Niyam v2 is live — start for just ₹100 — 200 credits to try

september 1970

Supreme Court of India · 1970-09-10

MADHU LIMAYE AND ANR. vs VED MURTI & ORS.

Citation / case number
SC 1970/60075
Court
Supreme Court of India
Petitioner
MADHU LIMAYE AND ANR.
Respondent
VED MURTI & ORS.
Bench
HIDAYATULLAH, M. (CJ),SHELAT, J.M.,BHARGAVA, VISHISHTHA,MITTER, G.K. & VAIDYIALINGAM, C.A.,RAY, A.N. & DUA, I.D.

Judgment text excerpt

The Supreme Court held that an intervener in a habeas corpus petition under Article 32 of the Constitution cannot argue in Hindi when the language of the court is English, and both counsel and several members of the Bench are unable to follow the arguments. The court provided alternatives for the intervener to present his case in English or through his counsel, which were refused. Consequently, the court canceled the intervention due to the futility of allowing arguments in a language not understood by the court.

MADHU LIMAYE AND ANR. vs VED MURTI & ORS. · Niyam