These cases are indeed very significant.
After a 49-day long summer vacation, the Supreme Court of India reopened on 1st July. In the meanwhile, vacation benches were formed which were dealing and pronouncing verdict on urgent cases. Now that the apex court has resumed its functioning, there are many important cases scheduled to be heard.
Few of them are review cases and a few of them haven't even had their arguments heard. Here are some major cases which are very significant and matters a lot to the different sections of the society.
1. Ayodhya Dispute Case
Source: Zee News
The judgment on the Ayodhya case has been getting stalled since a very long time. It is one of the most delicate issues to be heard by the Supreme court. The Allahabad High Court earlier divided the disputed site into two parts between Hindu organisations and Muslim Sunni Waqf Board, which has been challenged by the people. The SC on 8th March 2018, appointed a court-monitored mediation and selected a three-member panel to come to a solution.
If any group gets more part in the final verdict, it will create havoc between Hindus and Muslims. This is the sole reason the case has been prolonged for such a long time.
2. Rafale deal Review Petitions
Source: Zee News
A three-judge bench, headed by Ranjan Gogoi, the Chief Justice of India (CJI) in December 2018 gave a clean chit to Modi government in the procurement of 36 Rafale jets. The court's judgement was challenged and review petitions were filed alleging that the centre misled the court.
Earlier, Attorney General KK Venugopal said that important documents related to this case were stolen, which clearly shows the government's irresponsibility. This hearing will give a historic judgement of the Rafale deal case and also give an answer to the politicians who were running election campaigns on the name of this case.
3. 10% Reservation for Economically Weaker Sections
Source: Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative
In January 2019, the 10% reservation quota bill got approved in the upper house of the Parliament. The bill will ensure reservation of 10% in jobs and education to the economically weaker sections who do not fall under any reservation quota. The apex court will now hear the petitions challenging the constitutionality of the bill passed.
This is a very sensitive issue, people who come under this reservation will be benefited while others who already have concerns with India's reservation system will be affected.
4. Sabarimala Review Petitions
Source: India Today
A constitution bench of the Supreme Court is likely to hear a batch of review petitions challenging its verdict which allows entry of women of all ages into Sabarimala temple. The Supreme Court delivered the historic verdict on 29th September 2018 and said that women in the menstruating age group can no longer be barred from entering Kerala’s Sabarimala temple.
The final fate of this case plays a crucial role as it will display the apex court's ability to stand on its judgement and also decide the future of discriminatory practices against women.
5. Oxytocin Ban
Source: India TV News
Oxytocin is a life-saving drug which induces labour and controls bleeding during childbirth in women. Earlier, the central government banned its usage because it was extensively used by dairy and agricultural industries. It has been misused to accelerate puberty and hormonal growth among trafficked children. However, the Delhi Court opposed the government's ban stating it was unreasonable which made the government appeal in the Supreme court.
This matter requires an urgent and proper solution as thousands of women are dying during deliveries as there is insufficient availability of the drug. Also, the government should deliver its decision regarding the control and usage of other critical drugs at the earliest.
6. The validity of Article 35A of Constitution
Source: Hindustan Times
Article 35A allows Jammu and Kashmir to define the state's permanent residents and also lets the legislature decide the rights and privileges of these citizens. BJP in its manifesto assured the annulment of this Article saying the provision is discriminatory against non-permanent residents of Jammu and Kashmir.
The hearing on this article is a sensitive case as its annulment will enable non-residents of the state to buy properties and run businesses in Jammu and Kashmir, adversely impacting its citizens.
7. Constitutionality of Electoral Bonds
The central government had earlier passed the electoral bond scheme, which is a promissory note that can be bought by any Indian company or citizen from select branches of State Bank of India. They can then donate the same to any eligible political party of his/her choice as a donation. Critics argue that this is an incorrect way of funding political parties. They also pointed out that as the identity of the donor is kept anonymous, it would result in the spread of black money. The Supreme Court, hence, said that it will hear the matter at a length and asked political parties to reveal details of the donations they received through electoral bonds to the Election Commission.
Its judgement will end the electoral politics and also result in a free and fair way to carry out elections.