2018/Issue 7

Juris Diurna

1st July to 15th July


Issue 7

  • Lieutenant Governor bound by aid and advise of Delhi Government: Supreme Court

The long ongoing power tussle between the Delhi government and Lieutenant Governor has finally come to an end. The Apex court reversed the decision of the Delhi HC and held that Lieutenant Governor is an administrative head in a limited sense, bound by aid and advice of the Delhi government, except in matters exempted under Article 239 AA (4) of the Constitution i.e. pertaining to land, police and public order. However, Delhi continues to have special status and does not fall under the category of a “State”.

Further reading:

  1. Krishnadas Rajagopal, Key Arguments in Delhi govt. vs L-G case, The Hindu (July 4, 2018)
  2. Manu Sebastian, Govt. of Delhi Vs Lt. Governor: Summary of Supreme Court Judgment, Live Law (July 4, 2018) .
  3. Faizan Mustafa, Delhi power tussle: Between the Supreme Court line, The Indian Express, (July 5, 2018).
  4. Gautam Bhatia, “Working a Democratic Constitution”: The Supreme Court’s judgment in NTC Delhi v. Union of Indian, Indian Constitutional law and Philosophy (July 4, 2018).
  5. Sanjay Hedge, The Democratic Mandate in Delhi, The Hindu (July 9, 2018).
  6. Shailaja Chandra, Marking the Boundaries, The Indian Express (July 5, 2018).
  7. Gaurav Vivek Bhatnagar, Despite Delhi Verdict on Power Tussle, Harmonious coexistence likely a far cry, The Wire (July 4, 2018).

  • Supreme court favours live streaming of court proceedings

The Supreme Court showed its willingness to experiment with live streaming of its hearings and asked Attorney General, K.K. Venugopal to advance suggestions in order to aid the framing of comprehensive guidelines for the same. The Supreme Court bench comprising of Chief Justice Dipak Misra, Justices A.M. Khanwilkar and D.Y. Chandrachud observed that livestreaming was an extension of the ‘open court’ system and that the same was the “need of the hour”. This comes in response to petitions filed by Senior Advocate Indira Jaising and law student Swapnil Tripathi, wherein Ms. Jaising asserted that citizens have the right to seek and receive information including live streaming of Supreme Court proceedings under Article 19 (1)(a). However, reservations were expressed about live streaming of cases involving national security concerns, matrimonial disputes and rape cases.

Further reading:

  1. Krishnadas Rajagopal, SC says it is ready to go live, Centre moots a TV channel, The Hindu (July 9, 2018).
  2. Express News Service, SC asks Centre to submit report on live- streaming of court proceedings, The Indian Express (July 10, 2018).
  3. Vishavjeet Chaudhary, To stream or not to stream?, Bar & Bench (July 10, 2018).
  4. Avani Bansal, Ramesh Mishra, Arun Thiruvengadam, Should Supreme Court proceedings be live-streamed?, The Hindu (February 16, 2018).

  • Supreme court issues directions on appointment of Director General of Police by States

The court ruled that the States must not appoint acting DGPs and shall avoid the practice of appointing a DGP who would continue to hold the post for an additional period of 2 years after his retirement age. This came in response to the Attorney General’s argument that States would appoint their favorite officers as acting DGP, then when they are about to retire, they are appointed as DGP so that they have an extended service for 2 more years, as required by Prakash Singh Case. It further directed the States to send proposals to UPSC 3 months prior to retirement date of current DGP. The UPSC would then be required to send in three suitable candidates out of which the States shall appoint any one.

Further Reading:

  1. Vijaita Singh, Political Masters wanted their own DGPs, The Hindu (July 3, 2018).
  2. Prakash Singh, Towards a people’s police, The Indian Express (July 5, 2018).
  3. Krishnadas Rajagopal, Consult UPSC, Supreme Court tells States, The Hindu (July 3, 2018).
  4. Mehal Jain, States can’t appoint ‘Acting Director General of Police’, Live Law (July 3, 2018).

  • Law Commission recommends legalizing of gambling in sports while supporting its regulation

The Law commission headed by former Supreme Court Judge, Justice B.S. Chauhan, has observed in a report that it is impossible to stop illegal gambling and hence, the viable option is regulating it. In terms of regulation, the commission suggested that only cashless betting be allowed, and transactions be linked to Aadhar card and PAN card of gamblers and operators. It also suggested a cap on both the amount and number of transactions per individual. However, one member of the commission dissented and observed that socio-economic and cultural circumstances in India are not suited for legalizing betting, especially as it is still attracts social stigma.

Further Reading:

  1. V.M Kanade, Navjeet Wasan & Jaydev Moody, Should gambling be legalized?, The Hindu (March 30, 2018)
  2. Editorial, Betting on the Future, The Indian Express (July 7, 2018)
  3. Sriram Veera, Law Commission recommends legalizing sports betting in India, The Indian Express (July 6, 2018)
  4. Krishnadas Rajagopal, Condition not ripe for gambling, The Hindu (July 6, 2018)

  • Cabinet approves accession to WIPO Internet Treaties

The Union Cabinet agreed to India’s accession to the WIPO Copyright Treaty and WIPO Performers and Phonograms Treaty which provides protection to the works of copyright owners, actors, musicians and sound recorders in the internet and digital environment. The accession is a step towards achieving the objectives laid in the National Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, which aims to get value for IPRs through commercialization over internet and mobile platforms. These treaties will help India enable creative right holders to benefit from their labour through an international copyright system,facilitate reciprocal international protection of domestic rights holders, while also contributing to the development of a dynamic creative economy.

Further Reading:

  1. Aasavri Rai, Cabinet Okays Proposal to Accede to WIPO Copyright Treaty, WIPO Performance and Phonograms Treaty, Live Law (July 5, 2018).
  2. Seemantani Sharma, India Approves Accession to WIPO Internet Treaties, The Wire (July 12, 2018).
  3. Rishabh Mohnot, Huge Win for Copyright Owners: India Signs up to Internet Copyright Treaties!, SpicyIP (July 6, 2018).
  4. Seemantani Sharma, India, RCEP and the WIPO Internet Treaties: Time For a Rethink, The Diplomat (August 16, 2017)


Intensely Human”: A Brief Biographical Sketch of Edmund Elmar Mack

By Douglas McDonald-Norman

This post is the fourth in a loosely-linked set of posts on colonial continuity in the Indian judiciary. Previous posts can be found here, here and here. This post sets out the key points of Mack’s career in India, before briefly examining what his life and career says about the difficulty of articulating clear divides between coloniser and colonised and between colonial and postcolonial dispensations. […]

Read More

HLS Library Book Talk | Supreme Court of India: The Beginnings

By Mitra Sharafi

The author discuses the work of Prof. George Gadbois (an earlier post on the same book is available here). The contents of this post first appeared during HLS Library Book Talk on Supreme Court of India: The Beginnings (available here). It has been converted into a transcript by Bhavisha Sharma. […]

Read More

The criminal law as sledgehammer: The paternalist politics of India’s 2018 Trafficking Bill

By Prabha Kotiswaran
The author discusses the issues ‘The Trafficking of Persons (Prevention, Protection and Rehabilitation) Bill 2018’ which may be tabled in this Monsoon Session of the Indian Parliament.

Read More

`Three reflections on the s 377 case

By Tarunabh Khaitan

The author discusses and reflects on the recent hearing the case regarding Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code by the Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court of India.

Read More

Increase in Retirement Age of Judges Isn’t Solution to Pressing Problems of Judicial Backlogs and Vacancies

By Chittkrishna Thakkar
The author discusses the proposal to increase the retirement age of judges and how the same does not address the issues of  backlog of cases and inordinate delay.

We thank Gayatri Gupta and Chittkrishna Thakkar for their assistance in collating the data, and Benjamin Vanlalvena for designing this newsletter.