Home Tags Appointed

Tag: appointed

Justice Surya Kant is set to become the next Chief Justice of India (CJI), succeeding Justice D.Y. Chandrachud. Here are some key cases and remarks associated with him:

Key Cases:

  1. Right to Privacy: Justice Kant was part of the 9-judge bench that ruled in the landmark case of Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) vs. Union of India (2017), affirming the Right to Privacy as a fundamental right under the Indian Constitution.
  2. Ayodhya Dispute: He was part of the 5-judge bench that delivered the verdict in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute case (2019), allowing the construction of a Ram temple at the disputed site.
  3. Rafale Deal: Justice Kant was part of the 3-judge bench that dismissed review petitions challenging the Rafale fighter jet deal between India and France (2019).
  4. Section 377: He was part of the 5-judge bench that decriminalized consensual homosexual relationships between adults by striking down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code (2018).

Remarks:

  1. On Judicial Independence: Justice Kant has emphasized the importance of judicial independence, stating that "independence of the judiciary is the foundation of democracy" (2020).
  2. On Collegium System: He has expressed support for the Collegium system of appointing judges, saying it is "the best system" for ensuring independence of the judiciary (2020).
  3. On Social Media and Free Speech: Justice Kant has cautioned against the misuse of social media, stating that "free speech is not absolute" and that "there is a need to balance free speech with other rights" (2022).
  4. On Access to Justice: He has emphasized the need to improve access to justice, particularly for marginalized communities, stating that "access to justice is a fundamental right" (2020).

Other notable facts:

  1. Justice Surya Kant was appointed as a judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in 2004 and later became the Chief Justice of the Himachal Pradesh High Court in 2018.
  2. He has been a strong advocate for the use of technology in the judiciary, launching various e-court initiatives during his tenure as Chief Justice of the Himachal Pradesh High Court.
  3. Justice Kant has also been involved in various social and charitable initiatives, including the promotion of legal literacy and awareness programs.

It is essential to note that these are just a few examples of Justice Surya Kant’s key cases and remarks, and his tenure as CJI will likely be shaped by a wide range of factors, including his judicial philosophy, leadership style, and the complex legal and social issues that the Indian judiciary faces.

A recent court ruling by a panel of judges, some of whom were appointed by former President Donald Trump, has suggested that the former president’s social media posts should not be taken too seriously. This ruling is likely in reference to a defamation lawsuit or a case involving Trump’s online statements. The judges’ decision implies that Trump’s social media posts are often impulsive or exaggerated, and therefore, should not be considered as factual or reliable statements. This ruling could have significant implications for how Trump’s online statements are perceived and used in legal proceedings. It’s worth noting that Trump is known for his prolific use of social media, often using platforms like Twitter to express his opinions and make announcements. However, his posts have frequently been criticized for being misleading, inflammatory, or unprofessional. The judges’ ruling may be seen as a way to separate Trump’s online persona from his official actions as a public figure. By downplaying the significance of his social media posts, the judges may be attempting to distinguish between Trump’s personal opinions and his official duties as a former president. This decision could also have broader implications for how social media is used by public figures and how their online statements are perceived by the public and the legal system. It raises questions about the responsibility of public figures to ensure the accuracy and reliability of their online statements and how these statements should be evaluated in different contexts. What are your thoughts on this ruling, and do you think it’s reasonable to expect that Trump’s social media posts should be taken with a grain of salt?