Ritika
Justice D.Y. Chandrachud said while reciting the extract..
Chief Justice D.Y. While reading out the extract, Chandrachud said, “The 7 judges cannot be taken into account in the context of the incident or in the abstract, separate and specific matters or in the facts of the case”. “It is necessary to consider whether the element which was decided in Nabam Rebia has no effect on the actual situation in the present case. Whether reference to the judgment in Nabam Rebia deserves to be referred to a larger bench will be decided on the merits of the issue or case. Aseel on the basis”, said Asanhi Chief Justice.
Kapil Sibal and Abhishek Manu Singhvi would have been rationalized by Shiv Sena and Mahavikas Aghadi. Kapil Sibal, citing various findings, would have demanded that Nabam Rebia’s findings be handed over to a 7-judge bench for reconsideration in the power struggle case in Maharashtra. Supreme Court Judge Abhishek Manu Singhvi had also commented on the proceedings of the Supreme Court on 27th and 29th June.
Thackeray Vs Shinde: Case 7 in Court: Incidents of Justices will not go to the bench? February 21 re-hearing
Shinde Gatcha big event protest
For Eknath Shinde, Harish Salve and N. Of. Kaul used rationalization. Senior advocates Mahesh Jethmalani, Maninder Singh and Siddharth Bhatnagar also argued. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued for the Governor. Or everyone would have argued that there was no need to reconsider the wrongness of the Nabam Rebia decision. Explainer: Why was the Nabam Rebia episode at the forefront of the Shinde vs. Thackeray debate?
