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

Kerala woman, Hadiya, who is in the midst of Love Jihad controversy, will depose before the Supreme Court on Monday to tell her side of the story.

&quot;I am a Muslim. I want to go with my husband. Nobody forced me to convert,&quot; shouted Hadiya as she was rushed by her parents and security personnel to board a flight to Delhi amid tight security on Sunday.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/hadiyas-statements-cannot-be-taken-at-face-value-fathers-lawyer-25176" target="_blank">Also read:&nbsp;Hadiya&#39;s statements cannot be taken at face value, says father&#39;s lawyer</a>

Hadiya, originally a Hindu, converted to Islam and married a Muslim man Shafin Jahan.

The National Investigation Agency (NIA), which is probing the case has alleged that Hadiya was indoctrinated and she may be incapable of giving free consent to her marriage.

The NIA had said there was a well-oiled machinery working in Kerala that has indoctrinated and radicalised her.&nbsp;

As many as 89 cases of similar nature have been reported from the southern state, Additional Solicitor General Maninder Singh, who is representing the NIA, told the top court.

Meanwhile, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, counsel for Shafin Jahan, had opposed the NIA&#39;s submission and that of the woman&#39;s father.

Advocate Shyam Divan, representing Hadiya&#39;s father KM Ashokan recently said that whatever she said &quot;could not be accepted at face value&quot;.

The lawyer said that Hadiya&#39;s behaviour with her family was not normal and what she told the press could not be taken as &quot;her own free comments&quot;.

&quot;What Hadiya is saying cannot be accepted at its face value because she was made to say so, and that is our impression. Her behaviour with her family was not normal. Whatever she has said to the media cannot be taken as her own free comments,&quot; the lawyer told ANI.

A Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices A M Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud had asked Hadiya&#39;s father&#39;s advocate to ensure she is produced before them to ascertain whether she had married of her own free will.

Hadiya had converted to Islam and married a Muslim man, Shafin Jahan

Kerala woman, Hadiya, who is in the midst of Love Jihad controversy, will depose before the Supreme Court on Monday to tell her side of the story. "I am a Muslim. I want to go with my husband. Nobody forced me to convert," shouted Hadiya as she was rushed by her parents and security personnel to board a flight to Delhi amid tight security on Sunday. Also read: Hadiya's statements cannot be taken at face value, says father's lawyer Hadiya, originally a Hindu, converted to Islam and married a Muslim man Shafin Jahan. The National Investigation Agency (NIA), which is probing the case has alleged that Hadiya was indoctrinated and she may be incapable of giving free consent to her marriage. The NIA had said there was a well-oiled machinery working in Kerala that has indoctrinated and radicalised her. As many as 89 cases of similar nature have been reported from the southern state, Additional Solicitor General Maninder Singh, who is representing the NIA, told the top court. Meanwhile, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, counsel for Shafin Jahan, had opposed the NIA's submission and that of the woman's father. Advocate Shyam Divan, representing Hadiya's father KM Ashokan recently said that whatever she said "could not be accepted at face value". The lawyer said that Hadiya's behaviour with her family was not normal and what she told the press could not be taken as "her own free comments". "What Hadiya is saying cannot be accepted at its face value because she was made to say so, and that is our impression. Her behaviour with her family was not normal. Whatever she has said to the media cannot be taken as her own free comments," the lawyer told ANI. A Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices A M Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud had asked Hadiya's father's advocate to ensure she is produced before them to ascertain whether she had married of her own free will.

Kerala 'love jihad' case: Hadiya to appear in Supreme Court today

The Supreme Court has questioned the West Bengal government for filing plea against Centre&rsquo;s decision to make Aadhaar mandatory for availing benefits of welfare schemes.&nbsp;

&quot;In a federal structure, how can a state file plea challenging Parliament&#39;s mandate,&quot; the Supreme Court bench said.

We know it is a matter which needs consideration but you satisfy us how state can challenge it, the bench added.

After the court&#39;s rap, the Bengal government has agreed to amend the plea and will file it again.&nbsp;

&quot;If the court has said on Aadhaar matter that I need to approach individually, then I respect it. They have not rejected my petition,&quot; Mamata Banerjee said.

The West Bengal government&nbsp;<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/mamata-banerjee-challenges-aadhaar-in-supreme-court-hearing-on-october-30-23047">filed the plea last week</a> after Chief Minister and Trinamool Congress chief Mamata Banerjee opposed the linking of her mobile phone number with Aadhaar. &quot;Aadhaar number should not be linked with one&#39;s mobile phone. I will not link my Aadhaar number with my mobile even if my connection is snapped,&quot; she said at a party meeting.

However, the Aadhaar-mobile issue is not part of the state government&#39;s plea, senior advocate and Member of Parliament Kalyan Banerjee said.

The Centre had, on October 25, told the top court that the deadline for mandatory Aadhaar linking to avail benefits of various government schemes has been extended till March 31 next year. The extension concerned those who do not have the 12-digit biometric identification number.

Attorney General KK Venugopal told a bench headed Chief Justice Dipak Misra that deadline extension would apply only to those who do not have Aadhaar and are willing to enrol for it. Earlier, the deadline for linking of Aadhaar was December end this year.&nbsp;

Venugopal had also told the bench that he would take instructions on certain issues on Aadhaar after which the court had asked him to mention the matter again on October 30.

Several petitions are pending in the top court which challenge the centre&#39;s move to make Aadhaar linkage with mobile number and bank accounts mandatory for welfare schemes and notifications.

The court today&nbsp;issued notice to Centre on separate plea challenging&nbsp;linking of mobile phone numbers with Aadhaar and sought reply within four weeks.

We know it is a matter which needs consideration but you satisfy us how state can challenge it, the bench added.

The Supreme Court has questioned the West Bengal government for filing plea against Centre’s decision to make Aadhaar mandatory for availing benefits of welfare schemes. "In a federal structure, how can a state file plea challenging Parliament's mandate," the Supreme Court bench said. We know it is a matter which needs consideration but you satisfy us how state can challenge it, the bench added. After the court's rap, the Bengal government has agreed to amend the plea and will file it again. "If the court has said on Aadhaar matter that I need to approach individually, then I respect it. They have not rejected my petition," Mamata Banerjee said. The West Bengal government filed the plea last week after Chief Minister and Trinamool Congress chief Mamata Banerjee opposed the linking of her mobile phone number with Aadhaar. "Aadhaar number should not be linked with one's mobile phone. I will not link my Aadhaar number with my mobile even if my connection is snapped," she said at a party meeting. However, the Aadhaar-mobile issue is not part of the state government's plea, senior advocate and Member of Parliament Kalyan Banerjee said. The Centre had, on October 25, told the top court that the deadline for mandatory Aadhaar linking to avail benefits of various government schemes has been extended till March 31 next year. The extension concerned those who do not have the 12-digit biometric identification number. Attorney General KK Venugopal told a bench headed Chief Justice Dipak Misra that deadline extension would apply only to those who do not have Aadhaar and are willing to enrol for it. Earlier, the deadline for linking of Aadhaar was December end this year. Venugopal had also told the bench that he would take instructions on certain issues on Aadhaar after which the court had asked him to mention the matter again on October 30. Several petitions are pending in the top court which challenge the centre's move to make Aadhaar linkage with mobile number and bank accounts mandatory for welfare schemes and notifications. The court today issued notice to Centre on separate plea challenging linking of mobile phone numbers with Aadhaar and sought reply within four weeks.

How can state challenge Parliament's mandate: Supreme Court on Mamata govt's plea against Aadhaar