If you don't like the toolkit, ignore it: SC Rejects Plea Seeking NIA Probe Into Alleged Congress Toolkit

Today, the Supreme Court refused to entertain a plea seeking a probe by the National Investigation Agency into the alleged Congress toolkit case. The bench ruled that the toolkit should be ignored if someone doesn't like it. According to the bench, the petitioner has to avail a remedy other than that provided under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.

If the allegations are confirmed in the investigation, the petitioner requested the cancellation of the registration of the Congress party. However, the bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and MR Shah raised concern regarding the maintainability of a petition under Article 32 against political propaganda.

According to NDTV, expressing displeasure over the petition, Justice DY Chandrachud said such frivolous petitions "cannot be heard". "The time has come that the Supreme Court does something about such petitions" he added. Thereafter, the petitioner sought permission from the court to withdraw the petition.

The BJP had earlier claimed that Congress had created a toolkit for social media, which was used to project the new variant of corona virus via social media as 'Indian Swaroop' or 'Modi Swaroop'. The BJP has accused Congress of trying to tarnish the image of India and Prime Minister Narendra Modi at the global level by the use of this toolkit. However, Congress has categorically rejected these allegations.

Comments

Pune Porsche Crash: Father of Minor Granted Bail

Image Credit: tv9marathi A Pune court has granted bail to the minor’s father, Vishal Agarwal, who faced charges under the Juvenile Justice Act for neglect and endangering the child by allowing him to drive without a license and consume alcohol. Additionally, bar owners and managers were arrested for serving alcohol to minors. The father, already in custody for other related charges, was implicated in the alleged manipulation of his son’s blood samples and in a separate case of kidnapping his driver. Advocate Prashant Patil argued that Vishal Agarwal's arrest was unlawful, contending that the charges were non-cognizable offenses and required a notice under the Criminal Procedure Code. Mr. Patil also highlighted contradictions in police reports, where the minor was listed as the accused in one FIR and as a victim in another. Also Read: Delhi High Court Stays Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's Bail in Excise Policy Case Earlier Proceedings in the Pune Porsche Crash Inc...

Patna High Court Declares Bihar’s Reservation Amendments Ultra Vires

In a landmark decision, the Patna High Court has invalidated the Bihar government's legislative attempt to increase reservations for backward classes. The court's ruling focused on procedural flaws and the absence of a robust empirical basis for the hike, sparking a debate on judicial intervention in affirmative action policies. Background and Rationale Behind Setting Aside Bihar Reservation Increase Law The Bihar government had proposed an increase in reservations to address socio-economic disparities faced by backward classes. However, the court found that the state failed to follow due process, which includes conducting a thorough empirical study to justify the policy change. This procedural oversight led to the court's decision to strike down the increase. The High Court emphasized the necessity of a data-driven approach for policy changes related to reservations. The ruling underscored that without solid empirical evidence, such policies could not be justified within...

Application by a Necessary Party Seeking Recall of an Ex-Parte Order is Maintainable: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court ruled that every Court and Tribunal possess inherent power to set aside an ex-parte order as a form of 'procedural review,' distinct from the statutory power to review a case on merits. Justice Yogendra Kumar Srivastava held that revenue authorities can recall an ex-parte order to correct procedural defects and ensure justice between the parties. This inherent power allows the Court or Tribunal to correct procedural illegality that invalidates the proceedings and the order itself. The case in question involved a recall application against an ex-parte order passed under Section 24 of the UP Revenue Code. The Court held that a recall application can be maintained by non-parties if they are necessary parties to the proceedings. The judgment emphasizes the principle of natural justice that no adverse orders should be passed without giving an opportunity of hearing, and a recall can be sought to correct procedural errors. The Court clarif...

Lawgic Simplified

Search This Blog