Delhi High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 12 To June 18

Citations 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 508 to 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 521

NOMINAL INDEX

PANKAJ BANSAL v. STATE (GOVT. OF NCT DELHI) & ANR. and other connected matter 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 508

SADANAND AND ANR. v. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION AND ORS. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 509

RS v. MB 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 510

MINOR VICTIM-V v. THE STATE & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 511

SAMEER MAHANDRU v. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 512

FIITJEE LIMITED v. ALLEN EDUCATION AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES PVT. LTD & ORS. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 513

IBRAHIM PUTHANATHANI v. NIA 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 514

Preeti Chandra v. ED 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 515

PROF DR SANJEEV BAGAI & ORS. v. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (ENVIRONMENT AND FOREST) & ORS. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 516

Rishiraj Aluminium Private Limited Versus Goods And Service Tax Officer 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 517

Ohmi Industries Asia Private Limited Versus Assistant Commissioner 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 518

ALL RESIDENTS WELFARE SOCIETY (ARWS). v. CAELUM ARPIT BRAND TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 519

BADAM VERVA v. DELHI BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 520

MMTC Limited vs Aust Grain Exports Pty. Ltd 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 521

Discretion To Choose High Court Or Sessions Court For Moving Anticipatory Bail Can’t Be Restricted By Narrow Interpretation: Delhi High Court

Title: PANKAJ BANSAL v. STATE (GOVT. OF NCT DELHI) & ANR. and other connected matter

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 508

The Delhi High Court has ruled that the discretion of an applicant to choose either High Court or trial court for moving anticipatory bail plea cannot be restricted by construing section 438 of CrPC narrowly.

Analyzing the provision, a vacation bench of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh said that there is no bar on approaching the High Court directly for seeking anticipatory bail and that both the courts have concurrent jurisdiction to deal with such cases.

“It is discretionary for the Applicant either to approach the High Court or the Court of Session. There is no restraint cast upon the Applicant to approach this Court first. It is based upon the discretion of the Applicant which Court they want to approach since both the Court have concurrent jurisdiction and the same cannot be restricted by construing the provision of Section 438 of Cr.P.C. narrowly,” the court said.

Permissible To Change Surname To Avoid Prejudices Attached To A Particular Caste, Right To Life Includes ‘Right To Identity’: Delhi High Court

Title: SADANAND AND ANR. v. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION AND ORS.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 509

Observing that right to identity is an intrinsic part of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the Delhi High Court has said that it is permissible for an individual to change his or her surname to be not able to be identified with any particular caste “that may be a cause of prejudice” to such person. The change will not lead to advantage of any reservation or any other benefit that may be available to the adopted caste/surname, said the court.

“The Right to Identity is an intrinsic part of Right to Life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. There is no denying the fact that Right to Life includes within its ambit, the Right to Live with Dignity, which includes not to be tied down by any casteism that a person may face on account of the caste to which such person belongs. Thus, if a person wants to change his or her surname, so as not to be identified with any particular caste that may be a cause of prejudice to such person in any manner, the same is permissible,” Justice Mini Pushkarna held in a judgment passed on May 19.

Revisional Court Can’t Make Deposition Of Arrears A Condition For Grant Of Stay On Interim Maintenance Order U/S 125 CrPC: Delhi High Court

Title: RS v. MB

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 510

The Delhi High Court has observed that a revisional court, while considering the grant of stay of the interim maintenance order passed under section 125 of CrPC, cannot put a general direction of depositing the entire maintenance amount by ignoring the facts of circumstances of the case.

“While exercising the revisional scrutiny of an interim maintenance order passed in proceedings under Section 125 CrPC, the revisional court for yet another reason cannot impose as a pre-condition to grant of stay on operation of the assailed interim maintenance order, such general rider of deposit of the entire amount of awarded maintenance ignoring the overall circumstances of the case,” a vacation bench of Justice Girish Kathpalia observed.

Delhi High Court Permits 13-Yr-Old Rape Victim To Undergo Medical Termination Of Pregnancy, Directs DSLSA To Look Into Grant Of Compensation

Title: MINOR VICTIM-V v. THE STATE & ANR.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 511

The Delhi High Court has permitted a 13-year-old minor rape victim to undergo medical termination of pregnancy with 24 to 26 weeks old foetus.

A vacation bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh also directed the Delhi State Legal Services Authority to look into the compensation to be paid to the minor.

On June 09, the court had directed the medical board, comprising of minimum two doctors at Guru Tegh Bahadur Hospital, to review the minor’s case for medical termination of her pregnancy.

Perusing the medical report submitted by the board, Justice Singh ordered: “In view of the opinion of the medical board wherein it has been opined that the continuation of pregnancy in this case carries the higher risk to both the mother and the foetus, it is directed that the termination of pregnancy be effected as soon as possible by the doctors at Guru Teg Bahadur Hospital.”

Liquor Policy Case: Delhi High Court Grants Interim Bail To Businessman Sameer Mahendru In Money Laundering Case

Title: SAMEER MAHANDRU v. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 512

The Delhi High Court has granted interim bail for six weeks on medical grounds to businessman Sameer Mahendru in the money laundering case related to the implementation of previous liquor policy in national capital.

A vacation bench of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh, who had reserved the judgment on June 07, directed that Mahendru be released from jail forthwith and that he shall surrender before the concerned Trial Court on July 25 on the expiry of the interim bail.

Credit War Over JEE Result: Delhi High Court Denies Interim Relief To FIITJEE In Suit Against Allen Coaching Centre

Title: FIITJEE LIMITED v. ALLEN EDUCATION AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES PVT. LTD & ORS.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 513

The Delhi High Court has denied interim relief to coaching institute FIITJEE in its suit against Allen Career Institute alleging that the latter claimed credit for one of its student’s result who successfully cleared the JEE (Mains) 2023 examination.

It was FIITJEE’s case that the student, Malay Kedia, opted for its “Four Year Classroom Program for IIT-JEE (Advanced)-Weekend Contact Classes” and enrolled himself in one of its coaching centres in 2018. The suit stated that the student attended classes till September 2022 but stopped after October 07 last year.

Delhi High Court Extends Custody Parole Of PFI National Coordinator By Two Hours For Daughter’s Wedding In Kerala

Title: IBRAHIM PUTHANATHANI v. NIA

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 514

The Delhi High Court has extended the custody parole of Popular Front of India’s National Coordinator Ibrahim Puthanathani, accused in a UAPA case registered by NIA, from four hours to six hours to enable him attend his elder daughter’s wedding in Kerala.

The UAPA case was registered against PFI, its leaders and cadres. NIA’s chargesheet against Puthanathani alleges that he was responsible for organizing and conducting arms training camps across various states on behalf of Popular Front of India.

A special NIA court on May 24 had granted custody parole to Puthanathani for four hours to visit Kerala for attending his daughter’s wedding. He then moved the High Court challenging the trial court order with a prayer to grant him interim bail.

Delhi High Court Grants Bail To Preeti Chandra In Money Laundering Case, Says Order Be Not Given Effect Till June 16 After ED Request

Title: Preeti Chandra v. ED

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 515

The Delhi High Court has granted bail to Preeti Chandra, the wife of Unitech promoter Sanjay Chandra, in a money laundering case probed by Enforcement Directorate.

However, at the request of ED, Justice Jasmeet Singh said that the order be not given effect to till Friday. As the court pronounced the order, ED Counsel Zoheb Hossain requested that the order may not be given effect to till June 16 as the agency has to challenge the same. The appeal will become infructuous, Hossain added.

Also Read: Woman Can’t Be Classified Based On Their Education Or Occupation For Bail Under Proviso To Section 45(1) PMLA: Delhi High Court

No Pruning Of Trees Will Be Permitted In Delhi Except In Accordance With Delhi Preservation of Trees Act: Delhi High Court

Title: PROF DR SANJEEV BAGAI & ORS. v. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (ENVIRONMENT AND FOREST) & ORS.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 516

The Delhi High Court has set aside the Delhi Government’s Guidelines permitting regular pruning of branches of trees with girth upto 15.7 cm without prior permission of the Tree Officer.

“In view of the above, no pruning of trees will be permitted in Delhi except in accordance with the DPT Act. It will be open to the respondents to frame guidelines and/or rules as may be requisite,” Justice Najmi Waziri said in an order passed on May 29.

Delhi High Court Quashes SCN For Being Devoid Of Reasons, Restores GST Registration

Case Title: Rishiraj Aluminium Private Limited Versus Goods And Service Tax Officer

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 517

The Delhi High Court has quashed the show cause notice as it was devoid of reasons and restored the GST registration.

The bench of Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Tushar Rao Gadela observed that the show cause notice was deficient. It does not sufficiently disclose the reasons why the petitioner’s GST registration was suspended or was proposed to be canceled. It is well settled that a show cause notice must clearly set out the reasons for proposing an adverse action in order for the noticee to respond to the same.

Rule 89(4) Under CGST Rules Inapplicable On Refund Of Integrated Tax Paid On Zero-Rated Supply: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Ohmi Industries Asia Private Limited Versus Assistant Commissioner

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 518

The Delhi High Court has held that Rule 89(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 is inapplicable to cases of refund of integrated tax paid on zero-rated supply.

The bench of Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Amit Mahajan has noted that the opening sentence of Rule 89(4) makes it amply clear that it applies only in cases of zero-rated supply of goods or services without payment of tax under a bond or letter of undertaking.

In City Gasping For Breath, Felling Of Trees Should Be Last Resort: Delhi High Court

Title: ALL RESIDENTS WELFARE SOCIETY (ARWS). v. CAELUM ARPIT BRAND TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 519

Observing that felling of trees should be the last resort in national capital, the Delhi High Court has restrained the Delhi Development Authority and others from clearing of land and felling of trees on a plot located in Vasant Kunj.

“In a city gasping for breath, I am of the view that felling of trees should be the last resort. In case, any other alternative site is available, the same must be looked at,” said Justice Jasmeet Singh in the order.

Construction Workers Can’t Be Deprived Of Right Of Pension Merely Due To Hyper-Technical Issues: Delhi High Court

Case Title: BADAM VERVA v. DELHI BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD & ANR.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 520

The right of pension of construction workers cannot be deprived of merely due to hyper-technical issues or requirements such as production of original MR Slips or serial number of the notary records, the Delhi High Court has recently observed.

Noting that a large number of construction workers are either illiterate or even semi-illiterate and hail from rural background, Justice Prathiba M Singh added that their pension benefit application must be processed without any delay.

Orders Of Arbitral Tribunal Not Signed By All Arbitrators And Absence Of An Arbitrator During Certain Proceedings, Cannot Be A Ground To Set Aside Award: Delhi High Court

Case Title: MMTC Limited vs Aust Grain Exports Pty. Ltd

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 521

The Delhi High Court has reiterated that procedural irregularity cannot be a ground to set aside the Arbitral Award unless such irregularity goes to the root of the matter and shocks the conscience of the Court, thus making the Award illegal.

The bench of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh made the observation while dismissing a petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act), challenging the majority Arbitral Award passed against the petitioner, MMTC Ltd.