April 20, 2026 05:08 pm (IST)
Follow us:
facebook-white sharing button
twitter-white sharing button
instagram-white sharing button
youtube-white sharing button
15 killed, 20 injured as bus plunges into gorge in J&K’s Udhampur | Oil jumps over 5% as Strait of Hormuz closure fuels supply fears | Pushback from smartphone makers: Centre drops Aadhaar app pre-install plan — report | Meta eyes first wave of layoffs on May 20: Report | TCS breaks silence on Nida Khan: ‘No HR role, no power’ in Nashik case | ‘Panic reaction’: Rahul Gandhi on women’s bill, says PM Modi ‘wants to send a message’ | Adani Group shares rise as Gautam Adani becomes Asia’s richest, overtakes Mukesh Ambani | TCS Nashik ‘conversion’ case accused seeks anticipatory bail citing pregnancy | IT raids TMC candidate Debasish Kumar’s premises ahead of Bengal polls | Bengal SIR: Supreme Court allows voters restored by tribunal till April 21 and 27 to vote
VikasGuptaEncounterCase

Vikas encounter case: SC reserves order in plea seeking removal of inquiry commission

| @indiablooms | Aug 11, 2020, at 10:53 pm

New Delhi/UNI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday rapped a lawyer for questioning sanctity of Inquiry Commission headed by Justice B S Chauhan, formed by the Uttar Pradesh government to probe gangster Vikas Dubey encounter case and reserved the decision.

The bench headed by Chief Justice Sharad Arvind Bobde reserved the verdict after hearing the arguments of the petitioner Ghanshyam Upadhyay and the Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appearing for the Uttar Pradesh government.

Mr. Upadhyay, quoting a media report, questioned the loyalty of former Supreme Court judge BS Chauhan on the grounds that two relatives of Justice Chauhan are leaders of the Bharatiya Janata Party.

During the hearing, Mr. Mehta said that the petitioner's arguments against Justice Chauhan contained derogatory material.

The Chief Justice also said that the bench cannot accept aspersion on a former Apex Court judge on the basis of a newspaper report.

"There are judges whose relatives are in Parliament. Are they not fair? There are judges whose father is an MP. They are not fair judges? Is belonging to a political party an illegal act?" the bench asked the petitioner.

However, the top court asked the counsel to give suggestions in writings and reserved its order.

Support Our Journalism

We cannot do without you.. your contribution supports unbiased journalism

IBNS is not driven by any ism- not wokeism, not racism, not skewed secularism, not hyper right-wing or left liberal ideals, nor by any hardline religious beliefs or hyper nationalism. We want to serve you good old objective news, as they are. We do not judge or preach. We let people decide for themselves. We only try to present factual and well-sourced news.

Support objective journalism for a small contribution.