High Courts Weekly Roundup [October 11, 2021 To October 17, 2021]

Allahabad High Court

1. Advocates Requiring Firearm Licence For Safety A Dangerous Practice, Not In Noble Profession's Interest: Allahabad High Court [Ram Milan v. State of U.P. and Others]

While dealing with a lawyer's plea challenging the firearm licence authority's decision to reject his application, the Court observed that a general trend to have a firearm licence by an Advocate without any good reason is not appreciable and it is not in the interest of the noble profession of Advocate.

The Bench of Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery further opined that if an Advocate requires a firearm licence for his personal and professional safety, it would be a very dangerous practice.

2. Passing Of Adverse Orders No Basis To Infer Personal Bias Of A Judge: Allahabad High Court Dismisses A Transfer Plea [Neha Bhardawaj v. Pankaj Bhardwaj]

The Court observed that adverse orders are no basis to infer the personal bias of a Judge. The Court further noted that if this ground were to be permitted for allowing a transfer plea, the wheels of justice would come to a standstill.

The Bench of Justice J. J. Munir observed thus while dismissing a plea seeking transfer of a Hindu Marriage Petition from the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Firozabad to some other court.

3. Paying ₹450 Per Month Is 'Forced Labour' & Violation Of Article 23: Allahabad HC Directs UP Govt To Pay Minimum Wages To A-IV Class Employee [Tufail Ahmad Ansari v. State Of U P And 2 Others]

The Court pulled up the Uttar Pradesh government for paying Rs. 450 per month as wages to a Class-IV post since his initial engagement in 2001, which is less than the minimum wages as prescribed in the State.

The Bench of Justice Pankaj Bhatia observed that it was beyond comprehension as to how the state government could exploit a Class-IV employee by continuing to pay him Rs 450 per month for the last 20 years.

4. "Inaction Being Defended By Lame Excuses": Allahabad HC 'Dissatisfied' With UP Govt On 'Serious' Issues Related To Courts Functioning In UP [In Re v. Zila Adhivakta Sangh Allahabad]

In a strongly worded order, the Court expressed its dissatisfaction over the manner in which the officers of the State are progressing on the serious issues pertaining to the functioning of the Courts in the State of U.P.

A Seven-judge bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari, Justice Pritinker Diwaker, Justice Naheed Ara Moonis, Justice Manoj Misra, Justice Sunita Agarwal, Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani, and Justice Manoj Kumar Gupta was hearing a suo moto case pertaining to the functioning of Courts in Uttar Pradesh.

5. Allahabad HC Upholds NSA Detention Order Passed Against Man Accused Of Murdering Hindu Samaj Party's Kamlesh Tiwari [Mohseen Saleem Sheikh v. U.O.I. Thru Secretary,Min. Of Home Affairs,New Delhi & Ors.]

The Court upheld the detention order passed under the National Security Act against one Mohseen Saleem Sheikh, who has been accused of conspiring in the 'brutal murder' of the President of the Hindu Samaj Party, Kamlesh Tiwari.

Even though the period of detention is already over, the Bench of Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Saroj Yadav found justification in the detention order passed against Detenue/petitioner Mohseen Saleem Sheikh, and therefore, upheld the detention order

Bombay High Court

1. Corruption FIR Against Anil Deshmukh: Maharashtra Govt. Moves Bombay High Court Challenging CBI Summons To Chief Secretary And DGP

The Maharashtra government has approached the High Court challenging summons issued by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to state Chief Secretary Sitaram Kunte and Director General of Police (DGP) Sanjay Pandey in connection with the corruption FIR against former State Home Minister Anil Deshmukh.

The CBI recently summoned Kunte and Pandey for the third time after the Mumbai Police asked CBI director Subodh Jaiswal to appear before the BKC cyber police.

2. PIL To Remove 'Prime Minister' Name And Image From PM CARES To Be Heard On October 25 By Bombay High Court

A PIL in the Court seeks directions to Prime Minister Narendra Modi to remove the name and image of the 'Prime Minister' from the PM CARES fund's trust deed and official website.

The petition filed by the district president of the Indian National Congress party, Thane, further seeks removal of the State Emblem of India and the National Flag, calling it a violation of The Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950 and Rules, and The State Emblem of India (Prohibition of Improper use) Act, 2005 and Rules.

Calcutta High Court

1. Calcutta High Court Refuses Relief On Plea Alleging Disrespect Of Goddess Durga By Alleged Display Of Shoes In Puja Pandal [Santanu Singha @ Santanu Sinha v. State of West Bengal & Ors.]

The Court refused to grant any relief on a plea filed against the alleged display of shoes in a Durga Puja Pandal in the Dum Dum area of Kolkata.

The Bench of Justice Kausik Chanda was hearing a plea filed by one Santanu Singha, who alleged that by displaying shoes in the Puja pandal (at Dum Dum Park, Bharat Chakra Club), utter disrespect had been shown to the Goddess Durga.

2. Calcutta High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail To BJP Leader Kailash Vijayvargiya, Others In Assault Case

The Court granted anticipatory bail to BJP Leader, Kailash Vijayvargiya, RSS member Jisnu Basu, and Pradeep Joshi in an assault case in view of the fact that the matter has reached the Supreme Court.

The Court observed that the petitioners/bail applicants should be granted bail till October 25 as the matter before the Supreme Court is set to be heard on October 20.

The Bench of Justice Harish Tandon and Justice Kausik Chanda was hearing the pleas of bail applicants including Vijayvargiya challenging the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore, directing the complaint filed by the victim woman to be treated as First Information Report.

Delhi High Court

1. Delhi High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Rakesh Asthana's Appointment As Delhi Police Commissioner [Sadre Alam v. Union of India]

The Court dismissed a petition which challenged the appointment of IPS officer Rakesh Asthana as the Commissioner of Delhi Police.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh dismissed the petition filed by one Sadre Alam. The NGO 'Centre for Public Interest Litigation' had intervened in the petition through Advocate Prashant Bhushan challenging Asthana's appointment.

2. SC Directions In Prakash Singh Case For DGP Appointment Not Applicable To Union Territories: Delhi High Court [Sadre Alam v. Union of India]

The Court has held the directions issued by the Supreme Court in the case of Prakash Singh & Others v. Union of India for appointment of Police Chiefs by the Union Public Service Commission are applicable only to the States.

"The judgement and the directions therein have no application for appointment of Commissioners/Police Heads of Union Territories falling under the AGMUT cadre," the Division Bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh ruled.

3. Plea In Delhi High Court Seeks Change In Nomenclature Of Nursing Personnel Working In Private Hospitals At Par With Govt Hospitals [Indian Professional Nurses Association v. Union of India and Ors.]

A petition has been moved in the Court seeking change in the nomenclature of Nursing Personnel working in private hospitals at par with the Government Hospitals in the national capital.

Moved by Indian Professional Nurses Association, an NGO, through Advocate Jose Abraham, the plea states that the change in nomenclature is an honor that is being bestowed on the nurses in recognition for their services to society.

Also Read: Delhi High Court Allows Early Hearing Of Swami Chakrapani's Plea For Restoration Of Z Security

4. Delhi HC Directs National Institute of Electronics & IT To Ensure Payment Of Statutory Dues, Salaries Of NDMC's Data Entry Operators Without Delay [Pramod Pandey & Anr. v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation & Ors]

The Court has directed the National Institute of Electronics & Information Technology to ensure payment of statutory dues and salaries of data entry operators working with the North Delhi Municipal Corporation on or before 20th October 2021.

Justice Pratibha M Singh also clarified that stringent action would be liable to be taken against the contractor i.e. NIELlT in case of failure of the said direction.

5. Delhi High Court Denies Bail To Four Who Allegedly Defiled Statue Of BR Ambedkar On Independence Day, Hurled Caste Based Abuses & Injured Others [Deepak v. State of NCT of Delhi]

The Court has recently denied bail to four people, including three men and one woman, who had allegedly defiled the statue of BR Ambedkar on the occasion of Independence Day, hurled caste-based abuses and caused injuries to eight people.

Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri was dealing with bail pleas in relation to an FIR registered under sec. 3(I)(II)(III) and 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act and sec. 323, 341, 354, 509, 147, 148 and 34 of IPC.

6. High Court Issues 'Stern Warning' To Delhi Police, NDMC, Over Illegal Hawking In Connaught Place Area [New Delhi Traders Association v. New Delhi Municipal Corporation & Ors]

The Court has observed that the failure of municipal authority, NDMC in the present matter, in discharging their duties severely and adversely impact the rights of citizens including the Right to life, which also includes a right to a clean and healthy environment.

Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Jasmeet Singh expressed their displeasure over the illegal hawking, squatting or vending activities in No Hawking and No Vending areas in Connaught Place.

7. Delhi HC Issues Notice On Plea Seeking Declaration That National Commission For Scheduled Castes Has No Power To Interfere In Sub Judice Matters [Government of NCT of Delhi v national Commission for Scheduled Castes & Anr]

The Court has issued notice on a plea seeking a declaration that the National Commission for Scheduled Castes has no power to interfere in sub judice matters in terms of Rule 7.4.1(e) of the Rules of Procedure of the Commission.

Justice Rekha Palli issued notice on the plea and granted four weeks' time to the Commission for filing a status report in the matter.

Also Read: Man Poses As Army General In Matrimonial Site; Delhi High Court Refuses Anticipatory Bail

8. "Do Social Service To Atone For Sins": Delhi High Court Directs Man Accused Of Stalking, Threatening Woman To Throw Acid On Her While Quashing FIR [Yash Kumar Chauhan v State of NCT of Delhi]

While quashing an FIR against a man accused of stalking and threatening a woman to throw acid on her face, the Court has directed him to do social service for one month to atone for his sins.

Justice Subramonium Prasad directed the man to do one month community service at Lok Nayak Jai Prakash Narayan Hospital and also imposed a cost of Rs. 35,000 on him to be deposited in the Army Welfare Fund Battle Casualties.

9. Indian Professional Nurses Association Moves Delhi High Court Seeking Voting Rights To All Nurses Registered With Delhi Nursing Council [Indian Professional Nurses Association (IPNA) v. Delhi Nursing Council & Anr.]

A Public Interest Litigation has been moved in the Court seeking voting rights to all nurses registered with Delhi Nursing Council for the purpose of electing its office bearers and executive committee.

Moved by Indian Professional Nurses Association, an NGO, through Advocates Robin Raju and Joel Joseph, the plea also seeks further direction on Delhi Nursing Council to publish the annual audited accounts on its website.

10. Delhi Has Unique Law & Order Requirements; Experienced Officer Required As Police Commissioner: Delhi HC On Rakesh Asthana's Appointment [Sadre Alam v. Union of India]

The Court has expressed concurrence with the stand taken by the Central Government that appointment of IPS Officer Rakesh Asthana as the Delhi Police Commissioner was done with a strategic view to addressing the "extremely challenging" law and order situation therein, which often has international implications by virtue of it being the national capital.

11. 'Courts Are Soft Targets, Security Issue Can Get Worse With Overcrowding': Delhi Police Tells High Court [Court on its own motion v. Commissioner of Police & Ors.]

In the suo moto case concerning safety and security at various court complexes in the national capital, the Delhi Police suggested that entry of visitors to the Courts should be restricted in general.

"I will say this very cautiously. Security issue can get worse with overcrowding. Courts are soft targets," said ASG Chetan Sharma, appearing on behalf of the Delhi Police. He urged that use of technology in enhancing security should be maximized.

Jammu and Kashmir High Court 

1. Reporting Of Allegations About Official Duties Of Public Figure Not Defamation: J&K&L HC Quashes Complaint Against Arnab Goswami, Aditya Raj Kaul [Aditya Raj Kaul and Ors. V. Naeem Akhter]

The High Court quashed a defamation complaint filed by the senior leader of Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Naeem Akhter, against the Editor-in-Chief of Republic TV, Arnab Goswami, and journalist Aditya Raj Kaul.

The Bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar stressed that the press has a bounden duty to bring to the notice of the viewers and readers the day-to-day events, particularly those relating to public figures and public servants concerning their actions/omissions affecting the public at large.

Karnataka High Court

1. Case Closed Via Lok Adalat Amounts To Decree/ Award; Courts Can't Recall The Said Order, Bar Under S. 362 CrPC Will Apply: Karnataka High Court [Shally M. Peter And M/S. Banyan Projects India Pvt. Ltd.]

The Court recently said that once a case is closed at a Lok Adalat, it amounts to a decree or award and the court or magistrate does not have the power to recall the said order.

Justice K. Natarajan said, "Once the case is closed, it amounts to decree or award in Lok Adalat. Therefore, once the amount has not been paid by the accused in terms of the compromise, then the petitioner is required to approach the same court for recovery of amount in accordance with law and it need not reopen the case, which was already closed by the Court and Magistrate does not have power to recall the said order in view of the bar as per the provisions of Section 362 of the Cr.P.C."

2. 'Favouritism By Karnataka Housing Board, Due Procedure Not Followed': High Court Cancels Land Allotment To Trust Headed By BJP MP's Wife [Adinarayanashetty And The Principal Secretary]

Observing that, "Favoritism has been done by Karnataka Housing Board (KHB) to respondent No.3, Murthy Charitable Trust, without following the prescribed procedure," the Court set aside the allotment of a plot of land to the trust, represented by its President Gayathri, who is the wife of BJP Member of Parliament, Umesh G Jadhav.

A division bench of then Acting Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum also imposed a cost of Rs 1 lakh on the authority (KHB) which is to be paid to the Karnataka Advocate Clerks Association within a period of thirty days.

3. Karnataka High Court Passes Interim Order To Exempt SJMC Doctors From Compulsory Rural Service [Dr Gali Samrat And State Of Karnataka]

The Court by way of interim relief has directed that the state government notification dated 04.10.2021 in regards to compulsory one-year rural service, shall not be operative as against 38 MBBS graduates of St John's Medical College.

Justice R Devdas while hearing a petition filed by Dr. Gali Samrat and others said, "Since the petitioners have made out a prima facie case for their exemption from the rural services, the petitioners are entitled for interim relief. Consequently, it is directed that the notification dated 04.10.2021 issued by the State Government shall not be operative as against the petitioners herein until further orders."

4. Examining The Accused And Recording Their Statement Under S.313 CrPC: Karnataka High Court Issues Directions For Trial Courts To Follow [Meenakshi v. State of Karnataka]

The Court recently issued guidelines to be followed by trial court judges while examining the accused and recording his statement under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).

Justice Sreenivas Harish Kumar said, "Section 313 of the Code embodies the fundamental principle of 'Audi Alteram Partem'. Since this is the stage where the accused gets an opportunity to explain inculpatory evidence against him, the questions must be framed in such a manner as he or she understands them."

Kerala High Court

1. Incorrect Date & Venue On COVID Vaccination Certificate: Kerala High Court Directs Centre, State To Rectify Error Within 3 Weeks [K P John v. Union of India]

The Court directed the Central government and the State to issue a corrected vaccination certificate within three weeks to the petitioner, thereby removing the discrepancy in date and venue printed on his vaccination certificate.

Justice P V Kunhikrishnan noting that the 73-year-old petitioner was planning to travel abroad to meet his children, remarked: "Admittedly, a mistake has been made. The petitioner should not suffer because of this. The corrected certificate should be issued within three weeks."

2. Victim Protection Scheme In The State Only Exists On Paper: Kerala High Court Voices Concern Amid Rising POCSO Cases [Bessie Paul v. Station House Officer]

The Court was alarmed by the increasing number of cases registered under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO) in the State and the absence of a procedure to protect children from these offences or threats from the perpetrators.

Justice Devan Ramachandran while hearing a plea raised by a victim and her mother seeking police protection in a POCSO matter citing that they were being threatened by the perpetrator, expressed his concern over the lack of a victim protection programme:

Also Read: Kerala High Court Once Again Calls For Effective Implementation Of Rape Victim Protection Guidelines In State

3. Sabarimala Virtual Queue: Kerala High Court Seeks Details Regarding Privacy Of Data Submitted By Devotees [Suo Motu v. Travancore Devaswom Board]

A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed before the Court questioning the legality of the 'Sabarimala Pilgrim Management System' ('SPMS') implemented by the Kerala Police, alleging that it restricts Darshan in Sabarimala to only those who avail the Virtual Queue Services.

The Virtual Queue, as per the website maintained by the Police Department, is "a limited subscription, first come first serve basis service" to provide access to the pilgrimage to a devotee.

4. Unauthorised Flag Posts In Public Spaces Erected By Political Bodies: Kerala High Court Seeks State Response [Mannam Sugar Mills Cooperative Ltd v. Deputy Superintendant of Police]

The Court slammed the practice of political entities setting up flag posts in public spaces without obtaining the requisite permission from the concerned authorities.

Justice Devan Ramachandran issued notice to the State and sought its response in the matter while remarking:

"The one question that crosses the mind of this court is how an entity is allowed to put up flag masts on public roads or road poramboke because this certainly would be a violation of the (Kerala) Land Conservancy Act. I am constrained to pose this question because such flag masts and installations are very ubiquitous all over the State and various entities of several hues and colours appear to be installing it as if they require no permission for doing so."

5. News Report Suggests Police Demanded Money To Release Two Girls To Their Parents: Kerala High Court Takes Suo Motu Cognizance

The Court took suo motu cognizance of a news report which accused the Assistant Sub Inspector of Police (ASI) of demanding money for the release of two girls from children's home, to their parents.

Justice Devan Ramachandran strongly condemned the incident and remarked:  "If the allegations are proved to be true, this is a serious matter. This is a dangerous game."

6. 'Petitioner Not Qualified, Fabricated Admit Card': JEE Responds To Plea Alleging Lack Of Arrangements At Exam Centre Before Kerala HC [Navaneeth P Krishna v. Union of India & Ors.]

The Chairman of the Joint Admission Board of JEE (Advanced) 2021 and other respondents have filed a statement before the Court in a plea where a candidate sought another attempt on the premise that no arrangements were made at his allotted test centre.

Justice P.B. Suresh Kumar had earlier admitted the plea, and the matter will be taken up again after the Court holidays.

Also Read: Plea Before Kerala High Court Challenges Anointing New Catholicos Without Inviting Patriarch

7.  Kerala High Court Reserves Judgment On Centre's Appeal Against Direction To Reduce Covshield Dose Interval [Secretary to Government of India Department of Health and Family Welfare v. Kitex Garments Ltd & Ors]

The Court reserved for orders the matter assailing the single judge decision allowing early administration of the second dose of COVISHIELD vaccine to the workers of two petitioner companies before completion of the prescribed 84 day-gap.

A Division Bench of Chief Justice S Manikumar and Justice Shaji P Chaly was hearing an appeal preferred by the Central government alleging that by allowing early administration of the vaccine, the Single Judge had interfered with the Vaccine policy of the Government.

8. Is GST Leviable On Services Provided By Association To Its Members? Kerala High Court Issues Notice On KHCAA's Plea [Kerala High Court Advocates' Association & Anr v. Assistant Commissioner, SGST Department & Ors.]

The Court has issued notice on a plea moved by the Kerala High Court Advocates' Association challenging the Goods and Services Tax (GST) levied on the goods and services provided by the Association to its own members.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas observed while admitting the plea: "I am satisfied that the petitioners have made out a prima facie case, which merits admission."

9. [S.197 CrPC] State Sanction Not Required To Prosecute Policemen For Their 'Illegal Acts': Kerala High Court [D. Rajagopal v. Ayyappan & Anr.]

The Court has ruled that sanction stipulated under Section 197 Code of Criminal Procedure is not necessary to prosecute police officers in cases of police brutality since such acts are not related in any manner to the discharge of their official duties.

Justice Mary Joseph remarked: "...the accused can only be taken to have exercised their authority for committing some illegal acts, under the guise of exercise of lawful discharge of their official duties and therefore are not liable to be afforded with the protection envisaged under Section 197. Sanction contemplated under the above provision is not intended to safeguard illegal acts."

10. Former PWD Minister Ebrahim Kunju Files Appeal Before Kerala High Court DB Against Court-Ordered ED Probe in Money Laundering Case [V.K Ebrahim Kunju v. P Girish Babu & Ors]

Former Minister V.K Ebrahim Kunju has moved the Court challenging the decision of a Single Judge directing the Enforcement Directorate to probe into the allegations that a cash deposit of Rs 10 crores was made during demonetisation into the current account of a newspaper daily called Chandrika, where he was the Chairman of the governing body.

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice S. Manikumar and Justice Shaji P Chaly admitted the appeal and granted leave on Tuesday.

11. Kerala High Court Orders Police Protection To Transport Contractor After NFSA Godown Workers Illegally Obstruct Ration Distribution [Reji Varghese v. Station House Officer & Ors]

The Court granted police protection to a transportation contractor and his employees in a plea where he alleged that certain NFSA godown workers illegally obstructed the distribution of ration articles in Cheriyanadu.

Justice Devan Ramachandran passed an interim order directing the Chengannur Station House Officer to provide protection to the petitioner amid labour disputes:

"I direct the 1st respondent to afford adequate and effective protection to the petitioner and his employees to conduct their activities, however, strictly in terms of the order."

Madhya Pradesh High Court

1. MP High Court Issues Show Cause Notice To Trial Court Judge For Disclosing Rape Victim's Name In Her Deposition [Mahesh Kushwaha Vs. State of MP & Anr.]

The Court issued a show-cause notice to a trial court judge for disclosing the name of a rape victim in the deposition underscoring that the same is inconsistent with Section 228A of the Indian Penal Code and is also in violation of Apex Court's direction in the case of Nipun Saxena vs. Union of India [(2019) 2 SCC 703].

The Court was hearing the second bail application of rape accused booked under Sections 376 (2)(cha), 376(3), 506 of IPC and Section 5 (n) / 6(a) and 11/12 of POCSO Act, when it noted that the trial court had named the rape victim in her deposition before the Court.

2. Madhya Pradesh High Court Directs State & Municipal Corporation To File Compliance Report on Road Safety Policy, 2015 [Abhishek Singh Parmar v. Gwalior Municipal Corporation Thr. & Ors.]

The Gwalior Bench has ordered the State and Gwalior Municipal Corporation [GMC] to submit a compliance report to the Madhya Pradesh State Road Safety Policy, 2015.

A Division Bench of Justice Sheel Nagu and Deepak Kumar Agarwal was hearing a petition alleging failure to maintaining and levelling the roads with a lack of adequately lighting of the public streets in important locations of Gwalior, leading to severe road safety concerns.

Madras High Court

Renovate & Construct Govt Care Camp For Wandering Mentally Ill Persons; Give Details Of Their Vaccination Status: Madras HC To Govt

The Court last week sought details on the vaccination drive being undertaken among the homeless mentally ill person and also asked the State Government to renovate, restore and construct the govt care camp/home so that the wandering mentally ill persons can be put up at such site.

Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice P. D. Audikesavalu were hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea filed by an NGO seeking directions to the State government to identify homeless mentally ill people and vaccinate them.

Punjab & Haryana High Court

1. Difficult For Doctors To Work If They Always Face The Threat Of Being Beaten Up/Harassed By Patients' Relatives: P&H High Court [Naresh Kumar and others v. State of Haryana and another]

The Court observed that if doctors face the threat of being beaten up or being harassed by the relatives of patients every single day, then it would be difficult for them to function.

Justice Vikas Bahl observed thus while dismissing a 482 CrPC plea for quashing of an FIR registered against Naresh Kumar and others (applicants before the Court) for allegedly creating turmoil and disturbance in the Hospital, beating up doctors and threatening to murder the Doctor.

2. Marriage Involving 20 Yr Old Boy- "Examine Matter, Priest's Role & Check Prohibition of Child Marriage Act's Violation": P&H HC Directs CP [Neha and another v. State of Punjab and others]

The Court directed the Commissioner of Police, Panchkula to examine the matter which involved a marriage of a 20-year-old boy, who had, along with her alleged wife (19-year-old), filed a protection plea.

The Bench of Justice Gurvinder Singh Gill noted that though the girl is of marriageable age being 19 years, the boy, who is aged 20 years, cannot be said to be of marriageable age being less than 21 years.

3. Casteist Remarks Case- Release Yuvraj Singh On Interim Bail If He Is Arrested On Joining Probe: Punjab & Haryana High Court [Yuvraj Singh vs. State of Haryana and another]

Noting that the Haryana Police is presently seeking only "formal arrest" of Cricketer Yuvraj Singh in an alleged casteist remark case, the High Court directed that in case he is arrested on joining the probe, he should be released on interim bail upon furnishing bail and surety bonds.

The Bench of Justice Amol Rattan Singh was hearing Singh's plea seeking quashing of the FIR registered against him for his alleged casteist remarks against another cricketer during an Instagram chat last year.

4. Couple Claims 'Saptapadi' Performance By Lighting Fire In A Utensil: P&H HC Imposes 25K Cost Noting 'No Valid Marriage' In Protection Plea [Aarti and another v. State of Haryana and others]

The Court imposed Rs. 25K cost on a couple while hearing their plea protection plea, wherein they had claimed that they were married as they had exchanged garlands and had performed "saptapadi" (Saat Phere) by lighting fire in a utensil in a hotel room.

Noting that there was no 'valid marriage' and that the petitioners had tried to mislead the Court, the Bench of Justice Gurvinder Singh Gill, however, directed the Commissioner of Police, Panchkula to look into the matter and their representation seeking protection.

Tripura High Court

Mob 'Brutally Lynched' 18-Yr-Old Only On Cattle-Lifting Suspicion Even Though He Carried No Cattle: Tripura HC Denies Anticipatory Bail [Sri Gagan Debbarma v. The State of Tripura]

The Court denied pre-arrest bail to a man who was allegedly a part of a mob that brutally murdered/lynched an 18-year-old boy, Saiful Islam on the suspicion that he was in the team of cattle lifters.

Stressing that a young boy of 18 years was brutally lynched by a mob only on the suspicion that he was a cattle lifter, even though no cattle were found in his possession, the Bench of Justice S. G. Chattopadhyay denied pre-arrest bail to the accused, one Gagan Debbarma.