February 23, 2026

Rashid Khan Pathan

Final Door to Justice Cannot Be only for the Rich: JALSA and Sanvidhan Rakshak Samiti Urges CJI to Abolish Senior Counsel Certification Requirement for Curative Petitions, Citing Violations of Equality under the Constitution of India and International Covenants including the ICCPR. Screenshot 2025-12-28 at 11.52.13

Final Door to Justice Cannot Be only for the Rich: JALSA and Sanvidhan Rakshak Samiti Urges CJI to Abolish Senior Counsel Certification Requirement for Curative Petitions, Citing Violations of Equality under the Constitution of India and International Covenants including the ICCPR.

Rashid Khan Pathan Posted on 7 days ago
The Sanvidhan Rakshak Samiti (SRS) and Junior Advocates and Law Students Association (JALSA) contends that the requirement...
Read More Read more about Final Door to Justice Cannot Be only for the Rich: JALSA and Sanvidhan Rakshak Samiti Urges CJI to Abolish Senior Counsel Certification Requirement for Curative Petitions, Citing Violations of Equality under the Constitution of India and International Covenants including the ICCPR.
An order passed by the Supreme Court in proceedings under Article 136 of the Constitution can, be corrected or set aside in proceedings invoking Article 136 itself. A.R. Antulay v. R.S. Nayak, (1988) 2 SCC 602 (7-J). Screenshot 2026-02-02 at 22.04.35

An order passed by the Supreme Court in proceedings under Article 136 of the Constitution can, be corrected or set aside in proceedings invoking Article 136 itself. A.R. Antulay v. R.S. Nayak, (1988) 2 SCC 602 (7-J).

Rashid Khan Pathan Posted on 1 week ago
A  Seven-Judge Constitution Bench decision in A.R. Antulay v. R.S. Nayak, (1988) 2 SCC 602,   set aside...
Read More Read more about An order passed by the Supreme Court in proceedings under Article 136 of the Constitution can, be corrected or set aside in proceedings invoking Article 136 itself. A.R. Antulay v. R.S. Nayak, (1988) 2 SCC 602 (7-J).
The United Nations Human Rights Committee (HRC) can now intervene and examine Adv. Nedumpara’s case concerning his arbitrary conviction for contempt by the Supreme Court and the absence of a right of appeal as mandatorily required under Article 14(5) of the ICCPR. image-750x-2023-10-28-10_01_43pm-653d376f8f3b2

The United Nations Human Rights Committee (HRC) can now intervene and examine Adv. Nedumpara’s case concerning his arbitrary conviction for contempt by the Supreme Court and the absence of a right of appeal as mandatorily required under Article 14(5) of the ICCPR.

Rashid Khan Pathan Posted on 1 week ago
In several orders including Anthony Michael Emmanuel Fernando v. Sri Lanka, 2005 SCC OnLine HRC 22, decided...
Read More Read more about The United Nations Human Rights Committee (HRC) can now intervene and examine Adv. Nedumpara’s case concerning his arbitrary conviction for contempt by the Supreme Court and the absence of a right of appeal as mandatorily required under Article 14(5) of the ICCPR.
The Supreme Court rule permitting dismissal of a review petition without hearing and without recording reasons is unconstitutional, as it violates fundamental rights, denies fair procedure, and disregards the caution expressed by the Seven-Judge Constitution Bench. 2_03_59_58_supreme-court-_1_H@@IGHT_0_W@@IDTH_600

The Supreme Court rule permitting dismissal of a review petition without hearing and without recording reasons is unconstitutional, as it violates fundamental rights, denies fair procedure, and disregards the caution expressed by the Seven-Judge Constitution Bench.

Rashid Khan Pathan Posted on 1 week ago
Various Bar Association wrote CJI to struck down Order XLVII Rule 3 of the Supreme Court Rules,...
Read More Read more about The Supreme Court rule permitting dismissal of a review petition without hearing and without recording reasons is unconstitutional, as it violates fundamental rights, denies fair procedure, and disregards the caution expressed by the Seven-Judge Constitution Bench.

You may have missed

Screenshot 2025-12-28 at 11.52.13

Final Door to Justice Cannot Be only for the Rich: JALSA and Sanvidhan Rakshak Samiti Urges CJI to Abolish Senior Counsel Certification Requirement for Curative Petitions, Citing Violations of Equality under the Constitution of India and International Covenants including the ICCPR.

Rashid Khan Pathan Posted on 7 days ago
Screenshot 2026-02-02 at 22.04.35

An order passed by the Supreme Court in proceedings under Article 136 of the Constitution can, be corrected or set aside in proceedings invoking Article 136 itself. A.R. Antulay v. R.S. Nayak, (1988) 2 SCC 602 (7-J).

Rashid Khan Pathan Posted on 1 week ago
image-750x-2023-10-28-10_01_43pm-653d376f8f3b2

The United Nations Human Rights Committee (HRC) can now intervene and examine Adv. Nedumpara’s case concerning his arbitrary conviction for contempt by the Supreme Court and the absence of a right of appeal as mandatorily required under Article 14(5) of the ICCPR.

Rashid Khan Pathan Posted on 1 week ago
2_03_59_58_supreme-court-_1_H@@IGHT_0_W@@IDTH_600

The Supreme Court rule permitting dismissal of a review petition without hearing and without recording reasons is unconstitutional, as it violates fundamental rights, denies fair procedure, and disregards the caution expressed by the Seven-Judge Constitution Bench.

Rashid Khan Pathan Posted on 1 week ago