Photo credit: ANI NEW DELHI: In stark contrast to politicians and activists using Article 32 rights to approach the Supreme Court directly, the SC acted promptly to respond to the tearful pleas of a poor young advocate, who lost her father in her childhood, tormented by her paternal uncle eyeing her share in ancestral property.She was incoherent when she interjected into a proceeding on Thursday afternoon before a three-judge bench led by CJI Surya Kant, who calmed her down and told her to place her grievances in Hindi. Tearfully she narrated how her uncle has slapped false cases on her and her widowed mother and is attempting to alienate her share in the ancestral property.What forced her to unceremoniously appear before the court was the police of Bulandshahr, allegedly hand-in-gloves with her monied uncle, issuing a bailable warrant in a case accusing her of throwing acid on him and his family members.CJI Kant asked the SC Legal Services Committee to immediately assign a competent lawyer to help her draft a petition overnight and ordered that the petition be listed for hearing on Friday. Her advocate Dushyant Parashar told the court that her father passed away in 2002 and since then her father’s younger brother has been attempting to deprive her and her mother of their share in the ancestral property by foisting cases on them.“Both were arrested sometime ago and had spent a month in jail. The local lawyers came to their rescue. After they were out on bail, she pleaded with the local SHO and Bulandshahr Superintendent of Police to provide her protection, but to no avail. She was abducted once,” Parashar said.The bench of CJI Kant, and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi directed the local police SHO and Bulandshahr SP to ensure that the young woman and her mother do not come to any harm and provide them with security if need be. It directed the UP police not to register any fresh FIR or take coercive action against the daughter-mother duo without SC’s prior permission.It restrained the girl’s uncle and his family members not to alienate the ancestral property and passed pre-emptive restraint orders. It asked the Bulandshahr SP to investigate into the matter and file a report on the genesis of the family dispute and the allegations of the young advocate.When asked what motivated him to entertain oral pleas of the young advocate, CJI Kant told TOI, “Poor have the first right over judicial time, and the courts must listen to their grievances on priority. Article 32 is meant to help mitigate the woes of the poor.” The case epitomized Dr Ambedkar’s words – “Article 32 is the heart and soul of the Constitution.”Before parting, the CJI told the young advocate – “Patience and perseverance is key to success in the legal profession.”End of ArticleFollow Us On Social MediaVideosUN Warns Bangladesh Against Violence After Protest Leader Osman Hadi Shot, Seeks Accountability Now’Yoga Is Medicine, Not Just Practice’: PM Modi’s Global Message At WHO Traditional Medicine SummitVaping, Bhow-Bhow & Shouting Match: A Look At Viral Moments Of Parl As Chaotic Winter Session EndsBondi Beach Terror Suspect Visited Hyderabad Six Times After Leaving India, Telangana Police Reveal’To Delay Elections, Instigate India’: Former Minister Blames Yunus Govt For Bangladesh ViolenceBangladesh Crisis: Tharoor Panel Red Flags 5 Reasons That Make It India’s Biggest Test Since 1971Rijiju Blames Congress As Parliament Session Ends Without Pollution Debate, Jairam Ramesh RespondsBangladesh: Hindu Man Lynching Sparks Outrage, Former Indian Envoy Calls Situation Total MobocracyExplained: Why Bangladesh’s Fresh Unrest Ahead Of Polls Is One Of India’s Biggest Strategic WorriesWho Was Sharif Osman Hadi, The Anti-India Face Of Bangladesh Whose Death Has Set Dhaka Ablaze123PhotostoriesThese places can bring bad luck based on your birth dateWeight loss Diet: How to make Mushroom Oats Omelette with just 1 tsp oil for breakfastCelebrity divorces and breakups in Bollywood in 2025: From Dhanashree Verma-Yuzvendra Chahal to Tamannaah Bhatia to Vijay Verma5 simple moves that keep kids active without calling it a workoutMerry Christmas 2025: The hidden science behind snowflakes and why no two are ever the sameBaby names inspired by female warriors of IndiaThe right way to add protein to your diet, according to ICMRAlia Bhatt, Ranveer Singh, Ayushmann Khurrana redefine method dressing7 Christmas delicacies you should warn off if you’re diabetic17 one-pot rice dishes for winter months123Hot Picksvb g ram gICICI Prudential AMCUAE RainGold rate todaySilver rate todayPublic Holidays DecemberBank Holidays DecemberTop TrendingJosh Allen Luxury Car CollectionRandi MahomesAuston MatthewsWho is Nicole LundersJeremy Doku and Shireen Doku Net WorthRBSE Rajasthan Board Exam Time TableWalker Buehlers WifeSibley ScolesAssam Rajdani Express TragedyCristiano Ronaldo
NEW DELHI: In stark contrast to politicians and activists using Article 32 rights to approach the Supreme Court directly, the SC acted promptly to respond to the tearful pleas of a poor young advocate, who lost her father in her childhood, tormented by her paternal uncle eyeing her share in ancestral property.She was incoherent when she interjected into a proceeding on Thursday afternoon before a three-judge bench led by CJI Surya Kant, who calmed her down and told her to place her grievances in Hindi. Tearfully she narrated how her uncle has slapped false cases on her and her widowed mother and is attempting to alienate her share in the ancestral property.What forced her to unceremoniously appear before the court was the police of Bulandshahr, allegedly hand-in-gloves with her monied uncle, issuing a bailable warrant in a case accusing her of throwing acid on him and his family members.CJI Kant asked the SC Legal Services Committee to immediately assign a competent lawyer to help her draft a petition overnight and ordered that the petition be listed for hearing on Friday. Her advocate Dushyant Parashar told the court that her father passed away in 2002 and since then her father’s younger brother has been attempting to deprive her and her mother of their share in the ancestral property by foisting cases on them.“Both were arrested sometime ago and had spent a month in jail. The local lawyers came to their rescue. After they were out on bail, she pleaded with the local SHO and Bulandshahr Superintendent of Police to provide her protection, but to no avail. She was abducted once,” Parashar said.The bench of CJI Kant, and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi directed the local police SHO and Bulandshahr SP to ensure that the young woman and her mother do not come to any harm and provide them with security if need be. It directed the UP police not to register any fresh FIR or take coercive action against the daughter-mother duo without SC’s prior permission.It restrained the girl’s uncle and his family members not to alienate the ancestral property and passed pre-emptive restraint orders. It asked the Bulandshahr SP to investigate into the matter and file a report on the genesis of the family dispute and the allegations of the young advocate.When asked what motivated him to entertain oral pleas of the young advocate, CJI Kant told TOI, “Poor have the first right over judicial time, and the courts must listen to their grievances on priority. Article 32 is meant to help mitigate the woes of the poor.” The case epitomized Dr Ambedkar’s words – “Article 32 is the heart and soul of the Constitution.”Before parting, the CJI told the young advocate – “Patience and perseverance is key to success in the legal profession.”
