Allahabad High Court ● The Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court posted the Habeas Corpus petition filed on behalf of Lucknow based senior lawyer and president of human rights group Rihai Manch, Mohammad Shoaib, for next week. The bench of Justices Shabihul Hasnain and Virendra Kumar-II, has granted a week's time to the State to file the counter affidavit. Advocate Shoaib...
Allahabad High Court
● The Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court posted the Habeas Corpus petition filed on behalf of Lucknow based senior lawyer and president of human rights group Rihai Manch, Mohammad Shoaib, for next week. The bench of Justices Shabihul Hasnain and Virendra Kumar-II, has granted a week's time to the State to file the counter affidavit. Advocate Shoaib was arrested on December 20 midnight over anti- CAA protests in Lucknow. A habeas corpus petition was moved on his behalf by Advocate Guarav Kumar Kashyap, alleging that since arrest, his whereabouts were not known.
● The Allahabad High Court has directed the National Human Rights Commission to investigate into the alleged police violence in Aligarh Muslim University, during anti-CAA protests. The order was passed by the bench of Chief Justice Govind Mathur and Justice Vivek Varma in the PIL filed by Mohd. Aman Khan against police action during an anti-CAA protest at AMU on December 15, 2019. The Commission has been directed to complete the probe within 5 weeks and the matter has been listed for February, 17.
● The Allahabad High Court took suo moto cognizance of the situation in the state of Uttar Pradesh, following the passing of the Citizenship Amendment Act. The division bench of Chief Justice Govind Mathur and Justice Vivek Varma took cognizance on news reports alleging that situation in the State of Uttar Pradesh is antithetical to core constitutional values.
● While making crucial observations with regards the deplorable condition of security cover at Courts, the Allahabad High Court directed the state government to prepare a roadmap for security of courts across the state and submit it before January 15.
● Justice Sidharth asked the courts to award proper sentence having regard to the nature of the offence and the manner in which it was executed or committed. While reproducing Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 and Section 360 of CrPC, the high court observed that it was pertinent to release deserving convicts on probation and to cater to the reformative nature of Indian criminal jurisprudence.
● Justice Rajiv Joshi stayed an order of the UP government stating that schools running under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (RTE Act) should have owned premises, otherwise recognition will not be granted to them under Sections 18 and 19 of the Act.
Bombay High Court
● The Bombay High Court held that parents of a married son are not entitled to claim filial compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act. Partly modifying the order of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Solapur, the single-Judge bench of Justice RD Dhanuka struck off the amount awarded to the deceased's parents towards filial compensation
● A division bench of Justice SC Dharmadhikari and Justice RI Chagla dismissed a writ petition filed by Prannoy Roy and Radhika Roy, promoters of New Delhi Television (NDTV) challenging a show-cause notice issued by Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) for alleged violation of Sections 12 a(d) and 12 a(e) of Securities and Exchange Board of India Act read with Prohibition of Insider Trading Regulations, 1992. The court refused to interfere with SEBI's notice alleging that the petitioners committed violation of insider trading regulations a decade ago.
● The Bombay High Court has held that an independent right of tenancy cannot be claimed to be inherited merely because the original tenant was a relative. Justice GS Kulkarni heard the petition filed by one Vasant Joshi along with his family members as he suffered eviction from the said property after lower appellate Court under its judgment and order dated November 1, 1997 allowed the eviction suit filed by the landlords of the property.
● Justice RK Deshpande and Justice Milind Jadhav of the Nagpur bench imposed a cost of Rs.50 lakh on Nagarjuna Agro Chemicals Pvt Ltd, a private company working in the agrochemical space for filing a "frivolous and vexatious" petition seeking an enquiry in respect of manufacturing and marketing of STFR (Soil Testing Fertilizer Recommendations) technology developed by Indian Council for Agriculture Research (ICAR) and Indian Agriculture Research Institute (IARI).
● The Bombay High Court refused to stay the release of the Deepika Padukone starrer movie "Chhapaak" based on the life Laxmi Agarwal an acid attack victim in the suit filed by writer Rakesh Bharti who claimed infringement against the makers of the movie. The movie was released on January 10 as decided. Justice SC Gupte questioned the plaintiff's lawyer as to how a case of copyright infringement is made out?
● The Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court has issued several directions to all the Principal District & Sessions Judges in the State after certain irregularities were observed while inspection of subordinate courts was being conducted. SG Dige, Registrar (Inspection I), Appellate Side, High Court wrote to all the Principal District and Sessions Judges.
● The Bombay High Court fined a police inspector at Deoli Police Station in Wardha, Rs.2 lakh for illegal detention of one Kishore Futane and his son Dr.Indraprasad Futane under Section 151 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The division bench of Justice ZA Haq and Justice MG Giratkar held that the said detention was illegal and quashed the action taken by the Tahsildar and Taluka Magistrate under Chapter VIII of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
● Justice GS Kulkarni allowed the adoption of a 7-month-old girl child to a Mumbai-based couple who already have a 14-year-old daughter. The court observed-"It needs to be further appreciated that despite the fact they have a biological girl child, they decided to adopt another girl child. This is the approach that needs to be cultivated in a society which is mostly said to be dominated by patriarchy."
Calcutta High Court
● Taking a stern view of the incessant lawyers' strike in Medinipur district of West Bengal, the Calcutta High Court asked the President and Secretaries of the concerned Bar Associations to show cause for not initiating contempt proceedings against them. The division bench of Justices Suvra Ghosh and Joymalya Bagchi has asked the Presidents and Secretaries of Medinipur Bar Association and Midnapur District Bar Association to file their response by February 17, 2020.
Delhi High Court
- The Delhi High Court has issued notices to the Ministry of IT & Electronics and Twitter Communications in a plea filed by Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde seeking framing of guidelines for Twitter, and restoration of his Twitter account. Justice Navin Chawla has posted the matter after four weeks.
● Delhi High Court has held that the spouses of deceased casual workers would be entitled to the same pensional and retiral benefits as those given to regular employees. While relying on the catena of judgments of the same court and other High Courts, the Division Bench of Justice Muralidhar and Justice Talwant Singh observed that benefits shall be allowed in the present case, as the casual workers were not regularised for years despite the availability of vacancies.
● A Delhi Court passed an interim direction to the Tihar jail authorities to provide urgent medical treatment to Bhim Army Chief Chandra Shekhar Azad if the same is required. Azad was arrested by Daryaganj police on December 21 for allegedly inciting violence during anti-CAA protests.
● The Delhi High Court directed the CBI Director to make an appearance before the court if the investigation against Rakesh Asthana, the former Special Director of CBI, is not completed within 3 weeks. While criticising the agency for not completing the investigation despite the multiple extensions granted by the court, Justice Vibhu Bakhru noted that if the investigation is completed and the report is filed in the next 3 weeks, then the personal appearance of the CBI Director can be dispensed with.
● Delhi High Court has held that if a person is in coma, only the spouse or the children of that person can be appointed as a legal guardian, who would also have to disclose the details of the assets held by such patient. The Single Bench of Justice Rajiv Shakdher also noted that if a person in coma is abandoned by the family, then his next friend can be appointed as a legal guardian with the prior permission of the court.
● The Division Bench of Justice DN Patel and Justice Hari Shankar refused to entertain an application seeking shifting of Anti-CAA protests from Shaheen Bagh to a different 'authorised protesting area'. The applicant, a student residing in Delhi, wanted the protests to be shifted from Shaheen Bagh as, according to him, it has directed a large chunk of traffic towards the DND flyover route.
● The Delhi High Court reserved order in a writ moved by Fox Studios, the producers of the movie 'Chhappak', challenging the trial court order which had asked the filmmakers to give credits to lawyer Aparna Bhat. AdvocateAparna Bhat had represented acid attack survivor Lakshmi in her legal battle before various courts.
● Delhi High Court issued a notice in a plea challenging the order passed by the Delhi Medical Council exonerating a doctor against whom a case has been filed for causing permanent disability to a 2 years old child. The Single Bench of Justice Navin Chawla has also stayed the said order of the Delhi Medical Council till the next date of hearing.
● Delhi High Court asked Fox Studios to add a slide in the film Chhapaak, giving credits to lawyer Aparna Bhat who has represented the acid attack survivor Lakshmi Aggarwal. Justice Pratibha Singh directed the credits slide to be added in the beginning of the film by January 15 for screenings at multiplexes, and by January 18 for physical copies. Subsequently, Ms. Aparna Bhat was acknowledged by adding credits in the beginning of the film.
Gujarat High Court
● The High Court of Gujarat has reiterated that for the purpose of taxability, income should not be hypothetical but should have accrued to the assessee in the year under consideration. A bench of Justice J B Pardiwala and Justice Bhargav D Karia said so while refusing to interfere with the May 2019 order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal confirming the order of Commissioner of Income Tax for deleting the addition of Rs.4,42,72,610 as income of the assessee for assessment year 2010-11in holding carbon receipts as capital receipts
Karnataka High Court
● The Karnataka High Court agreed to hear a petition seeking to declare the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, to be in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and should be struck down as it is unconstitutional. A division bench of Chief Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Hemant Chandangoudar posted the plea filed by Peoples Unity for Civil Liberties & Human Rights Forum and Tiger Tipu and Baba saheb Ambedkar Welfare Organisation, for preliminary hearing after six weeks, on February 25.
● A division bench of Chief Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Hemant Chandangoudar directed Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev's Isha Foundation to file an additional affidavit disclosing the amount it has collected for the 'Cauvery Calling Project'. The Foundation has also been asked to explain the mode and manner in which the amounts have been raised. The bench said "Do not be under the impression that you are not bound by law because you are a spiritual organization."
● The Karnataka High Court disposed off a public interest litigation filed seeking direction to hoist the National Flag at an Anganwadi in Kalburgi district. A division bench of Chief Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Hemant Chandangoudar while disposing off the petition filed by Ramesh Gajare said "We find that petitioner has not made out a case on legal obligation on part of an anganwadi to hoist the flag. Flag code of the year 2002, does not make it mandatory for educational institutions to display national flag."
● The Karnataka High Court posted to February 12, hearing a bunch of petitions challenging the Section 144 issued by the Commissioner of Police, Bengaluru on December 18, 2019, a day ahead of the rallies to be held against Citizenship (Amendement) Act. A division bench of Chief Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Hemant Chandangoudar directed the perimeters to file their rejoinder to the statement of objections filed by the state government.
● The Karnataka High Court directed the state government to place on record by January 14, steps taken for implementation of a 2014 order passed by the Lokayukta, in relation to land grabbing case involving former Karnataka Chief Minister, H D Kumaraswamy and others. A division bench of Chief Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Hemant Chandangoudar gave the direction while hearing a petition filed by an NGO, Samaj Parivartan Samudaya.
● The Karnataka High Court while adjourning the hearing on a suo-moto criminal contempt petition filed against newspaper, Deccan Herald and three other local TV news channels, for publishing false news titled "Rupees 9 crores was seized from the residence of a City Civil Court (Bengaluru) Judge in a raid by the "vigilance wing of the Karnataka High Court," suggested them to come out with measures to mitigate the offence.
Kerala High Court
● Holding that an author has the right to protect his intellectual property even after assignment of copyright, the High Court of Kerala granted relief to author-scenarist Sajeev Pillai, who is fighting a legal battle against the makers of big budget Malayalam movie "Mamankam". A single bench of Justice V Shircy observed that Section 57 of the Copyright Act protects the special rights of the author even after the assignment, if his original creation has been changed, modified or distorted affecting his reputation and good name.
● Justice Muahammed Mustaque observed that the Maintenance Tribunal under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act 2007 has to follow an enquiry process as similar to inquisitorial system than adversarial system. The Court also observed that the Senior Citizens Act is not intended at dispute resolution but to promote measures to secure the welfare and interest of the senior citizens and parents.
● Justice TV Anilkumar held that the presumption under Section 139 of Negotiable Instruments Act applies even to a cheque issued by a guarantor. The Court held that a guarantor's cheque is also a cheque regarded under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments (NI) Act, 1881, as it is being issued in discharge of legally enforceable debt. Nowhere in the Section 138 it is said that it provides only to the cheque drawn in discharge of drawer's liability alone, said the Court.
● In a significant judgment, the High Court of Kerala observed the Juvenile Justice Act (JJ Act) 2015 will not affect the validity of an adoption carried out under the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act(HAM Act) 1956. A division bench comprising Justices K Harilal and CS Dias held the action of the authorities under the JJ Act in taking away an infant from the care of her adoptive parents to be illegal. The court noted that the adoption in the case was done as per a deed registered under the HAM Act and that the parties in the case were Hindus.
Madhya Pradesh High Court
● The Madhya Pradesh High Court set aside the conviction of the Appellant-accused, 23 years after the Additional Sessions Judge had found him guilty of abetting the suicide of his wife, punishable under Section 306 IPC. Justice Atul Sreedharan observed that a singular instance of physical assault (considered as proved) could not be interpreted as instance of continuing cruelty against the deceased that too of such nature that she had no option but to commit suicide.
Punjab & Haryana High Court
● The single-Judge bench of Justice Rajeev Narain Raina refused to direct the State to grant compensation while clarifying that State cannot be held responsible for every accident caused by a stray animal. The Petitioner, Krishna Devi, was the wife of the deceased who fell to death after being hit by a bull, which suddenly came out of the fields along the village road. The deceased's family sought compensation from the Municipal Corporation, Fatehabad and the State of Haryana.
● Justice Gurvinder Singh Gill directed all family courts in the state to insist on affidavit of assets, income & expenditure in all matrimonial cases, to avoid unnecessary burden on wives seeking maintenance. The direction came after Justice Gill observed that helpless wives, being bereft of requisite information required for assessing maintenance, were left collecting documents & evidence on spouse's financial status.
● Asking the All India Council for Technical Education to maintain bare minimum standards while conducting and declaring results for an examination, the Punjab and Haryana High Court directed it to re-compute the results for a validation test conducted in respect of candidates who had obtained the B.Tech Degree between the years 2001 to 2005 by way of distance education mode. Justice Tejinder Singh Dhindsa asked the Council to stick to the modalities that had been issued ahead of the examination, and to extend the benefit of additional marks qua the discrepant questions only to the candidates who had attempted the same.
Tripura High Court
● The Tripura High Court granted interim relief to a man, who was named as accused in an FIR which was registered on the basis of his Facebook post on the number advertised by the BJP for the missed-call campaign in support of Citizenship Amendment Act 2019. The accused had put up a Facebook post stating :"By mistake if you make a call in 8866288662, all of your data saved in the mobile would go to hackers. Be alert…. Be alert…."