The much awaited Delhi-Centre turf war case was finally heard today at court No 4 around noon as item 64, with the bench of justices Dipak Misra and UU Lalit giving the Delhi Government’s counsel, Indira Jaising, enough opportunity to make her submissions, but without compromising its position that it would not direct the high court to first decide the jurisdiction issue.

On 4 July, the Supreme Court bench comprising justices Dipak Misra and C Nagappan, assigned senior advocate, Rajeev Dhavan, an interesting assignment to be executed before 1 August.

In a two-day conference by the Bar Council of India (BCI) in Dehradun over the weekend, attended by Supreme Court justice Dipak Misra and law minister DV Sadananda Gowda, Professor Madhava Menon held a talk on the “need of continuing legal education to the lawyers”.

Supreme Court judge Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, who was elevated to the apex court on Friday from the Allahabad high court where he was the chief justice, was born on 11 November 1959.

At 11:15 am today, the Supreme Court began its proceedings for the last day of the current term. It was 45 minutes behind its usual schedule.

The Supreme Court on Friday upheld the constitutional validity of India’s criminal defamation law that was contested by Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi, Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and BJP leader Subramanian Swamy.

The Supreme Court is likely to pronounce on Friday its verdict on a batch of petitions including by Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi, Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and BJP leader Subramanian Swamy challenging the constitutional validity of sections 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code providing for criminal defamation.

Prashant Bhushan, acting for the NGO Angel Trust, has filed a public interest litigation (PIL) in the Supreme Court that more stringent punishments should be levied against those convicted of cruelty against animals, particularly in the pet shops industry.

The Supreme Court today cleared the decks for ousted Uttarakhand Chief Minister Harish Rawat to prove his legislative majority in the state assembly on Tuesday, but nine disqualified rebel Congress legislators won’t be allowed to vote. The top court said it would monitor the voting that is to take p...

In the ongoing hearing of petitions seeking the right to worship for women devotees of the Sabarimala temple before a Justice Dipak Misra-led three-judge bench this afternoon at Court No.4, senior counsel KK Venugopal, while arguing for the temple board, said women could not be recruited to be fielded in the frontline of armed forces, because they lack courage.

Asking the Supreme Court to quash a resolution of Parliament is not a simple thing. That too in the face of eminent voices in the legal fraternity disapproving of such a plea.

_President’s Rule_ will continue in Uttarakhand, the Supreme Court ruled today, drawing curtains on the floor test of the ousted Congress government that was to be held on Friday as ordered by the Uttarakhand high court. Advocate Rahul Kilam tweeted @KilamRahul: Uttarakhand fiasco: Attorney General ...

The afternoon hearing at Court No 4 of the Supreme Court on the entry of women to Sabarimala temple got interesting with senior counsel for the temple board, KK Venugopal, comparing the discrimination at Sabarimala with similar classification on the basis of gender in other areas of activity.

Taking a dig at Maharashtra government over its persistence to curb dance bars, the Supreme Court on Monday said that it was better to dance then go to streets for begging or going to “places which are not acceptable” to earn a livelihood.

It was an exchange of barbs, rarely witnessed, in the Supreme Court’s courtrooms. But then it was not an ordinary case, with huge stakes in the outcome, even if there are several rounds of battle ahead.

After not doing so yesterday despite everyone’s expectations to the contrary , the Supreme Court today asked the central government to approach its secretary general for listing its petition challenging the Uttarakhand High Court order setting aside president’s rule in the state. An apex court bench...

As news of the Uttarakhand high court quashing President’s rule in the state reached the Supreme Court, suspense was building up whether the Centre would seek an immediate stay by mentioning the matter before Court No.1, where the Chief Justice of India (CJI) TS Thakur and Justice R Banumathi were hearing the pollution matter.

In the ongoing hearing of petitions challenging the denial of right to worship to women devotees at the Sabarimala temple, Kerala, Justice Kurian Joseph, one of the three judges on the bench, on 18 April, asked amicus curiae Raju Ramachandran, a pointed question: Can you force deity who does not want to see women (of menstruating age), to ‘see’ women?

Maverick lawyer from Mumbai, Mathews J Nedumpara, had two of his writ petitions listed before two different benches at courts 3 and 4 on Wednesday, 13 April.

On 12 April, during the hearing of case 20 before justices Dipak Misra and Prafulla C Pant in Court 4 yesterday morning, senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan was angrily objecting to the appearance of the intervener-in-person, SN Shukla, a former IAS officer.