The <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/supreme-court-asks-army-to-decide-on-granting-special-commission-to-female-officers-263289">Supreme Court</a> on Monday issued notice to Centre and all the State governments on a petition against the continued deaths of children who fall into borewells and the negligence shown by authorities to prevent such tragedies.

A Bench of Justice <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-general-elections-2019/this-is-nonsense-says-supreme-court-dismissing-pil-seeking-100-vvpat-verification-220408">Arun Mishra</a> and Justice MR Shah sought response from the Central and State governments, Union Territories and the NDRF on the PIL filed by advocate GS Mani.

The plea said authorities remain negligent about safety measures concerning borewells despite Supreme Court directions in 2010. The advocate cited several news reports of borewell deaths in Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Tamil Nadu, and Maharashtra over the years after the court issued directions. 
Citing the failure of the government at the State and Central levels to comply with the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/united-states-supreme-court-to-hear-its-first-major-gun-case-since-2010-265748">Supreme Court 2010</a> guidelines to prevent bore well/tube well deaths, the plea said that such deaths have been reported across the country.

The plea was filed in October 2019 in the wake of the death of two-year-old Sujith Wilson, who got trapped in an abandoned borewell near Tiruchi in Tamil Nadu.

Not only Tamil Nadu State authorities failed to take any steps to prevent the death of small children who fall into abandoned or open bore wells and tube wells, but they have failed to implement or comply with the directions issued by the Supreme Court in this regard, the petition stated.

"After the 2010 Supreme Court judgment was passed, there have been several incidents clearly evincing the total failure of the government to do their part to prevent the death of innocent children from falls into such wells," the petition states.

Immediate, necessary action and punishment be ordered against erring government officials for non-compliance with these precautionary measures, it demanded.

The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice to Centre and all the State governments on a petition against the continued deaths of children who fall into borewells and the negligence shown by authorities to prevent such tragedies.

The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice to Centre and all the State governments on a petition against the continued deaths of children who fall into borewells and the negligence shown by authorities to prevent such tragedies. A Bench of Justice Arun Mishra and Justice MR Shah sought response from the Central and State governments, Union Territories and the NDRF on the PIL filed by advocate GS Mani. The plea said authorities remain negligent about safety measures concerning borewells despite Supreme Court directions in 2010. The advocate cited several news reports of borewell deaths in Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Tamil Nadu, and Maharashtra over the years after the court issued directions. Citing the failure of the government at the State and Central levels to comply with the Supreme Court 2010 guidelines to prevent bore well/tube well deaths, the plea said that such deaths have been reported across the country. The plea was filed in October 2019 in the wake of the death of two-year-old Sujith Wilson, who got trapped in an abandoned borewell near Tiruchi in Tamil Nadu. Not only Tamil Nadu State authorities failed to take any steps to prevent the death of small children who fall into abandoned or open bore wells and tube wells, but they have failed to implement or comply with the directions issued by the Supreme Court in this regard, the petition stated. "After the 2010 Supreme Court judgment was passed, there have been several incidents clearly evincing the total failure of the government to do their part to prevent the death of innocent children from falls into such wells," the petition states. Immediate, necessary action and punishment be ordered against erring government officials for non-compliance with these precautionary measures, it demanded.

Supreme Court seeks reply from Centre and States on plea to stop deaths in borewells

The <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/no-question-of-nrc-in-bihar-pm-has-clarified-his-stand-on-it-nitish-kumar-273931">Supreme Court</a> on Tuesday dismissed the curative petition of the two death row convicts in the 2012 Nirbhaya gang-rape case. 
 
A five-judge Bench of Justices <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/supreme-court-orders-review-on-all-restrictive-orders-in-jammu-and-kashmir-after-article-370-abrogation-273307">NV Ramana</a>, Arun Mishra, RF Nariman, R Banumathi and Ashok Bhushan heard the petition filed by Vinay Sharma and Mukesh Singh.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
SC's 5-judge bench, headed by Justice NV Ramana, starts hearing curative petitions filed by two Delhi 2012 gangrape&amp;murder case convicts Vinay&amp;Mukesh, in a chamber hearing.Curative petitions are decided in-chambers by judges. It' the last&amp;final legal remedy available to convicts. <a href="https://t.co/l7Lt8tKoiA">pic.twitter.com/l7Lt8tKoiA</a>
— ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1216999960861790208?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 14, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The duo had moved a curative petition in the top court after a Delhi court issued death warrants in their names for their hanging on January 22. 
 
Besides them, two other convicts named Pawan and Akshay are also slated to be <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/days-after-death-warrant-nirbhaya-case-convict-files-curative-plea-before-supreme-court-273126">executed</a> on the same day at 7 am in Delhi's Tihar Jail premises. 
 
They were convicted and sentenced to death for raping a 23-year-old woman in a moving bus in the national capital on the intervening night of December 16-17, 2012.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Asha Devi, mother of 2012 Delhi gang-rape victim: This is a big day for me. I had been struggling for the last 7 years. But the biggest day will be 22nd January when they (convicts) will be hanged. <a href="https://t.co/GBfPt9ezIb">https://t.co/GBfPt9ezIb</a> <a href="https://t.co/uMPcVfP7Sf">pic.twitter.com/uMPcVfP7Sf</a>
— ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1217009067983458304?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 14, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The victim, who was later given the name <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/tihar-jail-to-conduct-dummy-execution-of-nirbhaya-convicts-before-january-22-272825">Nirbhaya</a>, had succumbed to injuries at a hospital in Singapore where she had been airlifted for medical treatment. 
 
A curative petition is the last judicial resort available for the redressal of grievances. Curative petitions are decided in-chambers by the judges. 
 
If it is rejected, they are legally bound to move a mercy petition. It is filed before the President who has the power to commute it to life imprisonment. 
 
The court after issuing a black warrant in their name gave them two weeks time to file both the curative and mercy petitions.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed the curative petition of the two death row convicts in the 2012 Nirbhaya gang-rape case. A five-judge Bench of Justices NV Ramana, Arun Mishra, RF Nariman, R Banumathi and Ashok Bhushan heard the petition filed by Vinay Sharma and Mukesh Singh.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed the curative petition of the two death row convicts in the 2012 Nirbhaya gang-rape case. A five-judge Bench of Justices NV Ramana, Arun Mishra, RF Nariman, R Banumathi and Ashok Bhushan heard the petition filed by Vinay Sharma and Mukesh Singh. SC's 5-judge bench, headed by Justice NV Ramana, starts hearing curative petitions filed by two Delhi 2012 gangrape&murder case convicts Vinay&Mukesh, in a chamber hearing.Curative petitions are decided in-chambers by judges. It' the last&final legal remedy available to convicts. pic.twitter.com/l7Lt8tKoiA — ANI (@ANI) January 14, 2020 × The duo had moved a curative petition in the top court after a Delhi court issued death warrants in their names for their hanging on January 22. Besides them, two other convicts named Pawan and Akshay are also slated to be executed on the same day at 7 am in Delhi's Tihar Jail premises. They were convicted and sentenced to death for raping a 23-year-old woman in a moving bus in the national capital on the intervening night of December 16-17, 2012. Asha Devi, mother of 2012 Delhi gang-rape victim: This is a big day for me. I had been struggling for the last 7 years. But the biggest day will be 22nd January when they (convicts) will be hanged. https://t.co/GBfPt9ezIb pic.twitter.com/uMPcVfP7Sf — ANI (@ANI) January 14, 2020 × The victim, who was later given the name Nirbhaya, had succumbed to injuries at a hospital in Singapore where she had been airlifted for medical treatment. A curative petition is the last judicial resort available for the redressal of grievances. Curative petitions are decided in-chambers by the judges. If it is rejected, they are legally bound to move a mercy petition. It is filed before the President who has the power to commute it to life imprisonment. The court after issuing a black warrant in their name gave them two weeks time to file both the curative and mercy petitions.

Supreme Court dismisses Nirbhaya convicts curative pleas

Union Minister Prakash Javadekar on Monday said that India's green cover had increased by 15,000 square kilometres in the last four years.

While addressing a press conference here, Javadekar was asked about the ongoing issue of Aarey Colony in Mumbai.

"Supreme Court has given a decision on it, so I will not comment on the matter," Javadekar said.

However, Javadekar stated that the policy and the practice is, "if you cut one tree, you plant and ensure the growth of five trees."

Asked whether afforestation has worked, Javadekar replied, "In the last four years, the green cover of the country has increased by 15,000 square kilometres. There are only a few countries in the world whose green cover has increased, that includes India."

A special bench of the Supreme Court today asked the Maharashtra government to ensure that <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/supreme-court-asks-maharashtra-government-to-not-cut-more-trees-in-aarey-forest-254181">no trees are further axed</a> at Mumbai's Aarey Colony.

A Bench of Justices Arun Mishra and Ashok Bhushan directed the government to maintain the status quo and said it would further hear all the petitions in the matter on October 21.

The court passed the directive after hearing a suo moto PIL based on a letter written by a group of law students to the court against the felling of trees.&nbsp;

Union Minister Prakash Javadekar on Monday said that India's green cover had increased by 15,000 square kilometres in the last four years. While addressing a press conference here, Javadekar was asked about the ongoing issue of Aarey Colony in Mumbai.

Union Minister Prakash Javadekar on Monday said that India's green cover had increased by 15,000 square kilometres in the last four years. While addressing a press conference here, Javadekar was asked about the ongoing issue of Aarey Colony in Mumbai. "Supreme Court has given a decision on it, so I will not comment on the matter," Javadekar said. However, Javadekar stated that the policy and the practice is, "if you cut one tree, you plant and ensure the growth of five trees." Asked whether afforestation has worked, Javadekar replied, "In the last four years, the green cover of the country has increased by 15,000 square kilometres. There are only a few countries in the world whose green cover has increased, that includes India." A special bench of the Supreme Court today asked the Maharashtra government to ensure that no trees are further axed at Mumbai's Aarey Colony. A Bench of Justices Arun Mishra and Ashok Bhushan directed the government to maintain the status quo and said it would further hear all the petitions in the matter on October 21. The court passed the directive after hearing a suo moto PIL based on a letter written by a group of law students to the court against the felling of trees.

India's green cover has increased by 15,000 sq km in last four years: Union minister Prakash Javadekar

The Supreme Court on Tuesday partially allowed the review petition filed by the Centre against a March 2018 judgment of diluting various stringent provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

Setting aside a two-judge bench order, a three-judge bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra, said that the top court should not have ventured to frame guidelines as it comes within the domain of legislatures.

The <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/article-370-abrogation-supreme-court-seeks-centres-reply-on-pleas-challenging-decision-253017">apex court</a> observed that people belonging to SC and ST communities are still being abused and discriminated and that the abuse of the SC/ST Act cannot be a ground to dilute its provisions.

"Classes of SC/ST are suffering economically and socially for centuries," the bench said.

The court reserved its order on the review petition on September 18.

A two-judge bench had earlier this month referred the review plea to a three-judge bench for hearing the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/wont-grant-any-extra-day-after-october-18-to-complete-arguments-sc-tells-parties-in-ayodhya-case-252178">case</a>.

The three-judge bench today had set aside its March 20, 2018, order by which it had directed that a public servant could be arrested in cases lodged under the SC/ST Act "only after prior approval by the competent authority" and that there will be no automatic arrest on a complaint filed under the SC/ST Act.

The Centre had filed the review petition asking it to rethink its verdict after a backlash from the SC/ST community against the decision, which resulted in widespread protests across the country.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday partially allowed the review petition filed by the Centre against a March 2018 judgment of diluting various stringent provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday partially allowed the review petition filed by the Centre against a March 2018 judgment of diluting various stringent provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Setting aside a two-judge bench order, a three-judge bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra, said that the top court should not have ventured to frame guidelines as it comes within the domain of legislatures. The apex court observed that people belonging to SC and ST communities are still being abused and discriminated and that the abuse of the SC/ST Act cannot be a ground to dilute its provisions. "Classes of SC/ST are suffering economically and socially for centuries," the bench said. The court reserved its order on the review petition on September 18. A two-judge bench had earlier this month referred the review plea to a three-judge bench for hearing the case. The three-judge bench today had set aside its March 20, 2018, order by which it had directed that a public servant could be arrested in cases lodged under the SC/ST Act "only after prior approval by the competent authority" and that there will be no automatic arrest on a complaint filed under the SC/ST Act. The Centre had filed the review petition asking it to rethink its verdict after a backlash from the SC/ST community against the decision, which resulted in widespread protests across the country.

Supreme Court partially sets aside its 2018 order, allows Centre's review petition against dilution of SC/ST Act

The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed the cancellation of registration of <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/on-ms-dhonis-plea-sc-asks-amrapali-to-disclose-details-of-payments-214717">Amrapali Group</a> and ordered the National Buildings Construction Corporation (NBCC) to complete the unfinished housing projects of embattled real estate group in Noida and Greater Noida and handover these to the home-buyers.

A bench of the top court headed by Justice Arun Mishra further directed the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to conduct a detailed investigation against the group for diverting homebuyers` money.

The Supreme Court said that the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA) registration of Amrapali Group is cancelled.

The ED will register the money laundering cases against Amrapali Group, its Chief Managing Director, and other directors, the top court stated.

The top court had reserved the verdict on May 10 after hearing in detail the submissions from many parties, including Noida and Greater Noida authorities.

They had submitted to the Supreme Court that they don`t have the money or resources and expertise to finish the rest of the stalled projects of Amrapali Group in Noida and Greater Noida area.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed the cancellation of registration of Amrapali Group and ordered the National Buildings Construction Corporation (NBCC) to complete the unfinished housing projects of embattled real estate group in Noida and Greater Noida and handover these to the home-buyers.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed the cancellation of registration of Amrapali Group and ordered the National Buildings Construction Corporation (NBCC) to complete the unfinished housing projects of embattled real estate group in Noida and Greater Noida and handover these to the home-buyers. A bench of the top court headed by Justice Arun Mishra further directed the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to conduct a detailed investigation against the group for diverting homebuyers` money. The Supreme Court said that the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA) registration of Amrapali Group is cancelled. The ED will register the money laundering cases against Amrapali Group, its Chief Managing Director, and other directors, the top court stated. The top court had reserved the verdict on May 10 after hearing in detail the submissions from many parties, including Noida and Greater Noida authorities. They had submitted to the Supreme Court that they don`t have the money or resources and expertise to finish the rest of the stalled projects of Amrapali Group in Noida and Greater Noida area.

Amrapali Group's RERA registration cancelled; NBCC to complete unfinished housing projects: Supreme Court

Advocate Prashant Bhushan Thursday admitted before the Supreme Court that he made a "genuine mistake" by <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/supreme-court-issues-notice-to-lawyer-prashant-bhushan-on-contempt-plea-by-ag-and-centre-195507">tweeting that the government had perhaps submitted fabricated minutes of a meeting</a> of the high-powered selection committee on the appointment of M Nageswara Rao as an interim CBI director.

Attorney General KK Venugopal told a bench comprising justices Arun Mishra and Navin Sinha that in view of Bhushan's statement, he would like to withdraw his contempt plea filed against the noted lawyer.

However, Bhushan filed an application in the court seeking recusal of Justice Arun Mishra from hearing the contempt petition filed by Venugopal.

Bhushan also refused to tender an unconditional apology before the bench for seeking Justice Mishra's recusal.

Venugopal told the court that he stood by his earlier statement that he did not want any punishment for Bhushan in the matter.

The bench, however, said it would consider the larger issue of whether a person can criticise the court in a sub- judice matter to influence public opinion.

The bench posted the matter for further hearing on April 3.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan Thursday admitted before the Supreme Court that he made a "genuine mistake" by tweeting that the government had perhaps submitted fabricated minutes of a meeting of the high-powered selection committee on the appointment of M Nageswara Rao as an interim CBI director.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan Thursday admitted before the Supreme Court that he made a "genuine mistake" by tweeting that the government had perhaps submitted fabricated minutes of a meeting of the high-powered selection committee on the appointment of M Nageswara Rao as an interim CBI director. Attorney General KK Venugopal told a bench comprising justices Arun Mishra and Navin Sinha that in view of Bhushan's statement, he would like to withdraw his contempt plea filed against the noted lawyer. However, Bhushan filed an application in the court seeking recusal of Justice Arun Mishra from hearing the contempt petition filed by Venugopal. Bhushan also refused to tender an unconditional apology before the bench for seeking Justice Mishra's recusal. Venugopal told the court that he stood by his earlier statement that he did not want any punishment for Bhushan in the matter. The bench, however, said it would consider the larger issue of whether a person can criticise the court in a sub- judice matter to influence public opinion. The bench posted the matter for further hearing on April 3.

Prashant Bhushan admits in Supreme court he made 'genuine mistake' in his tweets on fabricated documents

The Supreme Court Tuesday disposed of a plea challenging the appointment of M Nageswara Rao as interim CBI Director.

A bench of Justices Arun Mishra and Vineet Saran said no further interference is required as the relief has already been granted with the appointment of a full-time CBI Director.

The verdict came on a plea of NGO, Common Cause, which had challenged the appointment of Rao as interim CBI director.

On February 4, Rishi Kumar Shukla, a 1983-batch IPS officer, took charge of the probe agency as a full-fledged director.&nbsp;

The Supreme Court Tuesday disposed of a plea challenging the appointment of M Nageswara Rao as interim CBI Director. A bench of Justices Arun Mishra and Vineet Saran said no further interference is required as the relief has already been granted with the appointment of a full-time CBI Director.

The Supreme Court Tuesday disposed of a plea challenging the appointment of M Nageswara Rao as interim CBI Director. A bench of Justices Arun Mishra and Vineet Saran said no further interference is required as the relief has already been granted with the appointment of a full-time CBI Director. The verdict came on a plea of NGO, Common Cause, which had challenged the appointment of Rao as interim CBI director. On February 4, Rishi Kumar Shukla, a 1983-batch IPS officer, took charge of the probe agency as a full-fledged director.

Supreme Court disposes plea challenging Rao's appointment as interim CBI chief, says no interference required

It is better not to be in Delhi, the Supreme Court said on Friday, expressing despair over the lack of implementation of measures to curb <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/dense-fog-at-delhi-airport-affects-over-450-flights-191247">air pollution</a> and traffic congestion in the capital which, it added, has become like a “gas chamber”.

“In the morning and evening, there is so much pollution and traffic congestion,” Justice Arun Mishra said, hearing a matter related to air pollution in the National Capital Region.

“It is better not to be in Delhi. I do not wish to settle in Delhi. It is difficult to live in Delhi,” he said.

A bench of justices Mishra and Deepak Gupta said these problems affect the right to life.

Justice Mishra cited an example to explain the problem of traffic, saying he was stuck in traffic on Friday morning and could have missed the swearing-in of two judges at the apex court.

Advocate Aparajita Singh, assisting the court as an amicus curiae, told the bench that Delhi has become a “gas chamber” due to pollution. And Justice Gupta agreed, “Yes, it is like gas chamber.”

Singh told the court that authorities always say they take measures to curb pollution but the reality is different.

“We would like to understand,” the bench said.

“What are the things which are required to be done in actuality? What remains to be done as per the comprehensive action plan? What is required to keep in check environment pollution in Delhi? What more can be done?” it said, adding, “implementation is definitely lacking”.

It said that many polluting vehicles enter Delhi at night and asked authorities how they were allowing these to enter the national capital.

The court asked the Delhi police what action they have taken to remove unclaimed vehicles — that are no longer required in legal cases — from police stations. It also asked the Delhi government why they have not appointed district ‘nazir’ (record keeper of record room).

The Delhi government’s counsel told it they are yet to receive a reply from Delhi Development Authority for allotment of land to build malkhana (record room).

“If you can dispose of the junk vehicles, you will get several acres of land,” the bench said.

The court posted the matter for further hearing on February 1.

It is better not to be in Delhi, the Supreme Court said on Friday, expressing despair over the lack of implementation of measures to curb air pollution and traffic congestion in the capital which, it added, has become like a “gas chamber”.

It is better not to be in Delhi, the Supreme Court said on Friday, expressing despair over the lack of implementation of measures to curb air pollution and traffic congestion in the capital which, it added, has become like a “gas chamber”. “In the morning and evening, there is so much pollution and traffic congestion,” Justice Arun Mishra said, hearing a matter related to air pollution in the National Capital Region. “It is better not to be in Delhi. I do not wish to settle in Delhi. It is difficult to live in Delhi,” he said. A bench of justices Mishra and Deepak Gupta said these problems affect the right to life. Justice Mishra cited an example to explain the problem of traffic, saying he was stuck in traffic on Friday morning and could have missed the swearing-in of two judges at the apex court. Advocate Aparajita Singh, assisting the court as an amicus curiae, told the bench that Delhi has become a “gas chamber” due to pollution. And Justice Gupta agreed, “Yes, it is like gas chamber.” Singh told the court that authorities always say they take measures to curb pollution but the reality is different. “We would like to understand,” the bench said. “What are the things which are required to be done in actuality? What remains to be done as per the comprehensive action plan? What is required to keep in check environment pollution in Delhi? What more can be done?” it said, adding, “implementation is definitely lacking”. It said that many polluting vehicles enter Delhi at night and asked authorities how they were allowing these to enter the national capital. The court asked the Delhi police what action they have taken to remove unclaimed vehicles — that are no longer required in legal cases — from police stations. It also asked the Delhi government why they have not appointed district ‘nazir’ (record keeper of record room). The Delhi government’s counsel told it they are yet to receive a reply from Delhi Development Authority for allotment of land to build malkhana (record room). “If you can dispose of the junk vehicles, you will get several acres of land,” the bench said. The court posted the matter for further hearing on February 1.

Better not to be in Delhi, it is like a gas chamber: Supreme Court

A Public Interest Litigation&nbsp;(PIL) seeking probe into judge BH Loya&#39;s alleged suspicious death&nbsp;is&nbsp;listed for hearing on Monday before a three-judge Supreme Court bench headed by Chief Justice of India(CJI) Dipak Misra.

Earlier, Justice Arun Mishra headed SC&nbsp;bench recused itself from hearing the case.&nbsp;

Justice Loya had been hearing the Sohrabuddin encounter case in which BJP President Amit Shah is also named.&nbsp;

Loya had died of cardiac arrest in Nagpur on December 1, 2014, when he had gone to attend the wedding of a colleague&#39;s daughter.

The Caravan magazine had, after talking to Loya&#39;s family members, first reported that he had died in mysterious circumstances.&nbsp;

Subsequent news reports have partly corroborated the Caravan report while disagreeing with other parts of it.&nbsp;

Justice Loya was hearing the Sohrabuddin encounter case in which BJP President Amit Shah is also named.

A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking probe into judge BH Loya's alleged suspicious death is listed for hearing on Monday before a three-judge Supreme Court bench headed by Chief Justice of India(CJI) Dipak Misra. Earlier, Justice Arun Mishra headed SC bench recused itself from hearing the case. Justice Loya had been hearing the Sohrabuddin encounter case in which BJP President Amit Shah is also named. Loya had died of cardiac arrest in Nagpur on December 1, 2014, when he had gone to attend the wedding of a colleague's daughter. The Caravan magazine had, after talking to Loya's family members, first reported that he had died in mysterious circumstances. Subsequent news reports have partly corroborated the Caravan report while disagreeing with other parts of it.

SC bench headed by CJI Dipak Misra to hear Justice Loya's death case on Monday

arun-mishra

Arun Mishra, News on Arun Mishra, stories on Arun Mishra, articles on Arun Mishra, Arun Mishra stories at Wion, Arun Mishra news, Arun Mishra latest news

arun mishra