Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra on Sunday assured a Bar Council of India delegation that the crisis in the Supreme Court resulting from a virtual revolt against him by four colleagues will be sorted out soon, the council chief said.

Auto refresh feeds

​Justice Chelameswar along with Justice Lokur and Kurian Joseph at the venue

"The democracy cannot survive without an independent judiciary. All our efforts to convince the Chief Justice have failed," he added.

"With no pleasure in our hearts that we do this. But sometimes, the administration of the Supreme Court is not in order. We owe a responsibility to the nation to do this," says Justice Chelameswar.

It appears that the four judges are upset with the Chief Justice Dipak Misra

When pressed by the media, he acquiesced that this was about the BH Loya death case.

"Today we went to the Chief Justice and asked him to do a certain thing," says Justice Chelameswar.

"The four of them gave a signed letter to the CJI. We wanted a thing to be done in a particular manner. The thing was done an unsatisfactory manner," said Justice Chelameswar.

However, they only had one copy of the letter. They have sent someone to get some photocopies of the letter.

The judges try to distribute copies of the letter they gave to the CJI

Justice Gogoi says there is nothing else to say, everything is in the letter

The judges have risen and the press conference is over

Senior Advocate and former president of the SC Bar Association Dushyant Dave in The Indian Express has pointed at serious issues in the constitution of benches and the allocation of work to such benches by the Chief Justice.

Bar and Bench had detailed the clash which took place between the CJI and Justice Chelameswar in November in Kamini Jaiswal's petition.

Justice Ranjan Gogoi, on being asked if it is about CBI Judge BH Loya said, 'yes'

"It's quite shocking. There must have been compelling reasons for the senior-most judges to have adopted this course of action. One could see pain on their faces while they were speaking," SC advocated KTS Tulsi tells ANI.

SC judges must have had compelling reason to call for the press conference

"Issues don't matter. It is their complaint on administrative matter. They are only 4, there are 23 others. 4 get together and show the Chief Justice in a poor light. It is immature & childish behaviour," Justice R S Sodhi was quoted as saying by ANI.

“I think all four should be impeached. Four judges cannot come together and speak against the CJI like this. Why should the CJI cow down to them?”

Retired Delhi HC judge Justice RS Sodhi hits out at Supreme Court judges — Justice J Chelameswar, Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Justice Madan B Lokur and Justice Kurien Joseph — for speaking out against CJI Misra.

"We are not mentioning details only to avoid embarrassing the institution but note that such departures have already damaged the image of this instituition to some extent," Supreme Court judges' letter to CJI Dipak Misra.

Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra will meet Attorney General KK Venugopal shortly after the country’s top judiciary was rocked by an unprecedented press conference by four sitting judges. News18 reports that the meeting will take place at 1.30 pm.

"Certain orders... have adversely affected judicial functioning... and independence of High Courts..." In another part, the letter reads, "Well settled... that Chief Justice is only first among equals – nothing more, nothing less."

The Chief Justice seeks to consult Venugopal on how to move further on this unprecedented development.

We can't criticise them, they are men of great integrity and have sacrificed a lot of their legal career, where they could've made money as senior counsels. We must respect them. Prime Minister must ensure that the four judges and Chief Justice of India, in fact, the whole Supreme Court come to one opinion and proceed further, ANI quoted Subramanian Swamy as saying.

1) Is top judiciary being run on whims? 2) Are most senior judges being bypassed by the CJI? 3) Are all big cases against Govt being assigned to "selective" benches 4) Is Govt interfering with highest judiciary? 5) Doesn't CJI need to answer?

On Friday, Justices J Chelameswar, Ranjan Gogoi, Madan B Lokur and Kurian Joseph addressed the media to highlight their grievances about how cases are allocated in the Supreme Court. Read the full text of the letter issued by the four Supreme Court judges

Sources tell ANI Prime Minister Narendra Modi spoke to Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad about the allegations made by the four Supreme Court sitting judges.

"Deeply sad and pained by the development. Also feel a sense of agony that highest court of land should come under such severe stress that forces judges to address the media," says senior advocate Salman Khurshid.

Former Supreme Court judge Santosh Hegde, was quoted as saying, "It is very unfortunate that the internal dispute of the judiciary was brought out in this manner publicly. What the four judges have done today by holding the press conference to bring out their dispute in public is that they’ve denigrated the institution of judiciary... When the judiciary goes for public opinion it spells the end of judiciary."

But it comes with a caveat, when the matter involves the Chief himself, the Chief shouldn't be involved in the decision to preserve integrity of the institution. But in this case, Misra didn't follow that procedure at all.

The Chief Justice determines which judges/benches hears cases of a particular type (i.e Criminal Appeals go to X, Civil Appeals go to Y, Writs go to Z). When it comes to constituting larger benches though, that becomes CJI's absolute discretion (3 or more judges), just like any boss can decide who gets what special assignments. Ideally, the Chief gets this power cause he's expected to know who's the best person for the job.

CJI determines which judges/benches hears cases, but when the matter involves the CJI himself, the chief shouldn't be involved

Judges had to come before media and take this unprecedented step. This means that there is a serious dispute, either with Chief Justice of India or some internal dispute, says PB Sawant, former Supreme Court judge on press conference by four sititng Supreme Court judges

This proves there's a serious dispute within the judiciary: Former SC judge

Soon after the four judges ended their media address, the Chief Justice had called upon Attorney General KK Venugopal to chart his next course of action.

According to sources in the Supreme Court, CJI Dipak Misra is likely to make a statement at a special hearing in a short while when the apex court resumes its proceedings for the day.

The market crashed to its lowest to 34349.99 points at 12:45 pm, taking a hit by 256 points as compared to the figures at noon before the presser.

The Bombay Stock Exchange stood at 34606 points at noon on Friday and fell to 34550.2 points at 12:15 pm, at the time the press conference of the Supreme Court judges began and further fell to 34423.8 at 12:35 pm, exactly five minutes after the press conference ended, plummeting by 183 points in a span of half an hour.

The markets responded adversely after four Supreme Court judges held a press conference for the first time in the history of Independent India.

Former Maharashtra Advocate General Shreehari Aney says, "I agree, some damage has been done to the office of Chief Justice of India (CJI), but this is not a permanent damage"

Going to the press is the last resort. And if the four judges have taken this last resort it also says that there is something seriously wrong with the judiciary. But I wish these issues were settled internally. The required changes within the system should have been brought about internally."

By this I don’t mean to imply that I’m supporting the Chief Justice of India. The four judges have got good reasons to challenge the monopoly of the CJI. But they should have challenged him in the confines of the four walls of the judiciary.

There are reasons for people to be aggrieved with the system but unlike other wings – the executive and the legislature – the judiciary doesn’t discuss its disputes in public. It is bound to protect its own integrity.

"It is very unfortunate that the internal dispute of the judiciary was brought out in this manner publicly. What the four judges have done today by holding the press conference to bring out their dispute in public is that they’ve denigrated the institution of judiciary.

If the four judges have taken this last resort it also says that there is something seriously wrong with the judiciary: Santosh Hegde

People have the right to know what's going on within the judiciary: Indira Jaisingh

"We are very concerned to hear 4 judges of the Supreme Court expressed concerns about the functioning of the Supreme Court. #DemocracyInDanger," the Congress' official Twitter handle said.

The Congress said "democracy is in danger" after four seniormost Supreme Court judges came out in the open to say that the situation in the apex court was "not in order".

CJI Dipak Misra had called Attorney General KK Venugopal for the Unitech case and not about the judges press conference as some media outlets are putting it out, Bar and Bench tweeted. "The CJI is hearing cases like he does everyday," Bar and Bench further reported.

"This is an internal matter of the judiciary, it is best they solve it themselves,” a top source told CNN-News18 , adding that Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad has received a copy of the dissenting note circulated by Justice J Chelameswar, Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Justice Madan B Lokur and Justice Kurian Joseph.

Top government sources told News18 that the Centre is likely to distance itself from the crisis, in the hope that the judges will be able to sort it among themselves.

Let the judges sort it out among themselves: Centre plans to distance itself from crisis

Four judges went public against CJI because issues raised were grave: Justice Mudgal

“We can't criticise them, they are men of great integrity and have sacrificed a lot of their legal career, where they could've made money as senior counsels. We must respect them. PM must ensure that the four judges and the CJI, in fact whole Supreme Court come to one opinion and proceed further,” Swamy said.

Subramanian Swamy bats for establishing consensus amid judges, says these are men of great of integrity

Bar Council of India says it was unaware of judges' internal matter, will meet tomorrow to discuss issue

Speaking to IndiaToday senior advocate Indira Jaisingh said, "We all know that the Chief Justice of India is the master of the roasters, but he cannot behave arbitrarily. He has to take on record the feedback provided by his colleagues."

Yes CJI is master of rosters but he can't be arbitrary in his choices: Indira Jaisingh

Former Supreme Court Judge AK Ganguli said that the CJI cannot afford to be rigid on issues like this after all this is not a matter of clash of egos but a matter of principle. These should have been thrashed out within the institution, he added. "I heard that the justices said that they tried and approached the CJI but did not succeed. Well, the CJI must try and resolve this internally as he must first earn the confidence of his peers, that is how he will become the Chief and not my merely by seniority," Ganguly said.

Judges should not make it an issue of egos but principle: Former judge AK Ganguly

CNN-News 18 reported that the four judges who have come out in public against the CJI had differences on the matter of appointment of judges. While Justice Chelameswar was the lone dissenting voice, who spoke against the Collegium system, Justice Gogoi and Justice Joseph, however, said that the traditional system must be upheld.

The dissenting judges had different views on Collegium system of appointment

Meanwhile, CPM, another Left-wing party has demanded a thorough investigation "to understand how the independence and integrity of judiciary was being affected."

According to a report by CNN-News28, CPI's D Raja met Justice Chelameswar, one of the four Supreme Court judges who held a press conference earlier today, speaking out publicly against the CJI. However, it was not clear whether Raja's meeting with the Supreme Court judge was related to the matter. Reports say that Raja shares a close family relation with Justice Chelameswar.

According to CNN-News18, Chief Justice Dipak Misra will confirm later whether he wishes to go public with his response over the issues raised by four senior Supreme Court judges. It is likely that the CJI chooses to address his colleagues first, before going public with a statement, the report said.

CJI yet to make up his mind on briefing media: Reports

News18 said it has learnt from sources close to Justice Chelameswar that the judge is ready to hold a discussion with his colleagues to sort out the issue. He has also reportedly said that his intention was never to humiliate the CJI but he did what he could to raise his point.

Mamata Banerjee tweeted on the issue, expressing her anguish and disappointment on the open fall out between Supreme Court judges. She, however, also added that "extreme interference of Central Government with Judiciary" is dangerous for society.

Government not to interfere in 'clash of personalities' within judiciary: Reports

The Congress senior leadership is in a huddle before they address the press on the party's stand on the crisis that unraveled today. The party will hold a press briefing at 6.30 pm.

The Supreme Court is currently hearing a plea seeking inquiry on the death of Justice Loya. This issue was raised up today after four Supreme Court judges went public with their allegations that CJI is not following procedure on allotment of cases. When one of the media persons asked the judges, whether their grievance about allotment of cases also related to the Justice Loya case, the judges nodded in affirmative.

Some legal luminaries also said the turn of events had raised a question mark about the credibility of the judicial system.

The decision of four senior-most judges of the Supreme Court to hold a press conference was today termed as "unprecedented" by the legal fraternity, with some experts terming it as "shocking" while some others saying there could have been some compelling reasons for such a move.

"As a retired judge of the Supreme Court, I feel devastated. "For some reason or the other, their cause is justified, (but) relief they are seeking is wrong...going to the media? No. Judiciary was always considered as a family. Family disputes are never taken to the streets," he told PTI.

​ Expressing deep anguish over four Supreme Court judges going public on issues related to the apex court, former Solicitor General of India N Santosh Hegde today said he was "devastated" by their action which has caused "irreparable" damage to the institution.

"What has happened today could have been avoided. The judges will now have to act in statesmanship and ensure that the divisiveness is wholly neutralised and total harmony and mutual understanding will prevail in future," he said. - PTI

Attorney General KK Venugopal said the unprecedented move by the four Supreme Court judges in holding a press conference "could have been avoided" and the judges would now have to act in "statesmanship" to ensure complete harmony.

The case of RP Luthra versus Union of India was specifically mentioned in the letter sent by four judges of the Supreme Court to the Chief Justice of India. The case pertained to appointments to the higher judiciary and the memorandum of procedure for doing so—issues which were highlighted in the press conference called by the judges on Friday.

A particular judge may have domain expertise in an area of law and therefore would be suitable for a particular matter while another judge may not. These decisions are often taken by the Chief Justice while assigning matters. While there is usually a system that is followed for most regular cases, when it comes to constituting special benches or assigning matters of constitutional import, the exercise of this power becomes as important as some of the decisions of the court itself.

The record of the allotment of cases to benches is called the roster. The CJI is the first amongst equals at the Supreme Court and his judgments carry no more weight than any other judge of the court. But the CJI does have more administrative powers, which includes control on the roster. This means it is up to the CJI to decide which set of judges hears which matters.

In the early years of its existence, the SC had only 7 judges and they would all hear matters together. But as the court expanded and its workload increased, the Supreme Court became an institution with multiple benches.

Explainer: What is a Supreme Court roster that the dissenting judges had objections to?

"The judiciary is independent and reputed. They will resolve it themselves. The government should have no need to intervene," said MoS Law PP Chaudhary.

Surjewala quoting the letter written by the four judges said that the Congress party is deeply disturbed by these developments.

Speaking to the press, Congress spokesperson said that while the Congress party was deeply disturbed by these development, we would request the senior most judges to hear the case and appoint an independent SIT to probe it.

Senior most judges should hear PIL in death of Justice Loya, says Congress party

"All citizens are looking at this issue and it must be addressed. It is an unprecedented move, so the questions raised by the four judges should be thoroughly looked into," Rahul Gandhi said.

The four judges — Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Justice Kurian Joseph and Justice Madan B Lokur besides Justice Chelameswar — released a letter they wrote to Justice Misra a couple of months ago, conceding that he was the master of roster but that was "not a recognition of any superior authority, legal or factual of the Chief Justice over his colleagues".

At a hurriedly called press conference at his residence, Justice J Chelameswar and three other colleagues said the Supreme Court administration was "not in order" and their efforts to persuade Justice Misra even this morning "with a specific request" failed, forcing them to "communicate with the nation" directly.

Divisions in the Supreme Court burst out in the open on Friday when four senior most judges took an unprecedented step of addressing the media to accuse Chief Justice Dipak Misra of breaching rules in assigning cases to appropriate benches, with one of them pointing to the plea regarding the mysterious death of Special CBI judge BH Loya.

Omar Abdullah voices support for SC judges, says 'worst thing we can do is wish it away'

Speaking to ANI , former additional solicitor general of India and the Supreme Court Bar Association president Vikas Singh said, "If they had to come for a press conference, then they should have said something substantial. Just creating doubts in the minds of people will not serve the interest of the judiciary. This was not properly planned. They didn't say anything about Justice Loya."

Former ASG Vikas Singh says judges' press conference was not planned, should have said something 'substantial'

Justice Chelameswar, who is set to retire as an apex court judge on 22 June this year, has also dealt with several important issues including Aadhaar and the JNU case which had witnessed violence inside the Patiala House Court complex in New Delhi.

Justice Chelameswar was the lone judge who had dissented when a five-judge bench had struck down the constitution amendment and held as unconstitutional the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act. He was part of the nine-judge constitution bench which had declared right to privacy as a fundamental right.

Justice Chelameswar had stoked controversy several times and was in the news for not attending the collegium meetings on the appointment of judges for higher judiciary.

He is the second senior most judge of the apex court after Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Misra.

Profile of the four SC judges who held the press conference: Justice Jasti Chelameswar

Speaking to CNN-News18, Attorney General of India KK Venugopal said the press conference held by four senior Supreme Court judges could impact public confidence. "Public confidence in the Supreme Court of India may be affected. We will settle this matter completely," he said.

CNN-News18 reported that the Supreme Court Bar Association will hold a meeting on Saturday over the judges' press conference on Friday at 5 pm. The SC Bar Association chief Vikas Singh will brief media at 6 pm.

The news of their sudden exit spread like wildfire in the corridors of the apex court, sending a shockwave among the journalists, lawyers and litigants and leading the scribes to scramble to the venue of the presser, about four kilometres away.

All four of them left the Supreme Court premises within minutes and gathered at the 4, Tughlaq Road Bungalow in Lutyen's Delhi, the official residence of Justice Chelameswar to hold an unscheduled press conference – no Supreme Court judge had ever addressed the media publicly.

Around 11.30 am, Justice J Chelameswar and Justice Kurian Joseph rose for the day in their respective court rooms, numbered 2 and 5. Justice Ranjan Gogoi, in the meantime, rushed through and disposed of most of the day's listed business, while Justice Madan B Lokur heard matters in his chamber.

But a brewing judicial firestorm, invisible to all except four judges, erupted an hour later, taking the nation by surprise and plunging the judiciary into an unprecedented crisis whose reverberations will continue to ring for years to come.

Nothing seemed amiss when the Supreme Court started work at 10.30 am on Friday, as always. Judges strode out of their chambers, lawyers fussed through the papers, litigants hung around and reporters took their assigned seats in court rooms.

RECAP: It was normal day in the Supreme Court, no hint of press conference

He further added that people would be failing in their national duty if they did not take note of this. "If political parties, or anyone concerned about the future of democracy in the country, don't take note of this, we fail in out national duty. It is a serious matter. All those who care about the future of the country and of democracy should raise their voice," Sinha said.

Speaking to reporters, former finance minister Yashwant Sinha attacked the Central government over the short Winter Session of Parliament and said, "If the country's Parliament is not in order, the Supreme Court is not in order, then democracy is under threat in the country. If the four senior judges have gone public then how is it a Supreme Court matter alone? If you read the letter, one thing is clear that Supreme Court judges or benches were appointed selectively to hear certain cases."

“This has led to imagination of the country running wild. The institution derives its respect for the credibility it has garnered over these years. If the credibility goes, who will respect the institution? The press conference has only led to speculation,” he added.

“There is no question of impeachment in this case. This has to be addressed within the system rather than going to press like this. You go for a press conference to reveal, but the intention of this press conference was to conceal,” he told News18 .

The Supreme Court Bar Association on Saturday dismissed possibility of Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra's impeachment and said there was "no question" of it.

Mishra further added that Bar Council is set to have a meeting at 5 pm on Saturday and meet the four senior judges on Sunday. "We have a meeting at 5 pm today (Saturday). Tomorrow (Sunday) our delegation will meet those senior judges, Chief Justice of India and other judges and request them to not bring issues like these in front of public," he said.

According to ANI , chairman of Bar Council of India Manan Kumar Mishra criticised the four Supreme Court judges for holding a press conference on Friday. "Holding a press conference on a minor issue of roster is saddening," he said.

"Let's hope everything works out very well. I am sure everything will be settled," he told reporters in New Delhi.

Attorney General KK Venugopal expressed the hope that the crisis in the top judiciary following a revolt by four Supreme Court judges would be "settled".

Justice Ranjan Gogoi said that "there is no crisis" when asked about the way forward to resolve the crisis. Asked whether their (judges') act had amounted to a violation of discipline, Gogoi refused to comment - PTI

Justice Kurian Joseph said there was no constitutional crisis in the apex court and there are only problems in procedure they had objected to. "There will be no constitutional crisis and there are only problems in procedures and that will be corrected," Justice Kurian told reporters. IANS

News18 reported that Bar Council of India's meeting has ended and it is expected to address media shortly.

The Bar Council of India discussed the contents of the letter sent to the CJI on Friday, said Manan Mishra, council chairman.

"There are enough mechanisms to address this inhouse. We discussed the contents of the letter. We have decided to form a seven-member delegation of judges. We will be meeting all the judges at the Supreme Court. We have already got appointment from 50 percent of the SC judges," said BCI chairman Manan Mishra

SC judges should not have gone public: Bar Council of India

He further said that the first move is to meet the rest of the judges, which means all judges excluding the CJI and the four judges who wrote the letter, reported News18.

BCI chairman Mishra said that the matter has to be sorted out anyhow and cannot go out in the media again. On behalf on the Bar Council of India, he also appealed to the judges not to create such an opportunity again.

The matter cannot go out in the media again: BCI chairman

The Supreme Court Bar Association said that instead of playing out in public, the matter should be resolved in closed court. SCBA president Vikas Singh said that the association will meet the CJI before meeting the four judges.

Matter should not be played out in public: SC Bar Association

Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra on Sunday separately met high-level delegations of top two lawyers' bodies -- BCI and SCBA -- and assured them that the crisis erupting after the revolt by the four seniormost judges against him would be sorted out soon and congeniality would prevail.

"Our family is pained by the chain of events in past few days. Please don't harass us," Judge BH Loya's son, Anuj Loya said to the media during a press conference on Sunday.

A seven-member Bar Council India (BCI) panel led by its chairman Manan Kumar Mishra had a 50-minute meeting with the CJI after hectic parleys with several apex court judges, with whom they shared the views of the apex body of the Bar regulating the lawyers.

Mishra said they would hold a press conference on Monday to apprise about the BCI's day-long parleys with the judges of the apex court in the wake of the crisis.

The BCI chairman said the panel met Justices J Chelameswar, M B Lokur and Kurian Joseph, and they also assured that everything would be sorted out. He did not mention whether the panel had any talks with Justice Ranjan Gogoi, who was not in the city.

And there were all indications that there was something stinking in the corridors of the Supreme Court, to borrow a phrase from Justice Markandey Katju (he was referring to the Allahabad High Court). All this was exposed in a jiffy as the judges pointed fingers at CJI’s alleged indiscretion in allocating cases to benches and his other administrative functioning.

“It was brewing for some time” is the general refrain if you talk to anyone conversant with what is going on. Letters were being secretly written to judges and circulating, pointing out skeletons in cupboards hidden from public view. Insinuation and innuendo over the formation of benches on certain issues of critical economic and political importance were the order of the day.

For those who have access to portals of the Supreme Court, the spectacle of four of its senior most judges raising the banner of revolt against their Chief Justice did not come as a surprise, but rather a conspiracy to alter the course of history.

According to The Times of India , there have been fifteen 'super sensitive' cases which have been handled by junior judges and not the four senior-most judges of the Supreme Court. These cases include Bofors, Rajiv Gandhi assassination, LK Advani's trial in Babri masjid demolition, Sohrabuddin Sheikh fake encounter, Best Bakery and the case that changed how BCCI, reported the publication.

According to Hindustan Times, the petition challenging the validity of the Aadhaar scheme will be heard by a five-member Constitutional bench on Wednesday.

According to Hindustan Times, there are three more cases that will be heard by the Constitution bench this week. One of the cases refers to an IPC code that makes adultery a criminal offense for a man but not a woman. Another case that will come up for hearing is Section 377, which criminalizes homosexuality. The final case pertains to the ban on women from entering the Sabarimala temple in Kerala.

Three more cases to be heard by Constitution bench

Of frequent reference is also the case of caste. It is argued that the judiciary, populated by as much as 95 percent of its constituency by individuals of the Brahmin caste, is Brahmanical. This criticism resurfaced in the defiance and subsequent punishment of Justice CS Karnan whose persecution, it is said, was about his caste.

Based on the letter to the CJI, the four justices made public on Friday, it seems clear that the main point of contention at present is the delay in implementing the Memorandum of Procedure towards the appointment of judges in India. "...there should be no further delay in finalisation of MOP in larger public interest," the SC order in the Luthra case had said and was reiterated by the four judges as well in their letter to the CJI.

The RP Luthra case is at the centre of the whole fiasco. To convey the "less than desirable" things taking place inside the apex court, the four justices referred to a letter that they had written to the Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra. The letter mentions an order passed in the case RP Luthra vs Union Of India Ministry Of Law And Another respondents passed on 27 October. What does the order in the RP Luthra case say that made the four justices speak publicly against the CJI?

"We are very concerned to hear 4 judges of the Supreme Court expressed concerns about the functioning of the Supreme Court. #DemocracyInDanger," the Congress' official Twitter handle said.

The Congress said "democracy is in danger" after four senior-most Supreme Court judges came out in the open to say that the situation in the apex court was "not in order".

According to a News18 report, Justice Sharad Arvind Bobde is brokering peace between Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra on one side and four other senior-most judges – Justices J Chelameswar, Ranjan Gogoi, Madan B Lokur and Kurian Joseph – on the other.

According to Times Now, Attorney General KK Venugopal, who is heading to the Supreme Court, has said that all the courts will be functioning as usual and that everything is okay in the Supreme Court.

A-G says everything is okay in Supreme Court

Regardless of the roster, it will be "business as usual" today at the Supreme Court, the four judges have reportedly told members of the Bar Council. "The judges will hear whatever is assigned to them," said sources.

Work will go on as usual, say sources

According to NDTV, every day, before work begins, all judges convene at the judges lounge and have coffee. However, the report claimed that on Monday, all court staff were asked to leave the lounge.

Four retired judges including an ex-Supreme Court judge have written an open letter to the Chief Justice of India urging him to resolve the ongoing crisis. According to an Economic Times report, the four judges have backed the four rebelling judges on the issue of allocation of cases.

Four senior-most Supreme Court judges, who had held an unprecedented press conference and raised issue of assignment of cases, today attended court and took up routine work, PTI reported. The four judges -- Justices J Chelameswar, Ranjan Gogoi, Madan B Lokur and Kurian Joseph -- have taken up their respective business on the first working day of the top court after the 12 January press conference.

According to NDTV, Supreme Court advocate RP Luthra has raised the judges issue before the Chief Justice of India's bench. The advocate is believed to have said that there is conspiracy to destroy the institution and Misra must take action. The report added that Misra listened to him and smiled without answering him.

Attorney General KK Venugopal was quoted by NDTV as saying that everything has been settled after an informal meeting in the morning today. he added that the courts are functioning. Nevertheless, Chief Justice Misra is yet to reach out to Justices Jasti Chelameswar, Ranjan Gogoi, Madan Lokur and Kurien Joseph, who took him on in an extraordinary press conference on Friday last.

A-G says 'everything has been settled now'

He said that the view expressed by the retired judges is "quite similar to the views of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) that till this crisis is resolved, the important matters should be listed before a five-judge Constitution bench of senior judges".

Justice Shah confirmed having written an open letter along with the other retired judges and told PTI, "We have written the open letter which the other judges named in the letter have also consented to."

An open letter by former apex court judge PB Sawant, ex-chief justice of Delhi High Court AP Shah, former Madras High Court judge K Chandru and ex-Bombay High Court judge H Suresh was given to the media. It has also gone viral on social media.

"I met the CJI and handed over a copy of the resolution. He said that he would look into it and ensure there was congeniality in the Supreme Court at the earliest," Singh told PTI after his 15-minute meeting with the CJI.

Supreme Court Bar Association president Vikas Singh on Sunday met the Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra and handed over a resolution on the crisis in the apex judiciary to him. The senior lawyer told PTI that he handed over a copy of the SCBA resolution to the CJI, who assured him that he would look into it.

Sinha, however, insisted that it was for the apex court to sort out the crisis after the four senior judges virtually revolted against the country's chief justice on Friday, raising questions on "selective" case allocation and certain judicial orders.

"Every citizen who feels for democracy should speak up. I will ask party (BJP) leaders and senior cabinet ministers to speak up. I will appeal to them to get rid of their fears and speak up," he said.

Sinha said "if four senior most Supreme Court judges say democracy is under threat, we have to take their words very seriously""

"The Chief Justice's administrative power effectively transform itself into a power to significantly influence the outcomes of cases (sic)," Bhatia further said.

Bhatia argued that two features in the Indian legal system — "the splitting up of the Supreme Court into multiple different benches, and the massive backlog of cases" — make these powers problematic. "In this context, the Chief Justice's powers to assign cases to benches and to decide when a case is to be heard become very significant," he said in one tweet.

Advocate Gautam Bhatia, in a series of tweets, said on Friday that in the last 20 years, the office of the Chief Justice of India has received a lot of power without having any system of accountability to keep it in check.

When asked how can such a major development be solved "internally", BCI chief Manan Kumar Mishra said that it was a matter "within a family" which has been resolved after the judges meet in the CJI's chambers at 10.30 on Monday morning.

Two days after four Supreme Court judges held a press conference citing lack of accountability and integrity in the apex court, the Bar Council of India told the media on Monday that "it was an internal issue and it has been resolved internally."

Justice Loya’s son, Anuj, said he did not have any doubts about the way his father died three years ago. "I had an emotional turmoil, hence I had suspicions about his death. But now we don't have any doubts about the way he died," he told reporters at a press conference.

The family of Justice BH Loya on Sunday said the death of the special CBI judge , who was hearing the Sohrabuddin Sheikh "fake encounter" case, was being politicised and urged all parties to refrain from taking advantage of the situation.

"Why drag the Judge Loya case into this? As you can see, Judge Loya's family has said that they do not have any doubts on the matter," says BCI chief Manan Kumar Misra.

"We did not want any political party to take advantage of the situation. Everyone are discharging their duties and everything has been resolved as the Attorney General has also said," BCI chief Manan Mishra told media on Monday.

The Bar Council of India (BCI) on Monday said its members have met 15 judges of the Supreme Court following the crisis in the apex judiciary and they have assured that the issues have been resolved. "Kahani khatam ho gaya (the story is now over)", BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra told a press conference in New Delhi. He also said that political parties should not try and take mileage out of the January 12 press conference by the four senior most apex court judges to flag some problems, including the assigning of cases.

The story is over, says BCI; asks politicos to not take advantage of issue

"All four senior most judges have resolved the differences and are attending the court. There is no need of any action on these four judges; all of them are honest and men of integrity," said BCI Chairman, Manan Kumar Misra.

Here are the five key questions raised in open letter to CJI

A day after Attorney General KK Venugopal called the ongoing crisis in Supreme Court a "storm in a tea cup", on Tuesday said the crisis seems to be unresolved and hoped it will be "fully settled" in a couple of days.

CBI judge BH Loya, was hearing the Sohrabuddin Sheikh encounter case when he passed away. After doubts were raised around the circumstances of his death, two pleas were filed by BR Lone, a Maharashtra-based journalist and activist Tehseen Poonawala, seeking a probe in the death.

BR Lone's petition sought a probe saying there were several contradictions emerging in the matter, according to The Indian Express . Tehseen Poonawala, in his plea contended that circumstances of the death of the judge were “questionable, mysterious and contradicting”.

A Constitution Bench comprising CJI Dipak Misra, Justice AK Sikri, Justice AM Khanwilkar, Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice Ashok Bhushan has been constituted to hear important cases including those on Aadhaar, decriminalisation of homosexuality, validity of adultery law under IPC, entry of women into Sabarimala temple etc. It will start the hearings from 17 January.

The Bar Council of India on Tuesday said there was "absolutely no crisis now" in the Supreme Court and normalcy will be restored soon in the higher judiciary that saw four top judges coming out in the open against the Chief Justice of India.

Absolutely no crisis now in SC, says Bar Council of India

Judge BH Loya's death case must not be confidential, the Supreme Court said in a 5-minute hearing. Everything must be before the public.

Tehseen Poonawala told Times Now that SC has ordered that all documents should be given over to him. He said that his faith in the judiciary has been restored as the case was not dismissed.

SC said that all documents must be given to me: Tehseen Poonawala

Maharashtra government tells Supreme Court that barring certain confidential reports placed by it, the petitioners can access other documents.

The Supreme Court, without fixing any specific date, lists the matter for hearing after a week.

CJI meets the four dissenting judges. Holds talks for 15 minutes over possible solutions to the issues raised

The discussion took between the CJI and the four dissenting judges, reported CNN-News18. The meeting was cordial and everyone agreed that the issues were important than the personalities. The issues are expected to be resolved by the end of the week.

The discussions are expected to continue tomorrow, according to NDTV. However it could take some time to resolve everything as many issues were raised by the dissenting judgments.

Supreme Court lawyer Prashant Bhushan on Tuesday said he had filed a complaint against Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra in the medical college scam case and requested five senior most apex court judges, including the four rebel judges, to hold an in-house inquiry into the matter.

"Nagpur Police undertook a thorough investigation in this case and his death was due to a heart attack", Shivaji Bodkhe, Joint Commissioner of Police, Nagpur told reporters. "The postmortem, as well as the forensic reports too, confirm the same. There was nothing unusual in the report," he said.

The Nagpur Police on Tuesday said that there was no cause for suspicion regarding the death of judge Loya and that he had indeed died of a heart attack.

RECAP: Judge Loya died due to 'heart attack', no cause for suspicion, says Nagpur Police

The Supreme Court made certain observations in the Bofors case regarding who can file a case in criminal matters, reported The Times of India . This could have an effect on the Loya case as all the PILs in the case have been filed by advocate associations or individuals who had no connection with the judge.

However there are numerous instances where incidents have come up where Aadhaar's secureness has been questioned. These include app-based flaws, disclosures on government websites, third party leaks, sale of data etc. Click here for report on all of these incidents.

Despite the number of reports over the last couple of years, UIDAI has constantly maintained that the server and the data itself, especially biometric data is safe.

He goes on to insist that we should "applaud the UIDAI for being responsive to the concerns of the public. We need to recognise that providing a unique, secure identification, with instant authentication anywhere, to 1.3 billion Indians is an evolving endeavour."

In an article in the Hindustan Times , Nandan Nilekani argues that the concern about the ‘linking’ of Aadhaar to various services are over-hyped and baseless.

Policy expert Alok Prasanna Kumar weighs in on the possible change of bench in the Loya case

Suhrith Parthasarathy argues in The Hindu that the government will, no doubt, argue that Aadhaar can bring about many benefits. However any policy, howsoever poorly framed, will likely bring about certain gains. The question is ultimately one of proportionality and justice. Arguing that the government's aim is to create a seamless police state, which will chill our freedom and give the State rampant power he asks whether the Supreme Court will dare to stop this.

In the five years that the Supreme Court has been hearing the Aadhaar petitions, the number of people issued Aadhaar numbers have gone up from 20-25 crore in 2012 to 119 crore, reports NDTV .

Legally speaking, the petition is being termed as an 'intervention application' which has yet to be accepted by the SC. There is no clarity on when it will be heard according to legal experts who have spoken to ET.

According to an Economic Times report, a petition has been filed by the Digital Lenders Association of India (DLAI) which comprises startups such as CapitalFloat, LendingKart, ZestMoney, IndiaLends as well as early-stage investment firms and companies which provide authentication services and background verifications. These companies are particularly appealing to ensure advantages such as eKYC offered by Aadhaar help a lot in real-time verification of customers.

Group of private companies bat for use of Aadhaar for eKYC and background verification process

The court will take up 29 pleas against Aadhaar. The final hearing on the pleas challenging Aadhaar comes five years since the first was filed.

Some policy experts are not impressed with those efforts.

Union ministers including Ravi Shankar Prasad and Rajyavardhan Rathore are using #AadharMythBuster to extol the virtues of Aadhaar.

Five-judge bench led by CJI Dipak Misra will start hearing the Aadhaar case at 11.30 am

Livelaw reported that the petitioners argue that details for Aadhaar are collected by private contractors and NGOs hired by UIDAI without any safeguard. This makes them prone to misuse. They claimed that empirical research shows that the biometric identification denoted for UID, namely the the iris scan and fingerprint identification, is faulty and is could be abused.

"A new day seems to be in order in the Supreme Court after clouds over its cohesiveness and probity. The CJI should now show the light and redeem the institution's glory by getting all his brother and sister judges along, to end this crisis and convert it into a chance to bring about all necessary institutional reforms," writes Utkarsh Anand on News18 .

"Tuesday was a sunny day at the Supreme Court after days of clouds over its cohesiveness and probity"

Petitioners argue that if the Aadhaar programme is allowed to continue unimpeded, it will hollow out the Constitution

Petitioners: The case at hand is unique. There are few judicial precedents to guide us

Petitioners: The State is empowered with a ‘switch’ by which it can cause the civil death of an individual

Shyam Divan is taking the court through the history of the case

Shyam Divan for the petitioners: You cannot live as a citizen of India without an Aadhaar

Shyam Divan takes Court through work of the petitioners to counter the State's claims that there are only elitist concerns against Aadhaar

Meanwhile companies are unable to stop themselves from sending informative messages

India Today reported that the CJI is meeting the judges for lunch. Three of the dissenting judges are present at the meeting. Justice Chelameswar is absent. Justice Bobde and Justice Goel are not present as well.

A total of five countries — Uruguay, New Zealand, France, Brazil, and England and Wales — legalised gay sex in 2013. Here is the full report on how the world has changed its views on homosexuality since 2013.

Since Supreme Court's 2013 verdict on homosexuality, at least 10 countries have legalised homosexuality

The final arguments in Aadhaar case begin before the Constitution Bench of Supreme Court. At the start of the arguments, Attorney General sought time bound arguments. A-G reminded the Bench that Ramjanmabhoomi land title dispute case is also scheduled to be taken up from 8 February.

'People's Constitution is being sought to be converted into a State's Constitution'

Senior Advocate Shyam Divan today submitted in court that Aadhaar seems too alter the relationship between the citizen and the State, while diminishing the status of the citizen. All rights, a citizen could earlier freely assert have now been made part of a “compulsory barter”, averring, “The barter compels the citizen to give up his biometrics ‘voluntarily’, unless the number is seeded in databases of the service provider, the citizen is denied access to these most essential facilities. "Inalienable and natural rights are dependent on a compulsory exaction.”

Aadhaar alters the relationship between the citizen and the State

Justice Chandrachud asked that if the government ensures that Aadhaar data is used only for the purpose it is collected, will it address the concerns raised by the petitioners. To this the petitioner's lawyer replied that the design in itself is bad as it allows State domination. Shyam Divan further argued that the problem is not that whether the State is actually tracking its citizens or not but the fact that the Aadhaar makes it possible.

Ensuring Aadhaar data is not misused not enough to grant it legality, petitioners argue in case

Justices AK Sikri and DY Chandrachud seek to know how is the Aadhaar biometrics system different from the biometrics for US Visa?

Meanwhile... Aadhaar tweets out 'myth busters' intermittently; claims banking, financial data not tracked via UIDAI

#AadhaarCase | Shyam Divan also argues that #Aadhaar Act cannot be used to deny basic amenities, rights or benefits pic.twitter.com/nSUvl1Gb4L

Aadhaar act cannot be used to deny basic amenities, rights or benefits, says petitioner's lawyer Shyam Divan

#Aadhaar case: Senior Supreme Court lawyer, Shyam Divan, appearing for petitioners, told the five-judge Constitution bench that ' #Aadhaar may cause death of citizens' civil rights. A people's Constitution is being sought to be converted into a State's Constitution.'

'People's Constitution is being sought to be converted into a State's Constitution'

Senior Advocate Shyam Divan today submitted in court that Aadhaar seems too alter the relationship between the citizen and the State, while diminishing the status of the citizen. All rights, a citizen could earlier freely assert have now been made part of a “compulsory barter”, averring, “The barter compels the citizen to give up his biometrics ‘voluntarily’, unless the number is seeded in databases of the service provider, the citizen is denied access to these most essential facilities. "Inalienable and natural rights are dependent on a compulsory exaction.”

Aadhaar alters the relationship between the citizen and the State

Justice Chandrachud asked that if the government ensures that Aadhaar data is used only for the purpose it is collected, will it address the concerns raised by the petitioners. To this the petitioner's lawyer replied that the design in itself is bad as it allows State domination. Shyam Divan further argued that the problem is not that whether the State is actually tracking its citizens or not but the fact that the Aadhaar makes it possible.

Ensuring Aadhaar data is not misused not enough to grant it legality, petitioners argue in case

Justices AK Sikri and DY Chandrachud seek to know how is the Aadhaar biometrics system different from the biometrics for US Visa?

#Aadhaar : You make take several steps to prevent leakages. But still an architecture which allows surveillance is not be permissible, Shyam Divan.

SD points to the Committee's observation that the United Kingdom revoked its national biometric database.

SD: the UK abandoned its identity system beacause it was "unsafe, untested.... and could be a threat to personal rights." (still quoting the Standing Committee)

Meanwhile... Aadhaar tweets out 'myth busters' intermittently; claims banking, financial data not tracked via UIDAI

Latest updates

The Bar Council of India chairman Manan Mishra has said that the issues raised by the four dissenting top judges of the Supreme Court have been resolved. "We did not want any political party to take advantage of the situation," said Mishra. There seems to be some headway in the Supreme Court crisis. All the judges of the top court, including the four dissenting judges, met over tea at 10.15 am on Monday.

Sources said there was a consensus that issues need to be solved institutionally.

Meanwhile, not just the Attorney-General of India KK Venugopal but sources close to Live Law too have confirmed that the four 'rebel' judges of the Supreme Court have buried their differences with Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra. The latest development took place after the judges met Misra in full court room this morning.

Earlier, Attorney-General said that "everything has been settled after the judges had an informal meeting on Monday morning. Speaking before Chief Justice Dipak Misra, Senior Advocate RP Luthra urged him to resolve the issue. He claimed that there is a conspiracy to destroy the judiciary.

All four judges who rebelled against Chief Justice Dipak Misra resumed their work on Monday. Meanwhile a News18 report claimed that SA Bobde was emerging as the peacekeeper between the Chief Justice of India and the four rebel judges.

The Bar Council of India is likely to hold a press conference on Monday. Meanwhile, a report in The Times of India stated that there has been a precedence of the Chief Justice of India delegating 'super sensitive' cases to junior judges.

Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra on Sunday assured a Bar Council of India delegation that the crisis in the Supreme Court resulting from a virtual revolt against him by four colleagues will be sorted out soon, the council chief said.

Also on Sunday, the son of special CBI judge BH Loya said in Mumbai that his father died of natural causes and not in suspicious circumstances. Loya's death, while he was hearing the politically sensitive Shohrabuddin Sheikh fake encounter case, is the subject of a PIL in the Supreme Court that was one of the triggers for the revolt against Misra.

The Indian judiciary was thrown into a turmoil on Friday when four senior Supreme Court judges — J Chelameswar, Ranjan Gogoi, MB Lokur and Kurian Joseph – convened an unprecedented press conference to complain about "selective" case allocation by Misra and passing of certain judicial order. Misra had assigned the Loya death PIL to Justice Arun Mishra, a relatively junior judge.

In their press conference, the four justices said India’s democracy is at risk unless the wrongs in the Supreme Court are set right.

Capping a weekend flurry of activity by jurists, lawyers and politicians, a delegation of the Bar Council of India, the highest body of lawyers in the nation, today met Misra at his residence for 50 minutes.

"We met CJI in a congenial atmosphere and he said everything will be sorted out soon," BCI chairman Manan Kumar Mishra, who led the delegation, told reporters.

He said that before meeting the CJI, the panel also discussed the crisis plaguing the apex judiciary with other judges including the three out of the four judges who have made the allegations against Misra.

Mishra said the panel met justices Chelameshwar, Lokur, and Joseph, who also gave an assurance that the crisis will be resolved.

He did not mention whether the panel had a meeting with Gogoi, who is out of town. Gogoi is next in line to succeed Misra as the chief justice.

The BCI will hold a press conference on Monday.

Earlier, Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) president Vikas Singh met the CJI and handed over a resolution in which the association has asked for a full court discussion to defuse the present crisis.

"I met the CJI and handed over a copy of the resolution. He said that he would look into it and ensure there was congeniality in the Supreme Court at the earliest," Singh told PTI after his 15-minute meeting with the CJI.

In another major development today, Anuj Loya, the son of the deceased CBI judge, held a press conference in Mumbai to say his family was "pained" by the recent developments surrounding his father's death. He claimed NGOs and politicians should stop "harassing" his family members over the issue.

"My father died of natural causes. Our family is convinced that it was a natural death," the 21-year-old Anuj told reporters, adding that although he and his family had earlier been suspicious about his father's sudden death three years ago, they no longer harboured doubts.

"I had an emotional turmoil, hence I had suspicions about his death. But now we don't have any doubts about the way he died," Anuj said.

"Earlier, my grandfather and aunt had some doubts about his death, which they shared. But now neither of them has any doubts," he said.

The deceased judge's father and Anuj's aunt had alleged foul play in his death.

Judge Loya, who was hearing the sensitive Sohrabuddin Sheikh "fake encounter" case, had allegedly died of a cardiac arrest in Nagpur on December 1, 2014, when he had gone to attend the wedding of a colleague's daughter.

BJP chief Amit Shah was an accused in the case but has been discharged.

With inputs from PTI