സുപ്രീം കോടതിയുടെ സുപ്രധാന ഇടപെടലുകൾ: പിണറായി വിജയൻ കേസ് മുതൽ വോട്ടർമാരുടെ അവകാശങ്ങൾ വരെ

Market Mastery

Webinar by Vishal Malkan

Find the weak links

in your portfolio by Vishal Malkan

This week, the Supreme Court stayed the vigilance investigation against former Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan in the CMRL-Exalogic case and directed the Andhra Pradesh State Election Commission to examine complaints of nomination obstruction. It also ruled that voters can file criminal complaints against candidates for concealing information in election affidavits. Other developments concerned temple land, wetlands protection, preventive proceedings against student activist Neha Bora and allegations of police excesses at Jantar Mantar.

Here are seven key developments:

October 21: Supreme Court stays vigilance probe against Pinarayi Vijayan

The Supreme Court stayed the vigilance investigation against Pinarayi Vijayan, his daughter Veena T and son-in-law P A Mohammed Riyas in the alleged Cochin Minerals and Rutile Limited (CMRL)-Exalogic bribery case.

A bench of Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana allowed the FIR to remain in place but temporarily halted the investigation. The case arose from a Kerala High Court order directing the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau to register an FIR over alleged payments by CMRL to Veena’s company, Exalogic Solutions.

The Supreme Court allowed the petitioners to challenge the single judge’s direction before the High Court Division Bench, without expressing an opinion on the merits of the allegations. The Kerala High Court is expected to hear the appeals on October 26.

October 21: Supreme Court intervenes in Andhra Pradesh election dispute

The Supreme Court directed the Andhra Pradesh State Election Commission to examine YSRCP’s allegations that violence and obstruction prevented its candidates from filing nominations for urban local body elections.

A bench of Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana directed the commission to consider whether affected candidates should receive additional time. It also ordered the deferment of the final candidates’ list and directed the state police chief to ensure security and CCTV coverage at nomination centres.

The court did not hold that the allegations had been proved but stressed that constitutional courts can intervene when illegal practices threaten electoral fairness.

The matter is scheduled for October 27, when compliance reports are expected from the commission and the Director General of Police.

October 19: Voters can prosecute candidates over concealed information

The Supreme Court held that private individuals can file criminal complaints against candidates under Section 125A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, for furnishing false information or concealing information in election affidavits.

A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Sheel Nagu ruled that Section 195(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, does not require complaints concerning this offence to be filed exclusively by public servants.

October 16: Supreme Court bars Tamil Nadu from accepting temple land as a gift

The Supreme Court declared void the transfer of 1 acre and 10 cents of land belonging to Nagapalayam Mariamman-Ponnachiamman Temple in Erode district to the Tamil Nadu government.

In K Ramalingam and Others v Government of Tamil Nadu, Justices Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok Aradhe set aside the Madras High Court judgment dismissing the challenge.

The land had been gifted to the government for a public office by a temporary trustee. The Supreme Court held that temple property could not be treated as the trustee’s personal property or transferred contrary to the law governing religious institutions.

The court also increased the monthly lease rent payable to the temple to Rs 31,000 and directed payment of arrears and costs.

October 23: Delhi High Court rejects Neha Bora’s plea against peace-bond proceedings

The Delhi High Court dismissed AISA president Neha Bora’s challenge to preventive proceedings requiring her to show cause why she should not furnish a Rs 10,000 personal bond with one surety.

Justice Subramonium Prasad upheld the initiation of proceedings under Sections 126 and 130 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), while directing authorities to provide the material relied upon in issuing the notice.

On October 24, Bora’s lawyer Abhik Chimni said the legal team had received the documents from the Special Executive Magistrate and would examine them before the next hearing on October 29.

October 24: Supreme Court directs states to demarcate wetlands

The Supreme Court directed states and relevant authorities to physically verify and demarcate wetlands and other water bodies within four months.

A bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and Vipul M Pancholi said courts could not remain passive when vital water bodies were left unprotected. It linked their protection to Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to life.

The directions require authorities to move beyond existing records and physically identify and mark water bodies, helping address gaps that leave them vulnerable to encroachment. The four-month period is a compliance deadline; the broader proceedings are reportedly listed for November 16.

October 24: Panel to hear evidence on Jantar Mantar violence

A Supreme Court-appointed High Powered Enquiry Committee, chaired by retired Supreme Court judge Justice R Subhash Reddy, will hear affected persons and record evidence on alleged violence during the Jantar Mantar protests on October 29 and 30.

The committee will examine allegations including pellet-gun use, excessive force, harassment of female protesters and property damage. It has also established an online portal for complaints and supporting evidence, with safeguards for vulnerable witnesses.

The proceedings follow the July 20 march towards Parliament, during which protesters and security personnel clashed.