Podcasts about chief justice ranjan gogoi

On 13th and 14th November, Supreme Court benches led by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, who is set to retire on the 17th of November, heard a clutch of important cases. On this episode of 3 Things, we dissect the judgements on these five cases- the Rafale case review, the contempt case against Rahul Gandhi related to the Rafale issue, a review of the Sabrimala case, a case seeking to make the highest court and it's administration a public authority, and a review of the Finance Act 2017 which would make tribunals less independent.  Anantkrishnan G and Apurva Vishwanath, who report on matters of law for the Indian Express, join us to explain whether it's the end of the road for the Rafale case, why the Sabarimala case got combined with other writ petitions and referred to a larger bench, what it means for the Supreme Court to finally become a public authority and open to RTIs, and how the Finance Act 2017 would have compromised the independence of tribunals like the National Green Tribunal. 

Supreme Court on Thursday said that restrictions on women in religious places was not limited to Sabarimala alone and was prevalent in other religions as well. The court referred all review pleas to a larger seven-judge bench seeking review of its 2018 ruling that allowed menstruating women to enter the Sabarimala temple in Kerala. A five-judge constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi gave its judgment this morning after hearing as many as 65 petitions - including 56 review petitions and four fresh writ petitions and five transfer pleas - which were filed after its Sabarimala verdict sparked violent protests in Kerala. On September 28, 2018, the top court opened the gates of the Sabarimala Temple in Kerala dedicated to Lord Ayyappa to the women in the age group of 10-50, saying it was violative of their fundamental rights and constitutional guarantees. The court’s verdict sparked protests across Kerala, mainly led by caste outfits like the NSS and right-wing Hindu organisations of the Sangh Parivar. Meanwhile, this year, the temple is being opened for the two-month-long annual pilgrimage on November 16 and the verdict has come just two days before it. Listen to the podcast to know how the Sabarimala Temple Case evolved over time

The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued notice to advocate Utsav Bains, who has filed an affidavit in the court claiming that the sexual harassment allegations against Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi are part of an attempt to frame the CJI, asking him to appear before the court on Wednesday morning with material to back up certain claims made by him.

A special hearing was convened by the Supreme Court on Saturday, 20 April, over safeguarding the independence of the judiciary following a complaint of sexual harassment against the Chief Justice of India (CJI). Undoubtedly, the matter required urgent attention but the court hereon has to be cautious not to proceed with the presumption that the complaint is false. It is not whether the allegations are true or false, but the impartiality with which the court proceeds will cement the faith of the people in the judiciary. The bench, presided over by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, did not issue any specific direction, but the hearing on the judicial side clearly seemed unwarranted. The hearing purportedly for preserving the independence of judiciary was based on the presumption that the complaint was false. Or at least it seemed to be so, with the proceedings maligning the alleged victim and her family members who were not represented. For more podcasts from The Quint, check out our [Podcasts](https://www.thequint.com/news/podcast) section.

The Supreme Court on 17 January fixed a February-end deadline for the search committee on Lokpal to recommend a panel of names for appointment of the country's first anti-graft ombudsman. The search committee is headed by former apex court judge Ranjana Prakash Desai. A bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi directed the Centre to provide the search committee requisite infrastructure and manpower to enable it to complete its work. The bench, also comprising justices L N Rao and S K Kaul, said it would hear the matter again on March 7. Attorney General K K Venugopal, appearing for the Centre, told the bench there were certain problems like lack of infrastructure and manpower due to which the search committee was not able to hold deliberations on the issue. Anchor- Frank Rausan Pereira Guest- Satya Prakash, Legal Editor, The Tribune Ashok Tandon, Senior Journalist Abhishek Atrey, Advocate, Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on 16 December dismissed the pleas of five states seeking modification of its order issued last year on the selection and appointment of director generals of police. The apex court was hearing applications of various state governments, including Punjab, Kerala, West Bengal, Haryana and Bihar, seeking implementation of their local laws regarding the selection and appointment of DGPs. A bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi said the earlier directions of the court on selection and appointment of DGPs were issued in larger public interest and to protect the police officials from political interference. The top court, on July 3 last year, passed a slew of directions on police reforms in the country and chronicled the steps for appointment of regular DGPs. It said the states will have to send a list of senior police officers to the UPSC at least three months prior to the retirement of the incumbent. The commission will then prepare a panel and intimate the states, which in turn will immediately appoint one of the persons from that list. Anchor- Frank Rausan Pereira Guest- Dr. Vikram Singh, Former DGP, Uttar Pradesh Sushil Chandra Tripathi, Former Chief Secretary, Uttar Pradesh P. K. Malhotra, Former Secretary, Ministry of Law, GoI Satya Prakash, Legal Editor, The Tribune

The Supreme Court on Monday declined early hearing of petitions in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title dispute case. A bench comprising Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justice S K Kaul said it had already listed the appeals before the appropriate bench in January. ""We have already passed the order. The appeals are coming up in January. Permission declined,"" the bench said while rejecting the request of early hearing of lawyer Barun Kumar Sinha, appearing for the Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha. The top court had earlier fixed the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute case for the first week of January before an ""appropriate bench"", which will decide the schedule of hearing.

RSS general secretary Bhaiyyaji Joshi today signalled that the Rashtriya Syayamsevak Sangh will organise (1992 loop) 1992 like agitation on the Ram Mandir issue. Addressing a press conference after the 3 day Akhil Bharatiya Karyakari Mandal Baithak, Joshi said,(graphic) “Ram Mandir is a matter of faith for crores of Hindus. It’s been over 7-8 yrs the matter is pending in Supreme Court. The delay in the verdict from the court’s side is surprising, concerning and insulting to Hindu sentiments. We appeal to the court to expedite the case,” The bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi said, “It will come up in the first week of January not for hearing but for deciding the date of the hearing. The hearing may be in January, February, March, whenever….also the bench by which it shall be heard will be constituted.