Legal Updates – July 2020

1. Supreme Court Issues Fresh SOPs Prior To Commencement of Its Post-Vacation

Functioning. The Supreme Court has released a notification highlighting the Standard
Operating Procedure (SOP) for purposes of effectuating hearings through virtual courts
w.e.f July 6. The Notification states that it has taken into account the suggestions
received from various quarters and of the guidelines issued by the GOI & Government
of NCT Delhi and is in supersession of its earlier SOP circulars for e-filing, mentioning,
listing and hearing of matters through video conferencing/tele-conferencing mode.
2. In Re: Extension of Limitation - The Supreme Court on July 10 allowed service of
summons & notices through instant tele-messenger services like Whatsapp as well as
via email & fax. A bench of Chief Justice SA Bobde, AS Bopanna & Subhash Reddy
clarified that all methods are to be employed to prove a valid service on a party . CJI
refused the request of the Attorney General for specifically naming Whatsapp as a mode
of effectuating service stating that it was not prudent to specify Whatsapp only.
3. Dumpala Ramreddy V. Union of India & Anr. - The Supreme Court asked a petitioner
seeking shutting down of Ashrams run by 'fake babas' to serve the petition upon the
Centre in order for them to come up with suggestions regarding the the possible course
of action. A bench comprising Chief Justice SA Bobde. Justices Subhash Reddy & AS
Bopanna, directed Solicitor General Tushar Mehta to read the Petition and seek
instructions from the Government regarding suggestions on what could possibly be
done.
4. Centre For Public Interest Litigation V. Union of India - The Central Government told
the Supreme Court that there exists no prohibition on creation of PM CARES Fund as
it is independent and distinct from the National Disaster Relief Fund (NDRF) which is
stipulated under the Disaster Management Act. In reply to the PIL, which has sought
transfer of funds from PMCARES Fund to NDRF for relief works in combating the
Covid19 pandemic, the Centre has taken the stand before A bench of Justices Ashok
Bhushan, SK Kaul & MR Shah that the NDRF, as stipulated under Section 46 of the
Disaster Management Act, 2005 (DMA), consists of funds in the form of budgetary
provisions made by the Central and State Governments without any private
contributions.
5. Vikas Dubey Encounter: SC Hints At Appointment Of Committee For Probe
[Ghanshyam Upadhyay V. Union of India] - The Supreme Court on July 14 orally
 remarked that it was inclined to appoint a Committee headed by a Retired Judge, just
as it had done on earlier occasion in the Hyderabad Encounter Case. A bench of Chief
Justice SA Bobde, N. Subhash Reddy & AS Bopanna also granted time to Solicitor
General Tushar Mehta, appearing for State of Uttar Pradesh to file a reply in the plea
seeking a CBI monitored investigation into the alleged encounter of accused Vikas
Dubey. Subsequently, the Supreme Court approved the constitution of an inquiry
commission headed by Justice B S Chauhan, former Supreme Court judge, to probe
into the genuineness of the encounter killing of UP gangster Vikas Dubey. The name
of Justice Chauhan was suggested by the Solicitor General, Tushar Mehta, who
appeared for the government of Uttar Pradesh before a bench of Chief Justice SA
Bobde, AS Bopanna & V. Ramasubramaniun. The SG also suggested the name of
former judge of Allahabad High Court, Justice Sashi Kant Agarwal and former UP
Director General of Police, KL Gupta, to be a part of the probe team. He submitted that
all background checks have been conducted for the former DGP.
6. Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple Case: SC Upholds 'Shebait' Rights Of Erstwhile
Royal Family Of Travancore [Sri Marthanda Varma & Anr. V. State Of Kerala & Ors.]
- The Supreme Court upheld the rights of erstwhile royal family of Travancore in the
administration of Sree Padmanabha Swamy temple at Thiruvananthapuram. Allowing
the appeal filed by members of the Travancore family, a bench of Justices UU Lalit &
Indu Malhotra reversed the finding of the High Court of Kerala that the rights of family
ceased to exist with the death of the last ruler of the Travancore in 1991. The death of
the last ruler will not result in escheat of the rights in favour of the government.
7. COVID-19 Lockdown: SC Issues Notice On Plea To Allow Advocates To Advertise,
Take Up Other Works [Chanderjeet Chanderpal V. BCI & Ors.] - The Supreme Court
on July 14 issued notice in a plea seeking issuance of directions to the Bar Council of
India to permit use of advertisements for lawyers till March 2021, allow public listings
so that other para-legal work can be taken up by them to earn their livelihood in light
of the pandemic situation and allow alternative means of sustenance. A bench of Chief
Justice SA Bobde, N. Subhash Reddy & AS Bopanna issued notice to the Bar Council
of India. The notice is returnable in 2 weeks
8. The Prashant Bhushan Case In Re Prashant Bhushan & Anr. - The Supreme Court
issued notice to Advocate Prashant Bhushan, asking him to show cause as to why
contempt of court proceedings should not be initiated against him over his tweets on
judiciary. A bench of Justices Arun Mishra, BR Gavai & Krishna Murari stated that the
 Court has taken cognizance of two tweets made by Bhushan on June 27 and June 29.The
Supreme Court also adjourned till August 4 the hearing on a 11-year old contempt case
against Advocate Prashant Bhushan over his remarks against Supreme Court judges in
an interview given to Tehelka magazine in 2009. A bench of Justices Arun Mishra, BR
Gavai & Krishna Murari adjourned the case to August 5 after Counsel sought time. The
subject matter of the 2009 case is an interview given by Bhushan to Shoma Chaudhury
of Tehelka magazine in 2009, where he allegedly said that for his allegations, half of
the last 16 Chief Justices were corrupt. As per the complaint, Bhushan also said in the
interview that he had no proof for the allegations.
9. SC Takes Suo Moto Cognizance Of Financial Difficulties Of Advocates Amid COVID-
19; Issues Notice To BCI, State Bar Councils [Bar Council India V. Union Of India &
Ors.] - The Supreme Court took Suo motu cognisance of the financial difficulties being
faced by lawyers due to the COVID-19 pandemic. A Bench headed by Chief Justice
SA Bobde was hearing a plea filed by the Bar Council of India which sought for
directions to the Centre/State and UT Governments for financial assistance to lawyers,
on account of losses faced due to decreasing litigation work in wake of the pandemic.
The Bench issued notice, returnable within 2 weeks, to the Centre, Bar Council of India,
State Bar Councils, each High Court's Registrar General, and recognized High Court
Bar Associations. The Bar Associations have been directed to show cause why a fund
for relief cannot be set up for deserving and eligible advocates.
10. Suo Motu Matter On Conditions In Children Homes: SC Directs Centre To Submit
Note On Funding And Audits [In Re: Contagion of COVID-19 Virus in Children
Protection Homes] - Supreme Court directed the Amicus Curiae to file an Affidavit
compiling all the "good practices" from States, so that a uniform order may be passed
in the suo motu case pertaining to the condition of children in protection, juvenile and
foster or kinship homes across the country amid the Coronavirus outbreak. A bench of
Justices L. Nageswara Rao, Hemant Gupta & S. Ravindra Bhat heard the matter and
directed the Amicus Advocate Gaurav Agarwal to prepare the note and circulate it
amongst all the States. The Centre was also directed to submit a note regarding how
funds were being spent and the subsequent audit of the same.
11. SC Issues Notice In Plea Seeking For Declaration Of Country Of Origin Of Goods On
E-Commerce Sites [Divya Jyoti V. Union of India] - The Supreme Court has issued
notice in a plea seeking for directions to the Centre to formulate a law in order to ensure
that e-commerce sites and business houses declare the "country of origin" of goods so
 as to facilitate boycotting of Chinese products. A bench comprising Chief Justice SA
Bobde, Justices AS Bopanna & V. Ramasubramanian heard the matter and proceeded
to issue notice in the same. This plea, came at the heels of a standoff between India and
China at Galwan Valley which took place on June 15 and left multiple Indian soldiers
dead.
12. Students vs UGC: 'Heavens Will Not Fall If Exams Are Cancelled', Submits Dr
Singhvi; SC To Hear On August 10 [Praneeth K & Ors. V. UGC & Ors., Batch pleas]
- The Supreme Court adjourned till August 10 the hearing on a batch of petitions
challenging the UGC direction to hold final year exams by September 30. A bench
headed by Justice Ashok Bhushan directed that the parties should complete the
pleadings by that time. Affidavits are to be filed by August 7 and rejoinders to be filed
a day after August 7. Though Advocate Alakh Alok Srivastava, appearing for 31
students, pressed for a stay of the notification in the light of the 'deadly floods' in Assam
and Bihar, Justice Ashok Bhushan said that no interim order can be passed at this stage.