Editorji is a popular short video news and information platform based in India. It was founded in 2018 by Vikram Chandra, one of India’s leading journalists, and has risen to prominence in the digital news space in a relatively short span of time. The platform is primarily designed for mobile devices, with applications available for Android and iOS.

ABOUT US:

about us editorji

Latest Video News: Editorji provides the latest news video headlines, latest videos clip from India and the World. Get all breaking news videos on Entertainment, Business, Coronavirus, Elections, Politics and more.

Latest Video News, Breaking News, Bollywood, Political, Sports, Business News | Editorji

+91 11 4035 6666 / info@editorji.com
3rd floor, Plot B, Khasara no 360, Sultanpur, New Delhi, Delhi 110030
<a title="mail to us" href="mailto:info@editorji.com">Send Feedback</a>
<a title="Contact Us" href="mailto:info@editorji.com">Contact Us</a>

REACH US

Contact for any questions, suggestions, comments, feedback or advertisement on Editorji.com, we are always looking forward to hearing from you.

Contact Us for Feedback, Suggestions and Advertising 

Editorji content is better experienced in our app.

In her address, the judge also cautioned governors to discharge their duties in accordance to with the Constitution.

Demonetisation was way of turning money into white: Supreme Court judge

In her address, the judge also cautioned governors to discharge their duties in accordance to with the Constitution.

Supreme Court Judge BV Nagarathna on Saturday cautioned against instances of governors sitting indefinitely on bills passed by elected legislatures, referring to the case involving the Punjab Governor.
In her keynote address at the inaugural session of the fifth edition of Courts and the Constitution Conference, held at the NALSAR University of Law here, Justice Nagarathna spoke about the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly case as another instance of gubernatorial overreach, where the governor lacked sufficient material to declare the floor test.
"This is not a healthy trend under the Constitution to bring the actions or omissions of the Governor of a state for consideration before constitutional courts," she said.
"I think I must appeal that the office of a governor, though it is called a gubernatorial post, the governor's post is a serious constitutional post, the governors must discharge their duties under the constitution in accordance to with the Constitution so that this kind of litigation before the law courts is reduced," Justice Nagarathna added.
She said that it is quite embarrassing for the governors to be told to do or not to do a thing.
So, a time has come where they would be now told to discharge their duties as per the Constitution, she said.
Justice Nagarthna's comments came days after a three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud expressed "serious concern" over the conduct of Tamil Nadu Governor RN Ravi for his refusal to reinduct DMK leader K Ponmudi as a minister in the state cabinet.
Justice Nagarathna also spoke on her dissent on the demonetisation case.
She said she had to dissent against the move by the central government as in 2016, when the decision was announced, the Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 notes comprised 86 per cent of the total currency notes in circulation, and 98 per cent of it came back after they were banned.
In October 2016, the Indian government demonetised Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 banknotes, purportedly in a blow against the black money.
"I thought it was a way of converting money into white money by this demonetisation because firstly, 86 per cent of the currency was demonetised and 98 per cent of the currency came back and became white money. All the uncounted money went back to the bank.
"Therefore, I thought it was a good way of getting unaccounted for cash accounted. Therefore, this common man's predicament really stirred me. Therefore, I had to dissent," the judge said.
The conference heard addresses from judges of the Supreme Courts of Nepal and Pakistan Justices Sapana Pradhan Malla and Syed Mansoor Ali Shah.
Telangana High Court chief Justice Alok Aradh and NALSAR Chancellor Justice S Ravindra Bhat also spoke at the conference, a press release from NALSAR said.
Also watch: <a href="https://www.editorji.com/india-news/ed-arrests-suspended-tmc-leader-sheikh-shahjahan-in-land-grabbing-case-1711814143528">ED arrests suspended TMC leader Sheikh Shahjahan in land-grabbing case</a>

Besides, RBI in an official statement has said that Rs 2000 notes can be exchanged in lower denomination notes. 

Withdrawal of Rs2000 currency note Demonetisation 2.0? 

Withdrawal of Rs 2000 currency note Demonitisation 2.0? 

Besides, RBI in an official statement has said that Rs 2000 notes can be exchanged in lower denomination notes.&nbsp;

In a surprise move, the Reserve Bank on Friday announced the withdrawal of Rs 2,000 currency notes from circulation but gave the public time till September 30 to either deposit such notes in accounts or exchange them at banks.
Congress launched a scathing attack on PM Modi, even calling the move Demonetisation 2.0
But is it actually similar to the 2016 note ban?&nbsp;
Simply putting, RBI's recent order has not banned the currency note and is still and will remain a legal tender till September 30, 2023.
On the other hand, as per the announcement made on November 8, 2016, all Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 denomination notes could not be used as legal tender. They were invalidated overnight.
Besides, RBI in an official statement has said that Rs 2000 notes can be exchanged in lower denomination notes.&nbsp;
With PTI Inputs

Justice Nazeer, who retired on January 4, has been part of several path-breaking verdicts, including the Ayodhya land dispute, Triple Talaq and the one that declared 'right to privacy' a fundamental right.

Retd. judge who delivered key verdicts including Babri Masjid, Triple Talaq case gets governor post

Justice Nazeer, who retired on January 4, has been part of several path-breaking verdicts, including those on the politically sensitive Ayodhya land dispute, instant 'triple talaq' and the one that declared 'right to privacy' a fundamental right.

Justice Nazeer, who retired on January 4, has been part of several path-breaking verdicts, including the Ayodhya land dispute, Triple Talaq and the one that declared 'right to privacy' a fundamental right.

Days after retiring from the post of Supreme Court judge, Justice Syed Abdul Nazeer has been appointed as the governor of Andhra Pradesh.
Justice Nazeer, who retired on Janaury 4, 2023 has been part of many landmark verdicts, including the Ayodhya-Babri masjid case, Triple Talaq case, 2016 demonetisation case and the judgment that held that the right to privacy is a fundamental right.
He replaces the incumbent Biswa Bhusan Harichandan, who has been shifted to Chhattisgarh.
President Droupadi Murmu on February 12 notified the appointment of Justice Abdul Nazeer as the third Governor of Andhra Pradesh.
Also watch: <a href="https://www.editorji.com/india-news/politics/pre-retirement-judgments-influence-congress-targets-centre-over-justice-nazeer-s-appointment-1676209635213">'Pre-retirement judgments influence....', Congress targets Centre over Justice Nazeer's appointment</a>

The Supreme Court is scheduled to pronounce its judgment on Monday on a batch of pleas challenging the government's 2016 decision to demonetise currency notes of Rs 1,000 and Rs 500 denominations.

Supreme Court to announce verdict on validity of demonetisation 

The Supreme Court is expected to announce its verdict on pleas challenging the validity of demonetisation on January 2.

The Supreme Court is scheduled to pronounce its judgment on Monday on a batch of pleas challenging the government's 2016 decision to demonetise currency notes of Rs 1,000 and Rs 500 denominations.

The Supreme Court is expected to announce its verdict on pleas challenging the validity of demonetisation on January 2. The 58 petitions heard by top court claim that the government did not follow the due process required to ban currency notes and the rights of Indians were violated because of demonetisation.
The top court had, on December 7, directed the Centre and the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) to put on record the relevant records relating to the government's 2016 decision and reserved its verdict.
It heard the arguments of Attorney General R Venkataramani, the RBI's counsel and the petitioners' lawyers, including senior advocates P Chidambaram and Shyam Divan.
Calling the scrapping of the Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 currency notes deeply flawed, Chidambaram had argued that the government cannot on its own initiate any proposal relating to legal tender, which can only be done on the recommendation of the RBI's central board.
Resisting the apex court's attempt to revisit the 2016 demonetisation exercise, the government had said the court cannot decide a matter when no tangible relief can be granted by way of "putting the clock back" and "unscrambling a scrambled egg".
The RBI had earlier admitted in its submissions that there were "temporary hardships" and that those too are an integral part of the nation-building process, but there was a mechanism by which the problems that arose were solved.
Also watch: <a href="https://www.editorji.com/india-news/local/train-derailment-in-rajasthan-8-coaches-off-the-tracks-no-casualties-say-reports-1672624222232">Train derailment in Rajasthan: 8 coaches off the tracks, no casualties, say reports</a>
In an affidavit, the Centre told the top court recently that the demonetisation exercise was a "well-considered" decision and part of a larger strategy to combat the menace of fake money, terror financing, black money and tax evasion.
The Supreme Court has heard a batch of 58 petitions challenging the demonetisation exercise announced by the Centre on November 8, 2016.
(with PTI inputs)

Six years after demonetisation, cash is still the king with official data showing close to doubling of cash with the public.

Cash circulation up 83% since demonetisation: RBI data

Six years after the shock move to ban 86 per cent of the currency in circulation, cash is still the king with official data showing close to doubling of cash with the public.

Six years after demonetisation, cash is still the king with official data showing close to doubling of cash with the public.

Six years after the shock move to ban 86 per cent of the currency in circulation, cash is still the king with official data showing close to doubling of cash with the public.
The value of the currency in circulation (or public holding of cash) stood at Rs 32.42 lakh crore as on December 23, 2022, according to Reserve Bank data.
This compares to Rs 17.74 lakh crore worth of notes in circulation (NiC) on November 4, 2016, days before Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced outlawing of old 1,000 and 500 rupee notes to target black money and fight corruption.
NiC fell to about Rs 9 lakh crore after demonetisation.
Compared with January 6, 2017, the cash in circulation has seen a more than 3-fold or 260 per cent jump, while from November 4, 2016, it has seen about 83 per cent rise.
After the shock announcement, the government gave a limited-time window for the public to return the banned currency. According to the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), almost the entire amount of currency withdrawn was turned in.
Also Watch| <a href="https://www.editorji.com/india-news/politics/demonetisation-verdict-congress-leader-p-chidambaram-reacts-to-sc-decision-1672655634275">Demonetisation verdict: Congress leader P Chidambaram reacts to SC decision</a>&nbsp;
The total value of notes returned by the public was Rs 15.3 lakh crore or 99.3 per cent of the total of Rs 15.4 lakh crore of notes in circulation on November 8, 2016. This raised questions over the purpose of a shock move that triggered a sharp slowdown in the economy and put the public to hardship.
The outlawed currency notes were replaced by new 500 and 2,000 rupee notes. However, the 1,000 rupee note was not reintroduced.
The demonetisation was challenged in the Supreme Court, which on Monday upheld the legality by a majority 4:1 verdict.
According to a written reply, Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman furnished in the Lok Sabha on December 19, 2022, the value of NiC fell over 20 per cent at end of March 2017 to Rs 13.1 lakh crore but has been on the rise since.
It rose by 37.67 per cent to Rs 18.03 lakh crore on March 31, 2018. The value of NiC soared to Rs 21.10 lakh crore on March 31, 2019, Rs 24.20 lakh crore on March 31, 2020, Rs 28.26 lakh crore on March 31, 2021, and Rs 31.05 lakh crore on March 31, 2022.
As on December 2, 2022, the value of NiC was Rs 31.92 lakh crore, almost 8 per cent more than Rs 29.56 lakh crore exactly a year back, according to her reply.

"It is a historic decision and is in national interest. Will Rahul Gandhi now say sorry for his campaign against demonetisation. He spoke against it even abroad," BJP's Ravi Shankar Prasad said at a press conference

SC's demonetisation verdict historic and in national interest, says BJP

"It is a historic decision and is in national interest. Will Rahul Gandhi now say sorry for his campaign against demonetisation. He spoke against it even abroad," BJP's Ravi Shankar Prasad said at a press conference

The BJP on Monday hailed the Supreme Court judgment upholding the government's demonetisation exercise as "historic" and slammed the Congress for its campaign against the decision and asked if its leader Rahul Gandhi will tender an apology after the verdict.
Former law minister and BJP leader Ravi Shankar Prasad asserted that the demonetisation done in 2016 proved to to be the "biggest blow" to terrorism by curbing terror funding. It boosted income tax and cleansed the economy, he claimed.
"It is a historic decision and is in national interest. The Supreme Court has held a decision taken in national interest valid. Will Rahul Gandhi now say sorry for his campaign against demonetisation. He spoke against it even abroad," he said at a press conference.
Also Watch| <a href="https://www.editorji.com/india-news/no-application-of-mind-by-rbi-what-dissenting-sc-judge-said-on-demonetisation-1672646828875">'No application of mind by RBI': what dissenting SC judge said on demonetisation</a>

Demonetisation verdict: Congress leader P Chidambaram reacts to SC decision 

"We are happy that the minority judgement has pointed out the illegality and the irregularities in the demonetisation. It may be only a slap on the wrist of the government, but a welcome slap on the wrist," he noted.

Former Union Finance Minister P Chidambaram on Monday said the majority verdict by the Supreme Court has steered clear of the question whether the objectives of the demonetisation exercise were achieved at all.
The 'minority' judgement pointed out the 'illegality' and the 'irregularities' in the demonetisation, Chidambaram said on Monday soon after the apex court made its verdict.
"Once the Hon'ble Supreme Court has declared the law, we are obliged to accept it. However, it is necessary to point out that the majority has not upheld the wisdom of the decision; nor has the majority concluded that the stated objectives were achieved," the senior Congress leader said in a tweet.
"In fact the majority has steered clear of the question whether the objectives were achieved at all," he said.
ALSO WATCH: <a title="Demonetisation verdict: Supreme Court calls Modi govt's note ban decision valid; one judge dissents" href="https://www.editorji.com/india-news/demonetisation-verdict-supreme-court-calls-modi-govt-s-note-ban-decision-valid-1672638093369">Demonetisation verdict: Supreme Court calls Modi govt's note ban decision valid; one judge dissents</a>
"We are happy that the minority judgement has pointed out the illegality and the irregularities in the demonetisation. It may be only a slap on the wrist of the government, but a welcome slap on the wrist," he noted.
The dissenting judgement would rank among the famous dissents recorded in the history of the court, he pointed out.
Earlier in the day, the Supreme Court upheld the government's 2016 decision to demonetise the currency notes of Rs 1,000 and Rs 500 denomination saying the decision making process was not flawed.
There has to be great restraint in matters of economic policy and the court cannot supplant the wisdom of the executive by a judicial review of its decision, a five-judge Constitution Bench of the apex court, headed by Justice S A Nazeer, said.&nbsp;

Justice B V Nagarathna dissented from the majority judgment and said the scrapping of the Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 series notes had to be done through a legislation and not through a notification.

'No application of mind by RBI': what dissenting SC judge said on demonetisation

Justice B V Nagarathna dissented from the majority Supreme Court judgment that the 2016 note ban by the Centre was valid. 

Justice B V Nagarathna dissented from the majority judgment and said the scrapping of the Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 series notes had to be done through a legislation and not through a notification.

The Supreme Court in a 4:1 majority verdict on Monday upheld the government's 2016 decision to demonetise the Rs 1,000 and Rs 500 denomination notes, saying the decision-making process was not flawed.
There has to be great restraint in matters of economic policy and the court cannot supplant the wisdom of the executive by a judicial review of its decision, a five-judge Constitution bench of the apex court, headed by Justice S A Nazeer, said.
Justice B V Nagarathna dissented from the majority judgment on the point of the Centre's powers under section 26(2) of the RBI Act and said the scrapping of the Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 series notes had to be done through a legislation and not through a notification.
"Parliament should have discussed the law on demonetisation, the process should not have been done through a gazette notification. Parliament cannot be left aloof on an issue of such critical importance for the country," Justice Nagarathna said.
She also said there was no independent application of mind by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and only its opinion was sought, which cannot be said to be a recommendation.
Also Watch| <a href="https://www.editorji.com/india-news/demonetisation-verdict-supreme-court-calls-modi-govt-s-note-ban-decision-valid-1672638093369">Demonetisation verdict: Supreme Court calls Modi govt's note ban decision valid</a>

Pronouncing the verdict on 2 January 2023, the top court said that the demonetisation exercise satisfied the test of proportionality.

Demonetisation verdict: Supreme Court calls Modi govt's note ban decision valid; one judge dissents

Demonetisation verdict: Supreme Court calls Modi govt's note ban decision valid

Pronouncing the verdict on 2 January 2023, the top court said that the demonetisation exercise satisfied the test of proportionality.

More than 6 years after the Narendra Modi government announced the demonetisation of ₹500 and ₹1,000 notes, the Supreme Court validated the decision.
Pronouncing the verdict on 2 January 2023, the top court said that the demonetisation exercise satisfied the test of proportionality, and the period of 52 days given for exchange of notes was reasonable.
While 4 judges in the 5-judge bench endorsed demonetisation, Justice BV Nagarathna dissented, saying that the note ban could've been implemented through an act of Parliament, and not by the government.
Also read|<a href="https://www.editorji.com/story/cong-to-probe-post-note-ban-deposits-if-voted-to-power-1552317749057">Cong to probe post-note ban deposits if voted to power</a>

The government reportedly said that difficulties caused to the people cannot be the basis for questioning the decision to ban ₹500 and ₹1000 notes.

'Difficulties caused by demonetisation not...': Modi govt to Supreme Court on 2016 Note Ban

The government reportedly said that difficulties caused to the people cannot be the basis for questioning the decision to ban ₹500 and ₹1000 notes.

The Narendra Modi government defended its 2016 demonetisation decision in the Supreme Court on 5 December.
The government reportedly said that difficulties caused to the people cannot be the basis for questioning the decision to ban ₹500 and ₹1000 notes.
The Centre also said that the Supreme Court cannot question the validity of 30 December 2016 as the cutoff date to exchange old notes as exclusion of those left out was not deliberate or discriminatory.
Also watch: <a href="https://www.editorji.com/business-news/six-years-of-demonetisation-in-india-cash-with-public-has-nearly-doubled-1667892025011">Six years of demonetisation in India: cash with public has nearly doubled</a>
"They (petitioners) have said we should have conducted studies before demonetisation. For more than a decade, central government and the Reserve Bank of India have been looking at the three problems (fake currency, terror financing, black money)... They are like Jarasandha. You have to cut it into pieces. If you don't cut it into pieces, it will always be alive," Attorney General R Venkataramani, appearing for the Centre, said.
The Supreme Court is hearing petitions which have challenged the validity of the demonetisation decision. The Centre recently told the top court in an affidavit that the demonetisation exercise was a "well-considered" decision and part of a larger strategy to combat the menace of fake money, terror financing, black money and tax evasion.
(With PTI inputs)

On November 8, six years ago, Prime Minister Narendra Modi had announced the demonetisation of old Rs 1,000 and Rs 500 banknotes

Six years of demonetisation in India; jury is still not out on efficacy of it 

On November 8, six years ago, Prime Minister Narendra Modi had announced the demonetisation of old Rs 1,000 and Rs 500 banknotes

It has been six years since the Narendra Modi government at the centre conducted the process of demonetisation in order to curb the circulation of black money, but Jury is still not out on the decision to demonetise high value currency notes on November 8, 2016.&nbsp;
While the government claims it has helped greater formalisation of the economy, LocalCircles reports that people are still paying or accepting black money in the real estate transactions.&nbsp;
On November 8, six years ago, Prime Minister Narendra Modi had announced the demonetisation of old Rs 1,000 and Rs 500 banknotes and one of the key objectives of the unprecedented decision was to promote digital payments and curb black money, besides eliminating terror funding.
As per a Reserve Bank data, currency with the public has jumped to a new high of Rs 30.88 lakh crore an October 21, indicating that cash usage is still substantial even six years after the demonetisation move.&nbsp;

The top court has  directed the Centre and the Reserve Bank of India to file a comprehensive affidavit on the petitions challenging demonetisation

Supreme Court to examine 2016 demonetisation order

The top court will essentially examine the decision-making process behind the noteban exercise. 

The top court has&nbsp; directed the Centre and the Reserve Bank of India to file a comprehensive affidavit on the petitions challenging demonetisation

The Supreme Court said on Wednesday it is aware of the "Lakshman Rekha'' on judicial review of the government's policy decisions but will have to examine the 2016 demonetisation decision to come to a conclusion whether the issue has become a mere "academic" exercise.
The top court will essentially examine the decision-making process behind the noteban exercise.&nbsp;
Observing that when an issue arises before a constitution bench, it is its duty to answer, a five-judge bench headed by Justice S A Nazeer directed the Centre and the Reserve Bank of India to file a comprehensive affidavit on the petitions challenging demonetisation of Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 currency notes.
Attorney General R Venkataramani submitted that unless the Act on demonetisation is challenged in a proper perspective, the issue will essentially remain academic.
The High Denomination Bank Notes (Demonetisation) Act was passed in 1978 to provide in public interest for demonetisation of certain high denomination bank notes in order to check illicit transfer of money harmful to the economy which such currency notes facilitate.
The top court said in order to declare whether the exercise is academic or has become infructuous, it needs to examine the matter since both sides are not agreeable.
"In order to answer that issue, we will have to hear and give an answer whether it's academic, not academic or beyond the scope of judicial review. The point in the case is the government policy and its wisdom which is one aspect of the matter.
"We always know where the Lakshman Rekha is, but the manner in which it was done has to be examined. &nbsp;We have to hear the counsel to decide that," the bench, also comprising Justices B R Gavai, A S Bopanna, V Ramasubramanian, and B V Nagarathna said.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, said the court's time should not be "wasted" on academic issues.
Objecting to Mehta's submission, senior lawyer Shyam Divan, representing petitioner Vivek Narayan Sharma, said he was surprised at the words "waste of constitutional bench's time" as the earlier bench had said these cases must be placed before a constitution bench.
Senior advocate P Chidambaram, appearing for one of the parties, said the issue has not become academic and has to be decided by the top court. He said this kind of demonetisation requires a separate act of Parliament.
The top court has now posted the matter for hearing on November 9, 2022.
On December 16, 2016, a bench headed by then Chief Justice TS Thakur had referred the question of the validity of the decision and other related matters to a larger bench of five judges for an authoritative pronouncement.
It had framed various questions in the reference order to be adjudicated upon by the five-judge bench which included whether the notification dated November 8, 2016 is ultra vires the provisions of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 and does the notification contravene the provisions of Article 300 (A) of the Constitution.
(with PTI inputs)

demonetisation

Categories