

Supreme Court Refuses To Consider Individual Grievances, Allows Petitioners To Make Representations Before Centre
On March 22, 2023 by Garima Pandey
The Supreme Court of India has recently refused to consider individual grievances and instead allowed petitioners to make representations before the Centre. This decision is a major step forward in ensuring that citizens have access to justice without having to go through lengthy court proceedings.
The ruling was made after considering several petitions filed by individuals who were seeking relief from various issues such as land disputes, medical negligence, police harassment etc.
This ruling is an important milestone for citizens as it will enable them to access justice faster and more efficiently than ever before. It also means that they do not need to wait for long periods of time or pay hefty legal fees while pursuing their cases in courts which can be both costly and time-consuming processes at times.
Additionally, this decision helps protect vulnerable populations such as women and children who are often unable or scared of approaching the judiciary due to the complex procedures involved with filing a case in court.
Finally, this judgment reinforces the idea that people should be able to use all available resources including government agencies like the Central Government when seeking redressal from any issue they may face instead of being limited to solely relying on judicial intervention.
This judgement sets an example for other countries where there are similar problems related to accessing timely justice, especially those belonging lower socio-economic strata. Allowing petitioners to represent themselves directly before the central government could prove a useful tool in providing quick resolution to many grievances faced by different sections of society today
The High Courts have been asked to respond to the Supreme Court’s request that proceedings against current and former MPs/MLAs be tried more quickly, as suggested by amicus curiae Senior Advocate Vijay Hansaria.
A bench made up of CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha stated during the hearing that the court would only be able to address the issue of accelerating the trial of legislators in a systematic manner when it had enough information regarding the backlog of cases and the workload of the judges.
The bench instructed all high courts to reply to the amicus curiae’s 17th report, which was submitted on November 17, 2022. Hansaria said that despite the Supreme Court issuing a number of instructions periodically to speed up the trial, the desired result has not been obtained. As a result, The following was recommended by Hansaria:
1. Only cases involving MPs and MLAs will be heard by the courts; all other cases will not be heard.
2. Trials under section 309 CrPC will be held in chronological order.
3. The High Court or the Principal Sessions Judge of the relevant district will assign the necessary work.
Judge PS Narasimha raised his concerns about the ideas and stated that since there are only so many judges in the Indian system, dealing with specific matters would essentially mean that the courts would not be taking up any other cases.
The controversial decision by the union administration was affirmed by the top court almost three months ago on the first working day of the new year, by a 4:1 majority. The judges who made up the Constitution Bench were S Abdul Nazeer, BR Gavai, AS Bopanna, V Ramasubramanian, and BV Nagarathna. They were hearing a group of 58 petitions that contested the November 8 circular, which in effect removed 86% of the currency in circulation overnight.
Specified Bank Notes Cessation of Obligations Act, 2017, which was subsequently promulgated, and the centre’s notification were both upheld by the majority of the court, however, Justice Nagarathna was the lone dissenting vote. She asserted that despite having good intentions, demonetisation had to be ruled illegal on strictly legal grounds.
You may also like
Archives
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- August 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- October 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- May 2020
- November 2015
Calendar
M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |||
5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |
12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 |
19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 |
26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 |
Categories
- adultery
- ANTIFA
- Article
- Artificial Intelligence
- Blog
- Blog Writing Competition
- Bombay High Court
- Business
- Call for Campus Ambassador
- Case comment
- Civil
- Climate Change
- Competition Law
- corporate goverance
- Covering the Supreme Court of India
- Covid-19
- Crime against Men
- current affairs
- Cyber law
- Delhi High Court
- Divorce
- Drug Abuse
- EMPIRICAL RESEARCH
- EMPIRICAL RESEARCH
- Environment
- Environment law
- Extra Judicial Killing
- Family Law
- freedom Speech and Expression
- Fundamental rights
- health
- High Court
- History
- Human RIghts
- Human trafficking
- International
- International law
- international news
- Judgement
- Karnataka High Court
- legal
- LRA Explains
- Madras High Court
- marital Rape
- Mental Health
- Muslim Women
- Nature
- News
- Opinions & Special Articles
- Planet Earth
- politics
- politics
- Property Law
- Reformation of Judicial System
- Refugee
- Research Study
- Science and Technology
- sexual harassment of women
- Significance of November
- space
- supreme court
- Today in History
- War in Europe
- Women's right