Chief Justice BR Gavai to hear Waqf law, marital rape, right to religion cases
Justice BR Gavai took oath as the 52nd Chief Justice of India on Wednesday and became the first from the Buddhist community to hold the highest judicial office in the country. During the seven-month tenure that he is going to have as the Chief Justice, BR Gavai faces a huge backlog of social justice cases, including on the contentious Waqf (Amendment) Act, among others.advertisementBefore taking oath, Chief Justice Gavai spoke to the media and reaffirmed his commitment to reducing pendency in the courts. India Today takes a look at the issues that the new Chief Justice of India would have to take up.HUGE PENDENCY: According to the data available on the National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG) there are 81,768 cases pending before the Supreme Court. A total of 28,553 of these are less than one-year-old. However, there is a significant number of matters that have been pending for more than five or even 10 years.
CONSTITUTION BENCH MATTERS: There are 20 pending matters before five-judge benches, five matters before seven-judge benches, and three matters before nine-judge benches in the Supreme Court.These include the right to religion matters arising out of the Sabarimala temple dispute, a labour law matter before a nine-judge bench pending since 2001, an issue of data privacy on Whatsapp and the Delhi Government's dispute with the Centre over control of services, among others.WAQF AMENDMENT ACT: More than 120 petitions were filed before the Supreme Court after Parliament passed the Waqf Amendment Act on April 4. On April 17, a bench headed by the then CJI Sanjiv Khanna agreed to hear the issue of challenge to the Waf act. The bench asked the government to not touch certain provisions of the previous act and deferred the matter to be heard by a bench led by the new Chief Justice on May 15.advertisementKANCHA GACHIBOWLI FOREST LAND CASE: The Telangana government had announced it plans to auction some 400 acres of forested land adjacent to the University of Hyderabad (UoH) to build IT parks in February. This sparked widespread outrage and protests by Hyderabad University students, conservationists and others. The Supreme Court bench headed by Justice BR Gavai had intervened in the matter on April 17, issuing an immediate stay on the project, after being informed that bulldozers had been sent in to remove the trees in the "urban forest" area.This matter is now scheduled to be heard before the bench headed by Justice Gavai on May 15.POWER OF GOVERNORS TO HOLD BILLS: On April 8, a Supreme Court bench verdict restricted the power of the Governor of a State to "hold" bills passed by the legislature and imposed a timeline on the Governor and the President to take a decision on giving assent to the bills. A dispute over similar action by the Kerala Governor remains pending before the Supreme Court.MARITAL RAPE ISSUE: The issue of the criminalisation of 'marital rape' is an important legal question before the Top Court. Organisations and individuals fighting for the equal rights of women have challenged Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 63 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023, which criminalise rape.advertisementThe case came to the Supreme Court in April 2022. The bench began hearing the case on October 17, 2024, but the bench headed by then Justice of India DY Chandrachud adjourned the matter as he was due to retire. The matter was not listed for hearing during the tenure of Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna.DIGNITY OF JUDICIARY: Several issues have come up in the last few months which raised concerns about the dignity and role of the Judiciary. From the corruption allegations after the Justice Yashwant Varma case to statements being made by Government Ministers and even the Vice President questioning "overreach" by the Judiciary, Chief Justice Gavai will have to put the debate to rest.Tune InTrending Reel
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News18
an hour ago
- News18
Disbanding Awami League Could Lead To Identity Crisis For Bangladesh
Last Updated: Awami League led a long political struggle for Bangladesh's emancipation. By rejecting this legacy, Bangladesh might end up shooting itself in the foot On May 10, 2025, the interim government in Bangladesh further amended the International Crimes (Tribunals) Act, 1973 through ordinance no. 20, 2025. It thus authorised the tribunal to suspend and prohibit the activities of any political party (including its front organisations), cancel its registration and confiscate its property if found guilty of aiding, inciting or conspiring in any crimes mentioned in the statute. The Yunus administration, however, was unwilling to wait for the tribunal's verdict. On the same day, it hastily announced a ban on all activities of Awami League, pending the disposal of cases against it. On May 8, the Yunus administration had created a second three-member tribunal with former High Court judge Nazrul Islam Chowdhury as its chairman. The existing three-member tribunal under Justice Mohammed Ghulam Murtaza Mazumdar has been re-designated as International Crimes Tribunal-I (ICT-I). The interim government has redefined the objective of the tribunal, established on March 25, 2010. Its original purpose was to prosecute and punish those guilty of genocide and crimes against humanity during the Bangladesh Liberation War, 1971. A second tribunal was created on March 22, 2012 to expedite pending trials, but the two were merged on September 15, 2015, after the caseload decreased significantly. The tribunal was essentially created by Sheikh Hasina's administration (though its conception dates back to her father Mujibur Rahman's government). Ironically, she now finds herself subject to its scrutiny. There was initial disagreement on whether approximately 1,400 lives lost in police firing during anti-quota protests (15 July to 5 August 2024) constituted genocide. The father of a student belonging to Students Against Discrimination filed a complaint with the ICT against nine people, including deposed Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina. Professor Asif Nazrul, Advisor on Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs in the interim government, opined that the July killings qualified for trial by the tribunal. The tribunal had previously ruled that crimes against humanity need not be specific to war. Banning political parties is not new in Bangladesh. Sheikh Mujibur Rahman initiated this practice. Not content with Awami League's overwhelming majority (307 out of 315 seats) in Bangladesh's first general election (March 7, 1973), Mujib amended the 1972 Constitution on January 25, 1975, changing the government from parliamentary to presidential. Mujib, as Marcus Franda (1982) states, 'was vested with all executive power and authorized to declare Bangladesh as a one-party state. In subsequent months he abolished all political parties, stripped the supreme court of its powers to enforce fundamental rights, created special courts and tribunals directly answerable to him, and closed down all but four daily newspapers (two in English, and two in Bengali). All four of the newspapers that were allowed to exist were either government or party owned". (Bangladesh: The First Decade, p. 55). On June 6, 1975, 40 days before his assassination in a coup, Mujib formally ended multiparty democracy in Bangladesh by establishing one-party rule under Bangladesh Krishak Sramik Awami League (BKSAL). Bangladesh subsequently fell under the rule of military dictators General Ziaur Rahman and General H.M. Ershad, who governed for 15 years combined. In the last 50 years, Bangladesh has experienced coups, military dictatorships, controversial elections, political violence, and attempts to create an Islamist state. Even the two-party democracy in place since 1991 devolved into confrontational politics, often dubbed the 'battle of the Begums". In 2007, under the caretaker government of President Iajuddin Ahmed, a controversial 'minus two" formula was devised to restore democracy by excluding both Sheikh Hasina and Begum Khaleda Zia from politics. Both leaders were arrested. This unpopular formula faced backlash and was abandoned. It resurfaced recently when BNP General Secretary Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir mentioned it disapprovingly. III Both Sheikh Mujib and Sheikh Hasina exhibited authoritarian tendencies, seeking to eliminate political opponents. Their personalities often overshadowed the party itself. However, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) has demonstrated similar tendencies. When in power (e.g., 1991-96 and 2001-06), the BNP attempted to manipulate elections, leading to the introduction of caretaker governments, demonstrating the immaturity of Bangladeshi democracy. Yet, banning Awami League is different. It threatens Bangladesh's identity. Ahmed Sofa (1943-2001), the late Bangladeshi essayist, poet and public intellectual, suggested that while Awami League's triumph might signify the victory of a few leaders, its defeat represents a loss for all of Bangladesh (Bangali Musalmaner Mon, p. 17). This is due to the party's historical roots in the struggle of the people of East Bengal. Sofa acknowledged Awami League's shortcomings, including its superficial secularism, which he considered a political tool incapable of addressing obscurantism and dogmatism within Muslim society, hindering Bangladesh's social progress. Nevertheless, Awami League spearheaded nation-building in East Pakistan, culminating in Bangladesh's independence. Founded as Awami Muslim League Party on 23 June 1949 under Maulana Abdul Hamid Khan Bhashani (1880-1976), its initial leadership comprised dissidents from the Pakistan Muslim League (formerly All India Muslim League). Before partition, the All India Muslim League prioritised the creation of Pakistan, neglecting governance issues that later plagued the new state. The party became an exclusive clique, restricting membership, which fuelled discord. The East Pakistan Awami Muslim League (estd. 1949) was among several dissident parties emerging from the Muslim League. By the end of 1949, according to Shyamali Ghosh (1990), around 20 opposition parties existed in Pakistan, including 13 in Punjab, eight formed by dissident Muslim Leaguers (The Awami League 1949-1971, p. 2). The Awami Muslim League's influence grew. In the 1954 provincial elections, its alliance with the Krishak Sramik Party, led by A.K. Fazlul Huq, and other smaller parties, campaigning on a 21-point demand (commemorating the Bengali language martyrs of 21 February 1952), decisively defeated the Muslim League, which secured only nine seats compared to the United Front's 229. The United Front's manifesto, essentially Awami Muslim League's charter of demands, was condensed from 42 to 21 points by journalist and lawyer Abul Mansur Ahmad. 'Neither in the manifesto of Awami League nor in that of Krishak Sramik Party", notes Justice Muhammad Munir (1979), 'was there any reference to Islam or the Quran and Sunnah" (From Jinnah to Zia, p. xvii). At its Dacca session from October 21-23, 1955, Awami Muslim League dropped 'Muslim" from its name. The Awami League (1956) advocated for abolishing separate electorates, a colonial legacy. Prime Minister H.S. Suhrawardy, leading a coalition of Awami League and the Republican Party, piloted the Joint Electorate Bill on 10 October 1956. Joint electorates were introduced in East Pakistan, but separate electorates remained in the west, highlighting Pakistan's internal divisions. 'In spite of economic backwardness", comments Badruddin Umar, 'East Bengal was an advanced region in respect of social, cultural and political developments. Owing to its cultural and political backwardness and predominantly feudal composition of leadership in West Pakistan they cling to old prejudices" (The Emergence of Bangladesh Vol-1, p. 329). On 3 April 1957, the East Pakistan Legislative Assembly adopted a resolution on regional autonomy, moved by Mohiuddin Ahmad of Awami League and addressed by his party colleague and United Front minister Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. Mujib described regional autonomy as crucial for East Bengal. The resolution demanded full autonomy for East Pakistan except for currency, foreign affairs, and defence, which would remain with the Centre. Mujib elaborated on regional autonomy and democracy in his booklet 'Six-Point Formula — Our Right to Live" (March 1966), published during Field Marshal Ayub Khan's military dictatorship (1958-69) after the 1965 Indo-Pakistani War. This Six-Point Formula became Awami League's programme. Ayub Khan attempted to implicate Mujib in the Agartala Conspiracy Case (1968), alleging collusion with India to divide Pakistan. However, he withdrew the case under pressure from public agitation in East Pakistan, compounded by his precarious position in West Pakistan. The 1969 agitations in East Bengal foreshadowed the 1971 uprising. Awami League thus prepared the ground for Bangladesh's independence. It won 167 of 169 East Bengal seats in the 1970 National Assembly elections (total strength 313). Whether Bangladesh would have emerged if Yahya Khan had allowed Mujib to become Prime Minister is debatable. However, the March 1971 uprising demonstrated East Bengal's determination to achieve sovereignty, with or without Mujib, who was imprisoned in Mianwali jail in West Pakistan. top videos View all Awami League's governance has been authoritarian at times, but so has that of the BNP and General Ershad. In a democracy, parties naturally cycle in and out of power. However, banning Awami League creates an identity crisis for Bangladesh. Denying its historical heritage could lead the nation in unpredictable directions. The writer is the author of 'The Microphone Men: How Orators Created a Modern India' (2019) and an independent researcher based in New Delhi. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely that of the authors. They do not necessarily reflect News18's views. Location : New Delhi, India, India First Published: June 11, 2025, 14:32 IST News opinion Opinion | Disbanding Awami League Could Lead To Identity Crisis For Bangladesh
The Wire
an hour ago
- The Wire
‘Some Progress' Yet Differences Over Farm Product Tariffs Hold Up US-India Trade Deal
Shipping containers at a port. Photo: Ali Mkumbwa on Unsplash. Real journalism holds power accountable Since 2015, The Wire has done just that. But we can continue only with your support. Contribute Now New Delhi: Differences over farm product tariff cuts is one of the reasons why officials of the United States and Indian sides have been unable to finalise an early trade agreement even after week-long negotiations, The Hindu Businessline has reported, quoting people aware of the matter. The outlet's sources said that 'some progress' had been made towards reaching a balanced deal. 'Differences continued over tariff cut demands by the US, especially for farm products, and the need to protect Indian sensitivities,' the source told Businessline. Reuters, meanwhile, has also reported on 'progress' in the latest round of talks in New Delhi on Tuesday. Government sources told the agency that talks focused on industrial and farm goods, tariff cuts, and non-tariff barriers. The US team has senior officials from the Office of the US Trade Representative. The delegation was in India from June 4-10. Indian trade ministry officials are headed by chief negotiator Rajesh Agrawal. Negotiations are likely to continue. 'During the visit, in-depth negotiations were held on various elements of the proposed BTA that among others included areas such as market access, SPS (sanitary and phyto-sanitary/TBT (technical barriers to trade), digital trade, customs and trade facilitation and legal framework,' an official told the news agency PTI. The report noted that the US has a special interest in digital trade, and its digital services providers have often flagged restrictions on cross-border data flows and competition policy as a hindrance in operating in India. Businessline's source told the outlet that India is ready to bring down tariffs for many US products and the list may include items like automobiles, alcoholic beverages, certain fruits and nuts and chemicals, among other items. India has not agreed to budge on items like rice and wheat. India has to arrive at a trade deal with the US by July 9, or face the brunt of the 26% 'reciprocal' duties imposed by Trump. The US president and Indian prime minister Narendra Modi had agreed earlier this year to conclude a bilateral trade agreement by fall 2025. The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
India Gazette
an hour ago
- India Gazette
Constitution transformed 'untouchables' into equal citizens: CJI Gavai at Oxford Union
New Delhi [India], June 11 (ANI): Many decades ago, millions of Indian citizens were called 'untouchables.' They were told they were impure and that they could not speak for themselves. But here we are today, where a person belonging to those very people is speaking openly as the holder of the highest office in the country's judiciary, said Chief Justice of India BR Gavai. CJI Gavai, the second Dalit and the first Buddhist to hold India's highest judicial office, spoke at the Oxford Union on Tuesday on the theme 'From Representation to Realisation: Embodying the Constitution's Promise'. He highlighted the positive impact of the Constitution on marginalised communities, saying that the Constitution has given people equal place in every sphere of society and power. 'Many decades ago, millions of citizens of India were called 'untouchables'. They were told they were impure. They were told that they did not belong. They were told that they could not speak for themselves. But here we are today, where a person belonging to those very people is speaking openly, as the holder of the highest office in the judiciary of the country. This is what the Constitution of India did. It told the people of India that they belong, that they can speak for themselves, and that they have an equal place in every sphere of society and power,' he said. 'At the Oxford Union today, I stand before you to say: for India's most vulnerable citizens, the Constitution is not merely a legal charter or a political framework. It is a feeling, a lifeline, a quiet revolution etched in ink. In my own journey, from a municipal school to the Office of the Chief Justice of India, it has been a guiding force,' said the CJI. He said the Constitution is a social document, one that does not avert its gaze from the brutal truths of caste, poverty, exclusion, and injustice. 'It does not pretend that all are equal in a land scarred by deep inequality. Instead, it dares to intervene, to rewrite the script, to recalibrate power, and to restore dignity,' CJI said at the gathering. The Constitution of India carries within it the heartbeat of those who were never meant to be heard, and the vision of a country where equality is not just promised, but pursued, he said, adding that it compels the State not only to protect rights but to uplift, to affirm, to repair actively. CJI said that during the framing of India's Constitution, a remarkable and often overlooked truth emerged: many of the nation's most vulnerable social groups were not merely subjects of constitutional concern but active participants in its making. 'From Dalits and Adivasis, to women, minorities, persons with disabilities, and even those once unjustly brandedas 'criminal tribes,' their presence in the Constituent Assembly, and in the broader constitutional imagination, was a collective demand for justice,' said the CJI. He said Dr BR Ambedkar as the Chairman of the Drafting Committee of the Indian Constitution, played a foresighted and defining role in embedding adequate safeguards and affirmative measures into the constitutional text, particularly the principle of representation. 'In an unequal society, he believed, democracy cannot survive unless power is also divided among communities, not just among institutions. Representation, therefore, was a mechanism of redistributing power, not only between the legislature, executive, and judiciary, but among social groups that had been denied a share for centuries, CJI further said. (ANI)
