Supreme Court Weekly Round Up

Plaint can either be rejected as a whole or not at all, remarked the Supreme Court while reiterating that it is not permissible to reject plaint qua any particular portion of a plaint including against some of the defendant(s) and continue the same against the others.

SC Declines To Apply 'Group Of Companies' Doctrine To Implead Foreign Company In Arbitration With Its Indian Affiliate [Reckitt Benckiser (India) Private Limited V. Reynders Label Printing India Private Limited and Anr.]

The Supreme Court refused to invoke the 'group of companies' doctrine to implead a foreign company in an application for appointment of arbitrator for a dispute arising out an agreement with its Indian affiliate.

No Prohibition Against Adoption In Christian Law Even If Couple Have Natural Born Child [Pharez John Abraham (Dead) vs. Arul JothiSivasubramaniam K]

The Supreme Court held that there is no prohibition against adoption in the Christian law.Unlike in the Hindu Law, there is no law prohibiting the Christian couple to adopt male or female child, although they may have natural born male or female child, the bench comprising Justice L. Nageswara Rao and Justice MR Shah observed.

PFI Leader's Plea Seeking Discharge In RSS Worker Murder Case Dismissed [AsimShariff V. National Investigation Agency]

The Supreme Court dismissed an appeal filed by a Popular Front of India leader accused in the murder of a RSS worker Rudresh in Karnataka. The bench comprising Justice AM Khanwilkar and Justice Ajay Rastogi reiterated that while examining the discharge application filed under Section 227 CrPC, it is expected from the trial Judge to exercise its judicial mind to determine as to whether a case for trial has been made out or not.

Consuming Liquor In A Private Vehicle In A Place Accessible To Public Is Punishable Under Bihar Excise Act [Satvinder Singh @ Satvinder Singh Saluja& Ors. V. The State Of Bihar]

The Supreme Court held that a private vehicle is not exempted from the definition of 'public place' under the Bihar Excise (Amendment) Act 2016. The ruling was given by a bench of Justices Ashok Bhuhsan and K M Joseph in the case Satvinder Singh v State of Bihar while dismissing an appeal filed against the refusal of the Patna High Court to exercise powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the charge-sheet filed against the appellants.

Judicial Review: Only Palpably Arbitrary Decisions Of Executive In Economic Matters Can Be Interfered With [Vasavi Engineering College Parents Association V. State Of Telangana And Others]

The Supreme Court, observed that while adjudging the validity of an executive decision in economic matters by exercising power of judicial review, it is not errors, but only palpably arbitrary decisions alone can be interfered with by the High Courts.

Principle Of 'Pay And Recover' Can Be Ordered If Driver Of Offending Vehicle Does Not Possess A Valid Driving License [Parminder Singh v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. & Ors.]

The Supreme Court reiterated that, if the driver of the offending vehicle does not possess a valid driving license, the principle of 'pay and recover' can be ordered to direct the insurance company to the pay the victim, and then recover the amount from the owner of the offending vehicle.

Courts Can Imply A Term In Contract Only If Literal Interpretation Fails To Give The Result Intended By Parties [M/S Adani Power (Mundra) Ltd. V. Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission And Ors.]

The Court should give effect to "plain, literal and grammatical" meaning of the clauses used in a contract, reiterated the Supreme Court while upholding Adani Power's termination of the Power Purchase Agreement with Gujarat UrjaVikas Ltd(GUVL).The bench of Justices Arun Mishra, B R Gavai and Surya Kant held that the Court can read a term into the agreement on the basis of 'business efficacy doctrine' only if it is not possible otherwise to give effect to the intention of the parties.

Land Owners Not Entitled To An Alternative Site Or Flat In All Cases Of Acquisition [State of Tamil Nadu vs. Dr. VasanthiVeerasekaran]

The Supreme Court observed that there is no rule that in all cases of acquisition of the land that the owner must be given an alternative site or flat. The contention of the state in appeal [State of Tamil Nadu vs. Dr. VasanthiVeerasekaran] was that the High Court order is in the nature of granting an extra-legal concession by way of allotment of an alternative site in lieu of acquired lands sans any such legal obligation on the State under the 1894 Act or any policy in force pertaining to the project of MRTS (Railways) to be implemented by the Ministry of Railway, Government of India.

Mitakshara Law - Property Inherited By A Male Will Remain As Coparcenary Property For Descendants Upto Three Degrees Below Him [Arshnoor Singh V. Harpal Kaur & Ors.]

The Supreme Court held that the rule under Mitakshara law that whenever a male ancestor inherits any property from any of his paternal ancestors upto three degrees above him, then his male legal heirs upto three degrees below him would get an equal right as coparceners in that property will apply in cases of succession which opened before Hindu Succession Act 1956.

Outer Limitation For Suit For Possession Based On Title Is Not Lost Merely Because Relief Of Declaration Is Also Sought [Sopanrao& Anr. V. Syed Mehmood& Ors.]

The Supreme Court held that merely because relief of declaration is also sought in a suit for possession, the outer limitation of 12 years is not lost. The three judge bench comprising Justice NV Ramana, Justice Deepak Gupta and Justice Indira Banerjee observed that the suit is not only for declaration but the plaintiffs also prayed for possession of the suit land.

An Accused on Bail Cannot Be Arrested on Addition Of New Offences Without Order of The Court Which Granted Bail [Pradeep Ram V. The State Of Jharkhand & Anr.]

The Supreme Court held that, in a case where an accused has already been granted bail, the investigating authority on addition of an offence or offences needs to obtain an order to arrest the accused from the Court which had granted the bail.

No Party Could Be Left Remediless: SC Upholds HC Order Reviewing Its Earlier Judgment Rendered Without Noticing Statutory Provision [Sunil Vasudeva v. Sundar Gupta.]

No party could be left remediless, said the Supreme Court while upholding a Calcutta High Court which reviewed its earlier judgment rendered without noticing a statutory provision.

Liberal View Is To Be Adopted In Matters Of Condonation Of Delay, SC Tells NCDRC [Hemlata Verma vs. ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Co. Ltd]

The Supreme Court reiterated that, in matter of condonation of delay, the Consumer Commission should take liberal view. The bench comprising Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre and Justice Indu Malhotra set aside an order of National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission which had refused to condone a delay of 207 days in filing the revision petition before it.

Member Of Air Force Has No Unqualified Right To Leave Service [Amit Kumar Roy V. Union Of India & Ors]

A person who has been enrolled as a member of the Air Force does not have an unqualified right to depart from service at his or her will during the term of engagement, the Supreme Court held.

A Candidate Once Availed Age Relaxation For Reserved Category Can't Later Migrate To General Category [NiravkumarDilipbhaiMakwana V. Gujarat Public Service Commission & Ors.]

The Supreme Court held that a candidate who has availed of an age relaxation in a selection process as a result of belonging to a reserved category, thereafter, cannot seek to be accommodated in/or migrated to the general category seat.

SC Restores Conviction And Sentence Of Accused In Former Gujarat Home Minister Haren Pandya Murder Case [Central Bureau Of Investigation & Anr. V. Mohd. Parvez Abdul Kayuum Etc.]

Supreme Court of India restored the conviction and sentence of accused in the murder case of former state Home Minister Haren Pandya in 2003.The Bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra was pronouncing the verdict on the appeals filed by CBI and the Gujarat government challenging the acquittal of 12 persons facing charges of murdering former state Home Minister Haren Pandya in 2003. The bench dismissed a fresh PIL filed by NGO 'Centre for Public Interest Litigation' (CPIL) which has sought court-monitored fresh investigation into the killing with Rs 50000 as Cost.

Lawyer Cannot Represent An Organization If He Is Part Of Its Executive Committee : SC In CPIL Plea In Haren Pandya Case [Central Bureau Of Investigation & Anr. V. Mohd. Parvez Abdul Kayuum Etc.]

While restoring the conviction and sentence of twelve accused in the Haren Pandya murder case, the Supreme Court dismissed the PIL filed by Centre for Public Interest Litigation(CPIL) demanding further probe in the case. Observing that the PIL lacked bona fides and was motivated by extraneous reasons, the bench of Justices Arun Mishra and Vineet Saran imposed a cost of Rs.50,000 on CPIL.

HC Cannot Reverse Acquittal Without Affording Opportunity Of Hearing To Accused Or By Appointing An Amicus Curiae [Christopher Raj vs. K Vijayakumar]

The Supreme Court observed, the High Court, in a criminal appeal, cannot reverse the acquittal without affording any opportunity of hearing to the accused or by appointing an amicus curiae to argue the matter on his behalf if he does not enter appearance. The bench comprising Justice R. Banumathi and Justice AS Bopanna found favour with the contention that, in the absence of the counsel for the accused, the High Court should not have decided the appeal on merits.

General Assam Rifles Court Can Try Offences Under Prevention Of Corruption Act Against Members Of Assam Rifles [Union Of India V. Ranjit Kumar Saha& Anr.]

The Supreme Court held that General Assam Rifles Court (GARC) has the jurisdiction to try offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act against the members of the Assam Rifles.The bench comprising Justice L. Nageswara Rao and Justice MR Shah set aside Gauhati High Court order which held otherwise. The High Court was of the view that an offence punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act is triable only by a special Judge in view of Section 4 of the PC Act.

Other Important Orders And Proceedings

• Issued notice to West Bengal Government on a contempt plea filed by brother of BJP YuvaMorchaConvenorPriyanka Sharma, who was arrested for sharing a meme of WB CM Mamata Banerjee, alleging despite SC's orders for her immediate release, she wasn't released by police immediately.
• The Bench headed by Justice S A Bobde said that it will begin hearing from July 16 the petitions chalenging the 10% quota for Economically Weaker Sections(EWS) introduced by 103rd Constitution Amendment passed by Parliament last January. The bench also agreed to hear the plea for interim stay of implementation of the EWS quota.
• Declined to intervene on a petition seeking a direction to the Central government for clear guidelines on the registration of FIRs for marital rape and to frame appropriate laws to qualify marital rape as a ground for divorce.
• Dismissed a PIL seeking a direction to the Centre to earmark and declare Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) and Gilgit as parliamentary seats. A bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi also imposed a fine of Rs 50,000 on former RAW official Ram Kumar Yadav for filing the petition and termed it "legally untenable".
• Deferred hearing on a string of PILs challenging the Ministry of Home Affairs' notification of December 20 last year authorizing ten Security and Intelligence agencies to intercept, monitor and decrypt "any information generated, transmitted, received or stored in any computer."
• Sought response from the Centre on a plea by Congress MP Jairam Ramesh challenging the amendments made to the money laundering law, PMLA, through money bills since 2015 on the ground that they violated the Constitution.
• State Government is under constitutional obligation to ensure clean environment to all its citizens, said the Supreme Court while approving (though it modified) the National Green Tribunal's directive to the State of Meghalaya to deposit Rs.100 crores with the Central Pollution Control Board.
• Refused to allow the plea of Bytedance Technology- the Indian operator and marketer of the TikTok app- to transfer the case pending against it in the Madras High Court to itself.
• Sought the response of the Centre and the UIDAI on the challenge to The Aadhaar and Other Laws (Amendment) Ordinance, 2019 and the Aadhaar (Pricing of Aadhaar Authentication Services) Regulations, 2019.
• Dismissed a PIL by Advocate M. L. Sharma seeking the cancellation of the recent Lok Sabha elections, alleging the use of electronic voting machines (EVMs) as unconstitutional.
• Turned down a public interest litigation seeking for a writ or order to revise the backward community list f Kerala and to increase the percentage of reservation of Muslim minority community and SC/ST in the public employment in Kerala accordingly. However, the Bench stated that they could approach the Kerala High Court.
• Dismissed a PIL challenging the "unbridled power to the State to prescribe 'Inner Line Permit' for Indian Citizens" to travel in some parts of the Country, as arbitrary, unreasonable and offensive of Articles 14, 15, 19 and 21.
• Upheld dismissal of a soldier who allegedly did not retaliate to the attack by militants during a military operation in 2006.
• Dismissed an appeal filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation challenging commutation of death penalty by the High Court in a murder case.
• Stayed execution of seven death row convicts accused of accused of gang rape of a mentally ill woman in Rohtak (Punjab).The bench comprising the Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justice Deepak Gupta granted leave in the special leave petition filed by the seven persons whose death sentence was affirmed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in March.

• Directed the Kerala Government to pay compensation of Rupees five lakhs each to four children, who are victims of Endosulfan.