PUNE: The Supreme Court of India delivered several landmark verdicts in 2019 that had a far reaching impact. The cases ranged from those pending for decades, while others helped pave way for better functioning of the system.
Ayodhya land title dispute
A five-judge Bench led by outgoing Chief Justice of India (CJI) Ranjan Gogoi delivered a verdict in the 69-year-old Ayodhya land title dispute. The case was pending for the last 69 years when a suit was filed in this regard.
The top court gave a verdict that disputed 2.77 acres land parcel had been occupied in the 16th century to build the mosque which was demolished in 1992. The disputed land was awarded to the deity Ram Lalla, one of the three litigants in the case.
The court directed the Central government to allocate 5 acres of alternative land to the Sunni Waqf Board in Ayodhya to build a mosque.
RTI Act supersedes Official Secrets Act
The apex court has given a ruling that the government cannot withhold documents citing the Official Secrets Act if concealing the documents could do more harm than disclosing them. The observation came during a judgment on the Rafale fighter jet deal case. The government had cited ‘national security’ as a reason for not sharing documents.
No dilution in SC/ST Act
In October, the Supreme Court recalled the two directions passed in 2018 by its two-judge Bench and restored the earlier position of the Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocity) Act, 1989. In its 2018 verdict, the apex court had taken note of the rampant misuse of the stringent SC/ST Act against government servants and private individuals and said that there would be no immediate arrest on any complaint filed under the law. However, the court made it clear that its Constitution Bench had already held that anticipatory bail could be granted in such matters if courts concerned felt no prima facie case was made out.
Sabrimala temple case referred to a larger bench
In September 2018, the Supreme Court ruled that women of all age groups can enter Lord Ayyappa’s Sabarimala temple which had banned the entry of women between the ages of 10 and 50 years. The ruling came on a petition filed by six women in 2006. However, review petitions were filed against the verdict after a widespread protest by the people. On November 14, 2019, the Supreme Court’s Constitution Bench referred the review petitions as well as the writ petitions to a larger bench of not less than seven judges.
