Centre in SC opposes Kerala's move to withdraw plea against Governor over bill assent delay
Senior advocate and former Attorney General (AG) of India, K K Venugopal, appearing for the Kerala government, sought to withdraw the plea from the top court by saying that the issue had become infructuous in view of the recent judgment passed in the Tamil Nadu Governor case on April 8.
This was vehemently opposed by the Centre through its top law officer, the AG of India, R. Venkataramani, and Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta, as they urged the court to await the Apex Court's decision on the reference of the President under Article 143 of the Constitution over the grant of assent to bills.
"Kerala government's petition could also be referred to be tagged along with the presidential reference," Mehta argued before the apex court.
Venugopal continued to plead before the top court, questioning how his plea could be opposed. Finding no rationale in the Centre's arguments, he submitted, 'Why my lords are hesitant for the state to withdraw the petition?'
The former top law officer said that the issues raised in this case will be further dealt with by the Supreme Court when hearing the 14 questions raised in the Presidential Reference on the assent of state bills by a Governor and the President under Articles 200 and 201 of the Constitution.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
24 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Guidelines to protect lawyers from summons is not immunity: Supreme Court
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday said that the guidelines proposed to protect lawyers from being summoned by investigating agencies for giving legal advice would not confer immunity on legal professionals who commit a crime. A view of Supreme Court (Sonu Mehta/HT FILE PHOTO) A bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Bhushan R Gavai and justice K Vinod Chandran made the observation during its hearing on a suo motu petition to frame guidelines to shield lawyers from investigating agencies summoning them for giving advice to clients facing criminal prosecution. The court asked the country's two top law officers, Attorney General R Venkatramani and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, to study the suggestions received from lawyer bodies and propose the possible directions that can be issued. The matter was taken up by the court following two instances where senior lawyers Arvind Datar and Pratap Venugopal were summoned by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) probing the grant of Employee Stock Option Plans (ESOP) by Care Health Insurance to former Religare Enterprises chairperson Rashmi Saluja. The ESOPs numbering over 22.7 million were valued at ₹250 crore. Tushar Mehta, who appeared for the ED, asked the court not to lay down any guidelines, reasoning that stray incidents such as these were condemnable but should not become the basis for the courts to establish guidelines. 'individual instances should not be sufficient to change the legal framework. As lawyers, we want to be protected. But not everyone may be discharging their duty credibly. There may be a possibility of summoning them within the framework of the law. But any future judicial legislation in this regard will make the task of investigating agencies counter-productive,' Mehta said. The bench said, 'We cannot ignore the recent instances. An eminent lawyer had been issued summons. We have made it clear that there is no protection for any crime. If somebody is assisting the client in destroying evidence, certainly they can be accused of destruction of evidence. But can that be done for giving advice?' The two lawyers' bodies of the Supreme Court - Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) and Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association (SCAORA) submitted their suggestions to the court. Senior advocate Vikas Singh, who is also SCBA president, submitted that in cases where the investigation agency has direct evidence against a lawyer, the same can be considered by the magistrate. If the magistrate feels that the evidence is admissible, summons can be issued, Singh said. SCBA secretary Pragya Baghel, who submitted the association's submissions, traced the protection afforded under the law to lawyers that protects privileged communication between the lawyer and client under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam that replaced the Indian Evidence Act. Similar protection is also available under the Companies Act. Senior advocate Siddharth Luthra, assisting the court, pointed out that the guidelines should also address the issue of receiving fees for the legal opinion tendered to a firm or person facing criminal prosecution. Attorney General R Venkatramani, assisting the court in the suo motu proceedings, assured the court that he will examine all suggestions and report back with his observations. The court asked both AG and SG to examine the suggestions and revert on the next date of hearing on August 12, when the bench will consider passing further directions. SCAORA, which had described the ED summons to the two senior lawyers as a 'chilling signal to the legal community', told the court that the unwarranted summons to advocates to disclose information concerning clients involved in criminal proceedings undermines the sanctity of the lawyer-client relationship and poses a serious threat to the integrity of India's criminal justice system. Senior advocate ANS Nadkarni, who represented SCAORA, pointed out a recent instance from Kolkata where the laptop of a lawyer practising before the Calcutta high court was seized. 'On the laptop, there is not just information about one client but all his clients. It is the lifeline of the lawyer's practice,' Nadkarni said, expressing concern over the search and seizure of lawyers conducted by investigating agencies that need judicial oversight. The submissions handed over by the SCAORA office bearers pointed out that the Bar Council of India rules explicitly prohibit advocates from committing, directly or indirectly, any breach of the obligations to their client, breach of which amounts to professional misconduct. 'The duty to maintain confidentiality is not merely statutory but is deeply embedded in the ethical and professional framework governing advocates in India. Disclosing privileged communication without client consent may constitute professional misconduct and attract disciplinary consequences,' SCAORA said.
Indian Express
24 minutes ago
- Indian Express
‘To end militancy, you have to win hearts of Kashmiris': Engineer Rashid
Independent MP from Baramulla Abdul Rashid Sheikh, better known as Engineer Rashid, in the Lok Sabha on Tuesday said the government needs to win the hearts of Kashmiris to end militancy in J&K as only they have a solution to the Kashmir issue. Speaking during the special discussion on Operation Sindoor, Rashid said: 'To end militancy you will have to win the hearts of Kashmiris. But since yesterday none of you here have spoken about Kashmiris. Do you want Kashmir's land or Kashmir's people? The ruling party and the Opposition will have to decide today.' On the situation of J&K, he said, 'You say everything is fine there. But you do not allow us to write anything on social media. Over 3,000 people are in jails.' The MP also said that everyone in the House talked about US President Donald Trump but he does not have the solution to the problem. 'J&K people, including Hindus, Muslims and every other community have the solution to the Kashmir issue. It is not a communal issue, it is a political issue. You need to give a political resolution…' 'When you could not speak about me, what would you speak about Kashmiris,' he said. Rashid said the government is 'in a hurry to make Hindu rashtra'. 'Do that happily but don't touch the demography of my Jammu and Kashmir and don't disturb the culture of J&K. Let J&K remain J&K. Do whatever you want to do with Pakistan, how are we concerned? You have a dispute with them (Pakistan) but we are suffering in the middle.' 'We are tired of carrying dead bodies,' he said. Rashid also asked the government how many members from Kashmir were there in the seven multi-party delegation sent by the Centre to different countries to convey India's message of zero tolerance against terrorism in May.
Time of India
32 minutes ago
- Time of India
Assam Govt orders closure of 28 stone quarries, 18 crushers near Kaziranga
1 2 Guwahati: The state govt has ordered the closure of 28 stone quarries and 18 stone crushers in the Dolamara area near Kaziranga National Park, adhering to a Supreme Court mandate prohibiting mining activities. Furthermore, 10 mining permits and related operations, including stone extraction, sand mahals, and sand-cum-gravel mining contracts in the Rangsali area, have been terminated. This was confirmed by minister of state for environment, forest and climate change, Kirti Vardhan Singh, in a written response to inquiries from Assam MP and deputy leader in the Lok Sabha, Gaurav Gogoi. In "TN Godavarman Thirumulpad Vs Union of India & Ors" case, the Supreme Court in its order on April 12, 2019 had directed the Assam DGP and the SP concerned to ensure that no illegal mining and transportation of illegally mined materials took place in the Kaziranga National Park area and in the entire catchment area of rivers or streams and rivulets originating in Karbi Anglong Hill ranges and flowing into Kaziranga National Park and Tiger Reserve. The minister further stated in the Lok Sabha that the govt has taken significant steps to mitigate the risk of road accidents involving wild animals and ecological degradation around Kaziranga. These steps include the construction of underpasses, elevated corridors, and culverts to facilitate the safe passage of animals across highways. The steps, as the minister stated, also include the identification and protection of wildlife corridors to maintain habitat connectivity and minimise the need for animals to cross roads. This is in addition to the installation of eco-friendly barriers and fencing along roads to guide animals toward designated safe crossing points. Implementation of speed-reducing measures such as rumble strips and speed breakers near wildlife crossing zones and putting up cautionary signboards to alert drivers about wildlife presence and enforce speed regulations are other steps taken by the govt. On the issue of the diversion of eco-sensitive land near Kaziranga for commercial or infrastructure projects despite its Unesco world heritage status, the minister said proposals were submitted by the state govt for consideration of the Standing Committee of the National Board for Wild Life (SCNBWL) after due recommendation of the State Board for Wild Life. Two proposals for diversion — construction of a four-lane tunnel across the Brahmaputra between Gohpur and Numaligarh and widening and improvement of the existing carriageway to four-lane construction from Kaliabor to Numaligarh — were recommended by the SCNBWL.
