Op Sindoor post deletion, apology doesn't mean case against student can be quashed: Bombay HC
Mumbai (PTI): The Bombay High Court on Friday orally remarked that the case against a 19-year-old student for her social media post against Operation Sindoor cannot be quashed only the ground that she has deleted the post and apologised for it.
A bench of Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam Ankhad said just because the accused is a "bright student" and has passed her exams with "flying colours" does not mean the FIR lodged against her can be quashed.
The court was hearing a petition filed by the Pune collegian seeking to quash the FIR lodged against her in May for her social media post on Indo-Pak hostilities amid Operation Sindoor.
She was arrested but was later released after securing bail from the High Court.
On Friday, the court was informed by the student's advocate that, after securing bail, the girl had appeared for her examinations and had secured good marks.
The bench, however, said just because she was a bright student cannot be a ground to quash the FIR.
The girl's lawyer submitted that she had no ill intention behind the post and had deleted the same immediately and apologised.
The court, however, noted that deletion (of the post) in fact aggravates and complicates the case.
The bench posted the matter for further hearing after two weeks while directing public prosecutor Mankhuwar Deshmukh to submit the case diary.
On May 7, the girl had reposted a post on Instagram from an account called 'Reformistan', which criticised the Indian government for provoking a war against Pakistan.
Within two hours, the girl realised her mistake and deleted the post after receiving a barrage of threats.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Ordinance issued to increase number of Supreme Court judges from 34 to 38
New Delhi (PTI): The government has promulgated an ordinance to increase the strength of the Supreme Court from the present 34 judges to 38, including the Chief Justice of India.
The law ministry notified the ordinance on Saturday, which amended the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act, 1956, to increase the sanctioned strength of the top court.
So far, the sanctioned strength of the top court was 34, including the Chief Justice of India (CJI). Now, the number of judges has been increased by four, taking the sanctioned strength to 38.
The top court will now have 37 judges, other than the CJI.
With the apex court having two vacancies at present, and the ordinance coming into force immediately, the Supreme Court Collegium will now have to recommend six names for appointment as judges in the top court.
A bill will be brought in the Monsoon Session of Parliament to convert the ordinance – an executive order – into a law passed by Parliament.
The Union Cabinet had cleared a draft bill on May 5 to increase the number of apex court judges.
The strength of the Supreme Court was last increased from 30 to 33 (excluding the CJI) in 2019.
The Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act, as originally enacted in 1956, put the maximum number of judges (excluding the CJI) at 10.
This number was increased to 13 by the Supreme Court (Number of Judges), Amendment Act, 1960, and to 17 by another amendment to the law.
The Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Act, 1986, augmented the strength of judges from 17 to 25, excluding the CJI.
A fresh amendment in 2009 further increased the strength from 25 to 30.
Article 124(3) of the Constitution lists the qualifications required to become a Supreme Court judge.
An Indian citizen who has either served as a high court judge for at least five years, or as an advocate for 10 years, or is a distinguished jurist, can be appointed to the top court.
The strength of the Supreme Court is increased based on the recommendations of the CJI, who writes to the Union law minister. After consulting the finance ministry, the Department of Justice under the law ministry moves the Cabinet with a draft bill.
