- Home
- /
- News Updates
- /
- High Courts Weekly Round Up [July...
High Courts Weekly Round Up [July 12, 2021 – July 18, 2021]
LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK
18 July 2021 6:35 PM IST
![High Courts Weekly Round Up [July 12, 2021 – July 18, 2021]](https://www.livelaw.in/h-upload/2021/05/09/750x450_393154-high-courts-weekly-roundup-1.jpg "High Courts Weekly Round Up [July 12, 2021 – July 18, 2021]")
Allahabad High Court 1. Allahabad High Court Issues Directions & Timeline For Disposal Of Bail Applications Under POCSO Act, 2012 The High Court held that only the local police or Special Juvenile Police Unit [SJPU] could serve notice on bail application for offences under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 [POCSO Act]. It also prescribed a timeline...
Allahabad High Court
The High Court held that only the local police or Special Juvenile Police Unit [SJPU] could serve notice on bail application for offences under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 [POCSO Act]. It also prescribed a timeline to execute the different statutory functions by the respective authorities. Justice Ajay Bhanot alongside administered a word of caution by stating that the failure to comply with the directions laid will be due to investigation, and the delinquent officials will proceed against it departmentally.
On a plea filed by an ex-soldier of the Indian Army alleging that he was humiliated and brutally tortured by the Uttar Pradesh Police, the Uttar Pradesh Government submitted before the High Court that the Government has acted against accused police officers and an SIT has been formed to investigate the matter. This response of the State Government comes in the backdrop of the serious remarks made by the Bench of Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani and Justice Gautam Chowdhary against the functioning of the Uttar Pradesh police.
3. Premeditated Murder Of Wife, Four Minor Daughters: Allahabad High Court Upholds Death Sentence
The High Court upheld the conviction of a man for brutally murdering his wife and four minor daughters aged 7, 5, 3 years and the youngest one was merely one and a half months old. A Bench comprising Justices Ramesh Sinha and Rajeev Singh also affirmed the imposition of death penalty on the accused by opining that it was a 'rarest of rare' case. The accused had been convicted of the offence of murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and awarded the death sentence by the Sessions Judge, Lakhimpur Kheri. Aggrieved by the conviction and the sentence imposed, the present appeal was filed.
The High Court asked the Uttar Pradesh Government authorities to instruct the concerned District Magistrates and District Basic Education Officer of different districts that Teachers shall not be assigned work in teeth of the RTE Act [Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009]. Justice Vivek Chaudhary was hearing the plea filed by 3 primary teachers who submitted that authorities of State and Parishad are appointing them as Booth Level Officer and that various other works were being assigned to them which are not required to be performed by teachers.
The High Court denied Bail to the wife of Amar Dubey (hereinafter 'K') who was a close associate of Vikas Dubey, a gangster who is said to be the mastermind behind the killing of eight policemen in the Kanpur's infamous Bikru encounter last year.
She allegedly instigated Vikas Dubey's men to do the policemen to death and she is stated to have been atop a house adjoining Vikas Dubey's, during the entire course of the brutal assault. It has also been alleged that 'K' gave out locations of the policemen, who had concealed themselves to save their lives and exhorted Vikas Dubey's men to do the policemen to death, while the entire encounter between Vikas Dubey and his aids and Policemen was taking place.
The High Court reinstated a man back into his service by setting aside a dismissal order passed against him solely on the ground that he was maintaining a live in relationship outside his marriage. Justice Pankaj Bhatia passed the order while dealing with a petition challenging the order dated 31st January 2020 by way of which the petitioner was dismissed from service. The petitioner had also challenged orders dismissing the appeal and revision thereof of the said dismissal order. It was thus the case of the petitioner that the impugned dismissal order was passed against him solely on the ground that he was maintaining a relationship with a woman despite being in a valid marriage and that he was living with her as a husband.
Bombay High Court
The High Court reserved for orders a petition by former Maharashtra Home Minister Anil Deshmukh for quashing the Central Bureau of Investigation's (CBI) corruption FIR against him. Before reserving the plea for orders, the bench of Justices SS Shinde and NJ Jamadar asked the CBI to submit its investigation papers to the court in a sealed envelope. CBI had registered the FIR against Deshmukh and unknown others under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and section 120B of the IPC on April 21, 2021, following a coordinate bench's order directing a preliminary enquiry into corruption allegations against him.
Opposing the default bail plea of Bhima Koregaon- Elgar Parishad accused Sudha Bharadwaj, the Maharashtra Government said that orders passed by the Pune Judge Kishore Vadane were not without jurisdiction even though he was a sessions judge and not a Special Judge under the NIA Act. During the last hearing Justices SS Shinde and NJ Jamadar had said that the Court's records were consistent with RTI replies received by Bharadwaj that judge KD Vadane's court was not notified as a special court under the NIA Act.
Livid at a developer's conduct of repeatedly dishonouring undertakings given to the court to repay flat purchasers, the High Court has ordered the firm's directors to demonstrate they are "paupers" through their standard of living. A division bench of Justices SJ Kathawalla and MN Jadhav heard a petition by Arun Veer, a retired pensioner, regarding a flat he had purchased from the developer in 2013 and was promised possession, in 2015. However, neither did he get possession of his flat nor was his money returned.
4. Sourav Ganguly Moves Bombay High Court To Enforce Arbitral Award Against Percept
President of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) and former Indian cricket team captain, Sourav Ganguly, has approached the High Court seeking over Rs. 36 crore payable to him pursuant to a 2018-19 Arbitral award against Percept Talent Management and Percept D Mark (India) Limited. Ganguly has alleged that Directors of Percept have systematically "siphoned" funds from the company to other companies in which they are Directors to avoid payment to creditors. It is, therefore, necessary and in the interest of justice that the "Corporate Veil" is lifted off the debtors.
The High Court directed Maharashtra's Energy Minister Nitin Raut, among others, to respond to a PIL by state BJP media cell chief - Vishwas Pathak - seeking directions to Raut to reimburse the state power companies over Rs 43.55 lakh, allegedly spent on his "illegal" use of chartered flights during the lockdown last year. "Chartered flights cannot be taken by any minister at State expense except with the approval of the Chief Minister of the State. Hence, Respondent No. 2 (Raut) misused his position as ex officio Chairman of MSEB to make MSEB…..pay for his luxurious chartered flights", the petition said.
Observing that the Court's powers to summon any person under section 311 of the CrPC cannot be used to tie loose ends in the prosecuting agency's case, the High Court has set aside a trial judge's order recalling a material witness for examination at the fag end of the trial.
"No doubt, under Section 311 CrPC, any Court may, at any stage of any inquiry, trial or other proceedings summon any person as a witness or examine any person in attendance, though not summoned as a witness or recall and re-examine any person already examined, if it is essential to the just decision of the case, however, at the same time, the said power under Section 311 cannot be used to fill in the lacunae in the prosecution evidence," Justice Revati Mohite Dere held.
7. System Paralyzed Due To Pandemic; Accused Languishing In Jail : Bombay High Court
Hearing a bail appeal of a Parbhani resident from Maharashtra, accused five years ago of links with the Islamic State (IS) under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, the High Court observed that under-trials are languishing in prisons in several cases, and more recently due to a system paralysed by the Covid pandemic.
A division bench led by Justice SS Shinde observed that they had come across cases where under-trials have completed their possible sentence, and trials still hadn't started. The court cited the Bhima Koregaon – Elgar Parishad 2018 case and the Malegaon 2006 serial blasts case, where even the charges were yet to be framed.
8. Bombay High Court Dismisses Sanatan Sanstha's Petition Against Facebook For Blocking Their Page
A division bench of Justices MS Sonak and MS Jawalkar dismissed Sanatan Sanstha's petition challenging Facebook's decision to block their social media page for violating their community standards. It observed that the petition is "sketchy" and the pleadings are "unclear". Moreover, if there is a breach of contractual obligation, then the Petitioner's remedies would lie elsewhere and not in a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
The NGO couldn't point out a single provision under the Information Technology Act by which it can insist on maintaining a Facebook page without agreeing to be bound by the company's contractual terms proposed, the court observed.
9. Don't Treat Them Like Criminals- Bombay High Court Directs Mumbai police To Protect Trans Person
The High Court directed the Mumbai police to protect a 23-year-old person identifying as a transgender male, from being forced to leave the city at the instance of the parents. The court also directed the police not to take any coercive steps against them ("they" is the petitioner preferred gender pronoun). A division bench of Justice SS Shinde and NJ Jamadar granted interim relief in a plea filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner said they apprehend a threat to their safety from their parents and the police.
Calcutta High Court
Justice Shampa Sarkar issued notice on the election petition filed by West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee challenging the election of Suvendu Adhikari from Nandigram. It directed that the records and papers in relation to the election be preserved during the pendency of the petition. The Court directed the Registry to serve a copy of the order to the Election Commission of India and the Returning Officer. Mamata Banerjee was also present online for the hearing. The senior counsel said that as per a Supreme Court judgment (2009) 8 SCC 736), the petitioner is required to appear before the Court to present the election petition.
A Constitution Bench of the High Court took on record the final report submitted by a Committee of the National Human Rights Commission, which examined the allegations of post-poll violence in West Bengal. The Court also ordered DNA test of deceased BJP member Abhijit Sarkar who was allegedly killed by TMC members during alleged post-poll violence. The direction came after the Court was informed that the autopsy has been conducted and a report in that regard will be submitted to Court in a sealed cover. However, Sarkar's brother Biswajit has expressed inability to recognize the body on account of its bad condition.
3. West Bengal Assembly Polls: Calcutta High Court Issues Notices On Election Pleas By Two BJP Leaders
Admitting two Election Petitions filed by the Bharatiya Janata Party's Swadhin Kumar Sarkar and Kalyan Chaubey challenging the election win of their opponents from their respective constituencies, the Calcutta High Court issued notice to the winning candidates. In both the election plea, the Court has directed that all the equipment, devices, documents both physical and in the electronic form in connection with the election under challenge shall be preserved by the concerned authority till the disposal of the Election Petition.
4. Calcutta High Court Stays TDS Collection Under Section 194N Income Tax Act Till Sep 30
Justice Md. Nizamuddin passed an interim order restraining the Income Tax Department from collecting Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) under section 194N of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Court placed reliance on the Kerala High Court judgement in Kanan Devan Hills Plantations Company Pvt. Ltd v. Union of India wherein a writ petition had been admitted on the same issue and accordingly an interim stay on deduction of tax on source under Section 194N of the Income Tax Act was imposed.
The Court was adjudicating upon a plea challenging the constitutional validity of the provision which was inserted by the Finance Act, 2019 and became effective from September 1, 2019. The provision mandates the deduction of tax at source at the rate of 2% on cash withdrawals from, inter alia, a banking company exceeding Rs 1 crore in a financial year.
Delhi High Court
The High Court asked the prison authorities to explain why it does not permit any person outside India to meet prison inmates via Video Conferencing. Justice Rekha Palli passed the order on a petition filed by student activists Natasha Narwal and Devangana Kalita, who were recently released on bail by a division bench of the High Court in Delhi Riots conspiracy case. Both of them were present before the Court via VC. The plea seeks directions for provision of facilities for under-trial prisoners and convicts.
The High Court ruled that the benefits of the Chief Minister's Advocates' Welfare Scheme have to be extended to all advocates registered with the Bar Council of Delhi, and are residing in the National Capital Region (NCR). Ruling thus, the Bench of Justice Prathiba Singh observed that the CM's Advocates' Welfare Scheme has a laudable objective, however its condition that it would apply only to Delhi residents with Voter ID cars is discriminatory and arbitrary.
Also Read: Delhi Voter ID Not Must For Advocates Enrolled With BCD To Claim CM's Welfare Scheme : High Court
The High Court has issued notice to the Delhi Government, the Delhi Police, media houses including Zee Media, Navbharat Times and the News Broadcasting Standards Authority (NBSA) on a fresh petition moved on behalf of a Hindu woman from Uttar Pradesh, who converted to Islam. She alleged that owing to her religious conversion, she and her family members are being targeted and malicious content about her is being published in the media.
The High Court has sought response of the Delhi Government on its proposal to make a Covid-19 care facility inside Jawaharlal Nehru University after questioning it's conduct for not expediting the proposal even after the lapse of over a month. Justice Rekha Palli orally remarked, "What is this Delhi Government doing? You then start blaming left right centre."
Advocate Abhik Chimni appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted before the Court that the Covid-19 numbers are not that much now and so, the process can be taken forward by the RWA also.
The High Court observed that unlimited number of personnel of any force cannot be accommodated in Delhi as accommodating one person is always at the cost of another. Denying relief to a constable of Central Industrial Security Force (CISF), a division bench comprising of Justices Rajiv Sahai Endlaw and Amit Bansal observed thus:
"Unlimited number of personnel of any force cannot be accommodated at Delhi. Accommodating one is always at the cost of another, who though may have been wanting to be posted at Delhi and whose circumstances also justify the same, is unable to be so posted owing to those already posted, by invoking medical/sympathetic grounds refusing to move out of Delhi."
The High Court issued notice on a petition raising a pertinent question as to whether a person having flying experience from a foreign operator and holding a valid commercial pilot license issued by the DGCA can be denied issuance of an Airline Transport Pilot Licence (ATPL) on the ground that his flying experience is with a foreign operator. Justice Rekha Palli issued notice on the petition and sought response of the Director General of Civil Aviation while posting the matter to October 12th.
7. Delhi Riots: Delhi High Court To Hear Former AAP Councillor Tahir Hussain's Bail Pleas On August 6
The High Court will be hearing on August 6 the bail pleas filed by former Aam Aadmi Party Councillor Tahir Hussain in the two FIRs registered against him in connection with the northeast Delhi riots case. Justice Yogesh Khanna issued notice in the bail application and had sought Delhi Police's status report to be filed before the next date of hearing. The second bail application, listed before Justice Subramonium Prasad, was also tagged along with the plea being heard by Justice Khanna.
The High Court has asked CBSE to consider as representation a petition for refund of fees collected by the authority for conducting class 12th Board examinations, that were cancelled vide order dated June 1, on account of second wave of Covid-19. Justice Prateek Jalan has directed the Board to consider the plea filed by one Deepa Joseph and decide whether exam fees deposited can be refunded, wholly or partially, within 8 weeks.
The High Court issued notice in a plea seeking removal of Mr. Zakir Khan from the post of Chairman of the Delhi Minorites Commission alleging that he misused his powers and position to influence others and acted as an agent of Aam Aadmi Party. A division bench comprising of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh issued notice to the Delhi Government, Delhi Minorites Commission and Zakir Khan accordingly.
The High Court directed the Centre to share in a sealed cover its office memorandum pertaining to the deportation of illegal migrants from Bangladesh. It was adjudicating upon a plea filed by three Bangladeshi nationals seeking to be repatriated to their country of origin after being allegedly abducted and brought to India. The order was passed after the Centre informed the Court that the memorandums enumerating the procedure for repatriation were confidential in nature.
Justice Rekha Palli took on record the counter affidavit filed by the State detailing the procedure required to be adopted by the petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners were directed to file a brief reply within a week. The matter is slated to be heard next on August 8.
A petition has been moved in the High Court seeking directions on the Centre to formulate a policy for protection of children from online gaming addition as well as constitution of a regulatory body to monitor gaming content, including both online and offline gaming. The plea moved by NGO Distress Management Collective through Advocates Robin Raju and Deepa Joseph makes Union of India through Ministry of Woman and Child Development and Ministry of Law and Justice as Respondents
A petition has been moved in the High Court by an advocate challenging the vires of Information Technology (Guidelines For Intermediaries And Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021. Moved by Advocate Uday Bedi, the plea challenges Rule 3 and 4 of the IT Rules for the reason that it provides sweeping powers to the Social Media Intermediaries to voluntarily remove access to information on the basis of complaints received by it from private individuals as it deems fit.
The High Court adjourned to August 3 the plea seeking directions on the Election Commission of India to stop using electronic voting machines (EVMs) and use ballot papers instead, in all forthcoming elections. A division bench comprising of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh adjourned the matter after Advocate CR Jaya Sukin, appearing as petitioner in person, was not audible to the Court due to some connectivity issues.
The High Court directed the Centre to share in a sealed cover its office memorandum pertaining to the deportation of illegal migrants from Bangladesh. The Court was adjudicating upon a plea filed by three Bangladeshi nationals seeking to be repatriated to their country of origin after being allegedly abducted and brought to India. The order was passed after the Centre informed the Court that the memorandums enumerating the procedure for repatriation were confidential in nature.
Justice Rekha Palli took on record the counter affidavit filed by the State detailing the procedure required to be adopted by the petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners were directed to file a brief reply within a week. The matter is slated to be heard next on August 8
The High Court found RTI activist Saket Gokhale's tweets against former Indian Assistant Secretary-General to the United Nations, Lakshmi Puri, calling her a "black money hoarder" etc with respect to a disproportionate assets allegation to be prima facie defamatory.
Justice C Hari Shankar ordered Gokhale to take down the tweets within 24 hours, failing which Twitter Inc has been directed to take down the tweets on the given URLs. Issuing summons in the main suit, the court has also restrained Gokhale from posting any further defamatory material against Puri and directed him to file his written submissions and denial affidavit, if any. The bench said Gokhale's right to seek modification etc of the order will be preserved.
Other developments:
- Delhi High Court Directs Centre To Immediately Notify Crowd Funding Platform For Treatment Of Rare Diseases
- Delhi High Court Seeks Response Of Centre, UIDAI On Plea Seeking Mechanism For Issuing New Aadhar Numbers To Existing Users
- Jaipur Golden Hospital Deaths: Delhi Court Grants Last Opportunity To Delhi Police For Filing ATR In Plea Against Hospital Administration
- Justice Sanjeev Narula Of Delhi High Court Recuses From Hearing Juhi Chawla's Plea For Waiver Of Rs. 20 Lakhs Cost In 5G Case
- Delhi High Court Dismisses Plea Seeking Reduction In Dosage Interval Of Covishield Vaccine To 8 Weeks
- Delhi High Court Issues Notice On New Zealand YouTuber Karl Rock's Wife's Plea Against Blacklisting Him From Entering India
Gauhati High Court
The High Court, Kohima Bench has sought the response of State Government as to whether the State Mental Health Authority has been constituted under the mandate of Mental Healthcare Act.
The development came after a division bench comprising of Justice Songkhupchung Serto and Justice S. HukatoSwu was dealing with a petition seeking directions on the State to constitute the Mental Health Authority as per the provisions of the Act so that further necessary steps can be taken for welfare of the mentally challenged people in the State.
2. Gauhati High Court Admits NIA's Appeal Against Discharge Of Assam MLA Akhil Gogoi In Chandmari Case
The High Court admitted National Investigating Agency's appeal against the order of the Special NIA Court discharging him of all the charges in the Chandmari case involving UAPA, sedition, and other offences under the Indian Penal Code. Admitting the appeal, the Bench of Justice N. Kotiswar Singh and Justice Soumitra Saikia directed that notice be issued to Akhil Gogoi, among others, within 3 weeks and has also called for the record from the Special Judge's Court, NIA, Assam, Guwahati.
Observing that the poor have been hit the hardest during the Covid-19 pandemic, the High Court, Kohima Bench directed the State Government to provide benefits and services to people entitled under the Food Security Act. The development came after a division bench comprising of Justice Songkhupchung Serto and Justice S. Hukato Swu was dealing with a PIL espousing the cause of lactating mothers and children deprived of the required nutrition due to economic conditions specially, during the pandemic period.
Also Read: COVID-19: Gauhati High Court Further Extends Interim Orders Till July 19
Gujarat High Court
The High Court granted bail to a lawyer who has been accused of drafting a fake rape complaint to honeytrap a businessman in a fake rape case and thereby extorting Rs 5 lakh from him. The Bench of Justice Gita Gopinath granted bail to one Bipin Upadhyay, an advocate practicing before the local courts in Ahmedabad, noting that what kind of professional advice was provided by him and whether his case would fall within the purview of professional ethics would be the matter which would be decided during the trial.
A division bench comprising of Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Vaibhavi D Nanavati observed that an election candidate dying after the polls but before declaration of result will not be able to fill the seat and thus, the only remedy in such a situation would be to have a bye-election within the stipulated time period.
It directed the State Election Commission to proceed with the bye election while dealing with a plea seeking setting aside of a Taluka Panchayat election result, declaring a deceased woman as the winning candidate. The plea instead sought to elect the candidate who had received second highest vote.
Jammu & Kashmir High Court
The High Court held that the act of an accused to take off his own and victim's trousers, in the absence of penetration, does not amount to 'attempt to rape' within the meaning of Section 376/511 of IPC. However, the Court has said that the act may amount to sexual assault under Section 7/8 of POCSO Act.
Justice Sanjeev Kumar granted bail to a man accused of offences under sec. 376 (punishment for rape), 354 (Assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty), 511 (Punishment for attempting to commit offences punishable with imprisonment for life or other imprisonment) of IPC and sec. 8 (Punishment for sexual assault) of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
Also Read: Jammu & Kashmir High Court Renamed As 'High Court Of Jammu And Kashmir And Ladakh'
The Court held that an Undertrial Prisoner does not have a right to dictate his choice of prison for lodgement during trial and as such, there is no question of providing him an opportunity of being heard in this regard.
Justice Sanjeev Kumar also held that since the permission of the Court is not mandatory before shifting the undertrial from one prison to another, in such a situation, the Court does not perform any judicial or quasi-judicial function, which may necessitate hearing of the undertrial before granting permission.
Jharkhand High Court
The High Court has held that in the absence of any allegation of deception, false promise, or inducement at the time of the transaction, merely the breach of undertaking to repay the loan in the manner claimed cannot be a basis for conviction under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. A bench of Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary, while setting aside the conviction of the accused, noted, "This Court also finds that the dispute between the petitioner and the informant was essentially in the realm of civil dispute and there being no evidence on record that the petitioner had the intention to cheat the informant right from the inception of the transaction of extending friendly loan/handing over mobile and golden ring to the petitioner, the conviction of the petitioner under Section 420 of Indian Penal Code cannot be sustained in the eyes of law."
2. Jagannath Rath Yatra At Ranchi- "Take Your Own Decision": Jharkhand High Court To State Govt
Dealing with a PIL filed by Jagannath Puri Mandir Nyas Samittee seeking permission to perform/celebrate the ritual/festival of Lord Jagannath Rath Yatra in Ranchi on July 12 and 20, 2021, the High Court asked the State Government to "take its own decision" keeping in mind Supreme Court's directions.
The Bench of Chief Justice Dr. Ravi Ranjan and Justice S. N. Prasad ordered thus: "(the Court is) disposing of the instant writ petition by directing the State to take its own decision with regard to the grievance of the petitioner well before the Rath Yatra Puja. However, while taking such a decision, directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in this regard should be followed."
Karnataka High Court
1. 'Decision Taken In Students' Interest' : Karnataka High Court Refuses To Cancel SSLC Exams
The High Court has refused to interfere with the decision of the State Government to hold SSLC exams in physical form for students of Class X from July 19. A division bench comprising Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Hanchate Sanjeev Kumar observed that the holding of exam was "in the interest of students" and that the state has taken adequate precautionary measures against COVID-19 pandemic.
It dismissed a PIL filed seeking cancellation of exam as lacking in merit. The bench observed that merely because II PUC exam was cancelled, it cannot be argued that SSLC exams should also be cancelled.
The High Court, Dharwad Bench, recently directed the Gulbarga Electricity Supply Company Limited to reconsider its decision to recover unpaid electricity dues of the entire premises from an auction purchaser who had bought only a part of the premise.
A division bench of Justices Krishna Dixit and Pradeep Singh Yerur while partly allowing the appeal filed by OPG Power Generation Private Limited said, "After all the apportionment of liability has a kinship with the doctrine of proportionality since the non-apportionment in a given circumstance may be true to be unjust & unfair to a perspective consumer who is made to shoulder the entire liability for arrears; no contra-indicative provision in the Supply Conditions is brought to our notice."
The High Court on July 9 directed the state government to place on record the assessment made on Covid-19 vaccine requirement for administering second doses in the State, during the months of July and August. Amicus curiae Vikram Huilgol raised a question whether the doses available in July 2021 to the state government from the Central government will be sufficient to meet the requirement of second doses which are due in July.
The High Court directed the State government to ensure that the State Revenue Department submits a proposal to the Finance department under the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, for providing video conferencing facilities to quasi-judicial authorities in the state.
A division bench of Chief Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Suraj Govindaraj said "We direct the state government to ensure that the Revenue department submits a proposal to the Finance department for providing Video Conference hearing facilities to quasi judicial authorities under the said act of 1964. If such a proposal is submitted the same shall take an appropriate decision within one month from the date of submission of the proposal. Moreover, by the next date of hearing the state government must identify quasi judicial authorities which are discharging important functions concerning the common man."
The State Government on informed the High Court that it has now decided to compensate families of those farmers who committed suicide for failure to repay loans taken from private money lenders who are licensed. The state government placed on record of the court its order dated July 8 by which it stated that "If a farmer has taken loan from licensed money lender and if he commits suicide due to he not able to repay the loan, compensation will be granted on par with those farmers who have committed suicide and taken loans from banks."
The High Court has set aside a circular issued by the Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Ltd by which it denied appointment on compassionate grounds to the second wife and her children of a deceased employee as the marriage has taken place during the subsistence of the first marriage.
A division bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Hanchate Sanjeevkumar said "We set aside the Orders of the learned Single Judge in the Writ Petition as well as the Review Petition. We quash the communication dated 11.03.2015 addressed to the fourth respondent by the third respondent (Annexure-B). We also quash the Circular dated 23.09.2011 to the extent in clause (2)."
Observing that "economic backwardness or poverty should not become a reason for lack of continuity in education, so far as the state of Karnataka is concerned," the High Court directed the state government to by July 29 place on record an action plan with regard to bridging the technological divide and making available technology to students who are unable to afford it.
A division bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Hanchate Sanjeevkumar orally said "We are not sure when the pandemic is going to come to an end....two years or three years... if students don't go to school there is every possibility of the students losing interest in education. Very few will pick up. This is what we are apprehensive about, they cannot be outside the umbrella of the education system."
Kerala High Court
The Court directed the State to consider the possibility of Kerala Medical Services Corporation Ltd supplying necessary materials to private laboratories to conduct RTPCR tests at reasonable rates. It passed the interim order in a plea challenging the government order dated 30th April 2021 revising the cost of RTPCR tests in the State.
Justice TR Ravi after considering the matter also directed the petitioners to submit a list of the materials that they would require for conducting the RTPCR test to the Kerala Medical Services Corporation Ltd. along with the required quantity. The matter has been listed after two weeks.
The Court extended the term of the present judicial members in the Kerala Administrative Tribunal, permitting them to continue to hold their offices subject to the upper ceiling age of 65 years, to avoid the functioning of the Tribunal coming to a standstill. "We cannot remain oblivious to the plight of the litigants," a Division Bench of Justice A Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Kauser Edappagath observed while passing this interim order.
3. I'm a Woman, A Nun, Fighting For Justice': Sister Lucy Argues Her Case Before Kerala High Court
In a historic turn of events, Sister Lucy Kalappura appeared before the Court to argue her own case challenging her eviction from the convent. This is reportedly the first instance of a nun to appear before a court to fight her case in Indian history.
"I am a woman, a nun fighting for justice. It is important for my nunship that I continue to stay at this convent. I have been a nun for the past 39 years; do not throw me into the streets. I have nowhere else to go," the nun pleaded. Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan reserved orders in the matter while emphasising that police protection can only be granted to her if she vacates from the convent.
Also Read: Forced Deduction From Pension To CM's Relief Fund Not Permissible: Kerala High Court
The High Court asked the State to file a statement while hearing the petition seeking immediate withdrawal of parole granted to the convicts in the Sister Abhaya murder case. The Division Bench of Justices K. Vinod Chandran and Ziyad Rahman A.A while issuing notice, sought the response of the concerned authorities in the matter. During the hearing, it was also pointed out by the State that all persons belonging to the age bracket of the convicts were released on parole.
5. Gold Smuggling Through Diplomatic Channel An Act Of Terrorism: NIA Argues Before Kerala High Court
The National Investigation Agency submitted to the Court that Swapna Suresh and others committed an act of terrorism by smuggling 167 kg of gold into India from UAE since they were aware that by doing so, they could potentially threaten the security and economic stability of the country.
A Division Bench comprising Justice K Vinod Chandran and Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. adjourned the matter to 29th July with the other connected matters for further consideration. The Court is awaiting the Supreme Court's decision in NIA's appeal to decide the matter accordingly.
The Lakshadweep Administration filed a counter affidavit before the Court in a plea primarily seeking that the UT's draft regulations be published in vernacular languages.
The Senior Standing Counsel S. Manu on behalf of the Administration submitted that the said writ petition is not maintainable and hence liable to be rejected, citing several reasons for the same. It has also been contended that English is taught in all schools on the islands and such, the petition has no merits.
Nutrition needs of the children can easily be satisfied with the altered menu,' the Lakshadweep Administration submitted before the Court in response to a plea challenging, among other things, removal of non-vegetarian food items from mid-day meal food menu for school children.
Earlier, a Division Bench comprising of Chief Justice S Manikumar and Justice Shaji P Chaly had stayed the impugned regulation, observing that the men u for the mid-day meal has been followed for several years. The development came on a PIL filed by Advocate Ajmal Ahmed R.
8. Kerala High Court Extends Interim Orders Yet Again Till 26th July Amid Ongoing Pandemic
A full bench of the Court further extended the life of interim orders up to 26th July 2021. Chief Justice S Manikumar, Justice C C.T Ravikumar, and Justice Shaji P Chaly considered that it was pertinent to extend these orders amidst the continuing lockdown restrictions in the State.
Advocate General Gopalakrishna Kurup produced before the Court government orders dated 29th June and 6th July respectively to submit that the State had issued additional guidelines and had re-categorized local self-government institutions upon examining the average weekly test positivity rates in the State.
9. Kodakara Money Heist- Investigation Still Underway: Kerala High Court Denies Bail To Ten Accused
The Court refused to grant bail to the ten accused in the Kodakara money heist case on the ground that several aspects were yet to be resolved in the matter. Justice K Haripal while delivering the order also suspected it to be a premeditated act on various grounds.
Upon perusing the documents on record and the arguments from both sides, the Court observed that it was not convinced to release the petitioners on bail at this stage since several aspects of the crime were yet to be unraveled.
The Court while hearing a plea by the parent of one of the parties, allowed the registration of marriage of a couple residing abroad through video conferencing, without requiring a power of attorney.
Justice N Nagaresh through this ruling has thereby enhanced the scope of online registration of marriage, particularly for couples who left India without executing a power of attorney and were restrained from registering their marriages through video conferencing.
The Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) has opposed the petition filed by former Secretary to Kerala PWD, TO Sooraj, seeking to quash the FIR registered against him in the Palarivattom Flyover Scam case. The agency asserted that it has obtained the requisite prior approval under Prevention of Corruption Act, for investigating accused officers. The Single Bench of Justice Narayana Pisharadi reserved orders in the matter after an elaborate hearing.
12. Board Exams : Kerala High Court Seeks State Response On Challenge To Scrapping Of Grace Marks
The Court sought the State's response regarding its decision to do away with the policy of awarding grace marks to students in Grade 10th and 12th in the State board examinations for the academic year 2020-2021.
The government justified its move citing that schools had remained closed during 2020 -2021 owing to the pandemic and hence extra-curricular activities were not conducted during the said academic year. A division bench comprising Chief Justice S Manikumar and Justice Shaji P Chaly after hearing the parties directed the State to file its statement before July 22nd in the matter.
A plea has been filed before the Court challenging a notification issued by the Travancore Devaswom Board calling for applications for the post of Melshanti at the Sabarimala Dharmasastha Temple on the ground that it only invited individuals belonging to Malayala Brahmin community to apply for the post.
It was contended that this condition for qualification was against the provisions of the Constitution of India, the law of the land, and the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in various instances. He submitted that the impugned notification was therefore unconstitutional and liable to be set aside.
The Court sought the State's response regarding its opinion on reopening retail outlets including textile stores on all days amid the ongoing pandemic. It also expressed its dissatisfaction with the crowd control measures adopted by the State during the proceedings.
Justice T.R Ravi issued the above directive while hearing a plea filed by the Kerala Textiles and Garments Dealers Welfare praying for the State to permit dealers to open their stores every day as opposed to the current restriction of operating only on allotted days of Monday, Wednesday and Friday.
The Court observed that an order to extend time for investigation under the NDPS Act should only be passed after properly alerting the accused in the matter. Justice K Haripal also held that the Public Prosecutor being an independent statutory authority was expected to independently apply his mind to the request of the investigating agency before submitting a report to the Court.
Other Developments:
- School Cannot Be Permitted To Be Shylock': Kerala High Court Issues Notice To School On Plea Against Denial Of Access To Online Classes Due To Non-Payment Of Fee
- Mere Erroneous Exercise Of Judicial Power Sans Extraneous Considerations Not Criminal Misconduct: Kerala HC Grants Relief To Ex-Asst. Tax Commissioner
- Banks Should Not Deny Educational Loan Citing Liabilities Of Student's Parents : Kerala High Court
- Consider Relocating Liquor Outlets Away From Main Roads: Kerala High Court Suggests To State
- KSEB Plan To Procure Lighter Workload Poles Against Safety & Public Interest : Kerala High Court
- Dowry-Matrimonial Homes Become Most Dangerous Place To Live For Women: Kerala High Court
Madhya Pradesh High Court
The Court has upheld the detention of a man, accused of black marketing of Remedesivir injections amid Covid-19 pandemic, under the National Security Act, 1980. A Division Bench of Justices Sujoy Paul and Anil Verma held that Black-marketing of Remedesivir injection has direct impact on "public order", and the Petitioner-accused if released, could indulge into same activity because there is still a scarcity of Remedesivir.
Condemning the action of nurses to go on strike at a time when the country has still not been able to come out of the ill effects of the second wave of the ill effects of the second wave of COVID-19, the Court has declared the strike of nurses in the State as illegal.
It was argued that approximately 50000 Nurses of the State are on strike, which is causing huge inconvenience to the people of the State. The Bench of Chief Justice Mohammad Rafiq and Justice Vijay Kumar Shukla directed the Nursing Association to immediately call off their strike and resume their duties.
The Court has granted protection to a couple receiving threat from their parents after observing that persons, being major, voluntarily marrying each other should not be harassed by anyone merely because they have objection to such a marriage.
A single judge bench comprising of Justice Vivek Rusia observed thus: "If the petitioners are major and entered into the marriage voluntarily, then they should not be harassed by any one, just because they have objection with their marriage."
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has denied bail to a man accused of abetment to suicide of a minor girl after observing that he instilled a feeling of helplessness within the girl by constant harassment and made her movement difficult, thereby leading her to commit suicide. Justice Shailendra Shukla observed that prima-facie, the elements of abetment of suicide are found to be existing in this case.
Madras High Court
The Court observed that an accused person who is eventually acquitted of all charges is entitled to have his name redacted from all Court orders in relation to the offence he was accused of in order to uphold his fundamental right to privacy.
Justice N Anand Venkatesh made the observation while adjudicating upon a plea wherein a man earlier accused of offences under Sections 417 and 376 of IPC and subsequently acquitted of all charges moved the High Court to redact his name from its judgment.
The Madras High Court has dismissed a petition filed by Tamil Actor Vijay in 2012, seeking forbearance against the Tamil Nadu Government from demanding entry tax on his imported Rolls Royce Ghost Motor car. Justice SM Subramaniam also imposed costs of Rs. 1,00,000 on the actor, saying that filing a a writ petition for avoiding tax can never be appreciated.
The Court admonished the Tamil Nadu government for filing an anomalous status report pertaining to the reliefs granted to differently abled persons during the Covid-19 pandemic.
Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice Senthikumar Ramamoorthy observed: "The State has filed a further status report and several documents, but it is still not clear as to whether the entire quantum of amount earmarked for distribution as aid to persons with disabilities has been reached to the appropriate citizens."
Overturning a 2019 circular issued by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue (Tax Unit), the Court has held that the Goods and Services Tax (GST) applies not on the full amount but to monthly maintenance amount exceeding ₹7,500 only. It noted that any interpretation to the contrary would disentitle the Resident Welfare Association to exemption, contrary to the express language used in the concerned entry.
The Court directed the Union Government to file a counter-affidavit on pleas challenging the constitutional validity of the Information Technology (Guidelines For Intermediaries And Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, notified by the Centre on February 25. A division bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy directed that counter-affidavit be filed by the Union Government within 2 weeks.
A 3-judge bench comprising Justices P N Prakashh, V Sivagnam, RN Manjula answered the reference made to it as follows: "An order passed by a Court of Session dismissing a bail application in a case involving offence(s) under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act,1967 must be challenged only by way of an appeal under Section 21 of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008. Consequently, such an appeal would lie only before a Division Bench vide Section 21(2) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008."
Manipur High Court
The Court has ruled that denying livelihood by linking employment of people to their getting vaccinated is an illegal act of the State and that such a measure would trample upon the freedom of the individual to get vaccinated or choose not to do so.
The Bench of Chief Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice Kh. Nobin Singh ruled thus: "Restraining people who are yet to get vaccinated from opening institutions, organizations, factories, shops, etc., or denying them their livelihood by linking their employment, be it NREGA job cardholders or workers in Government or private projects, to their getting vaccinated would be illegal on the part of the State."
The Court has directed the State government to specify as to how it proposes to augment the vaccination drive undertaken by it, in the light of the clear reluctance on the part of a lot of people to avail the benefit of such vaccination. Chief Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice Kh. Nobin Singh also asked the State to ascertain the reason behind the COVID Vaccine hesitancy among the people.
The Court upheld the decision of the Manipur Legislative Assembly Speaker to accept the resignation of 3 Bharatiya Janata Party MLAs without holding an enquiry and held that the resignation tendered by the petitioners were genuine and voluntary.
The Bench of Justice Lanusungkum Jamir and Justice Ananthem Bimol Singh also observed that if the resignation is genuine and voluntary (as per the decision of the Speaker), there is nothing wrong with accepting such resignation by the Speaker promptly.
Orissa High Court
The Orissa High Court last week sought response from the State government in a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking urgent directions to ensure the e availability of RT-PCR (Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction) testing facilities in rural areas of the State.
Taking cognisance of the aforementioned issue, a Bench comprising Chief Justice S Muralidhar and Justice Savitri Ratho directed the State to file a report addressing the measures undertaken before the next date of hearing.
The High Court directed the Governor of Odisha to expeditiously dispose of a plea seeking the disqualification of several Members of the Legislative Assembly (MLAs) of Odisha by November 8.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice S Muralidhar and Justice SK Panigrahi was adjudicating upon a plea wherein it was contended that a post-election petition dated May 28, 2019 filed before the Governor seeking the disqualification of the concerned MLAs had not yet been disposed of in accordance with law.
Punjab and Haryana High Court
The Court granted bail to an accused booked under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act while noting that though allegations against him are series, however, the same are not established in the charge sheet.
Justice Harinder Singh Sidhu opined: "Beyond merely asserting that the petitioner and the other accused are involved in terrorist activities, the State has not pointed out any material collected during the investigation which would connect the petitioner with the accusations and to indicate that the allegations against the petitioner regarding the offences under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, are prima facie true."
The Court expressed shock while adjudicating upon a case wherein a Sessions Court had rejected the bail plea moved by the petitioner who was unaware that he had already been granted bail by the concerned Magistrate. The petitioner had sought regular bail before the Sessions Judge. However, when the Sessions Court declined to grant him bail, the instant petition was filed before the High Court. Consequently, the petitioner sought liberty to withdraw the bail plea filed before the High Court on the ground that he had no knowledge that he had already been granted bail by the Chief Judicial Magistrate.
The High Court convened at midnight to provide urgent relief to the petitioners including two minors who were allegedly held hostage by an armed mob said to be consisting of farmers.
Justice Suvir Sehgal took immediate cognizance of the grievances raised and accordingly issued directions to ensure that the detained petitioners are safely allowed to exit from the custody of the armed mob.
Rajasthan High Court
The Jodhpur Bench has directed Child Rights Department of the State Government to ensure that a training programme is conducted for Principal Magistrates posted in Juvenile Justice Boards in order to sensitize them with the mandate of Juvenile Justice Act, 2015.
A division bench comprising Justice Manoj Kumar Garg and Justice Sandeep Mehta also directed Mr. Govind Beniwal, a child rights activist, to meet the Secretary, Child Rights Department in order to chalk out an action plan for effective monitoring of the functioning of Child Welfare Committees.
2. Drug Menace: Rajasthan High Court Issues Notice To NCB, Social Justice Dept In Suo Moto Case
The Court has issued notice to the Central Bureau of Narcotics, the Narcotics Control Bureau, the Controller (Drugs and Cosmetics Act) and Social Justice and Empowerment Department of the State in its suo moto case registered last year on the issue of illegal drug trade flourishing in the State.
A division bench comprising Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Vijay Bishnoi also appointed Advocate Harshad Bhadu as amicus curiae in the matter while posting it for further hearing on July 30.
3. Rajasthan High Court Orders Suspension Of Cop Who Allegedly Separated An Inter-Caste Married Couple
The Court ordered disciplinary action against the Constable and called for his provisional suspension, who has been accused of separating an inter caste couple and threatening the man who filed a habeas corpus petition seeking production of his wife.
The Court also took serious exception to the conduct of the Police Constable Chandrapal Singh as though he claimed to be on court duty in connection with the instant habeas corpus petition, he was not in uniform.
Sikkim High Court
1. Protect Inmates & Staff In All Care Facilities From COVID-19: Sikkim High Court To State
A Division Bench comprising Justices Meenakshi Madan Rai and Bhaskar Raj Pradhan expressed concern over spread of Covid-19 in various 'Care facilities' and has directed the State to take immediate steps for protection of inmates and staff thereof. While hearing its suo moto PIL for COVID-19 management, it took cognizance of the situation based on a news piece reporting non-adherence to social distancing at these facilities, allegedly due to practical reasons.
Telangana High Court
Children born out of second marriage cannot be treated as illegitimate children, the Telangana High Court observed while considering plea of a man whose application for compassionate appointment was rejected. In this case, Arpula 's application seeking compassionate appointment was rejected on the ground that he is an illegitimate child and he was born out of second marriage and his father was not obtained prior permission from the 1st wife for getting married his mother.
Observing that sexual violence against women is an unlawful intrusion into her right to privacy, the Telangana High Court has upheld the detention order passed against a 22 year old accused of stalking women, voyeurism and allegedly inducing them to do nude video chats.
Noting that to show mercy in such heinous crimes would be a travesty of justice, a division bench comprising of Justice A Rajasheker Reddy and Justice Shameem Akther observed thus: "Sexual violence against women, apart from being a dehumanizing act, is an unlawful intrusion into the right to privacy and sanctity of a female. It is a serious blow to her supreme honour and offends her self-esteem and dignity. It degrades and humiliates the victim and leaves behind a traumatic experience."
Uttarakhand High Court
The Court denied bail to a man who has been booked for abetting the suicide of his wife as he would allegedly pressurize his wife to make nude video calls and to have sex chat with different persons.
Justice Ravindra Maithani perused a recorded conversation which allegedly took place between the deceased/wife and the applicant/husband revealing a "horrible story" and thus, remarked: "Is it not a case wherein the deceased felt totally frustrated and found it difficult to continue existence? She ended her life."
