May 12, 2026 03:10 am (IST)
Follow us:
facebook-white sharing button
twitter-white sharing button
instagram-white sharing button
youtube-white sharing button
Suvendu Adhikari Cabinet clears BSF land transfer, census rollout, Ayushman Bharat in Bengal | Mamata govt's welfare schemes to continue: Bengal CM Suvendu Adhikari after first cabinet meeting | ‘One of life’s most emotional moments’: PM Modi performs grand Mahapuja at Somnath Temple | UPI trail cracks Suvendu Adhikari aide Chandranath Rath murder case; three arrested | Totally unacceptable: Trump rejects Iran’s peace plan in explosive showdown | Big defence boost: India successfully tests advanced Agni MIRV missile | India, Singapore unite for tough action against terror and transnational crime | TVK crosses majority mark with VCK, IUML support | I bow before Bengal: PM Modi’s powerful gesture at Suvendu Adhikari’s oath goes viral | Bengal turns a new page: Suvendu Adhikari takes oath as CM amid massive NDA show of strength
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.