{"id":239573,"date":"2020-11-24T16:20:03","date_gmt":"2020-11-24T10:50:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=239573"},"modified":"2021-11-24T14:56:30","modified_gmt":"2021-11-24T09:26:30","slug":"know-thy-judge-justice-b-r-gavai","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/24\/know-thy-judge-justice-b-r-gavai\/","title":{"rendered":"Know Thy Judge| Justice B.R. Gavai"},"content":{"rendered":"

Justice <\/span>Bhushan Ramkrishna Gavai was born on 24th November, 1960. At the age of 25, he enrolled as an advocate and started practicing at the Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court. He served both as a government pleader as well as a government prosecutor[1]<\/sup><\/a>. He was appointed as a judge of the Bombay High Court in 2003 and served in that position for 16 years before being elevated to become judge of the Supreme Court. The collegium in recommending him gave due weight to his seniority, integrity, merit and due representation in the Supreme Court.[2]<\/sup><\/a>.<\/p>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

\n

Some important judgments that Justice BR Gavai has been a part of\u00a0<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n
\n

Fertico Marketing and Investment Pvt. Ltd. v. Central Bureau of Investigation<\/b>,<\/span><\/span> 2020 SCC OnLine SC 938<\/b><\/a><\/h4>\n

The bench of AM Khanwilkar and BR Gavai, JJ\u00a0 held that not obtaining prior consent of the State Government under Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (DPSE Act) would not vitiate the investigation unless the illegality in the investigation can be shown to have brought about miscarriage of justice or caused prejudice to the accused. <\/span><\/p>\n

Read more<\/i><\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India,<\/b> <\/span>(2020) 3 SCC 637<\/b><\/a><\/h4>\n

A 3-judge bench of NV Ramana, R Subhash Reddy and BR Gavai, JJ has asked J&K administration to review all orders imposing curbs on telecom and internet services in the state in a week and put them in public domain.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cThe existing Suspension Rules neither provide for a periodic review nor a time limitation for an order issued under the Suspension Rules. Till this gap is filled, the Review Committee constituted under Rule 2(5) of the Suspension Rules must conduct a periodic review within seven working days of the previous review, in terms of the requirements under Rule 2(6).\u201d <\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Read more<\/i><\/b><\/a>\u00a0<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

Foundations for Media Professionals v. Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir,<\/b> <\/span>2020 SCC OnLine SC 453<\/b><\/a> <\/b><\/h4>\n

A 3-judge bench of NV Ramana, R. Subhash Reddy and BR Gavai, JJ has constituted a three-member committee to look into demand for allowing 4G mobile internet in the union territory of Jammu and Kashmir. Noticing that since the issues involved affect the State and the nation, the Court found it appropriate to constitute a Special Committee comprising of the following Secretaries at national, as well as State, level to look into the prevailing circumstances and immediately determine the necessity of the continuation of the restrictions in the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir. <\/span><\/p>\n

Read more<\/i><\/b>\u00a0<\/i><\/b><\/a><\/p>\n

In re: Prashant Bhushan<\/b>,<\/span><\/span> 2020 SCC OnLine SC 698<\/b><\/a><\/h4>\n

The 3-judge bench of Arun Mishra, BR Gavai and Krishna Murari, JJ has sentenced advocate Prashant Bhushan with a fine or Re.1\/\u00ad (Rupee one) to be deposited with the Registry by 15.09.2020, failing which he shall undergo a simple imprisonment for a period of three months and further be debarred from practising in this Court for a period of three years. It had found advocate Prashant guilty of criminal contempt on <\/span>14.08.2020<\/b><\/a> in the suo motu contempt petition initiated against him after he criticised the Supreme Court and the sitting and former CJIs in a couple of tweets.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cIf we do not take cognizance of such conduct it will give a wrong message to the lawyers and litigants throughout the country. However, by showing magnanimity, instead of imposing any severe punishment, we are sentencing the contemnor with a nominal fine of\u00a0 Re.1\/\u00ad (Rupee one).\u201d <\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Read more<\/a><\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

Sudru v. State of Chattisgarh, <\/span>(2019) 8 SCC 333<\/a><\/strong><\/h4>\n

In this case of murder of son by the accused father, on the basis of circumstantial evidence, last seen evidence and non-explanation of incriminating evidence by accused, conviction of accused confirmed.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Union of India v. Unicorn Industries<\/b><\/span>,<\/span> <\/span>(2019) 10 SCC 575<\/b><\/a><\/h4>\n

The 3-judge bench of Arun Mishra, MR Shah and BR Gavai, JJ., held that by invoking the doctrine of promissory estoppel, the Union of India cannot be estopped from withdrawing the exemption from payment of Excise Duty in respect of certain products, which exemption is granted by an earlier notification; when the Union of India finds that such a withdrawal is necessary in the public interest<\/span>.<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

Read more<\/i><\/b><\/a><\/p>\n

Union of India v. State of Maharashtra,<\/b><\/span> 2019 SCC OnLine SC 1279<\/b><\/a><\/h4>\n

The 3-judge Bench of Arun Mishra, MR Shah and BR Gavai, JJ., partially set aside the 2-judge verdict in <\/span>Dr Subhash Kashinath Mahajan v. State of Maharashtra, <\/span><\/i>(2018) 6 SCC 454. It was held that some portions of the said verdict were <\/span>against the concept of protective discrimination in favour of down\u00adtrodden classes under Article 15(4) of the Constitution and also impermissible within the parameters laid down by this Court for exercise of powers under Article 142 of Constitution of India<\/span><\/i>.\u00a0 The Court said,<\/span> <\/b><\/h4>\n

\u201cCan\u2019t treat all of them as a liar.\u201d<\/b> <\/span><\/p>\n

Read more<\/i><\/b><\/a><\/p>\n

Sarika v. Administrator, Mahakaleshwar Mandir Committee, Ujjain<\/b>,<\/b> 2020 SCC OnLine SC 704<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/h4>\n

\u00a0In a bid to prevent the deterioration of Shivlinga at Mahakaleshwar Temple, Ujjain, the 3-judge bench of Arun Mishra, BR Gavai and Krishna Murari, JJ has given the eight directions. <\/span><\/p>\n

Read more<\/i><\/b><\/a><\/p>\n

Rishad Murtaza v. Union of India,\u00a0<\/span> 2020 SCC OnLine SC 377<\/a><\/strong><\/h4>\n

\u00a0<\/span>The 3-judge bench of NV Ramana, SK Kaul and BR Gavai, JJ has asked the Central Government to extend the order passed in <\/span>In Re Contagion of COVID-19 Virus in Children Protection Homes<\/span><\/a>, to Nari Niketans also, if feasable. <\/span><\/p>\n

Read more<\/i><\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

Tata Housing Development Company Ltd. v. Aalok Jagga<\/b><\/span>,<\/span> <\/span>2019 SCC OnLine SC 1419<\/b><\/a><\/h4>\n

In the matter concerning the housing project, on the ground that the area in question falls within the catchment area of Sukhna Lake and is 123 meters away from the boundary of Sukhna Wildlife Sanctuary, the 3-judge bench of Arun Mishra, MR Shah and BR Gavai, JJ has held that such projects cannot be permitted to come up within such a short distance from the wildlife sanctuary. Stating that the entire exercise smacks of arbitrariness on the part of Government including functionaries, the bench said that <\/span>the Court has to perform its duty in such a scenario when the authorities have failed to protect the wildlife sanctuary eco\u00adsensitive zone<\/span>. It said,<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201c<\/b>The entire exercise of obtaining clearance relating to the project is quashed. We regret that such a scenario has emerged in the matter and that it involved a large number of MLAs of Punjab Legislative Assembly.<\/b>\u201d<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

Read more<\/i><\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

Anantha Raju v. T.M. Narasimhan<\/b><\/span>, <\/b>2021 SCC OnLine SC 969<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

The 3-Judges Bench comprising of L. Nageswara Rao, Sanjiv Khanna, B.R. Gavai*, JJ., held that when parties deliberately put their agreement into writing, it is conclusively presumed that they intended the writing to form a full and final statement of their intentions, and one which should be placed beyond the reach of future controversy, bad faith and treacherous memory.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cIt would be inconvenient that matters in writing made by advice and on consideration, and which finally import the certain truth of the agreement of parties should be controlled by averment the parties to be proved by the uncertain testimony of slippery memory.<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

Read <\/i>more<\/i><\/a><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Kanwar Amninder Singh v. High Court of Uttarakhand, Special Leave to Appeal (C)<\/span> No(s).2507\/2021, 17-09-2021<\/span><\/b><\/h4>\n

The Division Bench of L. Nageswara Rao and B.R. Gavai, JJ., held that strict Rules Of Evidence do not apply on a departmental enquiry.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Petitioner, an Additional District Judge in the State of Uttarakhand was facing a departmental enquiry. The grievance of the petitioner was that his application for placing certain documents on record before the Enquiry Officer was rejected on the ground that the Presenting Officer had made an endorsement on the documents that they do not deserve to be admitted in view of Sections 85A and 85B of the Indian Evidence Act.<\/span><\/p>\n

Read <\/i><\/b>more<\/i><\/b><\/a><\/p>\n

Punjab and State Power Corporation Ltd. v. EMTA Coal Ltd.<\/span>, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 766<\/a><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

While elaborating the scope of judicial review, Bench of L. Nageswara Rao, B.R. Gavai and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ., held that,<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cIt is not for the Court to determine whether a particular policy or a particular decision taken in the fulfilment of that policy is fair.\u201d<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Question relating to interpretation of Section 11 of the Coal Mines (Special Provisions) Act, 2015 which was an outcome of the judgment of this Court\u2019s decision in <\/span>Manohar Lal Sharma v. Principal Secretary, <\/span><\/i>(2014) 9 SCC 516<\/span><\/a>, and ancillary question pertaining to the scope of judicial review of administrative action of the State authority arose for consideration in the instant appeals.<\/span><\/p>\n

Read more<\/a><\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Subhranshu Sarkar v. Indrani Sarkar (Nee Das),<\/span> 2021 SCC OnLine SC 720<\/a><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The Division Bench of L. Nageswara Rao and B.R. Gavai, JJ., dissolved a marriage while exercising its jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India as the marriage was <\/span>emotionally dead<\/span>.<\/span><\/p>\n

Read more<\/a><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

All India Association of Jurists v. Uttaranchal High Court, WP (C) No. 941 of 2021, dated 6-9-2021<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

\u00a0A three-Judge Bench of L. Nageswara Rao, B.R. Gavai and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. is considering a writ petition seeking to declare that the right to access to virtual courts through video conferencing is a facet of fundamental rights. The Court has issued notice to various parties including the Bar Council of India, the Supreme Court Bar Association and several High Courts.<\/span><\/p>\n

Read more<\/a><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Common Cause v. Union of India,<\/span> 2021 SCC OnLine SC 687<\/a><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

A Division Bench of L. Nageswara Rao and B.R. Gavai, JJ. upheld the Central Government\u2019s order extending the tenure of the incumbent Director of Enforcement Sanjay Kumar Mishra for a period of one year. The Supreme Court held that there is no fetter on the power of the Central Government in appointing the Director of Enforcement beyond a period of two years. Interpreting Section 25 of the Central Vigilance Commission Act, 2003 which prescribes the minimum tenure of the Director of Enforcement, the Court observed:<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cThe words \u2018not less than two years\u2019 cannot be read to mean \u2018not more than two years\u2019 and there is no fetter on the power of the Central Government in appointing the Director of Enforcement beyond a period of two years.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Read more<\/a><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Madhya Kshetra Basmati Growers Association Samiti v. Intellectual Property Appellate Board, Chennai, Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No (s). 8461 of 2020, decided on 2-9-2021<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The Bench of L. Nageswara Rao, B.R. Gavai and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ., addressed a matter with respect to registration of \u2018Basmati\u2019 as a Geographical Indication for basmati rice.<\/span><\/p>\n

In the present matter, the Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority (\u201cAPEDA\u201d) filed an application before the Assistant Registrar of the Geographical Indications Registry, Chennai to register \u2018Basmati\u2019 as a Geographical Indication in Class 30 under the Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999.<\/span><\/p>\n

Read more<\/a><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Brajesh Singh v. Sunil Arora, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 571<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

A Division Bench comprising of R.F. Nariman and B.R. Gavai, JJ. found several political parties guilty of contempt of court for non-compliance of directions given by the Supreme Court in <\/span>Rambabu Singh Thakur<\/span><\/i> v. <\/span>Sunil Arora<\/span><\/i>, <\/span>(2020) 3 SCC 733<\/span><\/a> in connection with disclosure of information of candidates with criminal antecedents. Penalties have been imposed on the political parties found guilty. The Court also issued further directions in order to make the right of information of a voter more effective and meaningful.<\/span><\/p>\n

Read more<\/a><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Amazon.com NV Investment Holdings LLC v. Future Retail Limited, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 557<\/a><\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Holding that an award passed by Emergency Arbitrator is enforceable under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, a Division Bench of R.F. Nariman and B.R. Gavai, JJ., ruled in favour of Amazon in the infamous Future-Amazon dispute. It was held that the interim award in favour of Amazon, passed by the Emergency Arbitrator appointed under the Arbitration Rules of the Singapore International Arbitration Centre is enforceable under the Indian Arbitration Act. The Court declared that full party autonomy is given by the Arbitration Act to have a dispute decided in accordance with institutional rules which can include Emergency Arbitrators delivering interim orders.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Read More<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n

Union of India v. Rajendra N. Shah, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 474<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

A 3-Judge Bench of the Court held that the Constitution (97th Amendment) Act, 2011 which inter alia inserted Part IX-B is ultra vires the Constitution insofar it is concerned with the subject of Cooperative Societies for want of the requisite ratification under Article 368(2) proviso. At the same time, the Court by a majority of 2:1, followed doctrine of severability in declaring that Part IX-B is operative insofar as it concerns Multi-State Cooperative Societies both within various States and in Union Territories.\u00a0 R.F. Nariman and B.R. Gavai, JJ., formed the majority, whereas K.M. Joseph, J. penned a separate opinion dissenting partly with the majority. He expressed inability to concur with the view on the application of doctrine of severability.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Read More<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n

Amway India Enterprises Pvt. Ltd v. Ravindranath Rao Sindhia, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 171<\/a><\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Division Bench of R.F. Nariman and B.R. Gavai, JJ., addressed an important case regarding nature of arbitration under Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Bench ruled, if at least one of the parties was either a foreign n<\/span>ational, or habitually resident in any country other than India; or by a body corporate which was incorporated in any country other than India; or by the Government of a foreign country, the arbitration would become an international commercial arbitration notwithstanding the fact that the individual, body corporate, or government of a foreign country carry on business in India through a business office in India.<\/p>\n

Read More<\/a><\/p>\n

PSA SICAL Terminals (P) Ltd. v. V.O. Chidambranar Port Trust, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 50<\/span>8<\/a><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Division Bench comprising of R.F. Nariman and B.R. Gavai, JJ. held that an arbitral award which is based on no evidence and\/or in ignorance of evidence would come under the realm of patent illegality. The Court also held that an arbitrator cannot rewrite the contract for the parties. <\/span>Read More<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n

Navinchandra Steels (P) Ltd. v. Srei Equipment Finance Ltd., (2021) 4 SCC 435<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The Division Bench of Rohinton Fali Nariman and B.R. Gavai, JJ., addressed the instant appeal involving the question that whether an insolvency proceedings could be initiated after the winding up application had been admitted under the Companies Act. The Bench stated, that,<\/span>\u201c\u2026every effort should be made to resuscitate the corporate debtor in the larger public interest, which includes not only the workmen of the corporate debtor, but also its creditors and the goods it produces in the larger interest of the economy of the country<\/span><\/i>.\u201d <\/span><\/p>\n

Read More<\/a><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Gemini Bay Transcription (P) Ltd. v. Integrated Sales Service Ltd., 2021 SCC OnLine SC 572<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

\u00a0A Division Bench comprising of R.F. Nariman and B.R. Gavai, JJ. held that a foreign arbitral award is enforceable against non-signatories to arbitration agreement. The Supreme Court reiterated that grounds for resisting a foreign arbitral award contained in Section 48(1)(<\/span>a<\/span><\/i>) to (<\/span>e<\/span><\/i>) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 are to be narrowly construed, and that a non-signatory\u2019s objection cannot possibly fit into Section 48(1)(<\/span>a<\/span><\/i>). Furthermore, a foreign arbitral award cannot be challenged on the ground of \u201cperversity\u201d.<\/span><\/p>\n

Read more<\/a><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Nayan Tara v. Ritu Maheshwari, Contempt Pet. (C) No. 316\/2021<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The Division Bench comprising of Rohinton Fali Nariman and B.R. Gavai, JJ., settled a decade-old land-acquisition dispute by directing NOIDA (New Okhla Industrial Development Authority) to pay compensation to the aggrieved land-owners who were dispossessed of their land by the authority without any land acquisition proceeding and without the authority of law<\/span><\/p>\n

Read more<\/a><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

National Highways v. M. Hakeem,\u00a0 2021 SCC OnLine SC 473<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The Division Bench of R.F. Nariman and B.R. Gavai, JJ., while addressing a significant and interesting question of law expressed that,<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cIf one were to include the power to modify an award in Section 34, one would be crossing the Lakshman Rekha\u201d<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

Read more<\/a><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Shital Fibers Ltd. v. Indian Acrylics Ltd., 2021 SCC OnLine SC 281<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

In a corporate dispute case, the 3-Judge Bench comprising of R.F. Nariman, B.R. Gavai* and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ., held that,<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cThe company Court while exercising its powers under sections 433 and 434 of the Companies Act would not be in a position to decide, as to who was at fault in not complying with the terms and conditions of the deed of settlement and the compromise deed.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Read more<\/a><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

M\/S Utkal Suppliers v. M\/S Maa Kanak Durga Enterprices,\u00a0 2021 SCC OnLine SC 301<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The Division Bench comprising of Rohinton Fali Nariman* and B.R. Gavai, JJ., addressed the issue of overstepping of review jurisdiction by the High Courts in policy matters. The Bench expressed,<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cJudicial review in these matters is equivalent to judicial restraint in these matters\u2026the writ court does not have the expertise to correct such decisions by substituting its own decision for the decision of the authority.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Read more<\/a><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Navinchandra Steels (P) Ltd. v. SREI Equipment Finance Ltd., (2021) 4 SC<\/a>C 435<\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The Division Bench of Rohinton Fali Nariman* and B.R. Gavai, JJ., addressed the instant appeal involving the question that whether an insolvency proceedings could be initiated after the winding up application had been admitted under the Companies Act. The Bench stated,<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201c\u2026every effort should be made to resuscitate the corporate debtor in the larger public interest, which includes not only the workmen of the corporate debtor, but also its creditors and the goods it produces in the larger interest of the economy of the country.<\/span><\/p>\n

Read more<\/a><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

State of Kerala v. Mother Superior Adoration Convent, (2021) 5 SCC 602<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The Division Bench comprising of R. F. Nariman* and B.R. Gavai, JJ., addressed the instant case regarding statutory interpretation.\u00a0 The issue before the Bench was whether a residential accommodation for nuns and hostel for students would fall under \u201creligious or educational purposes\u201d for the purpose of tax exemption. The Bench expressed,<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cWe must first ask ourselves what is the object sought to be achieved by the provision, and construe the statute in accord with such object. And on the assumption that any ambiguity arises in such construction, such ambiguity must be in favour of that which is exempted.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Read more<\/a><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Amway India Enterprises (P) Ltd. v. Ravindranath Rao Sindhia, (2021) 8 SCC 465\u00a0<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The Division Bench of R.F. Nariman* and B.R. Gavai, JJ., addressed an important case regarding nature of arbitration under Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Bench ruled,<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cIf at least one of the parties was either a foreign national, or habitually resident in any country other than India; or by a body corporate which was incorporated in any country other than India; or by the Government of a foreign country, the arbitration would become an international commercial arbitration notwithstanding the fact that the individual, body corporate, or government of a foreign country carry on business in India through a business office in India.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Read more<\/a><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Ram Vijay Singh v. State of U.P., 2021 SCC OnLine SC 142<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

In a 38 year old case relating to murder the 3-Judge Bench of Rohinton Fali Nariman, Hemant Gupta* and B.R. Gavai, JJ., had held<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cThe ossification test conducted in year 2020 when the appellant was 55 years of age cannot be conclusive to declare him as a juvenile on the date of the incident.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Read more<\/a><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Rama Narang v. Ramesh Narang,<\/span> 2021 SCC OnLine SC 29<\/a>,<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

B.R. Gavai, J., while addressing a contempt petition expressed that:<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201c\u2026contempt proceeding is not like an execution proceeding under the Code of Civil Procedure.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201c\u2026contempt proceedings are quasi-criminal in nature and the standard of proof required is in the same manner as in the other criminal cases.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cA mere objection to jurisdiction does not instantly disable the Court from passing any interim orders.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

The instant contempt petition arose out of an unfortunate family dispute between a father and his two sons from his first wife.<\/p>\n

Read more<\/a><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

\n

*Associate Editor, EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd.\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

[1]<\/sup><\/a>SC Collegium recommends Justices BR Gavai, Surya Kant for elevation to top court<\/a>, Scroll, last updated May 09, 2019,<\/p>\n

[2]<\/sup><\/a> Supreme Court Observer,\u00a0Judges\u2019 archive<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

by Nilufer Bhateja*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67245,"featured_media":257622,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[38347],"tags":[3658,44180,44181,44039,5363,44182],"class_list":["post-239573","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-judges-information","tag-Judges","tag-justice-br-gavai","tag-justice-gavai","tag-know-your-judge","tag-supreme-court","tag-supreme-court-india"],"yoast_head":"\nKnow Thy Judge| Justice B.R. Gavai | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/24\/know-thy-judge-justice-b-r-gavai\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Know Thy Judge| Justice B.R. Gavai\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"by Nilufer Bhateja*\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/24\/know-thy-judge-justice-b-r-gavai\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2020-11-24T10:50:03+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2021-11-24T09:26:30+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image-32.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1331\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"888\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Nilufer Bhateja\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Nilufer Bhateja\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"15 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/24\/know-thy-judge-justice-b-r-gavai\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/24\/know-thy-judge-justice-b-r-gavai\/\",\"name\":\"Know Thy Judge| Justice B.R. Gavai | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/24\/know-thy-judge-justice-b-r-gavai\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/24\/know-thy-judge-justice-b-r-gavai\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image-32.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2020-11-24T10:50:03+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2021-11-24T09:26:30+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/613296bbb068e42828d5de4fc05a6c18\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/24\/know-thy-judge-justice-b-r-gavai\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/24\/know-thy-judge-justice-b-r-gavai\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/24\/know-thy-judge-justice-b-r-gavai\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image-32.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image-32.jpg\",\"width\":1331,\"height\":888},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/24\/know-thy-judge-justice-b-r-gavai\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Know Thy Judge| Justice B.R. Gavai\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/613296bbb068e42828d5de4fc05a6c18\",\"name\":\"Nilufer Bhateja\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/00467b0aa6bfe0f2f3a904ab01b8efd85feecf7c38f2f41e5b898bb014b0143f?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/00467b0aa6bfe0f2f3a904ab01b8efd85feecf7c38f2f41e5b898bb014b0143f?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Nilufer Bhateja\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/nilufer\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Know Thy Judge| Justice B.R. Gavai | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/24\/know-thy-judge-justice-b-r-gavai\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Know Thy Judge| Justice B.R. Gavai","og_description":"by Nilufer Bhateja*","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/24\/know-thy-judge-justice-b-r-gavai\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2020-11-24T10:50:03+00:00","article_modified_time":"2021-11-24T09:26:30+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1331,"height":888,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image-32.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Nilufer Bhateja","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Nilufer Bhateja","Est. reading time":"15 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/24\/know-thy-judge-justice-b-r-gavai\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/24\/know-thy-judge-justice-b-r-gavai\/","name":"Know Thy Judge| Justice B.R. Gavai | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/24\/know-thy-judge-justice-b-r-gavai\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/24\/know-thy-judge-justice-b-r-gavai\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image-32.jpg","datePublished":"2020-11-24T10:50:03+00:00","dateModified":"2021-11-24T09:26:30+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/613296bbb068e42828d5de4fc05a6c18"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/24\/know-thy-judge-justice-b-r-gavai\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/24\/know-thy-judge-justice-b-r-gavai\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/24\/know-thy-judge-justice-b-r-gavai\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image-32.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image-32.jpg","width":1331,"height":888},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/24\/know-thy-judge-justice-b-r-gavai\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Know Thy Judge| Justice B.R. Gavai"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/613296bbb068e42828d5de4fc05a6c18","name":"Nilufer Bhateja","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/00467b0aa6bfe0f2f3a904ab01b8efd85feecf7c38f2f41e5b898bb014b0143f?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/00467b0aa6bfe0f2f3a904ab01b8efd85feecf7c38f2f41e5b898bb014b0143f?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Nilufer Bhateja"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/nilufer\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image-32.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":277964,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/24\/know-thy-judge-justice-bhushan-ramkrishna-gavai\/","url_meta":{"origin":239573,"position":0},"title":"Know Thy Judge- Justice Bhushan Ramkrishna Gavai","author":"Editor","date":"November 24, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"by Sucheta Sarkar\u2020","rel":"","context":"In "Know thy Judge"","block_context":{"text":"Know thy Judge","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/judges-information\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Justice Bhushan Ramkrishna Gavai","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image-320.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":345953,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/17\/justice-sanjiv-khanna-recommends-justice-br-gavai-52nd-cji-sc-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":239573,"position":1},"title":"Justice Sanjiv Khanna recommends Justice B.R. Gavai as 52nd Chief Justice of India","author":"Sucheta","date":"April 17, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Justice B.R. Gavai will become only the 2nd Chief Justice belonging to the Scheduled Caste community after Justice K.G. Balakrishnan.","rel":"","context":"In "Appointments & Transfers"","block_context":{"text":"Appointments & Transfers","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/news\/appointments\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Justice BR Gavai 52nd CJI","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/Justice-BR-Gavai-52nd-CJI.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/Justice-BR-Gavai-52nd-CJI.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/Justice-BR-Gavai-52nd-CJI.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/Justice-BR-Gavai-52nd-CJI.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":346801,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/30\/justice-br-gavai-to-take-oath-as-cji-sc-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":239573,"position":2},"title":"Justice B.R. Gavai set to take oath as 52nd Chief Justice of India on 14th May","author":"Sucheta","date":"April 30, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Justice Gavai, whose name for the position was recommended on 16-4-2025, will take over reins from Justice Sanjiv Khanna, who is set to retire on 13-5-2025 after a tenure of 6 months as 51st Chief Justice of India.","rel":"","context":"In "Appointments & Transfers"","block_context":{"text":"Appointments & Transfers","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/news\/appointments\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Justice BR Gavai 52nd CJI","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/Justice-BR-Gavai-52nd-CJI-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/Justice-BR-Gavai-52nd-CJI-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/Justice-BR-Gavai-52nd-CJI-1.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/Justice-BR-Gavai-52nd-CJI-1.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":214490,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/05\/09\/sc-collegium-recommendation-appointment-of-justices-bhushan-ramkrishna-gavai-and-surya-kant-as-judges-of-supreme-court\/","url_meta":{"origin":239573,"position":3},"title":"SC Collegium Recommendation | Appointment of Justices Bhushan Ramkrishna Gavai and Surya Kant as Judges of Supreme Court","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"May 9, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"The Collegium considers that the following two persons are deserving and suitable in all respects for being appointed as Judges of the Supreme Court of India: 1. Mr. Justice Bhushan Ramkrishna Gavai, Judge, Bombay High Court, and 2. Mr. Justice Surya Kant, Chief Justice, Himachal Pradesh High Court (PHC: Punjab\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Appointments & Transfers"","block_context":{"text":"Appointments & Transfers","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/news\/appointments\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":310587,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/03\/justice-br-gavai-nominated-chairman-sclsc-justice-sanjiv-khanna-supreme-court-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":239573,"position":4},"title":"Justice B.R. Gavai nominated for the post of Chairman of Supreme Court Legal Services Committee","author":"Sucheta","date":"January 3, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"At present, the Chairman of the SCLSC is Justice Sanjiv Khanna.","rel":"","context":"In "Know thy Judge"","block_context":{"text":"Know thy Judge","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/judges-information\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"justice br gavai","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/b.v-gavai.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/b.v-gavai.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/b.v-gavai.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/b.v-gavai.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":214936,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/05\/23\/breaking-appointments-4-judges-appointed-to-be-the-judges-of-the-supreme-court-of-india\/","url_meta":{"origin":239573,"position":5},"title":"Breaking [Appointments] | 4 Judges appointed to be the Judges of the Supreme Court of India","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"May 23, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"President is pleased to appoint the following Judges as the Judges of the Supreme Court of India: Justice Surya Kant, Chief Justice of the Himachal Pradesh High Court Justice Bhushan Ramkrishna Gavai, Judge of the Bombay High Court Justice Aniruddha Bose, Chief Justice of the Jharkhand High Court Justice Ajjikuttira\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Appointments & Transfers"","block_context":{"text":"Appointments & Transfers","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/news\/appointments\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/239573","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67245"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=239573"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/239573\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/257622"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=239573"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=239573"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=239573"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}