Supreme Court rejects Indian Medical Association President's apology, asks for public apology
New Delhi: In a recent development, the Supreme Court has refused to accept the apology offered by the President of the Indian Medical Association (IMA), Dr. RV Asokan, regarding his comments made in a media interview concerning certain observations made by the Court.
Dr. Asokan appeared before the Court in response to a notice issued on an application by Patanjali Ayurved seeking contempt action against him. Despite conveying an unconditional apology to the bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, the Court expressed dissatisfaction with his conduct.
Justice Kohli expressed disappointment, stating, "Dr. Asokan, with your experience, we would have expected more sense of responsibility from you." Justice Amanullah labeled Dr. Asokan's conduct as "unfortunate," equating it with Patanjali's behavior, for which the Court had already discarded an apology.
The bench questioned the sincerity of Dr. Asokan's apology, pointing out that he hadn't issued a public apology before appearing in court. Dr. Asokan emphasized his respect for the institution but faced further skepticism from the judges.
Despite pleas from IMA's counsel Senior Advocate PS Patwalia, the Court remained unwilling to accept Dr. Asokan's apology at this stage. Justice Kohli reiterated, "We are not at this stage inclined to accept the apology tendered by your client."
The controversy arose in a case filed by IMA against Patanjali Ayurved for allegedly making misleading claims and disparaging advertisements against the Allopathic system of medicine. The Court had initiated contempt proceedings against Patanjali Ayurved and its founders for continuing to publish misleading medical advertisements in violation of a previous undertaking.
The recent turn of events came after Dr. Asokan criticized the Supreme Court's observations in a press interview following the Court's focus on IMA's internal practices. This led to Patanjali seeking action against Dr. Asokan for his remarks against the Court.
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.
