Supreme Court LIVE: Constitution Bench to Hear Pleas on Aadhaar Linking, Govt Unwilling to Extend Deadline

In a press conference, West Bengal chief minister Mamata Banerjee said that she respects the Supreme Court’s directive asking her to challenge the linking of Aadhaar in an individual capacity. “They have not rejected my petition,” she says. "How can a state file such a plea. In a federal structure, how can a state file a plea challenging Parliament's mandate," a bench comprising Justices AK Sikri and Ashok Bhushan had said earlier in the day.

The Surpeme Court has deferred the hearing in the Article 35-A case by two months. While the Centre had sought a time of six months, the apex court decided to adjourn the case for eight weeks. Article 35-A provides special rights and privileges to permanent residents of Jammu and Kashmir.

Mamata-Aadhaar Hearing | West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee is holding a press conference at 3:30 pm today. She is expected to address the Aadhaar issue.

The deadline issue talks of an extension for people who do not have Aadhaar card as of yet and the government giving them the leeway to do so and link all services by March 31, 2018. The petitioners are contesting why the same should not be extended to those already with Aadhaar. 

Aadhaar Deadline Hearing | The Supreme Court has decided to set up a Constitution Bench to hear pleas against the mandatory linking of Aadhaar with mobile numbers and bank accounts as the government remained unwilling to extend the December 31 deadline for those who already have the biometric ID. "We will argue the case," the government tells Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court on Monday asked West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee to approach the court on Aadhaar as an individual.

Mullaperiyar Case | Tamil Nadu Government has filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court stating that the embankment is functioning as a new dam and is safe in all respects.

"Marriage is a personal affair. There is no law stating that a person can't marry a criminal. Don't try to curb individual cases," says Supreme Court, while adding that it will examine parental authority can be exercised on a major.

"It is a well-oiled machinery. Consent is manipulated by indoctrination, radicalisation. In fact, people with Hypnotic expertise have been employed to manipulate young women," says NIA to the Supreme Court.

Hadiya's father Ashokan KM pleads in court that the case proceedings be heard in-camera but CJI Dipak Misra says it will be in open court around 3 pm. By November 27, it would have been five months since Hadiya's custody was handed over to her parents. Meanwhile, the NIA has told SC that there is a well-oiled machinery involving radicalisation and love jihad cases in Kerala.

Earlier, in a video released in August, Hadiya was heard pleading with activist Rahul Eashwar to help end her confinement. "Get me out of here. Today or tomorrow, I am going to die. I am sure about this. My father is getting angry, I can make out. He pushes me, stamps at me," says the 24-year-old. Hadiya has been living with her father after the Kerala High Court annulled her marriage to Shafin Jahan in May this year and ordered her to return to live with her parents in Kottayam.

Love Jihad Case Hearing | Supreme Court orders Hadiya to be produced in court on November 27. Will hear her out in open court.

Mullaperiyar Case | Tamil Nadu Government has submitted a report in Supreme Court stating that the dam is completely safe and asking the Kerala Government to educate its people about the safety.

Senior advocate Indira Jaising, appearing for Gandhi, said she will explain the locus if the court moves ahead with issuing of notice.

Mamata-Aadhaar Hearing | Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the West Bengal government, told the court that the plea has been filed by the labour department of the state as subsidies under these schemes have to be given by them. "You satisfy us how the state has challenged it. We know it is a matter which needs consideration," the bench said adding the Centre's move can be challenged by an individual but not by states. "Let Mamata Banerjee come and file a plea as an individual. We will entertain it as she will be an individual," the top court said. However, Sibal maintained that the state was entitled to file such a plea but said that they would amend the prayer in the petition.

Love Jihad Case Hearing | The hearing for the case is underway and the Supreme Court has observed that the consent of the girl is prime as she is a major.

Mamata-Aadhaar Hearing | The Supreme Court has issued a notice to the Centre, asking it to file responses in the case within 4 weeks. The apex court also sent notices to telecom companies.

Gandhi Assassination Case | Tushar Gandhi, the great-grandson of Mahatma Gandhi, today moved the Supreme Court opposing a plea seeking to reopen the 70-year-old assassination case of the Mahatma. A bench of Justices SA Bobde and MM Shantanagoudar questioned the locus of Tushar Gandhi in the case. Senior advocate Indira Jaising, appearing for Gandhi, said she will explain the locus if the court moves ahead with issuing of notice. The bench said there were several ifs and buts in the case and will like to wait for the amicus curiae (friend of the court) Amrender Sharan's report.

Article 35A Hearing | The Sangh Parivar would be closely watching the Centre's stand on the Article 35A hearing in the Supreme Court. RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat had called for "necessary Constitutional amendments" in his annual Vijayadashmi speech late last month. Bhagwat, while lauding the government's muscular policy in Kashmir, had broached the subject to assimilate “the residents of Jammu & Kashmir, with rest of Bharat”.

The hearing will be keenly watched in Kashmir where separatists claim the challenge to the provision is aimed at changing the state demographics.

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear fresh petitions against linking Aadhaar with mobile phone numbers. Thus opening the door for Mamata Banerjee, in an individual capacity, to challenge the move that she has vehemently opposed.

West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee had earlier said that she would rather lose her mobile phone connection than link it to her Aadhaar card. “Under no circumstances will I link Aadhaar with my telephone number. If the authorities disconnect my phone, let them do it. It will actually save me a lot of trouble as I won’t have to go through a number of text messages,” she said. The TMC supreme further alleged that linking of Aadhaar with phone numbers was a ploy by the BJP to spy on people. "It is a direct attack on privacy," she had said.

Mamata-Aadhaar Hearing | The Supreme Court has pulled up the Mamata Banerjee government for moving the court against linking Aadhaar with welfare schemes. "Mamata Banerjee has to approach us as individuals. A state cannot question laws passed by the parliament," said the apex court.

The last of the three petitions was filed by a Delhi-based lawyer, Charu Wali Khanna. “Article 14 of the Constitution gives a fundamental right to equality before law. But 35A is heavily loaded in favour of males because even after marriage to women from outside, they will not lose the right of being permanent residents,” she told the court. The petitioner has argued that such laws only “perpetuate power politics” which leave behind women who are trying to claim their own spaces. 

After the first petition in 2014, the West Pakistan Refugees Action Committee Cell moved the apex court through a writ petition in 2015. Its primary contention was that human rights of refugees, who crossed over to the state post-1947, were grossly violated. It argues that West Pakistan refugees have been living in the state for over four decades but still were deprived of their rights to property, right to vote or be recognized as permanent citizens.

Article 35A Hearing | The first petition was filed by 'We the Citizens', an NGO based in Delhi in 2014. The petition contends that ‘Kashmir never separated from the Federation of Indian dominion'. To buttress this point, the petition states that J&K had already acceded to the Indian dominion under the Government of India Act, 1935 and that a new instrument of accession was signed by the Dogra Ruler in 1947 was to only "remove doubt, confusion or ambiguity". The petitioners also argue that "no special provision was made in the Indian Constitution giving special status/treatment to the state of Jammu & Kashmir" as four representatives from the state were part of the constituent assembly which gave shape to the Indian constitution.

The petitions have been filed by NGO on grounds that Article 35A was illegally added to the Constitution of India as it was never floated before Parliament.

Mamata-Aadhaar Hearing | West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee had earlier said that she would rather lose her mobile phone connection than link it to her Aadhaar card. “Under no circumstances will I link Aadhaar with my telephone number. If the authorities disconnect my phone, let them do it. It will actually save me a lot of trouble as I won’t have to go through a number of text messages,” she said. The TMC supreme further alleged that linking of Aadhaar with phone numbers was a ploy by the BJP to spy on people. "It is a direct attack on privacy," she had said.

Schools Safety Petitions | The safety in schools petitions were filed after the Ryan school murder put focus on children’s safety in schools. A 42-year-old bus conductor, Ashok Kumar, was arrested after confessing to slitting the throat of the Class 2 student who he allegedly tried to sexually abuse inside the private school’s toilet. Other than the Ryan schoolboy, two girls — aged five and six — studying in separate private schools in New Delhi were raped by housekeeping staff of the institutes. There were allegations that the schools didn’t check the background of these people before hiring them.

The Article 35A hearing comes after Congress leader P Chidambaram spoke for greater autonomy for Jammu and Kashmir. Chidambaram's comments were strongly rebutted by the BJP's top brass, including Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Finance Minister Arun Jaitley. The Congress distanced itself from the comment by calling it an "individual opinion".