Latest news with #JusticeSuryakant
India Today
4 days ago
- Politics
- India Today
Supreme court to look into legality of NOTA for voters in uncontested polls
The Supreme Court on Thursday said that it will look into whether the option of NOTA (None of the Above) vote could legally be given in constituencies where there is an 'uncontested' election with only one candidate.'The issue is that the invisible will of the people should be allowed to be exercised. If there is only one candidate and voters don't like him shouldn't they be allowed to vote? I believe this is a very interesting proposition,' observed the bench of Justice Suryakant, Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice N Kotishwar Singh on observation came from a petition filed by the NGO Vidhi Center for Legal Policy and the intervention plea filed by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), which have challenged the polling process for 'uncontested' elections under section 53 (2) of the Representation of People Act. The petition had sought a declaration that the NOTA option should be available to voters in case there is only one contesting candidate for an election. The petition has argued that after the introduction of the NOTA option in polls since 2013, the 'Right to vote' of the electorate was being violated in situations where only one candidate contested the petitioners also submitted that while there was a sharp decline in uncontested seats in the Lok Sabha elections after 1989, there are several instances in State assembly elections when a candidate is elected unopposed. The figure is even higher at the level of Panchayat/Local body elections. During the brief hearing on Thursday, the bench noted that the averments by the petitioners seem to seek 'an extension of the NOTA principle.''If there is only one candidate and people still go and vote NOTA, then it shows there is so much resentment against the candidate,' suggested Justice government and the ECI, however, vehemently opposed the General R Venkataramani, during the hearing, informed the bench that, due to rare situations where an election is uncontested, 'this is an academic exercise.' The Attorney General also submitted that the court would have to 'see how far NOTA can be stretched.'Senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, for the ECI, also argued that "if people are so unhappy with the candidate, they can field their own candidate." Dwivedi also submitted that Advocate Harsh Parasher, appearing for Vidhi Legal however, said that the matter affected the people's right to choose their representative.'This has happened in Vidhan Sabhas more than 290 times in the last few years. In Arunachal Pradesh, in the 2024 polls, 6 seats were uncontested,' said Parashar. The counsel also submitted that the rules should allow countermanding an election if the NOTA votes are polled in an "uncontested" election. "What will happen then?" asked bench then observed that if the NOTA is accepted and an election is countermanded, it is likely that political parties would field different candidates in the bypoll."I think all parties will field candidates. In India, we also have independent candidates. It's rare to have an uncontested election. That's why the AG says it's an academic exercise," noted Justice Prashant Bhushan, appearing for ADR, also pointed out that some states have brought in rules for Local Body elections that if NOTA votes are more than votes for a winning candidate, then the election is countermanded and a fresh election can be held. The ECI counsel, however, argued that the local body polls, held under the state rules, are legally different from the State Assembly and Lok Sabha polls that are held under the RP Act and ECI hearing has for now been adjourned to November 6 as the affidavit filed by the central government on Thursday was not available on the court record at the time of the Centre and the ECI, in their affidavits, have opposed the plea, submitting that Section 53 of the RP Act and Rule 11 of the Conduct of Elections Rules specifically lay down the process for an 'Uncontested Election.'advertisementIn its affidavit filed on Thursday, the central government argued that 'there is a difference between the 'Right to Vote' and the 'Freedom of Voting' under the Constitution,' which has been recognised by the Supreme Government has further argued that NOTA cannot be included as a 'candidate' in the election, as the law clearly defines the procedure depending on the number of candidates in the election. According to the Center's affidavit, 'NOTA is merely an opinion or expression,' and therefore cannot be substituted as a 'candidate' as per the procedure prescribed under Section 53(2).- EndsTune InMust Watch
New Indian Express
26-07-2025
- Politics
- New Indian Express
Kargil Vijay Diwas: NALSA launches free legal aid services for soldiers, ex-servicemen and their families
HAMIRPUR: The National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) launched a scheme on the occasion of Kargil Vijay Diwas to provide free legal aid to soldiers, ex-servicemen and their families, officials said on Saturday. NALSA's executive chairman, Justice Suryakant, launched the Veer Parivar Sahayata Yojna on Saturday in a ceremony held in New Delhi. He virtually inaugurated legal services clinics in Sainik Welfare Boards across states. A legal services clinic at the headquarters of Himachal Pradesh Ex-Servicemen Corporation, Hamirpur, was also inaugurated virtually, officials said. Free legal aid will be provided to ex-servicemen, serving soldiers and their families in the legal services clinic established in Hamirpur.
Hans India
15-07-2025
- Politics
- Hans India
SC issues notice to Jharkhand HC over long-pending verdicts
New Delhi/Ranchi: The Supreme Court on Monday issued a notice to the Jharkhand High Court while hearing a petition filed by 10 convicts, including six on death row, who alleged inordinate delay in the pronouncement of judgment on their appeals. The petitioners had approached the Jharkhand High Court between 2018 and 2019, challenging their convictions by a lower court. Despite the completion of hearings in 2022-23, the High Court has yet to deliver its verdict, which prompted the convicts to move apex court. Out of the 10 petitioners, six were sentenced to death and the remaining four to life imprisonment. Nine of them are currently lodged in Birsa Munda Central Jail in Hotwar, Ranchi, while one has recently been released on bail from Dumka jail. A bench comprising Justice Suryakant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi observed that the judge who reserved judgment in all these appeals is the same in each case, raising questions about the prolonged delay. Appearing for the petitioners, advocate Fauzia Shakil argued that withholding a verdict for years after hearings are concluded constitutes a violation of Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, including the right to speedy justice. Shakil highlighted the mental anguish faced by the convicts due to the delay, especially those awaiting execution. She cited the Supreme Court's ruling in HPA International vs Bhagwandas, where the court expressed concern over the practice of reserving judgments indefinitely. The petition also referred to the Jharkhand High Court Rules (2001), which mandate that judgments must be delivered within six weeks of the conclusion of arguments. Further, citing previous Supreme Court rulings related to sentence suspension, the advocate pointed out that convicts who have already served eight years of actual sentence are, in most cases, eligible for bail.
Hans India
14-07-2025
- Politics
- Hans India
Supreme Court issues notice to Jharkhand HC over long-pending verdict after 10 convicts file petition
New Delhi/Ranchi: The Supreme Court on Monday issued a notice to the Jharkhand High Court while hearing a petition filed by 10 convicts, including six on death row, who alleged inordinate delay in the pronouncement of judgment on their appeals. The petitioners had approached the Jharkhand High Court between 2018 and 2019, challenging their convictions by a lower court. Despite the completion of hearings in 2022-23, the High Court has yet to deliver its verdict, which prompted the convicts to move apex court. Out of the 10 petitioners, six were sentenced to death and the remaining four to life imprisonment. Nine of them are currently lodged in Birsa Munda Central Jail in Hotwar, Ranchi, while one has recently been released on bail from Dumka jail. A bench comprising Justice Suryakant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi observed that the judge who reserved judgment in all these appeals is the same in each case, raising questions about the prolonged delay. Appearing for the petitioners, advocate Fauzia Shakil argued that withholding a verdict for years after hearings are concluded constitutes a violation of Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, including the right to speedy justice. Shakil highlighted the mental anguish faced by the convicts due to the delay, especially those awaiting execution. She cited the Supreme Court's ruling in HPA International vs Bhagwandas, where the court expressed concern over the practice of reserving judgments indefinitely. The petition also referred to the Jharkhand High Court Rules (2001), which mandate that judgments must be delivered within six weeks of the conclusion of arguments. Further, citing previous Supreme Court rulings related to sentence suspension, the advocate pointed out that convicts who have already served eight years of actual sentence are, in most cases, eligible for bail.
United News of India
10-05-2025
- Politics
- United News of India
SC decision on permanent commission will boost morale of women officers: Congress
New Delhi, May 10 (UNI) The Congress on Saturday hailed the Supreme Court's recent decision on granting permanent commission to women in the Indian Army, calling it a landmark step that will significantly uplift the morale of women officers across the country. Addressing a press conference here, Congress leader and retired Indian Air Force officer Wing Commander Anuma Acharya expressed strong support for the verdict. 'The decision of the Supreme Court which came yesterday (Friday) provides a lot of relief, and in the current environment of the country, it will boost the morale of women officers,' she said. She said that on Friday, the Supreme Court issued an order in support of the women officers, directing that the Short Service Commissioned women officers who had filed the petition be reinstated in service until the next hearing. Justice Suryakant emphasised the importance of maintaining the morale of women officers during these times and acknowledged their talent and capabilities. Acharya mentioned that she was personally a 'beneficiary of this case,' recalling that it was during the Congress government's tenure in 1992 when the entry of women officers was first allowed. She noted that the Indian Air Force, on behalf of the Defence Ministry, had issued a circular on November 25, 1991, stating that the induction of women officers would begin as a pilot project. Between 1999 and 2004, when the Old Pension Scheme (OPS) was discontinued for other government employees, the provision of pensions for women officers was also withdrawn. In 2007, Wing Commander Anupama Joshi and Squadron Leader Rukhsan Haq were the first to take the matter to court. Following their lead, women officers from the Army also became part of the legal battle. By mid-2009, all related cases were consolidated, and the Delhi High Court reserved its judgment on the matter on December 14, 2009. On March 12, 2010, the court delivered a verdict in favor of the women officers. However, the case of the Indian Air Force held a stronger position due to formal backing by a Ministry of Defence circular. Around this time, approximately 15 of us women officers, met Rahul Gandhi on March 23, 2010. He assured us that he would advocate for our case before the Defence Ministry, based on its merits. Since a policy letter had been issued specifically for the case of women officers in the Indian Air Force, 23 officers, including myself, were granted permanent commission at that time. However, no such policy was introduced for the Army, which led the remaining women officers to continue their legal battle in the Supreme Court for the next ten years through the Babita Punia vs Government of India case. She highlighted the evolving landscape of women's participation in the armed forces, noting that policy changes since 2006 have progressively opened doors for women. 'Two and a half years ago, women got entry into the Army through the NDA. Now we can imagine that 30 years from today, we might see one or more women reaching the position of Army Chief,' she added. She emphasised that while the path to top roles such as Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) has traditionally been available to male officers, recent shifts indicate a growing reconsideration of entry schemes for women officers as well. 'Now the Supreme Court has decided that the women officers should be reinstated until the next hearing in August. We welcome this decision of the top court,' she said. UNI RBE PRS
