW0yzS).

☀️ Good morning! Here are SCO’s updates for the day: 📰 Justice U.U. Lalit takes over as the Chief Justice of India today. His 74-day tenure as the CJI begins promisingly with announcements of substantial reforms at the Court. These include transparent listing of cases at the SC, prioritisation of urgent matters, and most notably, a plan to have a year-round Constitution Bench. The news comes as a breath of fresh air for pending Constitution Bench matters that have taken the back seat over the past year. What will CJI Lalit’s legacy be? SCO looks ahead: (https://bit.ly/3dVqMcy) 👨‍⚖ CJI Lalit’s journey at the SC began as a lawyer. He was the 6th Judge to be elevated directly from the Bar to the Bench, and the 2nd CJI to have been elevated directly to the SC after CJI S.M. Sikri. As a Judge, CJI Lalit has authored 297 Judgments and has been a part of 950 Benches. Read more on SCO’s Judge Profile: (https://bit.ly/3AQhvvh) 📺 Yesterday, the Supreme Court live streamed Court proceedings for the first time in its history, in CJI Ramana's Courtroom on the day of his retirement. Is this a one-time occurrence or is this the first instance of the Supreme Court moving towards regularly livestreaming cases? SCO wrote about the road to getting digital access at the SC: (https://bit.ly/3KnIxNE)

☀️ Good morning! Today is Chief Justice Ramana’s final day at the Supreme Court. 👨🏾‍🎓 Before he became a Judge, CJI Ramana was a student activist fighting for civil liberties in the 1970’s. After a brief stint as a journalist for the Telugu daily newspaper, Eenadu, he enrolled as an advocate on February 10th, 1983. In June 2000 he became a Judge of the Andhra Pradesh High Court and briefly served as its Acting Chief Justice between March and May, 2013. After being appointed Chief Justice of the Delhi HC in September 2013, he was elevated to the SC on February 17th, 2014. Read SCO’s Profile. (https://bit.ly/3Af6fqU) 👨🏾‍⚖️ CJI Ramana succeeded CJI S.A. Bobde as Chief Justice on April 24th, 2021, as the second wave of the pandemic was beginning, and became the second ‘COVID-19 CJI’. SCO covered the effect the pandemic had on pendency under CJI’s Ramana and Bobde. (https://bit.ly/3RdmaNs) 📊 A Chief Justice’s average rate of writing Judgments each year often falls after they are appointed as CJI. This could be attributed to the additional administrative responsibilities they take on at the Court. However, CJI Ramana’s average judgments per year has always remained relatively low, and fell from 22 judgments a year to 21. SCO looked at his tenure in numbers. (https://bit.ly/3wv7jGd) 📖 During CJI Ramana’s tenure, there have been no Constitution Bench hearings or decisions since June 2021, which left a bevy of cases dealing with important issues pending. As of August 2022 there are 53 pending Constitution Bench cases at the SC. SCO reported on the important pending Constitution Bench cases and the issues surrounding them. (https://bit.ly/3R6N2OY) 🚨 However, on August 24th the SC announced that it would hear 25 pending Constitution Bench cases starting from August 29th, 2022. With CJI Ramana retiring, the responsibility of assigning benches to these cases will fall to his successor, Justice U.U. Lalit. SCO reported on the announcement. (https://bit.ly/3dVSPZr)

☀️Today is Chief Justice Ramana's penultimate day at the Supreme Court, and he seems ready to make a final mark. 👨🏻‍⚖ Leadership at the SC will shift from CJI Ramana to Justice U.U. Lalit tomorrow. Justice Lalit's will be a short, 2 month tenure as CJI. Constitution Bench pendency appears to be among his top priorities. Yesterday, the SC announced that it will hear 25 5-Judge Bench cases from August 29th. What are these cases? (https://bit.ly/3QN15JG) It is common for Chief Justices to deliver significant Judgments as they approach their retirement. For CJI Ramana, who hasn't completed final hearings in too many crucial cases in recent months, important Judgments in his final days are unlikely. However, big Interim Orders are expected today. 👨‍💻A 3-Judge Bench led by the CJI will hear the Pegasus Spyware case today. The Court's Expert Committee filed their report with findings on whether the Union government illegally used Pegasus to spy on citizens. Will CJI Ramana deliver a substantial Order in the case today? SCO covered the highlights of the depositions before the Expert Committee here (https://bit.ly/3chNyuP). 💸 Another 3-Judge Bench led by CJI Ramana will hear Karti Chidambaram's PMLA review petition today. The PMLA Judgment, delivered by Justice Khanwilkar, upheld the Enforcement Directorate's wide powers in money laundering investigations. Will CJI Ramana allow a review? Read the review petition in SCO's case archive (https://bit.ly/3R7hiJE)

A big development at the Supreme Court calls for this break in our regular updates. This evening, the SC announced that it will hear *25 pending Constitution Bench* cases starting from August 29th. *Why is this huge news?* Constitution Benches are a defining feature of the Supreme Court as the interpreter of the Indian Constitution. Constitution Benches set essential precedents for smaller Benches and lower courts to follow for the years to come. The news about 25 Constitution Bench hearings is particularly notable as Constitution Benches have gradually become a rare sighting at the Supreme Court. During CJI Ramana’s tenure, they have come to a complete standstill. The last Constitution Bench hearing was in the Maratha Reservations case in March 2021. *What cases will the 25 CBs hear next month?* The list of cases due for hearing next month covers a wide variety of subjects. It includes demonetisation, EWS reservations, Assam NRC, Jallikattu, minority status for the Muslim community in Andhra Pradesh, Parsi Ex-communication, the precendential value of Judgments, Muslim marriage laws and the system for remission of convicts. As leadership shifts from soon to retire CJI Ramana to Justice U.U. Lalit, the next few months will bring big news from the Supreme Court. Stay tuned!

5 years ago today, on August 24th, 2017, a 9-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court recognised the Right to Privacy as an intrinsic part of the Right to Life and Personal Liberty, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, 1950. *Background:* In 2012, former Justice K.S. Puttaswamy, a retired Judge of the Karnataka High Court, filed a writ petition at the SC challenging the constitutional validity of the Aadhaar Scheme. His main argument was that the government did not place adequate safeguards to protect personal information of citizens. Read SCO’s Case Background for the whole story (https://bit.ly/3TaYCdz). *Arguments:* The Petitioners argued that the Right to Privacy was not limited to the right to be left alone. It included one's physical being, thoughts, interpersonal relationships, private communication, information and data. The Union of India argued that the Constitution did not explicitly mention the Right to Privacy as a fundamental right, so it could only be recognised to a limited extent. *What did the Court Decide?*: The Court affirmed that the Constitution of India guarantees to each individual the fundamental Right to Privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution. It held that the State is duty-bound to protect the privacy of an individual and directed the Union government to establish a robust regime to ensure the protection of the Right to Privacy. All restraints on privacy must be lawful and reasonable. SCO Summarised the opinions delivered by six of the Judges on the Bench here (https://bit.ly/3R5cc0e) and here (https://bit.ly/3TeELdx). *Why It Matters:* The _Puttaswamy_ Judgment has led to substantial developments with regard to the right to self-determination, homosexuality, adultery, religion, marriage and freedom of choice. Most notably, the Court decriminalised homosexuality (https://bit.ly/3PJ76G2) and Adultery (https://bit.ly/3QMo4oa) within a year of the Judgment. _Puttaswamy_ gave specific focus to digital privacy. The Court acknowledged the need to ‘impart constitutional meaning to individual liberty in an interconnected world’. *Bottom Line:* _Puttaswamy_ has formed a basis for claiming crucial personal rights. In _Navtej Singh Johar_, which decriminalised homosexuality, and in _Joseph Shine_, which decriminalised adultery, the Supreme Court based its decisions on the Right to Privacy and Personal Liberty. However, India still does not a have a Data Protection Bill. On August 3rd, 2022, in the monsoon session of the Lok Sabha, The Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019 was withdrawn. 5 years after the landmark Judgment, a key mandate, requiring the Union to form a robust data protection legal framework, remains unfulfilled.

☀️ Good morning! Here are SCO’s updates for the day: 🔊 Today, the Delhi HC will resume hearing Special Public Prosecutor Amit Prasad’s arguments against Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam’s bail applications. Yesterday, in a hearing that lasted almost two hours, Mr. Prasad read out Mr. Imam’s speeches delivered during anti-CAA demonstrations at Aligarh Muslim University and at Asansol in January 2020. Mr. Khalid and Mr. Imam are accused of instigating the violence that led to the 2020 Delhi riots through their speeches. Read SCO’s report on the hearing: (https://bit.ly/3pAEggn) 👩 A three-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court heard Ms. Teesta Setalvad’s bail application yesterday. Ms. Setalvad, a co-petitioner in _Zakia Jafri-Gujarat Riots_, was arrested on June 25th, 2022, on charges of forging evidence and influencing witnesses. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing Ms. Setalvad, argued that the SC must intervene since its own Gujarat Riots Judgment formed the basis for her arrest. SCO reports: (https://bit.ly/3wlRstg) 💸 Yesterday, a Bench led by CJI Ramana agreed to list a petition seeking review of the Judgment from the _Challenges to the Prevention of Money Laundering Act_ (PMLA). The verdict, delivered by a 3-Judge Bench last month, upheld all the challenges to the PMLA including the Enforcement Directorate's (ED) powers of arrest, bail provisions, and attachment of property. Opposition parties have strongly criticised the decision and have expressed apprehensions about the long-term impact of granting broad powers to the ED. SCO reported on the Judgment: (https://bit.ly/3T8wUOC)

☀️ Good morning! Here are some key cases being heard at the Supreme Court today: 👨🏾‍⚖️*OBC Reservations in Maharashtra Municipal Elections* Today, the SC will hear the Maharashtra State Election Commission on whether the Court’s repeated Orders to conduct local elections have been followed. On March 4th 2022, the Maharashtra SEC informed the Court that nearly 2500 local bodies were defunct without municipal elections. Despite SC directions in December 2021, March 2022 and May 2022 ordering the Maharashtra government to conduct elections immediately, the State has prioritised collecting data to provide 27% OBC reservations. Read about the Maharashtra government’s attempts to delay elections before today’s hearing. (https://bit.ly/3dN50HW) 🗳️*Maharastra Assembly Political Crisis* The Maharashtra Legislative Assembly is embroiled in another important SC dispute. Today the Court will continue to hear arguments in the challenge to the disqualification proceedings initiated by the Deputy Speaker against 13 MLAs from Eknath Shinde's faction of the Shiv Sena. The Shinde faction claims that they form a majority of the party in the Assembly and are the ‘real’ Shiv Sena. Former CM Uddhav Thackeray’s faction claims that the Shinde faction defected from the party through their conduct. Catch up with the latest developments from the August 4th hearing. (https://bit.ly/3pDaRCl) 👮🏾‍♀️*Teesta Setalvad's Bail Plea* The SC is set to hear Teesta Setalvad's bail application today. The co-founder of the NGO Citizens for Justice and Peace was arrested in Gujarat following the Court’s Judgement in June dismissing Zakia Jafri’s plea challenging the clean chit to several accused in the Gujarat Riots. Ms. Setalvad was a co-petitioner in the case and was arrested on charges of forgery and witness tampering, immediately after the Judgment was delivered. Read SCOs summary of the Judgment which formed the basis of the FIR lodged against Ms. Setalvad. (https://bit.ly/3PEFpy7)

☀️ Good morning! Today's story began with a Supreme Court Judgment in 2004. It's final chapter, however, is yet to be written. 🗓️In 2004, a five-judge Bench of the Supreme Court held that all Scheduled Castes form one large group. According to the Court, any 'sub-classification' to carve out reserved seats specific communities within the SC/ST groups would violate the right to equality. In 2020, however, the Court paused to reconsider its own decision on sub-classification. The issue has been pending before a 7-Judge bench ever since. Demands for sub-classification have not stopped since 2020 though. The latest chapter in this story is the Madiga communities demand for dedicated reservations in Andhra Pradesh. Dive in to the larger story of sub-classifications and the Supreme Court. (https://bit.ly/3K8IWnc) 🔊 Back in March 2022, SCO spoke to Prof. Anup Surendranath from NLU Delhi about the SC's reservation jurisprudence across the years. Ringing the alarm bells, Prof. Surendranath said, ‘There is no real conceptual or normative clarity coming from the Supreme Court on what we are doing with reservations, why are we providing reservations?' Tune in to our podcast, SCO Explains to find out what the gaps in the Court's reservation jurisprudence are, and how they contribute to confusion in reservation debates. (https://bit.ly/3QUiobs) 👨🏻‍⚖Most recently, the Court ruled on sub-classification in relation to the Vanniyar community's demands in Tamil Nadu. The Court struck down the sub-classification, stating that the policy was based on antiquated data. However, without normative clarity from the Courts, confusion about data for reservations is likely to linger on. Visit SCO's case archive on Vanniyar Reservations for court-side hearing reports, a Judgment summary and key documents filed in the case. (https://bit.ly/3c8H3u8)

☀️ Good morning! The Bhima Koregaon case saw some crucial developments yesterday, as the SC nudged the National Investigation Agency (NIA) to begin the trial for the accused in the 2018 violence. Justices U.U Lalit and S. Ravindra Bhat directed the NIA to separate the trial of the 15 Bhima Koregaon accused into two groups- those found and arrested and those still missing. The Court was hearing a bail application filed by Vernon Gonsalves, one of the five activists arrested under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, for allegedly inciting the Bhima Koregaon violence in 2018. The sudden arrest of the activists under the UAPA raised concerns about the stringent and draconian provisions of the Act. SCO traces a brief history of the challenges to the UAPA (https://bit.ly/3QQQBZs) Mr. Gonsalves and other activists have been in custody, without trial, since August 2018. The NIA is waiting to find and charge the missing accused persons to begin the trial. Immediately after the arrests in 2018, a petition was filed before the SC alleging that the Maharashtra Police had committed severe procedural lapses, and made the arrests on arbitrary grounds. The SC denied the request for an independent or Court monitored investigation. SCO’s case background gives a detailed account of the case (https://bit.ly/3wcRMus). The controversial bail provisions under the UAPA state that to grant bail, a Court must examine if there were reasonable grounds to believe that the case against the accused was prima facie true. The provision makes bail difficult to secure, since the Court must assess guilt by looking solely at the chargesheet prepared by the National Investigation Agency (NIA). The accused cannot provide any evidence outside the chargesheet in their defense. SCO’s Court in Review traces the history and challenges to the UAPA bail provisions. (https://bit.ly/3CfDugl)

☀️ Good morning! Here are SCO's must-reads for the day: 👨🏾‍⚖️ Yesterday, Chief Justice Ramana agreed to list Teesta Setalvad’s bail plea on August 22nd. It will be heard by a Bench led by Justice U.U. Lalit. Ms. Setalvad, co-founder of the NGO Citizens for Justice and Peace, was arrested on June 25th after the SC stated that she had ‘ulterior motives’ as a co-petitioner in Zakia Jafri’s challenge to the SIT’s findings in their investigation of the 2002 Gujarat Riots. An Ahmedabad Sessions Court denied her bail application on July 30th and Gujarat High Court is yet to hear the matter. Read about the situation surrounding Ms. Setalvad’s arrest. (https://bit.ly/3watEZq) 📑 On July 11th, the SC returned from a six-week summer vacation with aplomb and delivered 44 Judgments on the same day. The Court is often criticised for taking longer vacations than any other court in the country as it may be detrimental to the SC’s efficiency. However, Judges often claim that the holidays are spent researching and writing Judgments. SCO took a look at the Court’s output following the summer vacation to see if the numbers support this claim. (https://bit.ly/3waF3Zh) 🩺 Yesterday, a 3-Judge Bench led by Justice Chandrachud said that the petitions challenging the Union government’s ₹8-lakh annual income criteria for EWS reservations in PG-NEET admissions would be heard ‘on priority’. Senior Advocate Arvind Datar, representing the doctors challenging the income limit, requested the Bench to list the case at the earliest as counseling for NEET 2022 is scheduled for September. This was the first hearing in the case since March 21st, 2022. Read SCO’s background of the Case. (https://bit.ly/3Cb9i5U)

☀️ Good morning! Here are some of the key cases being heard at the Supreme Court today: 🩺 *OBC & EWS Reservation in PG Medical Admission* On July 29th, 2021, the National Testing Agency issued a notice providing 27% reservation for OBC students and 10% reservation for Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) for students admitted under the All India Quota, for UG and PG medical courses. Doctors and medical students challenged the reservation, stating that violates their fundamental rights, and amounts to ‘reverse discrimination’. On Jan 7th 2022, the SC passed an Order dismissing the challenges against OBC reservations, but kept the question on EWS reservations and its ₹8-lakh income eligibility criteria pending. Read SCO's case background for the whole story (https://bit.ly/3c08O8c). 👩 *Section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act* In Dec 2018, a writ petition challenging Section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 was filed before the SC. Under Section 15 of the Act, the property of a Hindu woman dying without a will (intestate) will be inherited by her children and husband, with no share for the woman’s parents. In contrast, Section 8, states that a Hindu man who dies intestate may give it to his parents. The petition claims that the different inheritance schemes for intestate men and women, violates the constitutional Rights to Equality and Non-Discrimination. The SC is scheduled to hear the first day of arguments today. SCO’s summary of the petition explains the main challenge: (https://bit.ly/3CgEuB3) 📃 *Reservation in Promotion* In 2006, the SC upheld Parliament’s decision to extend reservations for SC/ST persons in promotions. However, the Court also laid down conditions for granting these reservations, which the Union and State govts found difficult to make sense of. In September 2018, the SC, while upholding its earlier decisions, excluded reservation for individuals falling in the ‘creamy layer’ of the SC/ST category. However, in Jan 2022, after previously refusing to reconsider its earlier decisions, the Court delivered a Judgment providing clarifications on them. Today, the Court is expected to hear individual appeals to see how the clarifications apply to each fact scenario. SCO tracked the case: (https://bit.ly/3dA68i3)

☀️ Good morning! Happy Independence Day! Here are SCO's must-reads for the day: 👨🏻‍⚖👩‍⚖ The Supreme Court performs an important function in the Indian democracy- it is the final interpretor of the Constitution. Yet, in recent years, Constitution Benches have been conspicuous in their absence at the SC. What does this mean for the country and the Constitution? (https://bit.ly/3zTNg53) 🗓️As we inch closer to five years since the landmark Triple Talaq judgment (August 22nd, 2017), where the Supreme Court declared divorce by uttering ‘Talaq’ three times unconstitutional, clarity on Muslim woman’s rights in marriage remain unclear. Several Public Interest Litigation (PILs) challenging the constitutional validity of polygamy, nikah halala and other related Muslim marriage practices remain pending at the Supreme Court. SCO’s case background explains the challenges in detail (https://bit.ly/3SRAHzE) 📧 Have you subscribed to SCO Desk Briefs yet? Click on the link to receive updates on the Supreme Court straight to your inbox! (https://bit.ly/3PlTBME)