All High Courts Weekly Round-Up [August 29 - September 4, 2022]

Abbas Ansari v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 397

Bhagwan Shri Krishna Virajman And Another v. U.P Sunni Central Waqf Board And 3 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 398

Kanta v. State of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 399

Deepak @ Deep Prakash @ Deepu v. State Of U.P., Through Secretary Home Govt. Of U.P 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 400

Rajdhari Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 401

Gabbar Patel @ Dharmendra v. State 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 402

Dr. Vijay Arora v. King George Medical University Thru. Registrar Lko And Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 403

Pramod Kumar Singh And 5 Others v. State Of U.P. And 11 Others along with a connected plea 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 404

Mohd. Saif Ali v. State of U.P 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 405

Gufran Shaikh @ Gani Munawwar v. State of U.P. and Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 406

Annu Tandon and three others v. State Through Railway Protection Force 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 407

Eklavya Kumar v. State Of U.P. Thru. Addl.Chief Secy./Prin.Secy.P.W.D. And Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 408

Peeyush Kumar Jain v. Union of India 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 409

Satakshi Mishra v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Secondary Edu. Dept. Lucknow And 4 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 410

Kuldeep Sharma @ Kuldeep Hindu v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 411

Dr. B.R. Ambedker Granthalaya Evam Jan Kalyan v. State of U.P. and others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 412

Amitabh Thakur v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 413

Mohd. Sarfaraz v. Mohd. Abid And 3 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 414

Sri Bal Ganesh Pooja Mahotsav Samiti Thru. President Laxmi Niwas Tiwari v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 4 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 415

JUDGMENTS/ORDERS OF THE WEEK

"He Is Avoiding Process Of Court": Allahabad High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail To MLA Abbas Ansari In Arms License Case

Case title - Abbas Ansari v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko [Criminal Misc, Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. - 1396 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 397

The Allahabad High Court (Lucknow bench) last week denied anticipatory bail to Mau Sadar MLA Abbas Ansari, the son of jailed politician Mukhtar Ansari in connection with the Arms License case.

Denying him bail, the bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh took into account the fact that Ansari had been avoiding the process of the Court, against whom proclamation had been issued by the Court.

"Considering the serious allegations that accused-applicant got registered his arm license fraudulently and obtained prohibited Barrels, weapons and cartridges in large numbers by taking ground of shooting; and he has purchased weapons and cartridges, which are prohibited in shooting practice and against the Notification dated 4.8.2014 of the Government of India, and also considering the fact that accused-applicant has been avoiding the process of the Court, against whom proclamation has been issued, this Court does not find any ground to grant anticipatory bail to the accused-applicant."

Allahabad High Court Directs Mathura Court To Decide Plea For Survey Of Shahi Idgah Mosque Premises Within 4 Months

Case title - Bhagwan Shri Krishna Virajman And Another v. U.P Sunni Central Waqf Board And 3 Others

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 398

The Allahabad High Court has directed the Mathura Court to decide on two applications pending before it, filed in connection with the Sri Krishna Janambhumi Dispute, within 4 months. The applications essentially seek a survey of the disputed site and the appointment of a court commissioner for the purpose of the survey.

The Bench of Justice Piyush Agrawal issued this order on a plea made by Bhagwan Shri Krishna Virajman And Another by observing thus:

"Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue, the present petition stands disposed of finally with a direction to the concerned court below to consider and decide application dated 13.5.2022 i.e. paper no. 35 Ga and 37 Ga u/s 26 CPC pending in aforesaid case in accordance with law expeditiously and preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, but certainly after giving opportunity to the parties concerned and without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties, if there is no legal impediment."

"Relationship No Factor To Affect Credibility Of A Witness" : Allahabad High Court Upholds Conviction U/S 304 (II) IPC In A 1981 Case

Case title - Kanta v. State of U.P. [CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 549 of 1983]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 399

The Allahabad High Court last week upheld the conviction of a man under Section 304 of the IPC who was sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment under Section 304 (II) of the IPC for committing culpable homicide not amounting to murder in the year 1981.

Stressing that relationship is not a factor to affect credibility of a witnes, the bench of Justice Vikram D. Chauhan observed that mere statement that being relatives of the deceased they are likely to falsely implicate the accused cannot be a ground to discard the evidence which is otherwise cogent and credible.

"Merely because the witnesses are family members their evidence cannot per se be discarded. When there is allegation of interestedness, the same has to be established...It is more often than not that a relation would not conceal actual culprit and make allegations against an innocent person. Foundation has to be laid if plea of false implication is made. There is no bar in law on examining family members as witness. Evidence of a related witness can be relied upon provided it is trustworthy," the Court further remarked.

Allahabad High Court Grants Bail To Slain Gangster Vikas Dubey's Brother In Cheating Case

Case title - Deepak @ Deep Prakash @ Deepu v. State Of U.P., Through Secretary Home Govt. Of U.P [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 54178 of 2021]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 400

The Allahabad High Court has granted bail to the slain gangster Vikas Dubey's brother Deepak Dubey in connection with a cheating case. The allegation against Dubey is that he was found using a sim card registered in someone else's name with the intention to commit crime.

However, keeping in view the nature of the offence, the argument advanced on behalf of the parties, evidence on record regarding the complicity of the accused, and the larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the bench of Justice Siddharth granted him bail.

Interim Custody Of Conveyance/Vehicle Seized Under NDPS Act Can Be Granted U/S 451 & 457 CrPC: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Rajdhari Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another [CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3607 of 2021]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 401

The Allahabad High Court has observed that the Magistrate/Special Judge, NDPS Act has the power to consider the application for the interim custody of the conveyance/ vehicle (seized under the NDPS Act) under the provision of Section 451 and 457 of Cr.P.C.

"A perusal of Section 36- C and 51 of the NDPS Act indicates that the provisions of Cr.PC. so far as, they are not in contradictions with the special Act NDPS Act, shall be applicable to the NDPS Act and as in the NDPS Act no procedure for interim custody of the vehicle is prescribed Sections 451 and 457 of Cr.P.C. specifically deal with the custody and disposal of property pending trial and the procedure to be followed by the police upon seizure of property," the bench of Justice Sadhna Rani (Thakur) remarked.

Prosecution Must Establish Case Beyond Reasonable Doubt Even If Accused Pleads Guilty In Statement U/S 313 CrPC: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Gabbar Patel @ Dharmendra v. State [JAIL APPEAL No. - 5752 of 2007]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 402

The Allahabad High Court has observed that even if an accused pleads guilty in his statement recorded under Section 313 CrPC, even then the prosecution has to establish its case beyond so as to obtain an order of the court regarding the guilt of the accused.

"...mere stating of being guilty (by the accused) in the statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. will end the issue and would lead the route only to the guilt of the accused without prosecution establishing its case beyond reasonable doubt against him through cogent, reliable and admissible evidence," the bench of Justice Samit Gopal remarked.

With this, the Court acquitted Accused/Gabbar Patel of charges under section 307 IPC by extending the benefit of the doubt.

"No Allegation Regarding Misconduct Of A Sexual Nature" : Allahabad High Court Sets Aside Suspension Of A Junior Resident Doctor

Case title - Dr. Vijay Arora v. King George Medical University Thru. Registrar Lko And Others [WRIT - C No. - 2917 of 2020]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 403

The Allahabad High Court set aside a suspension order passed against a junior resident doctor who was restrained from taking up any medical work on the allegation that he had sexually abused the daughter of a patient

The Court noted that there was no allegation against the petitioner (a junior resident doctor) with regard to any misconduct of a sexual nature so as to warrant the punishment as had been awarded to him.With this, the bench of Justice Pankaj Bhatia allowed a writ plea moved by Dr. Vijay Arora challenging his suspension order passed by the management of the King George Medical University, Lucknow.

Excise Constable Exam | "Male Chauvinism Unacceptable": Allahabad HC Dismisses Plea Challenging Different PET Criteria For Males & Females

Case title - Pramod Kumar Singh And 5 Others v. State Of U.P. And 11 Others along with a connected plea [WRIT - A No. - 4225 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 404

The Allahabad High Court dismissed two pleas challenging criteria of different yardsticks for physical efficiency tests for males and females for the U.P. Subordinate Service Selection Board Excise Constable recruitment exam.

The bench of Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery observed that the classification of men and women in physical efficiency is not arbitrary and therefore, the allegation of discrimination between men and women is baseless and cannot be accepted.

"In the present recruitment, females have succeeded in huge numbers and it appears that unsuccessful male candidates are not able to cope up with the fact that female have overnumbered them in merit. It is an example of 'male chauvinism' which is unacceptable in twenty first century," the Court further remarked.

Allahabad High Court Grants Bail To Man Accused Of Tweeting Offensive Comments Against Hindu Women

Case title - Mohd. Saif Ali v. State of U.P [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31532 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 405

The Allahabad High court has granted bail to one Mohd. Saif Ali, who has been accused of posting certain offensive tweets against the modesty of Hindu women. The Court observed that Said had made out a case of bail.

Essentially, the bench of Justice Deepak Verma ordered to release him bail in view of the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, and complicity of the accused.

"Victim-Accused Living Happily As Wife-Husband": Allahabad High Court Quashes POCSO Case, Relies On Meghalaya HC's Ruling

Case title - Gufran Shaikh @ Gani Munawwar v. State of U.P. and Another [APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10258 of 2021]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 406

The Allahabad High Court quashed an FIR and criminal proceedings in a POCSO case registered against a man as it noted that the accused man and victim-wife (who was a minor at the time of the incident) were 'happily' living with each other as husband and wife.

The bench of Justice Gautam Chowdhary granted bail to one Gufran Shaikh who had been booked under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C., Section 3/4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, and Section 3(2)(v) SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Act), 1989.

Rail Roko Protest | "Citizens Have Right To Protest Against Govt Policies/ Inaction In A Democracy W/O Committing An Offence": Allahabad HC Modifies Ex-MP's Sentence

Case title - Annu Tandon and three others v. State Through Railway Protection Force [CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 638 of 2021]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 407

Stressing that in democracy under our Constitution, people have the right to protest against Government policies/action/inaction, provided the protest does not lead to the commission of an offence by the protesters, the Allahabad High Court today modified the sentence awarded to Ex-MP Annu Tandon and others in connection with a 'Rail Roko Protest' Case.

The bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh observed that except for detaining the train for 15 minutes, there was no damage to private and public property by the protesters and by and large, it was a peaceful and symbolic protest.

Can Order Recovery U/R 351-A Of Civil Service Regulations After Retirement Only If Pecuniary Loss Is Caused To State: Allahabad HC

Case title - Eklavya Kumar v. State Of U.P. Thru. Addl.Chief Secy./Prin.Secy.P.W.D. And Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 408

The Allahabad High Court has clarified that after the retirement of a government servant, the state government is empowered under regulation Rule 351- A of the Civil Service Regulations to order the recovery from his/her pension, however, the same can be done only where it is established that some financial loss has been caused to the State.

With this, the bench of Justice Alok Mathur quashed an order of the UP Government holding the petitioner (retired Executive Engineer) guilty and awarding a punishment of deduction of 5% from his pension for a period of three years.

"No Rule To Deny Bail In Case Of Grave Economic Offence": Allahabad HC Grants Bail To Businessman Accused Of Stashing ₹196 Crore In Cash

Case title - Peeyush Kumar Jain v. Union of India [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21223 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 409

The Allahabad High Court granted bail to Kanpur-based Perfume businessman, Peeyush Jain in connection with a case registered against him for allegedly stashing cash amounting to Rs. 196.57 Crores. He has been directed to furnish a personal bond of Rs.10 Lakhs and two reliable sureties each of the like amount.

The bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi granted him bail as it noted that even if the allegation is one of grave economic offence, it is not a rule that bail should be denied in every case since there is no such bar created in the relevant enactment passed by the legislature nor does the bail jurisprudence provide so.

"The position of law regarding grant of bail which emerges from the judgments of the Supreme Court referred to above, is that the basic jurisprudence relating to bail in economic offences remains the same inasmuch as the grant of bail is the rule and refusal is the exception so as to ensure that the accused has the opportunity of securing fair trial. It is not advisable to categorize all economic offences into one group and deny bail on that basis. One of the circumstances to consider the gravity of the offence is the term of sentence that is prescribed for the offence the accused is alleged to have committed," the Court remarked.

'Maternity Act' Doesn't Provide For Time Difference Between 1st & 2nd Child For Grant Of Maternity Benefits: Allahabad HC Grants Relief To Woman

Case title - Satakshi Mishra v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Secondary Edu. Dept. Lucknow And 4 Others [WRIT - A No. - 5114 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 410

The Allahabad High Court has observed that the Maternity Benefits Act, 1961 Act does not contain any such stipulation regarding the time difference between the first and second child for the grant of maternity benefits. A

With this, the Court granted relief to an Inter College lecturer whose application for maternity leave had been rejected by placing reliance on Rule 153(1) of the Financial Handbook by contending that the same contains a restriction that the second maternity leave cannot be granted where there is a difference of less than two years between the end of the first maternity leave and grant of second maternity leave.

Gangster Act Case| Allahabad HC Grants Bail To 'Int'l Hindu Leader' Who Allegedly Misused CM Yogi's Popularity To Cheat Public At Large

Case title - Kuldeep Sharma @ Kuldeep Hindu v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9799 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 411

The Allahabad High Court granted bail to a self-styled international Hindu Leader and Yogi Sena Pramukh, Kuldeep Sharma @ Kuldeep Hindu in a Gangster Act Case.

The prosecution under the Gangster Act had been launched against Sharma on the basis of a criminal case registered against him for allegedly misusing the popularity of the present Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, Yogi Adityanath, and fooling various persons to deposit money in bank accounts run by him.

"Only Parliament Can Include A Caste In The SC List": Allahabad HC Quashes UP Govt Orders Notifying 17 OBCs As Scheduled Castes

Case title - Dr. B.R. Ambedker Granthalaya Evam Jan Kalyan v. State of U.P. and others [PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 2129 of 2017]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 412

In a significant order, the Allahabad High Court has quashed the orders of the Uttar Pradesh Government recognizing or acknowledging 17 Other Backward Classes sub-castes as Scheduled Castes. The Court said that this exercise could have been undertaken only by way of parliamentary law.

"The provisions of Article 341 of the Constitution do not leave any scope for including any Caste or Group to the list of Scheduled Caste in a State provided by the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, except by law made by Parliament," the Bench of Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice J. J. Munir held.

Accused Can't Seek Trial Court's Direction To Prosecuting Agency To Collect A Particular Piece Of Evidence: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Amitabh Thakur v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. [APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5954 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 413

The Allahabad High Court has observed that an accused cannot ask the trial Court for a direction to the prosecuting agency that a shred of particular evidence is collected which may be in his favor.

The bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh dismissed a petition moved by Former IPS Officer Amitabh Thakur, who had sought the preservation of the Call Detail Records (CDR) of the then Additional Chief Secretary Home, DGP, ADG Women's Cell, Police Commissioner Lucknow along with other police officials.

Mindset Developed Among Public To Overawe Judges By Complaining & Maligning Them On Baseless Allegations: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Mohd. Sarfaraz v. Mohd. Abid And 3 Others [TRANSFER APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 528 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 414

While dismissing a plea filed seeking transfer of a civil case to another court, the Allahabad High Court remarked that a mindset has developed among the general public to overawe Judges by complaining and maligning them on baseless allegations.

The petitioner, Mohd. Sarfaraz had sought the transfer of the case from the Court of Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Nagina, District - Bijnore to any other Court of competent jurisdiction in the Judgeship of Bijnore by leveling allegations against the Presiding Officer, Civil Judge (Jr. Division).

[Ganesh Chaturthi] Authorities Must Maintain Tranquility So That Religious Rituals Are Observed Freely: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Sri Bal Ganesh Pooja Mahotsav Samiti Thru. President Laxmi Niwas Tiwari v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 4 Others [WRIT - C No. - 5854 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 415

In a significant observation, the Allahabad High Court has said that the administrative authorities cannot absolve themselves of the responsibility for law and order and maintaining tranquility to ensure that the religious practices and rituals are observed freely and without any invasion of public tranquility.

The bench of Justice Attau Rahman Masoodi and Justice Om Prakash Shukla further remarked that administrative authorities are required to blend their decision and not be indifferent to the people of faith.

With this, the Court disposed of a plea seeking a writ of mandamus to the Shravasti District Administration to allow the representation filed by the petitioner [Sri Bal Ganesh Pooja Mahotsav Samiti] seeking permission to celebrate Ganesh Chaturthi between August 31 to September 6 and to allow idol immersion.

Other updates of the Week

Hathras Rape And Murder Case: Allahabad High Court Seeks Trial Progress Report From The CBI

Case title - Suo-Moto Inre Right To Decent And Dignified Last Rites/Cremat v. State Of U.P. Thru Additional Chief Secretary Home And Ors.

The Allahabad High Court on Tuesday sought a trial progress report in the Hathras Gang Rape and Murder case from the CBI. A status report has also been requisitioned from the Trial Court through the District Judge, Hathras as to the status of Sessions before the next date [September 20, 2022].

The bench of Justice Rajan Roy and Justice Jaspreet Singh gave the direction to CBI counsel Anurag Kumar Singh.

Prima Facie State Govt Liable To Pay Compensation To Kin Of Persons Who Die Due To Poisonous Liquor Consumption: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Rani Sonkar And 10 Others v. State Of U.P. And 3 Others [WRIT - C No. - 24481 of 2022]

The Allahabad High Court has observed that the State Government, having complete control and regulation to manufacture and sale of liquor, is prima facie liable to pay compensation to the kin of deceased who die due to the consumption of Poisonous liquor.

The bench of Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani and Justice Saurabh Srivastava observed that under the U.P. Excise Act, 1910 and Rules framed, the State Government has complete control and regulation to manufacture and sale of liquor, and thus, prima facie, they are also liable to pay a specified amount to the sufferer or successors of the deceased under the provisions of "Mukhya Mantri Kisan Evam Sarvhit Bima Yojna" which provides for compensation on account of death or permanent disability due to poison etc.

Lakhimpur Kheri Violence: Allahabad High Court Grants Interim Bail To Accused Ankit Das For 15 Days On Medical Ground

The Allahabad High Court has granted short-term bail to Lakhimpur Kheri Violence Accused Ankit Das on medical grounds. The bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh ordered for his release on interim bail for 15 days on his filing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court/Magistrate concerned.

Das is among the 13 men who have been accused of killing four farmers and a journalist in Lakhimpur Kheri on October 3. Das, who is the nephew of the former Union minister Akhilesh Das, and the SUV which was behind the Thar that knocked down the four farmers is said to be owned by him.

Nizar Noorali Rangara and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 310

USP Studios Pvt. Ltd. v. Ganpati Enterprises & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 311

Relcon Infroprojects Ltd. & Anr. v. Ridhi Sidhi Sadan, Unit of Shree Ridhi Co. Op. Housing Society Ltd. & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 312

Jagdish Lahu Badhe & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 313

Unichem Laboratories Limited versus Union of India and Ors. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 314

Sunil Vishnu Mukane & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 315

Jalgaon Janta Sahakari Bank Ltd. & Anr. v. Joint Commissioner of Sales Tax & Anr. with 11 connected matters 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 316

Reports/Judgments

Company In Liquidation Cannot Always Avoid Proceedings U/S 138 NI Act, Its Conduct Can Be Weighed In: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Nizar Noorali Rangara and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 310

Bombay High Court held that to determine whether a complaint under section 138 can be entertained when the company is in the process of winding up, the fact and circumstance of each case have to be considered. The question cannot be considered without the facts especially to "insulate a company and its ex-directors from the rigors of law where it appears that they profess to take advantage of their own wrong".

Justice N. J. Jamadar further observed that a winding up order due to settlement terms is not on the same pedestal as winding up order passed on merits

Implicitly Admitted Liability Does Not Prevent Reference Of Dispute To Arbitration If Arbitration Agreement Exists: Bombay High Court (livelaw.in)

Case Title: USP Studios Pvt. Ltd. v. Ganpati Enterprises & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 311

The Bombay High Court held that impliedly admitted liability cannot prevent reference of dispute to arbitration. Justice N. J. Jamadar further held that judicial authority must make a reference to arbitration if even a semblance of dispute exists between two parties who have an arbitration agreement.

Notice Under Section 21 Of A&C Act Issued; Court Not Barred From Exercising Jurisdiction Under Section 9: Bombay High Court

Case title: Relcon Infroprojects Ltd. & Anr. v. Ridhi Sidhi Sadan, Unit of Shree Ridhi Co. Op. Housing Society Ltd. & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 312

The Bombay High Court ruled that merely because a notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act) to refer the disputes to arbitration is issued by a party, the Court is not barred from exercising jurisdiction under Section 9 of the A&C Act for interim measures. The Court added that it is not constrained to refer the parties to arbitration and convert the proceedings under Section 9 into an application under Section 17 of the A&C Act, to be adjudicated by the arbitral tribunal.

Justice G.S. Kulkarni reiterated that when an application under Section 9 has already been taken up for consideration, the question of examining whether the remedy under Section 17 is efficacious or not would not arise.

Registrar Didn't Act Independently: Bombay HC Sets Aside Govt Order Removing NCP Members From Jalgaon Milk Union's Managing Committee

Case title – Jagdish Lahu Badhe & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 313

The Aurangabad bench of Bombay High Court on Tuesday set aside an order removing 14 members of elected managing committee of the Jalgaon Zilla Dudh Utpadak Sangh Ltd.

"DDR has passed the impugned order not only in the absence of any ground or by resorting to any enquiry by following the principles of natural justice but even has passed it mala fide with an ulterior motive to oblige the Government", the court observed.

Bombay High Court Directs CBIC To Issue Clarification Regarding Distribution/ Reporting Of ISD Credit

Case Title: Unichem Laboratories Limited versus Union of India and Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 314

The Bombay High Court has directed the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) to issue a clarification in relation to the distribution/ reporting of the ISD credit.

The Bench of Justices K.R. Shriram and Gauri Godse was dealing with a batch of writ petitions, highlighting the difficulties faced by the petitioners in the distribution/ reporting of the ISD credit.

Bombay High Court Overturns Dacoity Conviction Citing Lapses In Arrangement Of Test Identification Parade By The Police

Case title: Sunil Vishnu Mukane & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 315

The Bombay High Court overturned conviction of four accused in a dacoity case observing that the prosecution's evidence was unreliable due to irregularities in arranging the test identification parade.

Justice Sarang V. Kotwal held "In this particular case in view of these infirmities, benefit of doubt must go to the accused. There are no other incriminating circumstances against the appellants".

The court noted the strong possibility that the prosecution witnesses had an opportunity to see the accused before the test identification parade. The prosecution has to rule out that possibility, which was not done. Further the prosecution didn't prove that the witnesses didn't see the dummies brought by the police for the identification. "If the witnesses had an opportunity to see the dummies before the test identification parade; then it was very easy to identity the accused", the court observed.

The court further observed that sixteen dummies were asked to take part in one single identification parade for four accused. Proper procedure stipulates six dummies per accused and no more than two accused in a single identification parade.

SARFAESI - Dues Of Secured Creditor Superior To Dues To State Govt Departments: Bombay High Court Full Bench

Case Title: Jalgaon Janta Sahakari Bank Ltd. & Anr. v. Joint Commissioner of Sales Tax & Anr. with 11 connected matters

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 316

The Bombay High Court held that the dues of a secured creditor would rank superior to the dues of a state government department on sale of secured asset.

A full bench consisting of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta, Justice M. S. Karnik and Justice N. J. Jamadar answered seven questions of law related to the SARFAESI Act, 2002 and Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDDB Act).

The court further held that Chapter IV-A of SARFAESI Act is prospective and will apply from the date it was brought into force, i.e., 24th January 2020.

The court held that a secured creditor cannot invoke section 31B of the RDDB Act to claim priority if it is disabled from obtaining 'priority' under section 26E of the SARFAESI Act for want of CERSAI registration.

The court overruled para 21 of division bench decision in ASREC (India) Limited v. State of Maharashtra. ASREC and paragraph 35 of the division bench decision in SBI v. State of Maharashtra

The court held that the priority under RDDB Act and SARFAESI Act wouldn't apply if the immovable property of the defaulter is attached and proclamation issued in accordance with law before Chapter IV-A of the SARFAESI Act or section 31B of the RDDB Act were enforced.

1. Person Having Consensual Physical Relationship Not Required To Judicially Scrutinse Other Person's Date Of Birth: Delhi High Court

Title: HANZLA IQBAL v. THE STATE & ANR.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 806

"The person, who is in a consensual physical relationship with another person, is not required to judicially scrutinise the date of birth of the other person," the Delhi High Court has observed.

Justice Jasmeet Singh made the observation while granting bail to a man accused in a rape case. The complainant had alleged that after becoming friends, in September 2019, the petitioner called her to a hotel and established a physical relationship with her and also made her video, thereby blackmailing her.

The complainant further alleged that the petitioner forced her to have physical relationships with different people under the threat of releasing the video.

It was also alleged that around August, 2021, the complainant managed to escape from the petitioner's house where she was held captive, after which she met an advocate who helped her lodging the FIR.

On the other hand, it was the petitioner's case that the date of incident as alleged was September, 2019, whereas the FIR was filed after three years in 2022.

2. Welfare State Expected To Create Conducive Conditions For Disabled Citizens, Provide Avenues For Public Employment: Delhi High Court

Case Title: VISHV MOHAN v. DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING AND ORS.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 807

The Delhi High Court has observed that a welfare State is expected to create conditions which are conducive to citizens with disabilities by providing them avenues for public employment.

A division bench comprising of Justices Sanjeev Sachdeva and Tushar Rao Gedela was of the view that under the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995, the State is enjoined to create conditions and opportunities for the welfare and betterment of the citizens with disabilities and those who are differently abled.

"The Central Government had enacted the said Act to ensure that the citizens falling in this category are not deprived of their rightful means of livelihood in respect of public employment. It is with a view to give impetus to the beneficial provisions of the said Act, that the Central Government and the State Governments created various avenues for public employment of such differently abled citizens," the Court said.

3. Plaintiff Cannot Value Suit Differently For Purpose Of Jurisdiction & For Payment Of Court Fees: Delhi High Court

Case Title: RAJINDER SINGH BHATIA v. MANJU BHATIA

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 808

The Delhi High Court has observed that a plaintiff cannot adopt a dual policy of valuing the suit at a certain value for the purpose of jurisdiction and payment of court fees.

Justice Neena Bansal Krishna further added that though it is in the discretion of the plaintiff to value his suit as per his bona fide belief and discretion, but once the suit has been valued in terms of sec. 8 of the Suit Valuation Act, the court fee shall become payable on the same amount in terms of sec. 7 of the Court Fees Act.

The Court made the observation while dealing with an application under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC filed on behalf of defendant in the suit for rejection of the plaint on account of payment of deficient court fees.

4. S.227 CrPC | Judge Cannot Act As Mouthpiece Of Prosecution While Deciding Discharge Application, Must Consider Broad Probabilities Of Case: Delhi HC

Case Title: SMT. SHIPALI SHARMA v. State & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 809

The Delhi High Court has observed that a judge, in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 227 of CrPC, cannot merely act as the post office or a mouthpiece of the prosecution but has to consider the broad probabilities of the case, the total effect of the evidence and the documents produced before it.

Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav added that the Judge should not make a roving inquiry into the pros and cons of the matter or weigh the evidence as if he was conducting a trial.

Section 227 of the Code provides for discharge of an accused. It states that upon consideration of the record of the case, documents submitted and after hearing the submissions of the accused and the prosecution, if the Judge considers that there is not sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused, he shall discharge the accused.

5. Mere Possession Of Tehbazari Right Does Not Entitle Occupant To Usurp Govt Land, Raise 'Pucca' Construction: Delhi High Court

Case Title: VED PRAKASH MANCHANDA v. DELHI URBAN SHELTER IMPROVEMENTBOARD & ORS.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 810

The Delhi High Court has observed that mere possession of a Tehbazari right does not entitle the occupant to usurp the Government land or to raise 'pucca' construction over it.

Justice Gaurang Kanth was dealing with a plea filed by one Ved Prakash Manchanda seeking directions on the authorities to regularise his long and continuous occupation in his favour in respect of premises of a property in city's Madangir, by way of executing a Lease Deed or other document.

It was the petitioner's case that since 1990-91 he was enjoying this site as a Tehbazari site and the Respondents authorities used to collect License Fee, damages and penalty from time to time. The petitioner also claimed that electricity connection was sanctioned in his favour based on the 'No Objection Certificate' issued by the authorities.

6. Sanction For Prosecution U/S 197 CrPC Can Be Postponed To Later Stage Unless Acts Complained Of Intricately Connected To Official Function: Delhi HC

Case Title: SHRI B K PARCHURE v. STATE

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 811

The Delhi High Court has observed that there is no legal bar to always postpone the requirement of sanction at a later stage of proceedings. If the acts complained of have a connection with the official duty, provision of Section 197 CrPC is attracted for obtaining sanction immediately at the time of taking cognizance.

Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav observed:

"….there is no doubt that a question of sanction can arise at any stage of proceedings but the same gets attracted immediately at the time of taking cognizance, if the facts of the case or act of the accused, are so intricately connected to his official function that it cannot be segregated. There is no legal bar to always postpone the requirement of sanction at a later stage...If Section 197 of Cr.P.C. is construed too narrowly it can never be applied, to any of the acts committed by a public servant as no public servant can be allowed to commit an offence in the discharge of his official duty. The entire legislative intent would be frustrated."

7. Delhi High Court Sets Aside Arbitral Award Requiring ISRO's Commercial Arm 'Antrix' To Pay Over 560 Million USD To Devas Multimedia

Case Title: ANTRIX CORPORATION LTD. v. DEVAS MULTIMEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 812

The Delhi High Court has set aside a 2015 arbitral award directing Antrix Corporation Limited, commercial and marketing arm of ISRO, to pay US$ 562.2 million to Devas Multimedia Private Limited over wrongful repudiation of contract.

Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva held that the arbitral award dated September 14, 2015 suffered from patent illegalities and fraud and was also in conflict with the Public Policy of India.

The Court thus allowed the plea filed by Antrix under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

8. Transfer Orders In Armed Forces A Necessary Exigency Of Service, Can't Be Interfered With Unless Arbitrary/ Malafide: Delhi High Court

Case Title: SGT. NAVNEET KUMAR SINGH (977823-F) v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 813

The Delhi High Court has observed that issuance of Posting Order resulting in transfer, especially for all those pertaining to Armed Forces, is a necessary exigency of service which should not be interfered by a Court as the Armed Forces are the best judges to exercise their own discretion.

"Posting Order resulting in transfer, which is in the absence of a violation of any statutory requirements, rules, regulations or like or which is unless vitiated by some sort of bias or malafide or vindictiveness further do not call for any interference from Courts," a division bench comprising of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Saurabh Banerjee added.

9. No Bar On Trial Courts In Deciding Issues Having No Precedent, Previously Undecided By Any Superior Court: Delhi High Court

Case Title: OM PRAKASH v. THE DELHI PINJRAPOLE SOCIETY (REGO.)

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 814

The Delhi High Court has observed that the Trial Courts are wholly competent to decide the questions of fact and law which may arise before them, many of which may be res integra and previously undecided by any superior court.

Justice C Hari Shankar added that the a Trial Court is well within its authority to decide all such issues and can even be the first judicial authority to take a view on a subject.

The Court also has stressed upon expeditious disposal of proceedings before the District Courts observing that the same has become a pressing necessity in today's day and age.

10. Not Mandatory To Grant Anticipatory Bail Merely Because Interim Protection Was Granted At Initial Stage Of Proceedings: Delhi High Court

Case Title: BHARTI SAHANI v. STATE (GOVT. OFNCT OF DELHI)

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 815

The Delhi High Court has observed that mere enjoyment of the interim benefit granted by it does not, in any manner, lessen the allegations which need to be considered on merits.

Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta added that the Court is required to consider the nature of accusations, supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with witnesses or apprehension of threat to complainants and prima facie satisfaction in support of charge.

11. Re-assessment Order Passed Without Considering Detailed Reply Of The Assessee: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Rithala Education Society Versus Union Of India

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 816

The Delhi High Court held that the significance of issuing a show cause notice prior to issuing a re-assessment notice has been lost because the order under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act was made without taking into account the detailed reply filed by the assessee.

The division bench of Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh has observed that the department has not examined the petitioner's plea that the petitioner-society has included all the transactions carried out by the Citizen Model School in its books of accounts.

12. Delhi High Court Allows Deduction To PVR On Difference Between Market Price & Issue Price Of ESOP

Case Title: PVR Ltd. Versus Commissioner Of Income Tax

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 817

The Delhi High Court has allowed the appeal of PVR Ltd. and allowed the deduction on the difference between the price at which stock options were offered to employees of the appellant company under ESOP and ESPS and the prevailing market price of the stock.

The division bench of Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora has relied on the decision of the Karnataka High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Biocon Ltd. and has observed that an assessee is entitled to claim a deduction under Section 37(1) if the expenditure has been incurred. The expression "expenditure" will also include a loss, and therefore, the issuance of shares at a discount where the assessee absorbs the difference between the price at which they are issued and the market value of the shares would also be expenditure incurred for the purposes of Section 37(1).

13. "Not Seen Instigating The Crowd": Delhi High Court Grants Bail To Another Accused In Jahangirpuri Riots Case

Case Title: Babuddin v. State

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 818

The Delhi High Court today granted bail to one Babuddin, an accused in relation to the clashes that broke out in April in city's Jahangirpuri area during a Hanuman Jayanti procession.

Noting that Babuddin was in custody since April 27, a single judge bench comprising of Justice Yogesh Khanna granted bail after observing that he was no more required for further investigation.

The Court also noted that chargesheet qua the accused has already been filed and that a co-accused was also recently granted bail in the FIR in question.

14. MOU Between Private Parties Cannot Be Specifically Enforced; Party Not Entitled To Interim Relief Under Section 9 Of A&C Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Royal Orchids versus Kulbir Singh Kohli & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 819

The Delhi High Court has ruled that a MOU which is in the nature of a commercial transaction between two private parties is by its very nature determinable and hence, the said MOU can be terminated even in the absence of any termination clause contained in it.

The Single Bench of Justice Mini Pushkarna held that since the MOU was not capable of specific performance due to the statutory bar contained in Section 14 (d) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, the party was not entitled to any interim relief under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act).

15. Urgent Need To Prevent Depleting Green Cover: Delhi High Court Orders Parties To Deposit 25K Cost Towards Green Highways Fund

Case Title: ANIL KUMAR & ORS. v. THE STATE & ANR.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 820

The Delhi High Court has quashed a cheating FIR of 2017 following a settlement between the parties and imposed a cost of Rs. 25,000 on the accused persons as well as the complainant to be utilized for plantation of trees along the national highways.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma directed that the cost be deposited in the Green Highways Fund which is formed pursuant to a project for Greening (Plantation & Its Maintenance) of National Highways, launched by the Ministry of Road Transport & Highways.

16. Sanction Of Resolution Plan U/S 31 IBC Does Not Discharge Liability Of Guarantor Towards Loan Agreement: Delhi High Court

Case Title: SANJAY SARIN v. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, CANARA BANK & ORS.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 821

The Delhi High Court has recently reiterated that where proceedings are initiated under the SARFAESI Act and the borrower is aggrieved by any of the actions of the bank for which it has remedy under the Act, no writ petition should be entertained.

Justice Sanjeev Narula further observed that the extent of liability of a personal guarantor would have to be determined in light of the agreement between the borrower, i.e., the corporate debtor and the personal guarantor, for which the appropriate forum would be the Debt Recovery Tribunal and not the High Court.

17. Indian Courts Can Direct 'Telegram' To Disclose Info Of Copyright Infringers Using Its Platform, Server Being In Singapore No Defence: Delhi HC

Case Title: NEETU SINGH & ANR. v. TELEGRAM FZ LLC & ORS.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 822

The Delhi High Court has observed that copyright infringers cannot be permitted to seek shelter under messaging platform Telegram's policies merely on the ground that its physical server is in Singapore.

Justice Pratibha M Singh added that Indian Courts would be perfectly justified in directing Telegram, which runs its massive operations in India, to adhere to Indian law and orders passed by them for disclosure of relevant information relating to infringers.

The bench further observed that the disclosure of personal data for the purpose of any proceedings, which would include proceedings related to infringement of copyright, would be a recognized exception to data privacy under Personal Data Protection Act, 2012 of Singapore.

State Of Gujarat v/s Thakore Chamanji Motiji & 3 other(s) 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 355

Patel Bhaveshkumar Chandrakantbhai V/S State Of Gujarat 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 356

Dhansukhlal Rambhai Patel & 1 Other(S) V/S Dhansukhlal Nagindas Kapadia 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 357

Jayrajsinh Madhubha Gadhvi v/s State Of Gujarat 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 358

Rajesh Sukamaran Nambiar V/S The Central Bank Of India Through The Chief Manager 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 359

Vimalaben Prabhunath Misra V/S Ketan Chandravadan Soni 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 360

Bank Of Baroda V/S Harshadgiri Chanchalgiri Goswami 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 361

Ramesh Babubhai Patel Versus State Of Gujarat 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 362

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. V/s Meraman Dana Harijan & 6 other(s) 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 363

Mohbatsinh Balusinh Zala V/S State Of Gujarat 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 364

Brijeshkumar Dasharathlal Patel v/s Chairman & 31 others 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 365

Dolly Surendra Pandey Versus State Of Gujarat 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 366

Kul Hind Jamiat-Al Quresh Action Committee Gujarat Represented By Danish Qureshi And Mr Razaiwala Mohammed Hammad Hussain V/S Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation And State Of Gujarat 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 367

JUDGMENTS/ORDERS OF THE WEEK

[Murder] Unnatural That Complainant Did Nothing To Save Deceased From Accused, Appears To Be False Case Due To Enmity: Gujarat HC Upholds Acquittal

Case Title: State Of Gujarat v/s Thakore Chamanji Motiji & 3 other(s)

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 355

The Gujarat High Court has upheld an order acquitting four persons accused in a Murder case on the ground that there are several material contradictions in the versions presented by the main witnesses and the weapon recovered did not have blood stains to establish the commission of the offence.

A bench of Justices SH Vora and Rajendra Sareen further noted that all witnesses were related to each other and could not deemed as 'independent witnesses.' They had prior enmity with the Accused and were interested in getting them convicted. Thus, it was concluded:

"The evidence of all the main witnesses is contradictory to each other, which is rightly disbelieved by the learned Sessions Judge. As a result, the judgement delivered by the Sessions Judge is sound on the aspect of law and facts. The evidence brought on record by the prosecution before the trial court has been rightly appreciated by the trial court. No apparent error on the face of the record is found from the judgement."

Infraction Of Law Not Done In Systematic Manner May Not Be Sufficient For Preventive Detention: Gujarat High Court

Case Title: Patel Bhaveshkumar Chandrakantbhai V/S State Of Gujarat

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 356

The Gujarat High Court has held that commission of infraction of law, not done in an organized or systematic manner, may not be sufficient for the detaining authority to justifiably come to the conclusion that there is no alternate but to preventively detain an accused.

The Bench comprising Justices SH Vora and Rajendra Sareen held:

"No doubt, neither the possibility of launching of a criminal proceedings nor pendency of any criminal proceedings is an absolute bar to an order of preventive detention. But, failure of the detaining authority to consider the possibility of either launching or pendency of criminal proceedings may, in the circumstances of a case, lead to the conclusions that the the detaining authority has not applied its mind to the vital question whether it was necessary to make an order of preventive detention."

Relief Of Specific Performance U/S 20 SRA Is No Longer Discretionary After 2018 Amendment: Gujarat High Court

Case Title: Dhansukhlal Rambhai Patel & 1 Other(S) V/S Dhansukhlal Nagindas Kapadia

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 357

The Gujarat High Court has held that the relief of specific performance under Section 20 of the Specific Reliefs Act is no longer discretionary, with notification of the 2018 Amendment Act.

Whereas the unamended Section 20 stipulated that the specific relief "may" be granted at the discretion of the court, the amending Act substitutes Section 20 and renders the specific relief as regular statutory remedy.

Court Cannot Order Registration Of FIR Against Investigating Officer U/S 218 IPC Sans Inquiry: Gujarat High Court

Case Title: Jayrajsinh Madhubha Gadhvi v/s State Of Gujarat

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 358

The Gujarat High Court has clarified that offences under Sections 218 and 219 of the IPC which pertain to a public servant framing incorrect records for saving a person from punishment and making reports in a corrupt manner, cannot be invoked without initiation of inquiry or in absence of any evidence.

In the event that these provisions are wrongly invoked such that they would adversely affect and prejudice the career of the public servant, the High Court can expunge the relevant parts from the judicial order of the Magistrate.

Notice U/S 13(2) SARFAESI Act Not Sufficient For Instituting Legal Challenge, Adjudication Must Await Until S.13(4) Stage: Gujarat HC

Case Title: Rajesh Sukamaran Nambiar V/S The Central Bank Of India Through The Chief Manager

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 359

The Gujarat High Court, while declining to exercise its writ jurisdiction at the stage of issuance of notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, has held that adjudication of matter would have to wait till the stage of Section 13(4) was reached. Thereafter, the aggrieved person can file a securitisation appeal under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act before the Debt Recovery Tribunal.

Section 13(2) of the Act refers to the issuance of notice to the borrower for discharging his liabilities within 60 days in case of default in payment of debt. While Section 13(4) pertains to declaring the accounts of the borrower as an NPA and thereafter, taking possession of secured assets and appointing a person to manage such assets.

Application For Mutation Of Entry In Revenue Record Does Not Create Encumbrance On Property: Gujarat High Court

Case Title: Vimalaben Prabhunath Misra V/S Ketan Chandravadan Soni

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 360

The Gujarat High Court refused to initiate contempt proceedings against a party to property dispute, said to have wilfully disobeyed court's status quo order by making an application for before the concerned Revenue Authority for mutation of the entry in the revenue record, on the basis of the registered Sale Deed.

The Bench comprising Justice Vipul Pancholi and Justice AP Thaker was of the view that such an application does not breach status quo with regard to the title and the encumbrance of the suit property, in any manner. It said,

"Opponent has neither got the Suit property transferred nor is there any encumbrance created...Just because the opponent made an application for entering her name in the revenue record, it cannot be said that there is willful and intentional disobedience of the order of this Court."

Permanent Part-Time Service Qualifies Under Pension Regulations: Gujarat HC Upholds Payment To Retd. Cleaner At Dena Bank

Case Title: Bank Of Baroda V/S Harshadgiri Chanchalgiri Goswami

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 361

The Gujarat High Court has affirmed that a 'permanent part-time' employee is entitled to grant of pension in terms of Dena Bank (Employees') Pension Regulations, 1995.

The Bench comprising Justice AJ Desai and Justice Mauna Bhatt thus upheld the single bench order directing grant of pension to a part-time cleaner, who had voluntarily retired from service.

S.306 IPC | Words Uttered In Fit Of Anger Sans Intention Not Instigation/ Abetment Of Suicide: Gujarat High Court

Case Title: Ramesh Babubhai Patel Versus State Of Gujarat

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 362

The Gujarat High Court has clarified in respect of Section 306 of IPC that a word uttered in a fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow cannot amount to 'instigation.'

Therefore, if in the instant case, the Accused/Applicant had uttered 'you may do whatever you like and if you want to die, you may die', then it would not constitute instigation as u/s 306.

These observations were made in connection with a Section 482 application challenging the FIR against the Accused for offences u/s 306 and 114 of IPC.

S.147 MV Act | Insurance Company Not Liable To Compensate Person Travelling In Goods Vehicle Prior To 1994 Amendment: Gujarat High Court

Case Title: Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. V/s Meraman Dana Harijan & 6 other(s)

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 363

The Gujarat High Court has held that liability cannot be fastened upon the insurance company under Section 147 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 if the motor accident victim was travelling in a goods vehicle and such accident took place prior to the 1994 Amendment Act. Justice Hemant Pracchak explained:

"…the present appellant insurance company is exonerated from the liability fasten upon it as the deceased was travelling in goods vehicle and it is clearly breach of the policy and therefore, the insurance company is not held liable…Considering the ratio laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court and considering the fact that the date of accident is of 9.1.1994 i.e. prior to the date of amendment in Section 147 of the Motor Vehicles Act which has come into force in November 1994 and therefore, the present appeal deserves to be allowed."

Order Of Premature Retirement Indicating Misconduct/ Lack Of Integrity Is Stigmatic: Gujarat High Court Grants Relief To Armed Police ASIs

Case Title: Mohbatsinh Balusinh Zala V/S State Of Gujarat

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 364

The Gujarat High Court has held that an order of 'premature retirement' become stigmatic if such order contains statements indicating misconduct or lack of integrity.

"Where orders have been passed which indicate blemish, disgrace, disrespute etc., and in that context if an order of termination or of compulsory retirement is seen, the same would amount to stigma by virtue of a statement made in the order."

B.Ed. Not "Bachelor Degree" Of Graduation: Gujarat High Court

Case Title: Brijeshkumar Dasharathlal Patel v/s Chairman & 31 others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 365

The Gujarat High Court has held that a B.Ed. Degree, i.e., Bachelor of Education, is not a Bachelor Degree of graduation since the said course, like 3-yrs-LLB course, can be perused only after one has graduated in any of the branches of arts or science.

In the same breath, the Court held that persons possessing a B.Ed. degree are over-qualified for positions having minimum prescribed qualification of Graduation and thus, rejection of their candidature for having more qualifications cannot be held to be bad in law.

'Too Harsh For Her 2-Months Old Infant': Gujarat High Court Grants Bail To 70-Yrs-Old Woman Accused Of Fraud

Case Title: Dolly Surendra Pandey Versus State Of Gujarat

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 366

The Gujarat High Court has recently granted bail to a 70 years old woman, having a two month old infant, for commission of offences u/s 406, 420, 114, 467, 471 and 120-B of IPC and Sections 66(C), 66(D) of the Information Technology Act and Sections 14, 14(A)(b) of the Foreigners Act.

The primary allegations against the Applicant as per the FIR and the charge sheet was that she had introduced herself as a Customs Officer and had asked the Complainant to deposit INR 3.87 lacs in the bank account of another person, so as to aid the main accused. Thereafter, the Applicant had withdrawn the said amount and handed it over to the main accused. In lieu, she received INR 50,000. The APP opposed grant of bail basis the gravity of the offence.

"AMC Resolution Doesn't Violate Fundamental Rights": Gujarat HC Dismisses Plea Against Slaughterhouse Closure Due To Jain Festival

Case title - Kul Hind Jamiat-Al Quresh Action Committee Gujarat Represented By Danish Qureshi And Mr Razaiwala Mohammed Hammad Hussain V/S Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation And State Of Gujarat

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 367

The Gujarat High Court dismissed a plea challenging the decision of the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (AMC) to close down its sole slaughterhouse in the city on the occasion of a Jain festival.

The bench of Justice Sandeep Bhatt observed that the order of the AMC was applicable only for two days and that it was a reasonable restriction and did not violate the fundamental rights of the citizens under Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution and therefore, the matter being meritless, was liable to be dismissed.

Other updates of the Week

No Ambiguity Permitted In Framing Of Questions, One Clear Answer Should Be The Norm: Gujarat HC Grants Interim Relief To Examinees

Case Title: Nirbhaysinh Vijaysinh Raulji V/S State Of Gujarat

The Gujarat High Court, while admitting that Courts must exercise restraint in matters involving correctness of answer keys, has concluded that in the event of ambiguity in questions/ multiple correct answers in a time-bound examination, the Court can interfere and provide relief.

"These petitioners apparently prima-facie appear to be the victims of framing of questions which appeared to be ambiguous or confusing. In the case of Kanpur University through Vice Chancellor and others v. Samir Gupta and others 1983 4 SCC 309, which has been followed by the decisions while warning of judicial restraint, the Court has recommended that there must be a system of avoiding ambiguity in questions. This is one case where the two questions appear to be ambiguous," the Bench comprising Justice Biren Vaishnav observed.

Nominal Index:

ROSHAN KUMAR MISHRA v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA. 2022 LiveLaw (kar) 340

MURTHY v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA. 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 341

HARSHAVARDHANA RAO K v. UNION OF INDIA. 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 342

THE BRANCH MANAGER ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD V TAHASEENTAJ W/O SHAMIULLA @ GULLAB, & Others. 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 343

MAHANTESH KOUJALAGI v STATE OF KARNATAKA. 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 344

The State of Karnataka v. S.B. Shivashankar. 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 345

S.C. MAHESH v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA. 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 346

M.PRAKASH v. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE. 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 347

Judgment/Orders.

1. Bhang Not Covered Under NDPS Act, Prosecution Must Show It Is Prepared From Charas/ Ganja: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: ROSHAN KUMAR MISHRA v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6611 OF 2022

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (kar) 340

The Karnataka High Court has granted bail to a man accused of possessing Bhang, holding that Bhang is not covered under the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS).

2. Transfer Orders Cannot Be Passed In Absence Of Vacancy, Must Show Place Of New Posting: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: MURTHY v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 14860 OF 2022

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 341

The Karnataka High Court has directed the State government to ensure that if transfers are made after the period of general transfers, no request for transfers should be entertained or orders made unless there is a vacant place.

3. No Notice Ought To Be Issued To The Subject Prior To Issuance Of Look Out Circular: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: HARSHAVARDHANA RAO K v. UNION OF INDIA

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.12185 OF 2022

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 342

The Karnataka High Court has held that no notice ought to be issued to the subject of the Look out circular prior to its issuance. A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna however added, "Right to travel being curtailed against the subject of the LOC, he would at least become entitled to a copy of the LOC, not at any time prior to his being stopped from travelling abroad, but only at the time when he is stopped from travelling out the shores of this nation."

4. Motor Vehicle Act | Insurer Liable To Compensate Spare Driver If Only One Claim Made: Karnataka High Court

Case title: THE BRANCH MANAGER ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD V TAHASEENTAJ W/O SHAMIULLA @ GULLAB, & Others

Case No: M.F.A.No.23205/2011 c/w M.F.A.No.23206/2011

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 343

The Karnataka High Court has reiterated that the insurer is very much liable to pay compensation in respect of a spare driver under Section 147 of Motor Vehicles Act, if there is only one claim under the policy.

5. Representation Of Peoples Act | S.127A Prescribes Non-Cognizable Offence, Magistrate's Permission Mandatory For Police Investigation: Karnataka HC

Case Title: MAHANTESH KOUJALAGI v STATE OF KARNATAKA

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.5528/2022

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 344

The Karnataka High Court has said that offence under Section 127-A of the Representation of People Act (Restrictions on the printing of pamphlets, posters, etc) is a non-cognizable offence and hence, permission for police investigation must be granted by Magistrate in terms of Section 155 of CrPC.

6. Minimum Punishment Prescribed U/S 27(d) Of Drugs & Cosmetics Act Can Be Reduced If Accused Enters Plea Bargain: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: The State of Karnataka v. S.B. Shivashankar

Case No: CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.775 OF 2018

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 345

The Karnataka High Court has upheld a trial court order imposing a sentence less than the minimum punishment prescribed under Section 27(d) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, noting that the accused had entered into a plea bargain under Section 265-B of CrPC and had accepted his guilt.

7. Article 350 Constitution | Citizens' Grievance Before Jurisdictional Authorities Can't Be Kept Unconsidered Indefinitely. Karnataka High Court

Case Title: S.C. MAHESH v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.16625 OF 2022

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 346

The Karnataka High Court has observed that Article 350 of the Constitution of India mandates that where a citizen raises a grievance before jurisdictional authorities, it cannot be kept unconsidered indefinitely.

8. Issuance Of Multiple Notices By Investigating Authority Does Not Falter Preliminary Inquiry: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: M.PRAKASH v. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.15624 OF 2022

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 347

The Karnataka High Court has said that issuance of multiple notices by the investigating agency to a person while carrying out preliminary enquiry into a case cannot be a ground for faltering the enquiry.

Other reports

1: Twitter Habitually Non-Compliant, Can't Decide What Content Will Threaten National Security: Centre Opposes Plea Against Blocking Orders

Case Title: TWITTER, INC v. UNION OF INDIA

Case No: WP 13710/2022

The Central government has opposed the petition filed by US-based microblogging platform Twitter questioning several 'take down' orders issued by the Ministry of Electronic & IT, to pull down content including accounts regarding farmers' protest, alleged mismanagement of Covid-19.

2: BREAKING| Karnataka High Court Refuses To Stay Ganesh Chaturthi Celebrations At Idgah Ground At Hubbali-Dharwad

Case no: WP 103290 of 2022.

The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday night refused to stay the permission granted by the Dharwad Municipal Commissioner to certain Hindu organizations for performing Ganesh Chaturthi rituals at Idgah ground at Hubbali-Dharwad.

Citations: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 374 To 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 383

NOMINAL INDEX

Kiruthika Jayaraj and others v. State, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 374

M/s Gupta Hair Products (P) Ltd. Versus The Deputy Director General of Foreign Trade, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 375

V Kannan v State, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 376

Woodlands Theatres v. State of Tamil Nadu, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 377

Dr. P R Subaschandran v. State and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 378

E Palaniswamy v. O Paneerselvam, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 379

K. Samad & Anr. versus Reliance Capital Limited, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 280

S. Annapoorni v. K Vijay, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 281

The Assistant Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Versus M/s.Ganges International Private Limited, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 382

M/s. Sunwin Papers versus M/s. Sivadarshini Papers Pvt. Ltd., 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 383

REPORT

1. [Kallakurichi Student Death] Unfortunate That Teachers Are Being Arrested For Asking Students To Study Well: Madras High Court

Case Title: Kiruthika Jayaraj and others v. State

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 374

The Madras High Court recently granted bail to two teachers, school principal, school management correspondent and secretary in connection with the death of a XIIth standard student in Kallakurichi.

Justice GK Ilanthiraiyan observed that there was no evidence to show that the girl had been tortured before her death. Even going by the suicide note, there was no evidence to implicate the teachers as they had merely asked the student to study well.

Regretting the recent events, the court also opined that teachers asking the students to study well and directing them to tell the equations was part and parcel of teaching and would not amount to abetment to suicide.

2. Exporter Can't Be Deprived Of MEIS Benefits Due To Technical Error In Electronic System: Madras High Court

Case Title: M/s Gupta Hair Products (P) Ltd. Versus The Deputy Director General of Foreign Trade

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 375

The Madras High Court has held that due to technical error or lacunae in the electronic system, the petitioner/exporter cannot be deprived of its benefit/incentive under the Merchandise Export from India Scheme (MEIS).

The single bench of Justice Abdul Quddhose has directed the department to consider the petitioner's representation seeking to get the benefit under the MEIS for the subject shipping bill and pass orders within a period of six weeks.

3. "It Has Become A Fashion To Make Such Comments": Madras HC Grants Conditional Bail To Stunt Master Kanal Kannan

Case Title: V Kannan v State

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 376

The Madras High Court on Thursday granted conditional bail to Hindu Munnani office bearer and stunt master Kanal Kannan for his remarks seeking to demolish the statur of Periyar outside Srirangam temple. The court while granting bail, however, criticised the recent trend of making such remarks. The court stated that it had become a fashion to make such comments.

Justice GK Ilanthiraiyan granted him bail on condition that he shall file an affidavit before the Egmore Court guaranteeing that he will not make any such statements in the future. He has also been directed to appear before the police two times for a period of four weeks.

4. TN Govt Prescribed "Very Low" Parking Fees In Cinema Theaters: High Court Quashes GO

Case Title: Woodlands Theatres v. State of Tamil Nadu

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 377

The Madras High Court recently found that the charges fixed by Tamil Nadu government for parking in cinema theaters is "very low" and directed the State to re-fix the same, keeping in view the fees levied by Municipal Corporations and Railway authorities.

Rule 91(B) of Tamil Nadu Cinemas Regulation Rules 1957 to empower states to fix parking charges for the vehicles parked in the cinema theatres in the state. The petitioner theatre had challenged the fee fixation claiming that parking rates for all other places except cinema theatre was higher.

5. Sports & Physical Activities Integral To Education, All Schools Must Have Playgrounds: Madras High Court

Case Title: Dr. P R Subaschandran v. State and others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 378

While disposing of a petition seeking to frame a set of guidelines for proper instruction of physical education in public and private schools, the Madras High Court stressed on the need for physical education in schools.

The court directed the state to constitute a committee to monitor and ensure that physical education is given due importance and requisite infrastructure in all schools is made available.

The committee shall be constituted by the Government within one month and shall be headed by the Secretary to the Government, School Education Department. The committee shall identify the schools not having requisite infrastructure for imparting physical education and ensure physical education is given necessary importance.

6. Madras High Court Sets Aside Single Judge Order Restoring Status Quo Ante As On 23rd June In AIADMK

Case Title: E Palaniswamy v. O Paneerselvam

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 379

The Madras High Court on Friday set aside the order of a single judge restoring the status quo ante in the AIADMK party as on 23rd June, 2022.

The bench of Justice M Duraiswamy and Justice Sunder Mohan passed the orders allowing an appeal preferred by Edappadi Palaniswamy.

Further, the court held that when majority of the General Council members, who were elected by the primary members, were in favour of convening a general council meeting on 11th July and had also supported the resolutions made on 23rd June, the balance of convenience was in favour of the appellants.

7. Section 8 Of A&C Act Falls Outside The Scope Of Section 42: Madras High Court Reiterates

Case Title: K. Samad & Anr. versus Reliance Capital Limited

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 280

The Madras High Court has reiterated that Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act) is an exception to Section 42 of the A&C Act. The Court added that if Section 8 is also brought within the ambit of Section 42, it would defeat the sublime philosophy underlining arbitration i.e., party autonomy.

The Single Bench of Justice M. Sundar ruled that a party has no choice of jurisdiction while filing a Section 8 application, and that it is a Hobson's choice for it since it is constrained to file an application under Section 8 in the Civil Court where the civil suit has been filed by the opposite party.

8. Madras High Court Full Bench Rules In Favour Of Original Jurisdiction Of High Court For Hearing Child Custody Cases

Case Title: S. Annapoorni v. K Vijay

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 281

The Madras High Court on Friday ruled in favour of original jurisdiction of High Court for hearing child custody and guardianship cases in a 3:2 majority decision.

Justice R Mahadevan, Justice M Sunder and Justice AA Nakkiran delivered the majority judgment and held that the jurisdiction of the High Court on original side is not ousted in view of explanation (g) to Section 7(1) of the Family Courts Act. They further observed that the judgement in Mary Thomas continued to be a good law.

Justice PN Prakash and Justice Anand Venkatesh however ruled against original jurisdiction of High Court and held that Mary Thomas was not a good law.

9. Assessee Entitled To Avail Cenvat Credit Of Service Tax Already Paid During Transitional Period: Madras High Court

Case Title: The Assistant Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Versus M/s.Ganges International Private Limited

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 382

The Madras High Court, consisting of Justice R. Ramdevan and Justice Mohammed Shaffiq, has held that the assessee is entitled to avail cenvat credit of the service tax already paid but the assessee was unable to claim due to a transitional provision that has come into effect from 01.07.2017.

The court directed the appellant to consider the application of the assessee under section 142(3) of the CGST Act, 2017, based on the available materials on merits and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the assessee, within a period of six weeks.

10. Order Under Section 16 Of A&C Act Which Results In Conclusion Of Arbitral Proceedings- Can Be Challenged Under Section 34: Madras High Court

Case Title: M/s. Sunwin Papers versus M/s. Sivadarshini Papers Pvt. Ltd.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 383

The Madras High Court has ruled that if an order passed by the Arbitral Tribunal under Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act), of ruling on its own jurisdiction, has the effect of concluding the arbitral proceedings, the same would be challengeable under Section 34 of the A&C Act.

The Single Bench of Justice M. Sundar held that since registration under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (MSMED Act) is not compulsory, the order passed by the Arbitral Tribunal accepting the plea of lack of jurisdiction due to the non-registration of the claimant under the MSMED Act, is patently illegal and in conflict with the public policy of India.

OTHER DEVELOPMENTS

1. Right To Appeal Accrues On Date Of Institution Of Suit: Madras HC Entertains Appeal Arising Out Of Claim Filed Prior To Motor Vehicle Amendment Act

When the Madras High Court registry put forward a query as to whether appeals whose value was less than one lakh rupees could be entertained in view of the amendment brought in by the Motor Vehicles Amendment Act 2019, Justice PT Asha observed that the right to appeal accrued on the date of filing the claim petitions and therefore the amendment was not applicable to claims filed prior to the amendment.

2. Litigant Moves Madras HC Seeking Removal Of Former CM Karunanidhi's Photos From Govt Websites, Ads

A litigant, S Venkatesh has recently moved the Madras High Court seeking to declare display of photos of former CM Karunanidhi on government websites, advertisements, posters and banners as illegal.

When the matter came up for hearing today, the bench of Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice N Mala adjourned the proceedings while directing the petitioner to submit translated copies of the documents annexed.

He has contended that displaying of the photo of a former CM in the Government websites and web portals of Government Department institutions, which are owned by Government, is against the spirit of constitutional democracy.

3. Contempt Case : Savukku Shankar Tells Madras High Court That He Stands By His Statement On Corruption In Judiciary

Youtuber Savukku Shankar on Thursday appeared before the Madras High Court (Madurai Bench) in the contempt case against him and said that he stood by his statement that the entire judiciary is riddled with corruption. He made the submission before a bench of Justice GR Swaminathan and Justice B Pugalendhi.

The case has been adjourned to September 8 after Shankar sought time to file counter.

4. TN Bar Council Suspends Practice Of Six Lawyers For Various Offences

The Bar Council of Tamilnadu and Puducherry recently suspended the practice of six lawyers considering their involvement in various offences.

The notification dated 1st September 2022 issued a prohibitory order against the advocates from practicing in any court, tribunals, or any other authorities.

Of the six advocates, three have criminal cases pending against them with one also being prosecuted under the POCSO Act. One advocate had suppressed the fact that he was working as a Government School teacher in Kohima at the time of enrollment. The other two lawyer had threatened certain individuals to grant recognition to their lnhabitants Puducherry Advocates' Welfare Association.

5. Media Should Show Sense Of Responsibility While Publishing News: Madras High Court In Kallakurichi Student Death Case

The Madras High Court recently emphasised that media should show some sense of responsibility while publishing the news, especially with regard to children. The remarks were made by Justice N Satish Kumar while considering the progress made by the investigation team in the Kallakurichi student death and the consequent violence.

The court also highlighted that freedom of speech should not be used to spread falsity and instead, social media should be conscious of its duty to the citizens and should share only genuine news.

6. Notify Rules For Transgender Rights, Sensitise Teachers To Needs Of Queer Children : Madras High Court To State

The Tamil nadu government on Friday informed the Madras High Court that the policy for protection of rights of transgender persons is at its final stage and that all steps will be taken to implement the policies at the earliest.

The bench of Justice Anand Venkatesh has thus granted a further 12 weeks' time to the State notify the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Rules.

Sanju v. State of Punjab 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 236

Amit Kumar (Deceased) through his LR's mother Smt. Sushila Devi v. State of Haryana and another 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 237

Kiran Kaur Versus State of Punjab 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 238

Shri Ram v. State of Punjab 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 239

Sukhpal Singh Khaira v. State of Punjab and Another 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 240

Raman Kumar v. State of Haryana and Another 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 241

Chaman Lal Chimnu v. State of Haryana [CRA-D-700-DB-2010] 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 242

Other Important Judgements/Updates

Mukadar Lal And Ors. Vs State Of Punjab And Others

NCPCR Moves Supreme Court Challenging HC Judgment Holding That 16-Year-Old Muslim Girl Can Enter Into Valid Marriage

Nominal Index

NDPS Act Does Not Bar Owner's Recourse To S.451 CrPC For Release Of Seized Vehicle On Superdari: P&H High Court

Case Title : Sanju v. State of Punjab

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 236

Punjab and Haryana High Court while dealing with a case registered under Section 18 of NDPS Act, held that the crime motorcycle impounded or seized should be released on superdari to the petitioner.

S.389 CrPC & S.148 NI Act Independent Of Each Other, Non-Compliance Of Latter Doesn't Jeopardize Suspension Of Sentence Pending Appeal: P&H High Court

Case Title: Amit Kumar (Deceased) through his LR's mother Smt. Sushila Devi v. State of Haryana and another

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 237

Punjab and Haryana High Court recently held that Section 389 of CrPC and Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act are independent of each other. Whereas Section 389 is meant for protecting the personal liberty of the convict, Section 148 is auxiliary or supplemental to the mandate carried in Section 389.

Abetment Of Suicide: P&H High Court Acquits Woman Accused Of Slapping Husband, Asking Him To Die Anywhere

Case Title: Kiran Kaur Versus State of Punjab

Citation:2022 LiveLaw (PH) 238

Punjab and Haryana High Court recently acquitted a woman convicted by the trial court for slapping her husband and asking him to die anywhere, thereby abetting his suicide.

Faced "Agony Of Trial" For 9.5 Yrs: Punjab & Haryana High Court Reduces Sentence In Rash & Negligent Driving Case

Case title : Shri Ram v. State of Punjab

Citation:2022 LiveLaw (PH) 239

Taking into consideration the "agony of trial" faced by the petitioner, who was convicted in a rash and negligent driving case, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has reduced the sentence of 1 year to the period of detention already undergone, i.e., 6 months.

Delayed Institution Of Police Report Does Not Threaten Assumption Of Cognizance U/S 468 CrPC: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Case Title : Sukhpal Singh Khaira v. State of Punjab and Another

Citation:2022 LiveLaw (PH) 240

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear that delay on part of investigating agency in filing the charge sheet does not attract Section 468 CrPC, which prescribes bar on taking cognizance after lapse of the period of limitation.

Defence Counsel Must Remain "Completely Awakened" During Cross-Examination, S.311 CrPC Not Meant To "Cure Defects": Punjab & Haryana HC

Case Title : Raman Kumar v. State of Haryana and Another

Citation:2022 LiveLaw (PH) 241

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear that Section 311 CrPC, which makes provision for recall of material witnesses, is not meant to "cure defects" in the defence and thus, the defence counsel must remain "completely awakened" during cross-examination of witnesses.

"Sacred Relation Of Uncle & Niece Was Besmirched": PH High Court Upholds Life Sentence Of Man Who Raped 12-Year-Old Niece

Case title - Chaman Lal Chimnu v. State of Haryana [CRA-D-700-DB-2010]

Citation:2022 LiveLaw (PH) 242

The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Wednesday upheld the life sentence awarded to a man who had raped his own 12-year-old niece in the year 2008. Noting that the accused was the real uncle of the victim, the Court remarked thus:

"The factual matrix of this appeal is unfortunately related to a sordid and obnoxious incident, where the appellant, who is the real uncle of the victim, raped his niece, a girl child of the tender age of 12 years. The result was that the sacred relationship of uncle and niece was besmirched. Such offenders are a menace to the civilised society and have to be dealt with strictly as per law. It is an act, which is not only a blow to her supreme honour and offends her self-esteem and dignity, it degrades and humiliates the victim and where the victim is a helpless child or a minor, it leaves behind a traumatic experience. Such crime is not only a crime against a minor innocent child, rather it is a crime against the entire society."

Other Important Judgements/Updates

Elected Municipal Councillors Move Punjab & Haryana High Court Over SDM's Failure To Administer Them Oath

Mukadar Lal And Ors. Vs State Of Punjab And Others

Six elected Municipal Councillors (independent) from Alawalpur ward in Jalandhar have moved the Punjab and Haryana High Court against the Sub Divisional Magistrate, alleging that despite winning the municipal elections, the authority has not administered them oath for more than 1 year and 6 months.

NCPCR Moves Supreme Court Challenging HC Judgment Holding That 16-Year-Old Muslim Girl Can Enter Into Valid Marriage

The National Commission for the Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) has filed a petition before the Supreme Court challenging a recent judgement of the Punjab and Haryana High Court which held that a 16-year-old Muslim girl can enter into a valid marriage.