High Courts Weekly Round-Up

Allahabad High Court

• Held that failure to give enquiry report to an employee, undergoing disciplinary proceedings, amounts to denial of reasonable opportunity to employee to prove his innocence and contravenes the principle "audialterempartem", as imbibed under the principles of natural justice.

Bombay High Court

• In what has come as a huge relief to Project Affected Persons (PAP) residing in Mahul, the High Court directed the state government to find alternative accommodation for them and until that happens, the residents be paid a transit rent of Rs.15,000 per month along with a security deposit of Rs.45,000.
• Acquitted one Asha Patil, mother of an 11-year-old girl from Nashik who was sexually assaulted by her stepfather SagarRathi.
• Dismissed a couple of writ petitions challenging the appointment of three ministers in the State cabinet less than 6 months before assembly elections.
• In a significant judgement, applied the principal of empty formality and granted permission for redevelopment of slums that was lying stuck for 20 years due to building restrictions under Coastal Regulation Zone 2011, without having to wait for preparation of coastal management plan.
• Recently held that copy of c-summary report must be provided to informant who wishes to file a protest petition and directed the investigating officer in a case to do so free of cost.
• Directed the Superintendent, Thane Prison to provide psychiatric help to one KunalBavdhane accused of stabbing a woman who turned down his proposal. The court rejected the bail application filed on behalf of the accused noting that the mental condition of the accused makes him a danger to the complainant victim's wellbeing.
• Granted relief to Indian Motion Pictures Association (IMPAA) and held that a notice issued by the Central Board for Film Certification in India (CBFC) dated April 27, 2017 was not sustainable.
• Held that insult or humiliation must take place in the presence of or in the proximity of atleast one independent public witness in order for the offence to qualify as atrocity under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
• Dismissed a writ petition challenging the prescription of 'shorthand test' as selection criteria for promotion as 'Private Secretary' to the judges. The said petition was filed by seven Personal Assistants working in the High Court seeking promotion as Private Secretary.

Calcutta High Court

• Stayed the execution of summons issued by the Enforcement Directorate to an Advocate, who had been representing his client before ED.

Delhi High Court

• Issued a notice to the Delhi Government in a PIL that challenges the validity of taking voice samples by the police under section 53 of CrPC as being violative of Right to Privacy.
• Clarified that the Central Bureau of Investigation is not required to furnish Final Report - Part I unless the facts warrant 'exceptional circumstances'.
• Mandated the presence of the informant or any person authorized by him in the court, at the time of hearing of the bail application of a person accused of rape, with immediate effect.
• It is a "wrong notion" that the minimum prescribed age for drinking liquor is 25 years under the Delhi Excise Act which only prohibits its sale to people below that age, the High Court ruled.
• Reserved order in P Chidambaram's application seeking bail in INXMedia case.
• Issued notice on a Public Interest Litigation seeking probe into the alleged financial irregularities by India Bulls Housing Finance Ltd (IBHL), its promoters and subsidiaries.

Gujarat High Court

• Re-emphasized on primacy of child welfare in cases for granting custody of a minor child. It observed, "…while considering the question of the custody of the minor child, the doctrine of comity of Court intimate contact and orders passed by the Foreign Court, etc. cannot override consideration of the best interest and welfare of the child. The Court has to consider on the basis of evidence adduced before it whether the direction to return the child to the Foreign jurisdiction would result into in physical, mental, psychological or other harm to the minor".

Jammu & Kashmir High Court

• The Srinagar Wing of the High Court allowed the habeas corpus petition filed on behalf of detenue Masood Ahmad Bhat, on account of authority's failure to supply him a copy of the detention order.
• Asked the state government to file its reply in a habeas corpus petition filed on behalf of an alleged minor, detained under the Public Safety Act. Considerably, Section 8 of PSA bars detention of persons below the age of 18 years.

Karnataka High Court

• Came down heavily on a police officer of the State Intelligence department, who made a phone call to a petitioner (party in person) to collect details of the plea filed by him in the court.
• Observing that "It goes without saying that if a person is arrested and not produced before the jurisdictional Court, he is entitled to maintain a petition under Section 437 Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate," the High Court directed a magistrate to entertain a bail plea and pass appropriate orders as per law.
• Upheld the constitutional validity of Karnataka Compulsory Service Training by Candidates Completed Medical Courses Act, 2012 and Rules of 2015. Under which it mandates all students who have enrolled for Graduation, Post Graduation and Super Speciality course in medicine, post the enactment of rules of 2015, to complusorily render public service for one year, in government health institutes which is remunerative.
• Observing that "If Mercy has to be show it has to be shown by a Constitutional Court," the High Court accepted an unconditional apology tendered by a police inspector of the State Intelligence department, who made phone calls to a petitioner (party in person) to collect details of the case filed by him.
• Has given a go ahead to the Union government for restructuring the Central Public Works Department. It quashed an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) directing the Union Government to call for inputs from all stakeholders, including employees of the Central Public Works Department, before moving ahead with restructuring of the Department.
• Said a father is not bound to pay monthly maintenance amount to his daughter, who is gainfully employed. A division bench of Justice S N Satyanarayana and Justice P G M Patil, partly allowed the appeal filled by one Sadashivananda.
• Disposed of a public interest litigation challenging the notification issued in July, by the Union Government, through the Ministry of Human Resources Development (MHRD), directing all Higher Education Institutes, to connect social media accounts, of all the students and teachers to their respective institution account to be created and designated as 'Social Media Champion' which in turn will be interconnected with all other institutes and finally to the Ministry of Human Resource and Development account.

Kerala High Court

• Held that to future maintenance to a wife who was divorced on the ground of adultery can be denied only on the ground that she is 'living in adultery'.

Madhya Pradesh High Court

• The Indore bench of the High Court issued notices on a plea filed against Over The Top (OTT) media platforms like Netflix, Amazon Prime, etc., for regulation against alleged streaming obscene and sexually explicit content.

Madras High Court

• Dismissed a lawyer's plea challenging transfer of its former Chief Justice Vijaya K. Tahilaramani to Meghalaya High Court. The division bench comprising of Justice M. Sathyanarayanan and Justice N. Seshasayee observed that the challenge to the order of transfer can be made only at the instance of the transferred Judge himself and not anyone else and as such, the petitioner has no locus standi to maintain this writ petition.

Uttarakhand High Court

• Held that the resort to strikes/boycott of Courts by Advocates is illegal and that it is also a misconduct for which disciplinary action can be taken by the State Bar Council and its Disciplinary Committees.

Tripura High Court

• Banned animal/birds sacrifice in the temples of the state observing that the animals also have fundamental right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. No person including the State shall be allowed to sacrifice of any animal/bird within the precincts of any one of the temples within the State of Tripura, declared the bench comprising of the Chief Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Arindam Lodh. It said that the sacrifice of an animal in a temple, not being an essential part of religion, is also violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.