Week Commencing From September 21, 2020 Till September 27, 2020Allahabad High Court 1. Allahabad HC Seeks UP Govt.'s Response In Journalist Prashant Kanojia's Bail Plea [Prashant Kanojia v. State of UP] The Bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh granted four weeks' time to the State Government to file its reply in the regular bail plea moved by freelance journalist Prashant Kanojia,...
Week Commencing From September 21, 2020 Till September 27, 2020
Allahabad High Court
1. Allahabad HC Seeks UP Govt.'s Response In Journalist Prashant Kanojia's Bail Plea [Prashant Kanojia v. State of UP]
The Bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh granted four weeks' time to the State Government to file its reply in the regular bail plea moved by freelance journalist Prashant Kanojia, in connection to a FIR lodged against him allegedly for making social media posts that have the potential to promote enmity between two or more communities/groups.
It is alleged that Kanojia had posted pictures of the President of India, the Prime Minister and UP CM Yogi Adityanath on his Twitter account, accompanied by objectionable comments. It was further alleged that he also made comments against the Dalit community, and his posts were intended to incite caste and religious sentiments among the citizens of the country for inciting violence.
2. [Missing BHU Student] 'Searching Student Sincerely; Departmental Action Taken Against Erring Officers', Varanasi SSP Tells Allahabad HC [Saurabh Tiwari v. State of UP]
SSP, Varanasi informed the Bench of Justice Pritinker Diwaker and Justice Subhash Chandra Sharma that a special team has already been constituted and efforts are on to search the missing BHU Student, namely, Shiv Kumar Trivedi.
Allegedly, Trivedi was picked up by certain police personnel from the M.P. Theatre ground, BHU on the said date and was taken to the Police Station Lanka, District Varanasi. Ever since there has been no sign of the student. His father made several complaints to senior police officials of Varanasi, registered IGRS complaints, etc. but in vain.
3. Allahabad HC Issues Notice To State On PIL For Release Of Aged Prisoners/Inmates With Comorbidities. Expeditious Disposal Of Bail, Parole Pleas [Man Mohan Mishra v. Allahabad HC & Ors.]
The Bench of Justice Pritinker Diwakar and Justice Subhash Chandra Sharma issued notice to the state government and asked it to submit its written reply in response to a PIL regarding decongestion of the prisons in the state of Uttar Pradesh in the light of growing Coronavirus cases in the prisons.
The plea seeks a direction to the Department of Prison Administration, Government of Uttar Pradesh, and the Uttar Pradesh High Powered Committee consider the release of prisoners who are above the age of 65 years old or suffering from co morbidities in view of the Guidelines issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs on 29.07.2020.
4. "No Person Should be Seen Outside his/ her House Without Mask on Face": Orders Allahabad HC Saying 'If Action Not Taken Today, We Won't Be Able To Face Our Progenies' [In-Re Inhuman Condition At Quarantine Centres…]
The Division Bench of Justice Siddhartha Verma and Justice Ajit Kumar issued a writ of mandamus for the whole of the State of Uttar Pradesh that "no person should be seen outside his/ her house without a mask on his/her face and he or she should check that the mask covers both the nose and the mouth."
The Court heard the following five issues and issued a slew of directions:
- Encroachment of public land and the menace of parking;
- Discharge of function by the Town Vending Committee;
- Disposal of used masks;
- Public wearing of masks; and
- Further medical facility during COVID-19.
Read full report to access the directions.
Bombay High Court
1. PIL Seeks Formulation of Guidelines For Protection Of Medical Professionals & Institutions From Violence In Case Of Medical Accidents; Bombay HC Seeks State's Reply [Dr. Rajeev Digambar Joshi v. Government of Maharashtra & Ors.]
Calling it a concern of seminal importance, the Division bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice GS Kulkarni issued notice to the State and sought a reply within two weeks, in the PIL seeking directions for formulation of guidelines for protection of medical professionals and medical institutions from violence and attacks in case of medical accidents etc.
"A concern of seminal importance is raised in this PIL petition. The concern relates to alleged non-implementation of the provisions of the Maharashtra Medicare Service Persons and Medicare Service Institutions (Prevention of Violence and Damage or Loss to Property) Act, 2010 as well as the amendments introduced in the Epidemic Disease Act, 1897," the Court said.
2. [Breaking] There Is No Material To Prove that Tablighi Jamaat Members Indulged in Activities Which Are Likely To Spread COVID: Bombay HC [HLA Shwe & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra]
The Bench of Justice VM Deshpande and Justice Amit B. Borkar quashed the FIR and the charge sheet filed against 8 Myanmar Nationals (booked for 'Tablighi activities') while observing that "allowing the prosecution to continue would be nothing but an abuse of the process of the Court, especially because of lack of evidence supporting the charges levelled against the foreigners."
"It is also not disputed that they were kept in isolation from 24.03.2020 till 31.03.2020 under the supervision of Dr Khawaj, NMC Zonal Officer, Mominpura, Nagpur. There is no material on record to prove that applicants had indulged in any act which was likely to spread infection of COVID -19," the Court added.
3. "Role Of A Woman As A Housewife Most Important & Challenging"; Bombay HC Grants Rs.8 Lakh In Compensation To Family Of Woman Who Died In Car Crash [Rambhau & Ors. v. Shivlal & Ors.]
The Bench of Justice Anil S Kilor granted over Rs.8 lakh towards compensation to the family of a deceased 45-year-old woman who succumbed to her injuries after the driver of the jeep she was travelling in violently dashed into a tree.
"When we talk about a 'family', the role of a woman as a 'housewife' in family is the most challenging and important role which deserves much appreciation but is least appreciated. In fact emotionally she holds the family together. She is a pillar support for her husband, a guiding light for her child/children and harbor for the family's elderly. She works round-the-clock without a single day off, no matter whether she is working or not. However, the work she does go unacknowledged and is not considered as a 'job'. It is an impossible task to count the services she renders which are consisting of hundreds of components that go into the functioning of a household itself, in monetary terms," the Court observed.
4. Right Of Citizens To Live In Safe Buildings A Facet Of Right Guaranteed By Article 21; Bombay HC Takes Suo Motu Cognizance OF Bhiwandi Building Collapse [Building collapses and lives lost]
Taking suo motu cognizance of the building collapse that took place in Thane, resulting in the death of 41, the Division bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice GS Kulkarni expressed pain and sadness at the loss of lives. Court issued notice to the State and Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai. It said,
"If this is true, it is unfortunate that no action was taken by the Municipal Authorities to get the building vacated. It is also reported that this building was constructed sometime in the year 1984 before the Municipal Corporation was formed and later on, two illegal floors came to be constructed. However, no action was taken by any of the Municipal Authorities and its officers."
Calcutta High Court
1. [COVID Victim's Last Rites] 'Only 6 Family Members Allowed To Escort Dead Body', Calcutta HC Modifies Its September 16 Judgment [Vineet Ruia v. Ministry of Health & Family Welfare & Ors.]
The Division Bench of Chief Justice TB Radhakrishnan and Justice Arijit Banerjee modified its earlier Judgment delivered on Wednesday (16th September) and ruled that not more than 6 close kins of a person, who had died of COVID, would be allowed to accompany the dead body for the last rites/Funeral. The modified judgement states:
"When post mortem of the dead body is not required, the dead body shall be handed over to the immediate next of kin of the deceased i.e. the parents/surviving spouse/children; which shall be not more than six persons; after completion of hospital formalities, for being taken to the burial ground/crematorium directly. The body should be secured in a body bag, the face end of which should be transparent and the exterior of which will be appropriately sanitized/decontaminated so as to eliminate/minimize the risk to the people transporting the dead body."
2. Promoter-Directors Of Resolution Applicant, Who Are Also Guarantors Of Company, Not Entitled To Immunity Blanket Of IBC S.14: Calcutta HC [Sandip Kumar Bajaj v. State Bank of India & Anr.]
The Single Bench of Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya ruled that section 29-A or 31 of the IBC would not provide a shield against the operation of its section 14(3)(b) and that the promoter-directors of the Resolution Applicant-Company, who are also guarantors of the Company, would not come under the immunity-blanket of Section 14.
The Court appreciated that the scheme framed by the RBI was to identify events of wilful default by borrowers where the particular unit has defaulted in its payment obligations to the lender despite having a capacity to pay or has diverted the borrowed funds for some other purpose other than the specific purpose for which the funds were made available. The scheme evolved a mechanism of identifying such defaults by various methods of monitoring and prevention.
3. Submit Report Regarding Appointment Of Chairperson/Other Members Of Selection Committee Of CWC & JJBs Across The State: Calcutta HC Directs State [Court in Its Own Motion (In Re: Child Welfare)]
The Division Bench of Justice Harish Tandon and Justice Soumen Sen directed the Secretary, Women and Child Development and Social Welfare Department as well as the Judicial Secretary to submit a report disclosing the progress made in regard to the appointment of the Chairperson as well as other members of the selection committee of Child Welfare Committees and Juvenile Justice Boards in the various districts of this State.
4. [Drug Menace] 'Police Not Serious In Acting Against Kingpins; Gaps Are Deliberately Left For Bigger Fish To Slip Out': Calcutta HC [Hiten Roy @ Hiru v. State of West Bengal]
The Division Bench of Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice Aniruddha Roy observed that the menace of drug trade cannot be tackled unless the investigating agency is diligent and is serious in taking appropriate steps against the bigger players. The Court rapped the State Police for presenting drug-related matters before the Court in such a way that the court has no option but to grant bail to the accused person.
The Court even said that the "investigating agency takes no steps to unearth any material against the bigger players" and that "it appears that gaps are deliberately left for the bigger fish to slip out".
1. Writ Petition Relation To Industrial Dispute To Not Be Listed Unless 'Exceptional Circumstances' Disclosed In Synopsis, Opening Paragraphs: Delhi HC [PTI Employees Union v. Press Trist of India]
The Bench of Justice JR Midha held that a writ petition relating to an industrial dispute shall not be listed unless it discloses 'exceptional circumstances' in the synopsis and in its opening paragraphs.
The Court was hearing the writ petitioners' challenge to the retrenchment of 297 employees by the Press Trust of India on 29th September, 2018. The petitioners sought the quashing of the retrenchment notices, their reinstatement with back wages and consequential benefits. The preliminary issue was whether the writ petitions should be entertained in view of the statutory remedy available to the retrenched employees under the Industrial Disputes Act.
Also Read: Delhi HC Refuses To Provide Relief To Retrenched PTI Employees, Says Avail Remedy Under Industrial Disputes Act
The Division Bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Prateek Jalan gave 8 weeks to the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India to take some action on the show-cause notices issued to entities to show progress made in ensuring compliance with the Telecom Commercial Communications Customer Preference Regulations (TCCCPR), 2018.
While pulling up TRAI for lack of compliance with its own regulatory framework, the court said, "These regulations were issued in 2018, why haven't you taken action against a single entity for non-compliance? What are you waiting for, why are you so shy in taking the action? Every time you come up with one excuse or the other. You take action on the show cause notice issued to at least one or two entities, others will automatically toe the line."
The Single Bench of Justice Navin Chawla stayed the order of the Delhi Government dated 12/09/20 whereby private hospitals in Delhi were directed to reserve 80% beds in ICU for COVID19 patients, and adjourned the hearing on merits till October 16.
Filed by Association of Healthcare Providers, the petition challenges the September 12 order of the Delhi Government on the ground that no prior consultation was held with private hospitals to ascertain the demand-supply situation of critical care beds.
The Single Bench of Justice Najmi Waziri gave green signal to Harper Collins to go ahead with its book titled 'Gunning For The Godman', which is based on the criminal case against Asaram Bapu. It has set aside the ex-parte injunction passed by the district court by holding that where there's a fair discussion in public domain which is based on facts and not malicious, the same is protected under freedom to speech and expression.
The court said, 'In a civilised society, which is governed by rule of law, discussions should be governed by facts. The moment such discussions go into speculations and unproven facts, right to injunction arises.'
The Bench of Justice Mukta Gupta granted relief in Interim Applications filed by Star India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. against Jackstremas.com & Ors. in a suit filed for website blocking for alleged illegal and unlawful activities of the defendant websites.
The suit pertains to the communication to the public of Dream 11 India Premiere League, 2020, by the defendants for which the plaintiffs have claimed exclusive television, mobile, internet and mobile activation rights worldwide. The counsel for the plaintiff had argued that the defendant websites are all rogue sites which are registered and lie dormant only to become alive whenever there is a sporting event.
While dismissing a PIL seeking closure of illegal hookah bars in Delhi, the Division Bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Prateek Jalan rapped the Petitioner for lack of preparedness and went on to highlight that Petitioners must do their homework before filing Public Interest Litigation plea.
While allowing the Petitioner to withdraw his plea, the Court remarked: 'Everyone has become a champion of filing bogus PILs.' It further added, "He's a clerk at a lower court, what does he know about the building regulations and municipal bylaws? This seems like one of those cases where the counsel chooses the Petitioner, instead of the Petitioner choosing the counsel."
7. 'Allurement Advanced For Extortion Of Money Not Acceptable', Delhi HC Asks CP, Delhi To Compile Data Of Honey Trap Cases In 2020 & Act As Per Law [Kapil Gupta v. State]
The Bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait asked the Commissioner of Police, Delhi to call reports from all the police stations of Honey Trap/Extortion cases and file a report to this effect within four weeks. It opined that "though acceptance of allurement is not justified, at the same time, allurement advanced for extortion of money is also not acceptable."
The Court further directed that if the Commissioner of Police, Delhi feels that similar type of incidents have taken place in Delhi in the year 2020; he shall issue standing orders to all the concerned Police Stations that action may be taken as per law, however, without harassing such person/alleged accused therein.
8. [Allegation Of Communal Reporting By Republic TV] Delhi HC Directs Ministry of Information & Broadcasting To Decide Complaints Within 4 Weeks [Amrish Ranjan Pandey v. Union of India & Ors.]
The Bench of Justice Navin Chawla directed the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting to consider the complaint filed by Youth Congress Secretary Amrish Ranjan Pandey against Republic TV for communal reporting of the 'Palghar mob lynching' incident.
The petition, filed through Advocate Joby P. Varghese, alleges that the channel made repeated attempts to paint the event of mob lynching at Palghar, Maharashtra into a communal event, creating fear in the mind of common man. It was further alleged that migrant gatherings at Bandra in Mumbai were given the tag of a 'gigantic conspiracy' in another programme by the same media house.
9. Delhi HC Rejects Plea Challenging Selection Of Vice-Chancellor Of NLU Delhi
The Single Bench of Justice Jyoti Singh rejected a plea challenging the validity of the procedure adopted by the Selection Committee to appoint the Vice-Chancellor for the National Law University, Delhi. The Court noted that there's no violation of Article 14 in the procedure adopted by the Selection Committee, as otherwise alleged by the Petitioner.
Also Read: NLU-O VC Prof. (Dr.) Srikrishna Deva Rao To Be Appointed As New Vice-Chancellor of NLU-Delhi
Gauhati High Court
1. Gauhati HC Dismisses Review Against Order Holding Refusal To Wear 'Sakha & Sindoor' Signify A Woman's Refusal To Accept Her Marriage [Renu Das v. Bhaskar Das]
The Bench of Chief Justice Ajai Lamba and Justice Soumitra Saikia dismissed review against its order holding that refusal to wear 'sakha and sindoor' are indicative of the wife's refusal to accept her marriage.
The Court observed that when a wife, who used to wear Sindoor, suddenly stops wearing it due to differences with her husband, it can be safely concluded that her marriage with her husband has "irrevocably broken".
Gujarat High Court
1. Issue Of Caste Looms Large Over Human Relationship With Strong Biases And Conditioning: Gujarat HC Directs SP To Escort Inter-Caste Couple To UP [Rajesh Sadannd Pandey v. State of Gujarat]
The Division Bench of Justice Sonia Gokani and Justice NV Anjaria directed the Superintendent of Police, Valsad to make an arrangement for an Inter-caste Couple to be escorted till Prayagraj in the State of Uttar Pradesh.
"It is although not an issue, which needs to be dealt with by this Court, suffice to note that the issue of caste looms large over the human relationship with strong biases and conditioning," the Bench remarked.
2. 'It Is Essential That Vocational Training Be Imparted To Girls Kept In Shelter Homes', Gujarat HC Issues Slew Of Instructions [Koli (Thakore) Dashrathji Magaji v. State Of Gujarat]
The Division Bench of Justice Sonia Gokani and Justice NV Anjaria Court issued a slew of instructions/ directions related to education, healthcare and other facilities in Women Shelter/ Protection Home, to ADJ asking him to implement them in consultation with the Principal District Judge.
The Court issued these directions while observing that the Corpus before it (13 years and 04 months old girl) does not want to join the parents and insists on staying at Women Protection Home.
3. Gujarat HC Imposes Cost On Advocate For Smoking During Virtual Hearing [Mansukhbhai Polabhai Dhaduk v. State of Gujarat]
Taking stern view of the "irresponsible conduct" of an Advocate who was smoking during the course of Court proceedings via video conferencing, the Bench of Justice AS Supehia imposed a cost of Rs. 10,000
The Court observed that the advocates appearing through video conference are required to maintain "minimum dignified decorum" so that the majesty and dignity of the proceedings as well as the Institution are maintained.
4. Gujarat HC Imposes Cost On Applicant/Accused For 'Spitting Openly' During Virtual Hearing [Ajit Kubhabhai Gohil v. State of Gujarat]
The Bench of Justice AS Supehia, while taking up a Criminal Misc. Application, noticed that applicant-accused who was present before the Court through video conferencing, was spitting openly. Deprecating such conduct of the accused, the Court said, "This Court is not inclined to take up the matter today looking to the conduct of the applicant-accused No. 1."
Further, the Court directed him to deposit a cost of Rs. 500/- before the HC Registry, failing which the matter shall not be taken up for hearing.
Jammu and Kashmir
1. Lakhs Of Students Took NEET; Parliament Is Functioning; Kashmir Chamber of Commerce and Industries Can Elect Its Committee Too: J&K HC [Kashmir Chamber of Commerce & Ors. v. Zubair Mahajan & Ors.]
The Single Bench of Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey allowed the Kashmir Chamber of Commerce and Industries (KCCI) to elect its Administrative or Executive Body, called 'Committee'.
The Court was of the view that "there should be no impediment in holding elections to the Administrative / Executive Body of the Company which has just 1300 members and the elections are required to be conducted by ballot, not by raising hands. Cooperation of the Deputy Commissioner, Srinagar, in this behalf can be sought by this Court."
2. 'A Person Under Detention Can't Be Prevented From Taking Examination'. J&K HC Directs Govt. To Facilitate Appearance Of Detenu In Exam [Omer Akbar Mir v. UT of J&K & Ors.]
The Single Bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar directed the government to make arrangements for a detenu (Omer Akbar Mir) to appear in Class-12th examination commencing from September 22.
It observed, "a person under detention cannot be prevented from taking the examination, unless there are pressing circumstances, which may even involve the security of the detenu itself."
Karnataka High Court
A division bench of Chief Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Ashok S Kinagi directed the Registrar General of the Court to register a suo-motu petition, in view of the directions issued by the Supreme Court asking the Chief Justices of the High Courts to formulate an action plan to rationalize the disposal of criminal cases pending against legislators.
2. Provide Periodical Training To Authorities Appointed Under PC-PNDT Act: Karnataka HC Directs State [Dr. Sarvabhoum S. Bagali v. State of Karnataka & Ors.]
A division bench of Chief Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Ashok S Kinagi directed the State government to conduct periodical training programmes for members of the Appropriate authority constituted under the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostics Techniques Act, to carry out the functions as required under various provisions of the Act.
While disposing off the petition, the Court also directed the state government to issue directions to the Appropriate Authority to comply with the requirements of sub-section (2) of Section 23 of the said Act of 1994 (offences and penalties to be imposed on any medical geneticist, gynaecologist, registered medical practitioner, etc. for contravention of provisions of the Act).
3. 'Court Is Required To Ensure That Petitioners Are Deported To Their Country', Karnataka HC Quashes Case Against 5 Thailand Nationals [Jantra Wanida v. State Of Karnataka]
The Single Bench of Justice John Michael Cunha quashed a case against 5 Thailand nationals who were arrayed as accused on the file of Metropolitan Magistrate, Traffic Court, Bengaluru for the offence punishable under section 14(b) of the Foreigners Act.
The Court observed that the documents produced by the prosecution in support of the charge go on to show that except the statement of the witnesses, no other clinching material is available in proof of the said accusations.
4. Karnataka HC Stays Govt Order Deferring Variable Dearness Allowance Payment
A division bench of Chief Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Ashok S Kinagi stayed the execution and operation of the order dated 20th July, by which the State Government directed that the payment of Variable Dearness Allowance (for short, "VDA") will stand deferred from 1st April, 2020 till 31st March, 2021.
The Court held that "the result of the impugned order is that the employees will not be entitled to VDA which is an integral part of the minimum wages fixed under the provisions of the said Act for the period specified in the impugned order and the employees will get VDA for the said period only after the expiry of the said period. This is something which is clearly impermissible under the said Act and especially, keeping in mind the object of the said Act. The impugned order, as observed earlier, is ex-facie illegal and deserves to be stayed."
5. Become Like 'Chanakya' To Nip Drug Peddling Menace: Karnataka HC To NCB [Abdul Aleem v. Narcotic Control Bureau]
The Bench of Justice BA Patil observed that it is high time that officials of the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) take proper steps and become "Chanakya" to nip from the bed from grass root level to tackle the menace of drugs peddling.
While quashing a case registered under provision of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, the Court observed, "There is a trend of inculcation of drugs, ganja and other such things in the society by various transactions and it has created menace in the society and such things are to be dealt with iron hands and they could not be spared even for a while. However, in the absence of any legal material, this Court will be helpless only to pass the present order."
6. Karnataka HC Quashes Criminal Case Against Website Designer Accused Of Developing Site Used For Prostitution [Gavin Mendes v. State Of Karnataka]
The Bench of Justice Ashok G Nijagannavar quashed a criminal case against a 31-year-old website designer, who was arrayed as a co-accused in the case alleging him of developing a website which was used for soliciting customers for prostitution.
"Unless the chargesheet records reveal that the petitioner has actively involved with other accused in immoral trafficking or use of foreign girls by accused No.4, for the said purpose by specifically designing the website for them, the proceedings cannot be allowed to be continued against him. As such, the proceeding deserves to be quashed as per the parameters laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal," the Court said.
A division bench of Chief Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Aravind Kumar asked the state government to consider modifying the constitution of the State Level Expert Committee constituted based on the directions issued by the Supreme Court to supervise Covid-19 Hospitals, on finding out that it has not discharged its duties properly.
On going through the report submitted by the Committee, the Court noted that "The data published by the State Government of the number of cases reported every day will show that the cases in the entire State and in particular, the city of Bengaluru are on the rise. We, therefore, expected that the State Level Committee which is appointed as per the directions of the Apex Court will play a very proactive role. The report submitted by the Member Secretary shows that the State Level Committee has not discharged its duties."
Kerala High Court
1. Unsafe To Look At Religious Or Philosophical Texts To Interpret Sec 23 Of Senior Citizens Act : Kerala HC (FB) [Subhashini v. District Collector]
Whether the traditional values and general moral policies could determine and expand the scope and ambit of a piece of legislation, to bring in consequences which even the law makers would not have contemplated or intended ?, a Full Bench of the Kerala High Court has expressed its doubt.
The bench observed thus while considering a reference which involved interpretation of Section 23(1) of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. The court noticed that, to give an expansive interpretation, a single bench judgment had referred to the religious and philosophical texts to highlight the traditional value systems.
Madhya Pradesh High Court
1. [Political Gatherings Amid COVID] Law Deserves Respect & Obedience From A Common Man, A Political Functionary And Even From The Head Of State: Madhya Pradesh HC [Ashish Pratap Singh v. State of M.P. & Ors.]
The Division Bench of Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava observed that "law, whether statutory or in the shape of executive instructions deserves respect & obedience, as much from a common man as from a leader, a political functionary and even the head of State." The remarks were made while hearing a plea seeking to restrain the function organized by the political parties in the State.
The Court acknowledged the fact that COVID-19 Pandemic situation is on the rise. Various instructions & precautionary guidelines have been issued from time to time by the Central Government/State Government to contain the aftermath.
2. If Shown That Conviction Isn't based On Sound Evidence, Appellate Court Can Suspend The Conviction Of An MLA Wishing To Contest Elections: MP HC [Shakuntala Khatik v. State of M.P]
The Single Bench of Justice JP Gupta ruled that if any MLA, who is convicted and sentenced for offences under IPC for more than 2 years of imprisonment becomes disqualified to further contest the election of MLA under Section 8 of Representation of the People Act and if convicted MLA is interested to contest the forthcoming election of MLA and succeeds to demonstrate before the Appellate court that prima facie conviction is not based on sound evidence and has immense chances of success in the appeal, then the conviction can be suspended to ensure that it does not operate to cause serious prejudice. The Court further noted,
"In a democratic setup, restriction on the exercise of such right can be considered hardship to aspirants, if the conviction and sentence prima facie arguable to be fabulous and malice, in other words where the appellant has a fair chance to succeed in the appeal against the conviction and sentence."
Madras High Court
1. Madras HC Grants 30 Days' Leave To Rajiv Gandhi Assassination Case Convict, On Grounds Of Illness [Mrs. T. Arputham v. State of Tamil Nadu]
In view of multiple co-morbid illness and high chances of getting Covid-19 infection in the prison, the Bench of Justice N. Kirubakaran and Justice P. Velmurugan directed the concerned authorities to grant 30 days' leave to a convict in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, T. Arputham.
The Court observed, "When the Government itself has admitted that the petitioner's son is suffering from multiple co-morbid illness and his chances of getting infection are high, especially, when prisoners are infected with Covid-19 and a Probationary Officer has already died due to covid infection, the convict should be given treatment privately, especially, when it is not possible to give treatment in Government Hospital…"
2. Madras HC Issues Guidelines For Settlement Of Just Accident Compensation Under MV Act [United India Insurance Company Limited v. Shanmugam & Ors.]
The Bench compromising Justice SM Subramaniam issued detailed guidelines for the settlement of just compensation, so as to minimize false claims and illegal practices in the matter of settlement of accident claims. The Bench noted that the facts in a Claims Petition must be "unambiguous". It stressed,
"Even in case there is a loss of memory or the claimant due to the injury, unable to provide the correct vehicle number, at least the Police Investigation should reveal the accident occurring time and the place specified as in the Claim Petition. If the charge sheet of the Police is not corroborating with the facts stated in the Claim Petition, then the Tribunal ought not to have considered the Claim Petition at all."
Access the Full Report to read further directions.
3. Though Witness Protection Scheme Evolved In 2018, System Not Instilling Confidence In Witnesses To Come Out With Truth Against Hard-Core Criminals: Madras HC [Padhakumar & Ors. v. State]
The Bench of Justices T. Raja and B. Pugalenthi observed that even though the Witness Protection Scheme has been evolved in the year 2018, still the system is not providing confidence to the witnesses to come out with the truth as against the hard-core criminals.
The Court continued to explain that as per the directions of the Apex Court, the Witness Protection Scheme, 2018 is evolved to give confidence to the witnesses to come forward to assist law enforcement and judicial authorities with full assurance of safety and aiming to identify series of measures that may be adopted to safeguard witnesses and their family members from intimidation and threats against their lives, reputation and property.
4. Strictly Implement The Rule Indicating Punishment For Non-Wearing Of Mask, Spitting In Public Places, Etc. : Madras HC Directs Govt. [N. Rajkumar v. Chief Secretary to Government & Ors.]
The Division Bench of Justice MM Sundresh and Justice R. Hemalatha directed the State Government to strictly implement the amended Rule (framed indicating the punishment for non-wearing of the mask, violating social distancing and spitting in public places) which came into being pursuant to the above Government Order dated 04.09.2020.
"We have already issued appropriate directions earlier to the authorities in the State of Tamil Nadu to implement the provisions strictly. We only reiterate that the amended Rule which came into being pursuant to the above said Government Order dated 04.09.2020 will have to be implemented strictly by the respondents. Due publicity will have to be given on the Rule and the action that is likely to be taken," the Court said.
A Division Bench of Justice MM Sundresh and Justice R. Hemalatha issued notices on the petition filed by independent journalist Saurav Das through Advocate M V Swaroop to the Union Government, Tamil Nadu State Govt, Central Information Commission (CIC) and Tamil Nadu State Information Commission (TNSIC) seeking their response on a PIL seeking various directions for improving the right to information (RTI) regime and for facilitating RTI applications and hearings related to the pandemic.
The petition points out that since the average waiting time for a case to be heard by the CIC and TNSIC is almost 2 years, several important pandemic related RTI appeals are not being heard on priority by these Commissions and they may turn infructuous if the normal waiting time is followed. More importantly, pandemic related cases filed under 'threat to life and liberty' (for which information must be furnished within 48 hours by the Public Information Officer of a public authority) are also not being heard by these Commissions on priority.
Orissa High Court
The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Mohammad Rafiq and Justice BR Sarangi directed the Advocate General AK Parija to obtain instructions and file details of the criminal cases pending before different the courts of all the districts of Odisha against sitting/former M.Ps and M.L.As.
"There are a total of 4442 cases pending against MPs/ MLAs (sitting and former) in different courts including Special Courts for MPs and MLAs. In 2556 cases sitting legislators are accused persons. The number of legislators involved is more than total number of cases since there are more than one accused in one case, and the same legislator is an accused in more than one case," the Court said.
Patna High Court
1. [X & XII Examination Process] Patna HC Directs State Government And 'Bihar Board of Open Schooling and Examination' to Take An Immediate Decision [Grassroot Empowerment and Development by Youth v. State of Bihar]
The Division Bench of Chief Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice S. Kumar directed the State Government to take a decision regarding the process of conducting the examination (10th and 12th) for the students enrolled with Bihar Board of Open Schooling and Examination (BBOSE).
The Court was of the view that there has to be a categorical decision as to how much time it would take in concluding the process of conducting the examination and by what date the results would be declared. "It cannot be left open with uncertainty, after all, students also have to plan the career", the Bench further observed.
Punjab & Haryana High Court
1. [Monkey Menace] 'Garbage Littering, Feeding Religious Offerings to Monkeys Created The Menace', P&H HC Calls For Action-Taken Report From Authorities [Divyam Dhakla v. Chandigarh Municipal Corporation & Anr.]
The Bench of Justice Arun Monga observed that the suggestion, to start killing and/or culling monkeys like vermin (in case of self-defence), on the face of it, is outrageous, cruel and preposterous. "The monkey menace is self-created by the residents and/or the visitors to the adjoining religious establishment, where, invariably the visitors/residents either out of the fondness or by way of religious offerings feed the monkeys," the Court said,
It further remarked, "Garbage littering by residents is another contributor. The said action on their part, itself becomes counter protective, inasmuch as, the monkeys instead of being stable in their natural habitat, in the adjoining Sukhna Forest, end up gathering in and around the said religious establishment/residential colony, owing to the easy availability of food.
2. [Raids On Illegal Miners] 'Its A Strange Coincidence That Offenders Manage To Flee From Spot In Almost All Cases', P&H HC Directs DGP To Ensure Secrecy [Bittu Ram v. State of Punjab]
The Bench of Justice Arun Kumar Tyagi observed that almost in all cases under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulations) Act, 1957 and the Punjab Excise Act, 1914 which come before the Court (regarding conducting of the raid by the Punjab Police on the basis of secret information), the offenders were alleged to have fled from the spot at the time of the raid.
The Court said that "this coincidence in all such cases is very strange" and that it is "suggestive of either leakage of information regarding the raid to the offender by some police officer/official or manipulation of record by the police officers/officials conducting the raid who allow the offenders to escape or inefficiency of the raiding police officers/officials in suffering escape of the offenders despite their empowerment by law to use reasonable force for preventing such escape."
3. Provide The List Of Persons Who Have Been Given Security Cover But Are Not Holding Any Public Office : P&H HC [Bir Devinder Singh v. State of Punjab & Ors.]
The Bench of Justice Jaishree Thakur asked the Punjab State Government to inform the Court about the number of persons, who have been provided security beyond the State Security Policy 2013. The Court further asked for the list of those persons, who have been allowed security but are not holding any public office (other than any security provided to the Judicial Officers).
The Court was hearing the plea of former Punjab deputy speaker, Bir Devinder Singh who has challenged the state government's decision to withdraw his security cover.
4. 'Give 7 Days' Advance Notice Before Arrest', P&H HC Grants Interim Relief To Former Punjab DGP Sumedh Saini [Sumedh Singh Saini v. State Of Punjab & Anr.]
The Single Bench of Justice Arun Kumar Tyagi directed the Punjab State government to issue one week's advance notice to the former Director-General of Police (DGP), Sumedh Singh Saini before arresting him (in case, the state contemplates to do so in connection to the three-decade-old Multani kidnapping and murder case) so as to enable him to have recourse to remedies available to him in accordance with the law.
Rajasthan High Court
1. [Udaipur Hotel Case] Rajasthan HC Stays CBI Court's Order; Raps Court Over Issuance Of Arrest Warrants Against Arun Shourie & Others [Jyotsna Suri v. Union of India Through CBI]
The Single Bench of Justice Dinesh Mehta rapped the CBI court for issuing arrest warrants against former Union Minister Arun Shourie and four others in connection with the disinvestment of Laxmi Vilas Palace Hotel (Udaipur). It observed,
"This Court is constrained to observe that the Court below has not recorded any reason worth the name before resorting to the extreme mode of securing the presence of an accused - issuing an arrest warrant. The issuance of a warrant of arrest becomes all the more serious, when the petitioner was not put to any notice of the pending proceedings."
2. Rajasthan HC Allows Student Who Was Given Two Scores In JEE Mains To Appear For JEE Advance; Result To Be Withheld [Vaishali Jain v. NTA & Ors.]
The Bench of Justice Vijay Bishnoi directed the National Testing Agency to allow the student, who was precluded from appearing in the JEE (Advance) Examination after her Mains result was allegedly fiddled, to take the examination. It however clarified that appearance in the examination shall not confer any right in the Petitioner's favour and directed the NTA not to declare her result, without permission of the Court.
3. Migrants In Rajasthan Aren't Entitled To Claim Benefit Of Reservation In On-Going Panchayat Elections Or In Public Service Jobs: Rajasthan HC [Prem Devi v. State of Rajasthan]
The Single Bench of Justice Satish Kumar Sharma ruled that the people, who have admittedly migrated from other States to Rajasthan on their marriage, are not entitled to claim the benefit of reservation in on-going Panchayat Elections in Rajasthan.
The Court acknowledged the settled legal position that a person of reserved category is entitled to derive the benefits of reservation only in the State of his/her origin and not in the state to which he/she has migrated irrespective of the fact whether his caste is covered in the same reserve category in both the States. However, the Court said, only on the basis of such certificates, they shall not be entitled for the benefit of reservation in public employment and such certificates may be relevant for grant of benefits like housing scheme, which may be made available on the basis of domicile or residence.
Uttarakhand High Court
1. Uttarakhand HC Refuses To Quash Criminal Proceedings U/s 125 Representation Of People Act Against INC Candidate For 2012 State Elections [Rajendra Singh Bhandari v. State of Uttarakhand]
The Bench of Justice Alok Kumar Verma refused to quash criminal proceedings under Section 125 of the Representation of the People Act, against Rajendra Singh Bhandari, who was Badrinath Assembly Constituency Candidate of Indian National Congress Party to the Legislative Assembly of Uttarakhand in 2012.
It observed, "It is the fundamental duty of every citizen to promote harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood and fraternity amongst all the people of India transcending religious, linguistic and regional or sectional diversities. For a fair and peaceful election, during the election campaign, party or candidate should not indulge in any activity which may create mutual hatred or cause tension between different classes of the citizens of India on ground of religion, race, caste, community or language."
Telangana High Court
1. Preventive Detention Laws Cannot Be Invoked By State As An Easy Way Method Bypassing The Ordinary Law: Telangana HC [Read Order] [Mohd. Jaffar v. State of Telangana & Ors.]
The Division Bench of Chief Justice Raghvendra Singh Chauhan and Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy observed that "The preventive detention laws cannot be invoked as an easy way method bypassing the ordinary law and if the detention order is passed, it is very much necessary for the detaining authority to apply its mind and arrive at a conclusion that ordinary law is not capable of acting deterrent against the detenu and thus, detention order needs to be passed."
It further observed, "the State cannot take advantage of its own lapses, whereby, on one hand, the State does not effectively oppose the bail application or seeks cancellation of bail and on the other hand, State finds an easy way method to pass detention order by invoking preventive detention laws."
Inputs by Ayushi Mishra