High Courts Weekly Roundup [September 27, 2021 To October 3, 2021]

1. "Due To DM's Inaction Unavoidable RERA Cases Coming To Court": Allahabad HC Seeks GB Nagar DM Suhas LY's Personal Presence [Priya Kapahi And Another v. State Of U.P. And 5 Others]

The High Court sought the personal presence of the District Magistrate of Gautam Budh Nagar, Suhas LY while observing that due to his inaction 'unavoidable' RERA cases were coming to the Court. The Bench of Acting Chief Justice (ACJ) Munishwar Nath Bhandari, and Justice Piyush Agrawal has asked him to remain present before the Court on October 4, 2021, to explain his inaction in reference to the recovery certificate issued by RERA Authority in several cases.

2. Ram Janmabhoomi Road Widening: Allahabad HC Grants Liberty To Affected Shopkeepers To Approach DM For Rehab/Compensation [Kaushalya Devi & Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors]

The High Court disposed of a plea filed by shopkeepers seeking rehabilitation/accommodation and compensation for loss of their shops/business due to the proposed Ram Janmabhoomi Road Widening project, by granting them the liberty to approach District Magistrate, Ayodhya with their grievance. It was contended in the plea filed by the shopkeepers that the proposed construction of a new road from the main road to Sri Ram Janma Bhoomi via Shringar Hat Hanuman Gadhi would cause them commercial hardship.

Also Read: Allahabad High Court Dismisses PIL Seeking Probe Into UP Govt's Jal Jeevan Mission Scheme

3. Allahabad High Court Grants Interim Protection From Arrest To Ex-UP Governor Dr. Aziz Quereshi In Sedition Case Over Alleged Remarks Against CM [Dr. Aziz Qureshi v. State Of U.P. And 3 Others]

Dr. Aziz Quereshi, former Governor of Uttar Pradesh including two other States, was granted interim protection from arrest by High Court in a sedition case registered against him over his alleged derogatory remarks against CM Yogi Adityanath led Uttar Pradesh Government. A bench of Justice Pritinker Diwaker and Justice Mohd. Aslam granted him the protection till the next date of hearing while listing the case for October 6 on state counsel's request.

4. "Harassment Of Common Man By Public Authorities Socially Abhorring": Allahabad HC Orders Fair Probe In Ex-Army Man Torture Case [Resham Singh v. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 Others]

The High Court ordered a fair investigation, immediate action in the case of an ex-soldier of the Indian Army, who had alleged that he was humiliated and brutally tortured by the Uttar Pradesh Police in May this year. He was allegedly forcefully taken to a Police Station, where he was disrobed and then tied up on a cot and brutally beaten up by the police officials for two continuous hours using "Dandas". The Bench of Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani and Justice Piyush Agrawal underscored that the harassment of a common man by public authorities is socially abhorring and legally impermissible and that it may harm him personally but the injury to society is far more grievous.

Bombay High Court

1. 'No Drugs Were In My Possession, Embargo For Bail Won't Apply', Aryan Khan's Lawyer Tells Court, Agrees On NCB Custody For One Day

A holiday court at Mumbai has remanded actor Shah Rukh Khan's son - Aryan – and two others in the Narcotics Control Bureau's (NCB) custody till tomorrow in connection with the seizure of drugs on the luxury cruise ship off the Mumbai coast.

Additional CMM RK Rajebhosale remanded Khan, along with Advocate Aslam Merchant's son - Arbaaz Merchant- and Munmun Dhamecha to NCB's custody till October 4 after NCB sought their custody for two days and Khan's lawyer conceded to custody for one day. They were arrested at 2pm on Sunday.

2. No Media Reporting, Public Disclosure Of POSH Case Judgments Without Prior Approval : Bombay High Court Issues Guidelines To Shield Anonymity[P v. A & Ors.]

The High Court, issuing guidelines for cases regarding Sexual Harassment of Women at the Workplaces, has directed that such matters will be heard either in-camera or in the judge's chambers, orders are not to be passed in open court and should not be uploaded on the official HC website either. A bench of Justice Gautam Patel has further barred the media from publishing proceedings under the Sexual Harassment of Women at the Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 or reporting on a judgement without the court's permission.

Also Read: Bombay High Court Allows Representative Procession For Imam Hussain's Chelum In Maharashtra With 150 persons

3. Bombay High Court Says Freedom Fighter's Pension Can't Be Withheld For Long, Seeks State Govt's Response On Widow's Plea [Shalini Laxman Chavan v. Union of India & Ors.]

Withholding a freedom fighter's pension for such long periods isn't justified, the High Court said, seeking the State's response on a plea by the 90-year-old widow of Laxman Chavan, who fought during 1942 Quit India Movement and passed away in 1965. A division bench of Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice Madhav Jamdar were hearing Shalini Laxman Chavan. She claimed that her husband was a freedom fighter who had participated in the Quit India Movement in 1942 and undergone imprisonment in the Byculla jail for six months in 1944.

4. "Gives An Impression That Justice Can Be Bought & Judges Can Be Sold": Bombay HC Refuses Bail To Man Who Assured Favourable Court Decision [Minol Anil Hudda v. State of Maharashtra]

The High Court refused bail to a man accused of cheating a woman by guaranteeing a favourable court decision for her son's release on bail, observing that it is a grave issue and amounts to tarnishing the judiciary's image.

Justice Bharti Dangre said that such instances have become rampant and must be nipped in the bud. "This tendency of guaranteeing the decision to come in favour of one party or the other amounts to maligning a particular Judge and at large, the institution itself by giving an impression that justice can be bought and the Prosecutors and Judges can be sold. These vexatious attempts are rampant and this has to be nipped in the bud."

Also Read: Serious Dent To The Financial Health Of State': Bombay High Court Denies Bail For Rana Kapoor's Wife & Daughters In Yes Bank- DHFL Scam

5. Country Made Pistol Hardly Satisfies Description Of Prohibited Arms': Bombay HC Grants Bail To Rtd. Delhi ACP In Pro-Khalistan Terror Case

The High Court granted bail to a retired ACP from Delhi, Sunderlal Parashar (62), accused by the National Investigation Agency of providing arms to a man who was allegedly a part of the pro-Khalistan movement. A division bench of Justices SS Shinde and NJ Jamadar allowed Parashar's appeal under section 21(4) of the NIA Act, challenging the rejection of his bail application by a Special Court on July 1. He was arrested on 24 April 2019. Parashar claimed that he was not part of a criminal conspiracy but working on a secret mission for the Indian Government with his informant to gather information about the Lashkar-e-Toiba, a terror outfit.

Also Read: Courts Are Not Playgrounds And Litigation Is Not A Pastime' – Bombay HC Imposes Rs 25 Lakh Costs For Vexatious Application In Commercial Dispute

6. Mother's Work Commitments Don't Make Her Unsuitable For Child's Custody: Bombay High Court

Observing that a busy actress's work commitments don't make her unsuitable for her child's custody, the Bombay High Court has ruled that a minor's 'welfare' cannot be decided solely on which parent has more free time. A division bench of Justices SS Shinde and NJ Jamadar dismissed the husband's habeas corpus petition under Article 226 for custody of their minor son. However, the court allowed him visitation rights.

Also Read: Won't Arrest Param Bir Singh Till October 21 In FIR Under SC/ST Act, Maharashtra Govt Tells Bombay High Court

Also Read: Right Of Reply Not For Dishonest Defendant': Bombay High Court Fumes At Violation Of Court Undertaking In Copyright Dispute On Bollywood Movies

7. Javed Akhtar Defamation Case: Mumbai Court Seeks Magistrate's Response In Kangana Ranaut's 'Lost Faith In The Court' Transfer Plea [Kangana Ranaut v. The State of Maharashtra]

The Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court has sought the Andheri Magistrate's response on actor Kangana Ranaut's plea to transfer the defamation case filed by lyricist Javed Akhtar against her, as she had lost faith in the court. The in-charge CMM ST Dande at Mumbai said she would first want Magistrate RR Khan's response on the actor's allegations of "bias" against him. The judge also took Akhar's reply to the transfer plea on the record, where he accuses Kangana of merely attempting to delay the proceedings.

Also Read: Dignity Of Rape Victim Must Be Upheld, Judge's Duty To Forbid Scandalous Questions In Cross Examination': Bombay High Court

Calcutta High Court

1. Calcutta High Court Refuses To Interfere With Bhabanipur Bypolls Date; Admonishes Chief Secretary For Writing To ECI To Expedite Elections [Sayan Banerjee v. The Election Commission of India and Ors]

The High Court dismissed a challenge made to the decision of the Election Commission of India (ECI) to prioritize the bye-elections of Bhabanipur Assembly Constituency from where the Chief Minister of West Bengal Mamata Banerjee is set to contest on September 30. A Bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj however passed adverse comments against the Chief Secretary of the West Bengal Government for writing to the ECI seeking to expedite the Bhabanipur bypolls.

2. Calcutta HC Directs WB Speaker To Decide Disqualification Petition Against TMC MLA Mukul Roy By October 7 [Ambika Roy v. The Speaker, West Bengal Legislative Assembly and Ors]

The High Court directed the Speaker of the West Bengal Legislative Assembly to decide on the disqualification petition against TMC MLA Mukul Roy and place on record the order passed by the next date of hearing which is slated to take place on October 7. The direction was issued in the plea moved by BJP MLA Ambika Roy challenging the appointment of Mukul Roy as the Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) of the West Bengal Legislative Assembly.

3. No One Can Claim To Be Exclusive, Above The Law': Calcutta HC Quashes Allotment Of Land To Sourav Ganguly, Imposes Costs On Him & State [Humanity, Salt Lake & Anr v. State of West Bengal]

The High Court quashed the allotment of a plot by the West Bengal Housing Infrastructure Development Corporation (HIDCO) to former cricketer and current BCCI President Sourav Ganguly for the purpose of establishing an educational institution. A

Division Bench of Acting Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice Arijit Banerjee also imposed costs to the tune of Rs 50,000 each on the State government and the state owned West Bengal Housing Infrastructure Development Corporation (HIDCO). A token cost of Rs 10,000 was also imposed on Sourav Ganguly and the Ganguly Education and Welfare Society by noting that they should have acted in accordance with law.

4. Speaker Worked On Dictates, Failed To Discharge Constitutional Duty': Calcutta HC Rules That Constitutional Convention Is To Appoint Opposition Leader As PAC Chairman [Ambika Roy v. The Speaker, West Bengal Legislative Assembly and Ors]

The High Court observed that it is a 'constitutional convention' to appoint a leader of the Opposition as the Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) of the West Bengal Legislative Assembly. The observation was made in the plea moved by BJP MLA Ambika Roy challenging the appointment of Mukul Roy as the PAC Chairman.

The Court further directed the Speaker of the West Bengal Legislative Assembly to decide on the disqualification petition moved against TMC MLA Mukul Roy and place on record the order passed by the next date of hearing i.e. on October 7. On June 17, a disqualification petition had been moved before the Speaker by BJP MLA and Leader of the Opposition Suvendu Adhikari against Mukul Roy on the grounds of defection under the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution.

Also Read: Calcutta High Court Seeks State Govt's Response On Application Of Foreigners Act, 1946 On Religious Minorities Protected Under CAA 2019

5. Petition U/s 482 CrPC To Quash Domestic Violence Proceedings Maintainable: Calcutta High Court Disagrees With Madras HC Ruling [Chaitanya Singhania & Anr v. Khusboo Singhania]

The High Court had the opportunity to expound in detail on the question whether an order passed by a Magistrate in a proceeding under Section 12 read with Section 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (Act) on the point of maintainability of the said proceeding can be quashed under the provisions of Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).

Section 23 empowers the Magistrate to grant interim and ex parte orders on the basis of an affidavit of the aggrieved person seeking temporary reliefs under Sections 18-21 of the Act.

Also Read: Durga Puja Pandals In State To Be No-Entry Zones For Visitors: Calcutta High Court Reiterates Previous Directions

6. Calcutta High Court Directs State Govt To Permit Transgenders To Appear For Recruitment Examination Of Kolkata Police [Pallabi Chakraborty v. State of West Bengal & Ors]

The High Court provided relief to a transgender applicant who had filed a petition alleging that the online application form that is required to be submitted for recruitment to the post of Sub-Inspector and Sergeant in the Kolkata Police for the year 2021 does not provide for a column permitting a transgender person to apply. Justice Arindam Mukherjee vide order dated September 6 had sought the State government's response in this matter.

Also Read: Calcutta High Court Dismisses Plea Seeking Inquiry Into Dr Syama Prasad Mukherjee's Death

Delhi High Court

1. Delhi High Court Closes Google's Plea Against Competition Commission Of India Alleging Leak Of Confidential Report

The High Court closed the petition filed by Google India against the alleged leak of a confidential report, prepared by the investigative arm of Competition Commission of India over the company's alleged anti-competitive practices after taking on record the stand of CCI that it has no objection to accept all requests of Google in regards of confidentiality.

Taking on record the suggestions put forth by the Commission, Justice Rekha Palli disposed of the petition with a liberty to Google for taking appropriate legal recourse in law in case it still has a grievance that the information is further leaked.

Also Read: Delhi High Court Reserves Judgment On Plea Against Appointment Of Rakesh Asthana As Delhi Police Commissioner

2. Delhi High Court Stays Order Declaring CM's Promise On Payment Of Rent For Poor As 'Legally Enforceable' [GNCTD v. Najma & Ors.]

The Delhi High Court has temporarily stayed a single judge order making promises extended by Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal for payment of rent on behalf of poor tenants enforceable.

A Division Bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh said that operation and implementation of the single judge order will be kept in abeyance till the next date of hearing, i.e., November 29. It also orally asked the Government if it is willing to pay in part.

3. "Individual Liberty Cannot Be Misused In A Manner That Threatens Fabric Of Society By Attempting To Destabilise It, Cause Hurt"- Delhi HC In Riots Case [Mohd. Ibrahim v. State]

While denying bail to Mohd. Ibrahim in Head Constable Ratan Lal Murder Case during the North East Delhi riots, the High Court observed that individual liberty cannot be misused in a way that it threatens the fabric of society by attempting to destabilize it or cause hurt to others. Justice Subramonium Prasad made the observation while passing order in connection with murder of Head Constable Ratan Lal and causing head injuries to a DCP during the North-East Delhi riots that rocked the national capital last year. (FIR 60/2020 PS DayalPur).

4. Not Surrendering On Time When Granted Bail Last Year Cannot Be Reason To Deny Interim Bail Under HPC Guidelines: Delhi High Court [Court on its own motion v. State]

Full Bench of the High Court has observed that an applicant not surrendering on time when bail was granted last year cannot be a reason to deny interim bail under the High Powered Committee guidelines. A full bench comprising of Justice Vipin Sanghi, Justice Rekha Palli and Justice Talwant Singh was also dealing with applications filed by various applicants seeking interim bail.

"In our view, the consideration of the applicant not surrendering on time, when he was granted bail last year, cannot be a reason to deny him interim bail," the bench said while dealing with one of the applications.

Also Read: Plea Seeking Waiver Of Board Examination Fee For Class X & XII Students- High Court Directs Delhi Govt, CBSE To Treat It As Representation

5. Delhi Riots Did Not Take Place In Spur Of The Moment; Calculated Attempt To Dislocate Functioning Of Govt : High Court [Mohd. Ibrahim v. State]

While denying bail to Mohd. Ibrahim in Head Constable Ratan Lal Murder Case, the High Court has observed that the riots which took place in North East Delhi in February 2020 did not take place in a "spur of the moment" and was a "calculated attempt to dislocate the functioning of the Government as well as to disrupt the normal life".

Justice Subramonium Prasad made the observation while passing order in connection with murder of Head Constable Ratan Lal and causing head injuries to a DCP during the North-East Delhi riots that rocked the national capital last year. (FIR 60/2020 PS DayalPur).

6. "Tahir Hussain's Plea Challenging UAPA Charges In Riots Case Is Nothing But An Attempt To Short Circuit And Stall The Trial": Delhi Police To High Court [Tahir Hussain v. State of NCT]

The Delhi Police has told High Court that the petition moved by former Aam Aadmi Party Councillor Tahir Hussain challenging the UAPA charges invoked against him in connection with the Delhi Riots larger conspiracy case, is nothing but an attempt to short circuit and stall the trial. Hussain had also sought quashing of sanction granted in the matter.

In the reply filed by Delhi Police, it has been stated that the question of validity of sanction order is a question of fact and therefore, should be left to be determined in the course of the trial and not in the exercise of writ jurisdiction or under sec. 482 of CrPC.

7. Delhi High Court Seeks Police's Stand On Swami Chakrapani's Plea Seeking Restoration Of Z Security Citing Threats By Dawood Ibrahim, Chota Shakeel [Swami Chakrapani v. Union of India & Ors.]

The High Court has sought response from the Delhi Police on the plea filed by National President of Hindu Sant Mahasabha, Swami Chakrapani, seeking restoration of his Z security cover which according to him was withdrawn abruptly and in an arbitrary manner by Centre and Police.

Swami Chakrapani in his plea has alleged that he is vulnerable to the attacks by 'associates of Dawood Ibrahim, Chota Shakeel and other antisocial and anti National elements.'

8. Right To Be Forgotten Depends On How Far It Has To Be Stretched, Rights Have To Be Balanced: Delhi High Court [Sukhmeet Singh Anand v. Union of India & Ors.]

The High Court observed that the Right to be Forgotten depends on how far it has to be be stretched and that the rights of a person have to be balanced. The oral observation came from Justice Rekha Palli who said:

"Right to be Forgotten depends on how far it has to be stretched. Tomorrow, people who defraud the banks will come and say 'please remove the judgment'. We have to balance the rights."

9. "Issue Communications To Fair Price Shop Holders Informing Them Of Those Who Opted For Receiving Rations At Doorstep": High Court Directs Delhi Govt [Delhi Sarkari Ration Dealers Sangh Delhi v. Commissioner Food & Supplies]

The High Court has directed the Delhi Government to issue communications to all fair price shop holders informing them about the persons who have opted for receiving rations at their doorsteps. Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Jasmeet Singh also clarified that it is only after this exercise that such fair price shop holders need not be supplied the rations.

"The GNCTD shall first issue communications to each of the fair price shop holders, informing them of the particulars of the ration card holders, who have opted to receive their rations at their door steps and, only thereafter, the rations, to the extent that they are being supplied to such optees, need not be supplied to the fair price shop holders," the Court said.

Also Read: Delhi High Court Dismisses Avantha Group Promoter Gautam Thapar's Plea Challenging His Arrest In Yes Bank Loan Fraud Case

10. Grave Matter, Requires Immediate Attention' : Delhi High Court Takes Suo Moto Cognizance Of Rohini Court Firing Incident [Court on its own motion v. Commissioner of Police & Ors.]

The Chief Justice led bench of the High Court has taken suo moto cognizance of the recent gun firing incident inside Delhi's Rohini Court hall. "This is a grave matter and requires immediate attention," observed the Bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh at the outset.

It has impleaded the Commissioner of Delhi Police, Ministry of Home Affairs and the Union Law Ministry as Respondent parties. The Court has also added all the Bar Associations in Delhi, including the Delhi High Court Bar Association as Respondents.

Also Read: "Don't Want To Lose Lives": Delhi High Court Issues Notice On Plea Seeking Directions To Ensure Safety & Security Of District Courts

11. Delhi High Court Seeks Expeditious Appointment Of Recovery Officers In DRTs, Framing Of Rules For High Value Recovery Matters Within 3 Weeks [Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Co. Ltd. v. Secretary, Department of Financial Services & Ors.]

The High Court has directed the Centre to ensure appointment of Recovery Officers in Debt Recovery Tribunals across India without any delay. A Bench of Justices Vipin Sanghi and Jasmeet Singh sought a status report to be filed in this regard on November 17, the next date of hearing, highlighting the progress made so far.

The Bench was hearing a plea raising the issue of delay in disposal of high-value recovery cases pending before the Debt Recovery Tribunals. In one of the earlier hearings in the matter, the Court had directed the respondents to constitute a Committee to examine this situation.

12. Prohibition On Sale Of Herbal Hukkahs: High Court Expresses Displeasure Over Delhi Govt's Response

The High Court expressed displeasure on the affidavit filed by Delhi Government in the plea challenging prohibition on sale and serving of herbal hukkahs in restaurants and bars amid Covid-19.

Justice Rekha Palli was hearing the pleas filed by by various Restaurants and Bars operating in the national capital, aggrieved by the alleged interference of Delhi Government as well as the Police in the sale of Herbal Hukkahs. The Petitioners had challenged the order passed by the Joint Commissioner of Police, prohibiting sale and service of herbal hukkahs in restaurants and bars run by them.

Also Read: COVID- Delhi High Court, District Courts To Continue With Restricted Physical Hearings Till October 30

13. Provocation Depends On Mental Attitude Of People': Delhi High Court Disposes Plea To Restrain Movie 'The Conversion' [All India Practising Lawyers Council v. Union of India & Ors.]

The High Court refused to restrain the release of film 'The Conversion', challenged on account of allegedly displaying communally charged content and having the potential of provoking hatred among religious communities. "Provocation depends upon mental attitude of people," remarked Chief Justice DN Patel at the outset.

The Bench also comprising of Justice Jyoti Singh added, "Someone may be provoked by anything, even without anyone saying a single word. Whereas some people may never be provoked, they are very cool and calm."

14. Juvenile Justice Act: Delhi High Court Terminates All Petty Offences Cases Against Children Where Inquiry Is Pending For Over 1 Year [Court on its own motion v. State]

The High Court has directed that all cases alleging petty offences against children or juveniles, where the inquiry has been pending and remains inconclusive for a period longer than one year, regardless of whether such child or juvenile has been produced before the Juvenile Justice Boards in Delhi, shall stand terminated with immediate effect. The order has been passed in view of Section 14 of the Juvenile Justice Act.

15. Doctors Should Not Be Made To Run From Pillar To Post': Delhi High Court Allows Plea For Study Leave From Hospitals To Pursue PG Course [Dr Ruchita Ghiloria & Ors. v. Medical Superintendent & Ors.]

The High Court has allowed the pleas filed by several doctors seeking directions on the employer-hospitals to grant them study leave to pursue further education, NEET PG.

The Bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh orally observed that Doctors should not be made to run from pillar to post merely for obtaining NOCs and other permissions. It stated that grant of NOC from the hospital should be enough for the Doctors to pursue further education, and the requirement of applying for study leave separately appears to be a superfluous idea.

16. Delhi Riots: High Court Denies Bail To One In Rahul Solanki Murder Case [Sirazuddin v. State]

The High Court has denied bail to Sirazuddin in connection with the case concerning murder of one Rahul Solanki, who died after being shot during the North East Delhi riots last year. Justice Mukta Gupta rejected Sirazuddin's bail plea after opining that he was seen as a part of the mob carrying a danda, as per the video footages available on record.

"Considering the fact that at the moment charge is yet to be framed and material witnesses are also required to be examined, this Court finds no ground to grant bail to the petitioner. Petition is dismissed," the Court said.

Also Read: Delhi Riots- "CCTV Footage In Itself Not Sufficient To Prolong Incarceration": Delhi HC Grants Bail To Man In Jail For 17 Months

18. Delhi Riots- High Court Grants Last Opportunity To Prosecution For Responding To Location Proof Submitted By Accused In Bail Pleas [Ankit Chaudhary alias Fauzi v. State]

The Court has granted one last opportunity to the Prosecution for responding to a location chart filed by one Ankit Chaudhary alias Fauzi in the two bail pleas filed by him in Delhi Riots cases. The chart shows his location as per mobile network on the alleged day.

Counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner has been involved in fourteen FIRs and cannot be present at all the places simultaneously and secondly, the location chart of the petitioner and the co-accused are also at variance though the both numbers are of Airtel thereby not justifying the presence of two of them together.

Other developments:

• "Witnesses In Ankit Gujjar Death Case Kept Under CCTV Surveillance, Jail Staff Briefed For Keeping Safety & Security": Delhi High Court Told
• Delhi High Court Issues Notice To Centre On Cancer Patient's Plea Seeking Permission To Take Covaxin As Second Dose Instead Of Covishield
• Religious Activities & Worship Places Will Not Be Affected': Another Plea In Delhi High Court Seeks Uniform Civil Code
• ED Opposes TMC MP Abhishek Banerjee, His Wife's Plea Before Delhi HC Seeking Quashing Of Summons In Coal Scam Case
• "ED Can Interrogate Or Arrest Me In Calcutta, Not Asking For Any Blanket Order": TMC MP Abhishek Banerjee, His Wife Tells Delhi HC
• Delhi High Court Grants Bail To Man Accused Of Speeding Away Car With Cop On Bonnet
• Jantar Mantar Sloganeering Case- Delhi High Court Issues Notice On Sushil Kumar Tiwari's Bail Plea
• Delhi High Court Sets Aside Appointment Of Prof. Mazhar Asif As Acting Chairperson Of JNU's Centre Of Spanish & Latin American Studies
• Investigation Bound To Fail If Police Leaks Case Related Documents': CBI Opposes SI Abhishek Tiwari's Bail Plea In Delhi High Court
• "Interests Of Deity And Devotees Are Paramount": Delhi HC Issues Directions Regarding Administration, Maintenance Of Kalkaji Temple And Bari Rights

Gujarat High Court

1. RTI Activist Amit Jethva Murder Case- Gujarat High Court Suspends Sentence Of Life-Imprisonment Of Ex-MP Dinu Solanki

The Court suspended the Life-imprisonment sentence of Ex-BJP MP Dinu Bogha Solanki who was convicted by a special CBI court in 2019 for killing RTI activist Amit Jethwa in 2010 after the activist had tried to expose illegal mining activities in the Gir forest region.

Suspending his sentence and granting him conditional bail, the Bench of Justice Paresh Upadhyay and Justice AC Joshi observed that the CBI court's judgment was based on 'assumptions and presumptions' and that the verdict was 'prima facie erroneous'.

Karnataka High Court

1. Infant In Distress Due To Rare Genetic Disease: Karnataka High Court Directs Indira Gandhi Institute Of Child Health To Examine Immediately [Master Janish N v. Union of India.]

The Court directed the Indira Gandhi Institute of Child Health, Bengaluru to forthwith examine a one and a half-year-old boy, who is suffering from a rare Spinal Muscular Atrophy (Type 1) disease.

Justice Krishna S Dixit directed "The infant shall be taken to NIMHANS compound for being examined by Dr G N Sanjeev, on the same day itself. Petitioners/guardians are permitted to contact the said doctor either through email, or mobile phone or otherwise, if the petitioner's guardians call or message the said doctor shall respond to the same immediately and that the non-responding shall be viewed very seriously."

2. 'Frivolous PIL To Stop Scheduled Caste Woman From Succeeding': Karnataka High Court Dismisses Challenge Against Land Conversion With Costs [Jagadeesha M S v. State Of Karnataka]

The Court dismissed a public interest litigation challenging the order of the Deputy Commissioner (Kodagu district) allowing conversion of land for operating and establishing a retail outlet of Indian Oil Corporation by a lady belonging to the Scheduled Caste community.

A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum termed the petition filed by social activist Jagadeesha MS as frivolous and imposed a cost of Rs. 1 lakh on the petitioner, which is to be deposited within 30 days with the Karnataka Advocates Clerks Welfare Fund.

3. 'Guilt Of Accused Can Be Established Only After Examination Of All Witnesses': Karnataka High Court Directs Retrial Of Rape Case [The State Of Karnataka v. Santhosh]

Observing that "guilt of the accused can be established only after examination of all the witnesses as desired by the prosecution," the High Court set aside the order passed by a trial court acquitting a person accused of raping a minor.

A division bench of Justice G Narendar and Justice M I Arun, while allowing the appeal filed by the state government said, "The matter stands remanded back to the trial court to continue the trial with liberty being given to the prosecution to adduce necessary evidence."

Also Read: High Court Issues Notice To Karnataka Government, BBMP On Plea To Permit Pets In Public Parks

4. 'Object Of JJ Act Defeated': Karnataka High Court Removes Unqualified Persons Appointed To State Selection Committee At Minister's Behest [Sudha Katwa v. State Of Karnataka]

The Court recently set aside the appointment of two members of the Karnataka State Selection Committee on the grounds that they did not have the requisite qualification prescribed under the Juvenile Justice(Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and the Rules made thereunder.

The said committee is constituted for the selection of Juvenile Justice Selection Committee Members.

5. Breastfeeding An Inalienable Right Of Lactating Mother Protected Under Article 21; Right Of Infant To Be Breastfed Also Assimilated With Mother's Right : Karnataka High Court

The Court has said that breastfeeding a child is an important attribute of motherhood and is protected under the umbrella of Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

Justice Krishna S Dixit in his order said, "In the light of domestic law and the international law, breastfeeding needs to be recognized as an inalienable right of the lactating mother; similarly, the right of the suckling infant for being breastfed too, has to be assimilated with mother's right; arguably, it is a case of concurrent rights; this important attribute of motherhood is protected under the umbrella of Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India."

6. 'Bala Sanyasa' Is Legal; No Statutory Or Constitutional Bar Against Minor Becoming Swami : Karnataka High Court [P Lathavya Acharya v. State Of Karnataka]

The Court upheld the legality of "bala sanyasa" and held that there was no legal bar against a minor becoming a swami.

A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum delivered the judgment while dismissing a writ petition filed questioning the legality of appointing 16-year-old Aniruddha Saralathaya (now named as Vedavardhana Tirtha) as the Peetadhipathi of the Shiroor Mutt in Udupi.

Also Read: Alleged Patent Infringement On Sanitary Product: Karnataka High Court Makes Temporary Injunction Absolute

7. State Govt Order Permitting Only A Muslim Priest To Perform Rituals At Datta Peeta Violates Right To Religion Of Both Hindus & Muslims : Karnataka High Court [Sri Guru Dattatreya Peeta Devasthana Samvardhana Samithi v. State Of Karnataka]

The Court has observed that the Government's order permitting only a Mujawar (Muslim Priest) to perform the rituals at the Datta Peeta - a holy cave shrine in Chikmaguluru which is revered both by Hindus and Muslim communities - amount to "a flagrant violation of rights of both communities guaranteed by Article 25 of the Constitution of India".

"...the impugned order infringes the right of both communities guaranteed under Article 25 of the Constitution by preventing Hindus from performing pooja as per their faith and compelling the Mujawar to offer pooja contrary to his faith", the Court said in its order.

8. Irregularities In Reasoning & Appreciation Of Evidence By Trial Court: Karnataka High Court Sets Aside Death Penalty Of 62 Yr Old In POCSO Case [Venkateshappa v. State Of Karnataka]

The High Court has set aside the sentence of death penalty handed down to a 62-year-old man accused of raping a minor girl in the year 2018.

A division bench of Justice G Narender and Justice M I Arun, while partly allowing the appeal filed by accused Venkateshappa, set aside the judgment of conviction and sentence and remitted the matter back for partial re-trial.

Also Read: Once An Apartment Is Subjected To Karnataka Apartment Ownership Act, Karnataka Ownership Flats Act Won't Apply: High Court

9. High Court Directs Karnataka Govt. To Provide Braille Text Books For Visually Disabled Students Within 15 Days [The National Federation Of The Blind, Karnataka v. State Of Karnataka]

The Court has directed the State Government to positively provide textbooks in Braille for all special children (visual disabilities) within a period of 15 days, starting from September 17.

A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum said, "This Court, on 18.03.2020, has passed an interim order on an assurance given by the learned AGA that the textbooks in Braille for Class-I to X of the Kannada medium will be available from the next academic year. As the next academic year has already commenced, the State Government is directed to provide textbooks in Braille for all special children (visual disabilities) positively within a period of 15 days from today, if the same has not been done."

Kerala High Court

1. Rummy A Game Of Skill: Kerala High Court Lifts Ban On Online Rummy, Finds It Unconstitutional [Gamescraft Pvt. Ltd. Technologies v. State of Kerala]

The Court quashed an amendment to a government notification issued under Section 14A of the Kerala Gaming Act, 1960 banning online rummy in the State, bringing huge relief to the online skill-gaming industry.

Justice TR Ravi noted that the notification was arbitrary and violative of the right to trade and commerce guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution and the right to equality guaranteed under Article 14 of the Constitution.

Also Read: Rummy A Game Of Skill When Played With or Without Stakes: Kerala High Court While Lifting Ban On Online Rummy

2. Kerala Schools Reopening: Plea In High Court Seeks Urgent Vaccination Of Students With Homeopathic Prophylactic Medicines [Advocate M.S Vineeth v. State of Kerala & Ors.]

A lawyer and former Central Government Counsel has preferred a writ petition before the High Court seeking to immediately administer homoeopathic medicines for Covid-19 to willing students, taking into account the fact that schools will reopen next month.

The petitioner Advocate M.S Vineeth had previously moved a representation to the State to provide alternate medical protection against Covid-19 for school children by immediately administering homoeopathic prophylactic medicines to them.

3. Cannot Be Blind To Junior Lawyers' Agony: Kerala HC Slams Bar Council For Delay In Implementing GO Mandating Stipend [Advocate Dheeraj Ravi & Ors. v. State of Kerala & Ors]

The Court has expressed dissatisfaction with its State Bar Council for not implementing the Government's Order issued in 2018 directing to pay a stipend of Rs 5,000 each to junior lawyers.

Justice PV Kunhikrishnan observed: "The Court cannot pretend that it does not see the agony of junior lawyers."

4. Kerala High Court Directs Probe Into Controversial Antique Dealer's Alleged Links With Senior Police Officers, Grants Police Protection To His Former Driver [Ajith E.V. v. The Commissioner of Police & Ors.]

The Court granted police protection to controversial fake antique dealer Monson Mavunkal''s former driver who had moved the Court alleging harassment from his ex-employer and certain police officers close to him.

Justice Devan Ramachandran has also sought for the State Police Chief to be impleaded in the matter to conduct an elaborate probe into the grave allegations put forth by the petitioner against some of the superior police officers and their alleged links with the bogus collector.

5. 'This Adventurism In Litigation Has To Stop Now': Kerala High Court Lashes Out In Church Feud Case [St. Mary's Orthodox Syrian Church v. State of Kerala]

The Court lashed out on the State over prolonged clashes between the Orthodox and Jacobite factions in the State despite clear directions from the Apex Court to solve the dispute. Justice Devan Ramachandran minced no words while coming down on the State government for failing to resolve the feud.

"This adventurism in litigation has to stop now. I know the judges who have heard this case before had to face consequences. I am not afraid of that. My view will not change. It's about time the factions came together and resolved their differences. This has been going on for years. If you pass this on to the next generation, things could get dangerous."

Also Read: Would Lead To A Super-Spreader Of Covid-19: State In Its Statement Before Kerala High Court Justifying Inaction In Orthodox-Jacobite Church Feud

6. Illegal Felling Of Rosewood Trees: Kerala High Court Denies Bail To Prime Accused [Anto Augustine & Ors. v. State of Kerala]

The Court declined to grant bail to the prime accused in a massive illegal tree felling and rosewood smuggling case that shook the State earlier this year.

Justice Shircy V. dismissed their bail pleas apprehending that if released, they could potentially tamper with the evidence.

7. 'No Rule That Poor People Can't Donate Organs': Kerala High Court Directs Authority To Reconsider Plea For Unrelated Kidney Transplantation [Reeja P. & Anr v. District Level Authorization Committee]

The Court recently observed that the poor economic background of a donor is not a bar for organ donation. It thus allowed a petition challenging the order of the District Level Authorization Committee, rejecting the application of a woman for organ donation on the ground inter alia that the donor hails from a poor family.

Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan while considering the plea remarked: "I fail to understand the reasoning of the respondent. Simply because a donor is coming from a poor family, there is no hindrance to donating the organs...There is no rule that poor people can't donate organs. Being poor is not a sin. There are people with big hearts in plenty in our country and they can save them. That is how we can reduce the difference between haves and have-nots."

8. Kerala High Court Dismisses Plea Seeking Reopening Of Karnataka Borders For Free Commute Between States, Cites Jurisdictional Irregularity [Jayananda K.R V. Union of India & Ors]

The Court dismissed a plea seeking Karnataka to reopen its borders adjacent to the State of Kerala and to allow entry of passengers from Kerala possessing Covid-19 vaccination certificate for at least one dose to Karnataka.

A Division Bench of Chief Justice S. Manikumar and Justice Shaji P Chaly cited territorial jurisdictional irregularities in the matter while dismissing the petition.

Also Read: Incursion Of Wild Elephants In Human Settlements: Kerala High Court Calls For State's Report On Proposed Action

9. District Consumer Forums Qualified To Issue Commissions For Local Inspection: Kerala High Court [P And N Ceramics & Ors v. Issac Sebastian]

The Court has ruled that a District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission is empowered to issue commissions for local inspection as vested in a civil Court under the Code of Civil Procedure.

Justice P.B Suresh Kumar while dismissing a plea that challenged an order issued by such a Commission, remarked: "Merely for the reason that the powers as vested in a civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure to issue a commission for local inspection have not been specifically made applicable to the proceedings before the Commission on a complaint, according to me, it cannot be said that the Commission is precluded from exercising that power."

10. Section 494 IPC: Second Marriage While Divorce Decree Was Stayed; Appeal Dismissed Later; No Offence Of Bigamy: Kerala High Court [Manoj v. State of Kerala & Ors.]

The Court has held that if a party enters into a second marriage when the appeal of the decree of divorce of the first marriage is still pending, he/she will not be guilty of the offence of bigamy under Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code if the appeal is subsequently dismissed.

While allowing a petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the complaint alleging bigamy, the Court ruled that Section 15 of the Hindu Marriage Act does not override Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, which confers a right of appeal.

11. 'Trials In Our Country Take Ages To Complete': Kerala High Court Frames Guidelines For Issuing Passports To Accused In Criminal Cases [Thadevoose Sebastian v. Regional Passport Office & Ors.]

In a significant ruling, the Court drew up a set of guidelines to be considered by criminal courts while granting permission for the issuance of passports to individuals involved in criminal proceedings.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas while disposing of a petition filed by a man who was awaiting issuance of a new passport for the past 5 years, observed: "The grant of permission by the Magistrate enabling an accused to travel abroad will be of great significance, especially since it will be a process of balancing the fundamental right of a citizen to travel abroad and the need to ensure the presence of the accused during trial."

12. Kerala High Court Disposes Plea Questioning Practices Related To Engaging Foreign Pilots On Contract In Indigo Airlines [Capt Pedro Guilherme da Veiga Pereira e Oliveira Artilheiro v. Union of India & Ors.]

The High Court directed a former Indigo Airlines Captain, a Portuguese national who had questioned practices related to engaging foreign pilots on contract by the Airlines, to approach the appropriate authorities.

Justice P.V Kunhikrishnan allowed the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum regarding the contentions raised over alleged violation of laws by the airlines. The Court also permitted him to visit India for a week to collect his belongings.

Also Read: Incursion Of Wild Elephants In Human Settlements: Kerala High Court Calls For State's Report On Proposed Action

13. Would Lead To Exclusion Of New Entrants To Work: Kerala High Court Permits Labour Companies To Register Own Employees As Headload Workers [Manzoor E v. District Labour Officer]

The Court has recently ruled that businesses are not obligated to recruit existing registered headload workers and that they are at liberty to register their own employees as headload workers as long as such employees are willing and able to do the work.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas issued the order declaring that a business is free to register its own workers as headload workers since there is no legal requirement mandating otherwise.

Other Developments:

• Devaswom Board Can Only Make Regular Appointments; Any Scheme For Regularization Will Be Unconstitutional: Kerala High Court
• Married Daughter & Parents Of Deceased Entitled To Compensation As Dependents Under Motor Vehicles Act: Kerala High Court
• Mere Use Of 'Irrevocably' On Talaqnama Does Not Invalidate Talaq If Husband Made Subsequent Efforts For Reconciliation: Kerala High Court
• Allegation Of Judicial Bias Not To Be Based On Conjectures & Mystic Maybes: Kerala High Court Dismisses Transfer Plea With Costs
• Section 53A Of Transfer Of Property Act Not Applicable To A Void Agreement For Sale: Kerala High Court
• Interest Under Customs Act Statutory, Cannot Be Waived Unless Authorised By Act: Kerala High Court

Madhya Pradesh High Court

1. MP High Court Seeks State's Reply On Arrangements To Keep Male, Female, Under Trials & Convicted Inmates In Separate Jails [Roma Kanjar and others v. The State Of Madhya Pradesh]

The High Court called for a jail status report from the Director-General, Prison and Correctional Services (Madhya Pradesh) with regard to arrangements made to keep the male and female inmates as well as under trials and convicted inmates in separate jails.

The order came from the Bench of Justice Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava while dealing with a bail plea filed in connection with an offence registered under Section 34(2) of the M.P. Excise Act.

2. "Unbecoming Of Elected Representative": MP High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail To Councillor Booked For Destroying Public Properties [Atamdas Vs. State of M.P]

The High Court denied bail to a sitting Councillor, Atamdas who has been booked for an offence that took place in the year 2018 wherein he, alongwith other co-accused, had led an unruly mob of 700- 800 persons who were protesting against the ratio of a decision of Apex Court.

Allegedly, they were protesting against the Top Court's ruling in the case of Dr. Subhash Kashinath Mahajan Vs. State of Maharashtra (2018) 6 SCC 454 under the impression that the decision was against the interest of the SC/ST community.

3. Samrat Mihir Bhoj 'Caste' Row- "Should A National Hero's Statue Installed With Public Funds Contain Caste In Its Description?": MP HC Asks Committee To Examine [Rahul Sahu v. State of M.P. & Ors]

The High Court has directed an enquiry committee to examine whether the Statute of a National Hero installed over a public place (through Public Funds) can be referred with caste attached to its description.

The Court ordered thus while dealing with a matter pertaining to the dispute that erupted between two communities (Gurjars and Kshatriyas) over the title/nomenclature to be inscribed over the statue of Samrat Mihir Bhoj (installed in Gwalior City).

4. "Issue Already Stands Referred To SC's Larger Bench": MP High Court Disposes Plea Challenging 100% Reservation In 600 PG Medical Seats [Association of Private Universities, Madhya Pradesh and another v. State of Madhya Pradesh and others]

The High Court disposed of the Writ Petition challenging 100% reservation in Post Graduate Medical seats holding that it is against the propriety to take a view on an issue that has already been referred to a Larger Bench for reconsideration.

The Division Bench of Chief Justice Mohammad Rafiq and Justice Vijay K Shukla held so while hearing the plea filed by the Association of Private Universities and Medical Colleges challenging the 100% reservation made for Domicile candidates from Madhya Pradesh and candidates who had completed MBBS from the Medical Colleges of the State.

5. Madhya Pradesh High Court Stays MPPSC's Selection Process For Appointment Of Medical Officers, Issues Notice To State Govt [Dr. Ronak Sharma and Others v. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Others]

The High Court stayed notification issued by the Madhya Pradesh Public Service Commission (MPPSC) for conducting interviews for the purpose of appointment of Medical Officers in the State of Madhya Pradesh.

The Bench of Justice S. A. Dharmadhikari was hearing the plea filed by Dr. Ronak Sharma and others being aggrieved by the alleged arbitrary selection process adopted by the MPPSC for the purpose of appointment of Medical Officers in the State of M.P.

Madras High Court

1. 'For Publicity Purpose': Madras HC Imposes Rs 5K Costs, 2 Year Ban On Filing PILs For 'Misconceived' Challenge To Govt Retirement Age Policy [R Balamuralidharan v. Union of India and Ors]

The High Court imposed costs to the tune of Rs 5000 on a petitioner who had who had challenged the State government's February 2021 decision to increase the retirement age for government officials to 60 years from the earlier 59 years. Additionally, the petitioner was also barred from filing any Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition for two years without obtaining the previous leave of the Court.

A Bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice PD Audikesavalu remarked, "The petition is utterly misconceived and filed only for publicity purposes"

2. 'Complete Abuse Of Process': Madras HC Imposes Rs 1 Lakh Costs For 'Worthless' Appeal, Cautions Against Impleading Arbitrators [Kothari Industrial Corporation Ltd. v. M/S Southern Petrochemicals Industries and Anr]

The High Court imposed Rs 1 lakh costs on an appellant while dismissing a challenge to an arbitral award by terming it to be an abuse of the process of law.

The appellant was directed to pay Rs 50,000 to the respondent and a further Rs 50,000 to the Tamil Nadu Legal Services Authority (TNSLA) within a month.

3. Strict Action Must Be Taken Against Political Parties For Damaging Public Property During Demonstrations: Madras High Court Directs State Govt [Pattali Makkal Katchi v. The Additional Chief Secretary and ors]

The Court has recently observed that political parties and communal, linguistic or ethnic groups who indulge in violence and damage public property during agitations must not be allowed to go scot-free.

The Court made the observations while refusing to quash proceedings initiated against the Pattali Makkal Katchi (PMK) party in relation to the 2013 under the Tamil Nadu Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act, 1992 (1992 Act). The alleged incident is said to have occurred when a clash broke out at a bus stop which involved PMK members leading to the destruction of buses and public property.

4. 'Attempt To Gain Political Publicity': Madras HC Quashes Criminal Defamation Complaint Against Telangana Governor Tamilisai Soundararajan [Dr.Tamilisai Soundararajan v. Dhadi K Karthikeyan]

The Court quashed a criminal defamation case against Tamilisai Soundararajan, now Governor of Telangana holding additional charge as Lieutenant Governor of Puducherry pending before a Judicial Magistrate court in Kancheepuram.

The defamation case had been filed against Soundararajan for comments allegedly made by her when she was the President of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in Tamil Nadu. During an interview, she had allegedly stated that the Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi (VCK) party and its head, Thirumavalavan conducted "kangaroo courts" and seized lands from the public.

5. 'Unscrupulous Elements': Madras HC Directs MHA To Frame Laws Within 3 Months To Ensure Immediate Deportation Of Illegal Immigrants On Completion Of Sentence [Suresh Raj v. State]

The Court directed the Ministry of Home Affairs to frame appropriate laws within 3 months with regards to illegal immigrants who repeatedly commit petty offences in order to continue inhabiting within the territorial limits of the country.

The Court observed that the Union must ensure that such illegal immigrants are immediately deported back to their country of origin on completion of their sentence.

6. Ensure No Further Elephant Is Taken Into Custody Except For The Purpose Of Treatment': Madras High Court Directs State [Rangarajan Narasimhan v. The Chief Secretary and Ors]

The Court reiterated that the State must ensure that no further elephant is taken into captivity except for the purpose of treatment of such elephants if found unable to support itself in the wild.

A Bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice PD Audikesavalu issued the directions on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition filed by activist Rangarajan Narasimhan over the alleged inhumane treatment of captive elephants kept in temples across the State.

Orissa High Court

1. Orissa High Court Imposes 50K Cost On An Investigating Officer For Non-Production Of Case Diary [Sujit Sahu v. State of Odisha]

The High Court recently imposed Rs.50,000/- cost on the Investigating Officer of Jaipatna Police Station (investigating a criminal case) for non-production of the case diary.

The Bench of Justice S. Pujahari has directed the probe officer to deposit the amount before the concerned District Legal Services Authority

Punjab and Haryana High Court

1. Son Cannot Insist On Staying In Father's House Saying He Has Contributed To Renovation : P&H High Court Upholds Eviction Order Under Senior Citizens Act

The High Court recently upheld an eviction order passed against a son and his wife at the instance of the father under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (Senior Citizens Act).

In this case, the father had not transferred the house in question to the son by way of gift or any other deed. The son sought to maintain the claim by saying that he had contributed to the renovation of the ground floor of the house.

Rajasthan High Court

1. Divorce Suit Transfer- "Convenience Of Wife Is To Be Preferred Over The Convenience Of Husband": Rajasthan High Court [Ekta Dhadhich v. Rajendra Prasad Sharma]

Dealing with a plea of wife seeking transfer of the Divorce case, the Jaipur Bench observed that in such matters, courts are required to give more weightage and consideration to the convenience of the female litigants in comparison to the husband's convenience.

"Transfer of legal proceedings from one Court to another should ordinarily be allowed taking into consideration their convenience and the Courts should desist from putting female litigants under undue hardships," the Bench of Justice Chandra Kumar Songara further observed.

2. BDS Admission Given To Student Who Failed Class 12 Subject Cancelled After One Year; Rajasthan HC Asks NEET Counselling Board, College To Pay Rs 10 Lakh Compensation Each [Nitendar Kumar Meena v. Rajasthan University of Health Sciences & Ors.]

In a pertinent judgement, the Court has found the NEET Counselling Board and a Dental College guilty of serious lapses in thoroughly examining the School Certificate produced by the candidate at the time of provisional allotment and admission.

The single-judge bench of Justice Ashok Kumar Gaur was considering the writ petition of a BDS student who was denied enrollment by Rajasthan University of Health Sciences, almost a year after his admission, when it was found out that he had failed in the subject of Chemistry in Senior School Examination.

Tripura High Court

1. Tripura High Court Issues Notice To State Govt Over PIL Challenging Order To Prohibit Political Gathering In Agartala

The High Court issued a notice to the State government on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition challenging the order of the District Magistrate, West Tripura, prohibiting any kind of meeting/procession/public gathering by any political party in several parts of Agartala till November 4.

For examining the issues involved in the plea, the Bench of Chief Justice Akil Kureshi and Justice S. G. Chattopadhyay issued a notice, returnable for 5th October 2021.