High Courts Weekly Round-Up

Allahabad High Court

In a matter of Reference to ensure the security in district courts across the state of Uttar Pradesh, a seven-judge bench of Allahabad High Court directed the state government to enhance the strength of judges in lower judiciary by 25% by the next year. The bench, headed by the Chief Justice directed the state government to complete the security work of High Court before celebration of 150 years of its establishment, i.e., by March 2016.

Bombay High Court

Bombay High Court held that deduction under section 37(1) of Income Tax Act cannot be allowed for expenditure on medical treatment of eyes for improving the vision as it has an element of personal expenditure. Upholding the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal  order of dismissal of claim, a division bench of Justices M.S.Sanklecha and G.S.Kulkarni  held that the expenditure incurred by the appellant on foreign tour for pre-operation investigation relating to his eyes cannot be allowed as business expenditure u/s 37 (1) of I-T Act.

Delhi High Court

In a major setback to Delhi Government, the Delhi High Court has quashed the order by the Government in exercise of powers under Section 20 of the CAG Act, asking the CAG to conduct an audit of the accounts of the DISCOMs. A Division bench of Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice RS Endlaw quashed the order on the ground that reasonable opportunity to represent with regard to the proposal for such audit was not given to DISCOMs.

The High court Court Single Bench, Justice Rajiv SahaiEndlaw, in a Writ Petition filed by two law students directed the Delhi government to investigate the charges levelled against Food Panda India Ltd., one of the leading food market-place in India, that the latter was levying an overstated Value Added Tax on customers using its services.

The President of India, Shri Pranab Mukherjee inaugurated the Golden Jubilee Celebrations of High Court of Delhi yesterday. Chief Justice of India H L Dattu, Najeeb Jung, Lt. Governor of Delhi, ArvindKejriwal, Chief Minister of Delhi and  Justice G Rohini, Chief Justice, Delhi High Court were also present in on the occasion.

Gujarat High Court

Gujarat High Court on Tuesday, quashed the First Information Report against PatidarAnamatAndolanSamiti (PAAS) convener Hardik Patel so far as it relates the offences under Section 153A, 505(2) and 506. The Court also directed the police to proceed with the investigation on allegation of Sedition [S.124A] since a prima facie Case is made out against him.

The Court quashed the appointment of Raghuvir  Nandkrishna Pandya, as Government Pleader­ cum ­Public Prosecutor.Justice J.B. Pardiwala allowed the Writ applications challenging the Government order appointing Pandya as the District Government Pleader and Public  Prosecutor  of  Vadodara.

The Division Bench comprising acting Chief Justice Jayant Patel and Justice N V Anjaria directed the State Election Commission (SEC) to provide the option of NOTA (None Of The Above) on the Electronic Voting Machines in the upcoming local body polls in the state.

Kerala High Court

In a Writ Petition filed by Shri Sebastian Mathew alias O.M. Joy alleging that the licence issued by a panchayat to catch stray dogs for their rehabilitation was cancelled pursuant to a telephonic direction from the minister’s office, High Court of Kerala Single Bench (Justice V. Chithambaresh) issued an urgent notice to Union Minister for Women and Child Development Smt. Maneka Gandhi by speed post.

The court held that a Madrassa is not a place of worship and can function as a polling booth. Justice V. Chitambaresh dismissed a Writ petition filed against the state election commission praying to shift a polling station from a Madrassa.

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Madhya Pradesh High Court upheld the Trial Court judgment awarding Death penalty to three staffers of a Private Bus involved in Sendhwa Bus burning case in which 15 passengers were charred to death and more than 20 sustained severe injuries. However the Court acquitted the owner of the bus who was sentenced to life imprisonment by the Trial Court.

The High court also held that even if an accused fell short of the date of majority by a single day, he is entitled to be treated as a juvenile in conflict with law. Justice C.V. Sirpurkar observed that the trial court had erred in holding that he was not a juvenile in conflict with law.

Madras High Court

Madras High Court Judge Justice N.Kirubalan in his order dated 16.10.2015, suggested ‘Castration’ as an additional punishment for child abusers. In the Judgment, which is already became a subject of hot debates.

The High Court Bench on Monday restrained the Special Disciplinary Committee(SDC), set up to hold an inquiry against 14 lawyers suspended by Bar Council of India for storming court rooms and shouting slogans against judges, from going ahead with its proceedings slated to start today.

The Court stayed single judge’s order which had directed the government to consider entrusting  the functions of the Bar Council of India (BCI) to an Expert Committee headed by a retired Supreme Court Judge.  A division bench of Chief Justice S.K Kaul and Justice T.S. Shivagnanam stayed the order, in an appeal filed against it by Bar Council of India.