IMPORTANT JUDGMENTS/ ORDERS1. Look Out Circular Curbs Right To Travel, Should Be Issued Only In Exceptional Circumstances & On Cogent Reasons: Delhi High CourtCase Title: Vikas Chaudhary v. Union of India & Ors.;Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 21The Delhi High Court has held that the State was unjustified in restricting an individual's right to travel abroad by issuance of a Look...
IMPORTANT JUDGMENTS/ ORDERS
1. Look Out Circular Curbs Right To Travel, Should Be Issued Only In Exceptional Circumstances & On Cogent Reasons: Delhi High Court
Case Title: Vikas Chaudhary v. Union of India & Ors.;
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 21
The Delhi High Court has held that the State was unjustified in restricting an individual's right to travel abroad by issuance of a Look Out Circular when it could not establish any evidence that the right would be 'detrimental to the economic interests of India'.
Justice Rekha Palli was hearing a Writ Petition filed by a businessperson of garment manufacturing based in Delhi to quash a Look Out Circular (LOC) issued against him by the Respondents, the Ministry of Home Affairs and the Income Tax Department.
The Court noted that the LOC had remained in force for almost three years, during which period, the respondents have admittedly not taken any further action against the petitioner.
2. Look Out Circular Curbs Right To Travel, Should Be Issued Only In Exceptional Circumstances & On Cogent Reasons: Delhi High Court
Case Title: Union of India v. Hemant Kumar
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 22
The Delhi High Court has clarified that the extension of limitation by the Supreme Court would apply to decisions rendered by the Authorities under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972.
While hearing an appeal filed against an order of the Appellate Authority which had dismissed an appeal filed by the Petitioner on the ground that the appeal was barred by limitation, Justice Pratibha M Singh clarified that the extension of limitation by an order of the Supreme Court dated 23.09.2021 would apply to decisions of the Appellate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act.
It further directed that the same be communicated to all the other authorities under the Act, so that the benefit of the computation of the period of limitation is extended to all and multiplicity of proceedings as has happened in the present case is avoided.
3. Permitting Use Of Illegally Intercepted Conversations In Court Would Violate Citizens' Fundamental Rights: Delhi High Court
Case Title: JATINDER PAL SINGH v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 23
The Delhi High Court has observed that if illegally intercepted messages or audio conversations pursuant to an order having no sanction of law are permitted, it would lead to manifest arbitrariness and would promote scant regard to the procedure and fundamental rights of the citizens.
Justice Chandra Dhari Singh thus set aside two orders passed by Special Judge which had framed charges against one Jatinder Pal Singh in 2012 in a case registered by CBI, on the basis of evidence gathered through such illegal means.
The case alleged that there was a criminal conspiracy with the object to show favor qua recognition of the courses and grant of permission pertaining to Gian Sagar Medical College and Hospital, Patiala as mandated by the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 and the relevant MCI Regulation and Rules for admission into 4th year of the MBBS course for the academic session 2011-2012.
4. Insurance Company Can't Avoid Liability If Offending Vehicle Is Stolen & Unauthorisedly Driven By Someone Else: Delhi High Court
Case Title: UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD v. SMT ANITA DEVI AND ORS
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 24
The Delhi High Court has observed that the insurance company cannot avoid it's liability of compensating the deceased's family, even if the offending vehicle was stolen and was being unauthorisedly driven by someone else.
Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva added that in order to avoid the liability, the insurer must establish that there was a willful breach on the part of the insured.
Accordingly, the Court upheld the order passed by the Tribunal which had directed the insurance company pay the compensation amount and recover the same from the driver who had stolen the vehicle.
5. "Sending Photograph Of Summons Through WhatsApp Not Overreach Of Judicial System": Delhi High Court
Case Title: ICICI BANK LIMITED v. RASHMI SHARMA
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 25
The Delhi High Court has set aside an order passed by a Commercial Court to the extent of issuing a show cause notice of criminal contempt after a plaintiff had sent the photograph of summons to the defendant through WhatsApp.
The Court said that the same cannot amount to overreaching the judicial system or running a parallel system with the judicial system.
Justice Amit Bansal was dealing with a plea challenging the Commercial Court order wherein notice was directed to be issued to the ICICI Bank Ltd., the petitioner, through the Chairman, as to why criminal contempt should not be initiated against him for overreaching the process of the Court.
Also Read: Subordinate Courts Can't Assume Jurisdiction & Issue Contempt Notices, Power Rests With HC Alone: Delhi High Court
6. "Complete Forgery Of Documents": Delhi High Court On UP Police Manipulating Records Following Illegal Arrest
Case Title: Teenu & Anr. v. GNCTD
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 26
The Delhi High Court has rapped the Uttar Pradesh police for "complete forgery of documents" regarding place of arrest of two individuals who were family members of a man, who had married a woman against her family's wishes.
The father and brother of the man, who married a woman against her family's wishes, were arrested by the UP Police for kidnapping. The couple, a major, claimed to have married out of their own free will. They alleged that the arrests were made from their residence in Delhi, without informing the Delhi Police.
The Uttar Pradesh government had earlier informed the Court that it had suspended the concerned SHO and Sub Inspector and that a SIT was formed to probe the matter.
7. 'Magnitude Of Offence Can't Be Only Criterion For Denial Of Bail': Delhi High Court Grants Relief To Accused In Hello Taxi Scam Case
Case Title: Surendra Singh Bhati v. State (NCT of Delhi) and other connected matters
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 27
While granting bail to two men accused of a multi-crore scam, the Delhi High Court recently observed that the magnitude of the offence cannot be the only criterion for denial of bail.
Justice Subramonium Prasad observed,
"The object of bail is to secure the presence of the accused at the time of trial; this object is, thus, neither punitive nor preventative, and a person who has not been convicted should only be kept in custody if there are reasons to believe that they might flee from justice or tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses."
8. 'Can't Enact Laws': Delhi High Court Dismisses Plea Seeking 'One Person One Tree' Policy For Sustainable Development
Case Title: Rahul Bhardwaj v. State, WP (C) 14483/2021
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 28
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation seeking sustainable development in the national capital, by formulation of a 'One Person One Tree' policy.
Noting that the subject matter of drafting policies lies exclusively within the domain of the legislature, the Division Bench comprising of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh dismissed the petition. It observed,
" It ought to be kept in mind that predominant role of this court is to interpret the law and not enact the law, except in exceptional cases. Drafting of policy is within the domain of the Respondent. Hence, no case is made out by the Petitioner for issuing a writ of mandamus for drafting a policy."
9. Letters Patent Appeal Against Division Bench Order Not Tenable In Law: Delhi High Court Imposes Cost
Case Title: Shafiq Khan & Ors. v. State NCT of Delhi & Anr.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 29
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a Letters Patent Appeal, filed against an order passed by the division bench, with Rs. 5,000 cost.
The Bench comprising of Chief Justice D. N. Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh made it clear that a "LPA against a division bench order is not tenable in law."
"File the appropriate remedy. A Special Leave Petition or whatever recourse is permissible in law," it orally told the Appellant.
The observation was made in appeal filed against an order dated 12.10.21 passed by the bench in Yuva Sangharsh Samiti v. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors., WP(C) 6649/2021.
10. Unilateral Appointment Of Arbitrator Not Permissible: NTPC Loses To Its Contracting Party In Delhi High Court
Case Title: ENVIRAD PROJECTS PVT. LTD. v. NTPC LTD.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 30
The Delhi High Court has reiterated that no single party can be permitted to unilaterally appoint an Arbitrator, as it would defeat the purpose of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, i.e., unbiased adjudication of dispute between the parties.
Accordingly, Justice Suresh Kumar Kait dismissed a unilateral arbitral clause imposed by NTPC, a Public Sector Undertaking, in its contract with the petitioner-company for a power project.
The Court held that the power to appoint an arbitrator in such a circumstance devolves on the Court.
11. Constitutional Duty Of Court To Prevent Arbitrary Deprivation Of Personal Liberty By Excess Of State Power: High Court In Delhi Riots Case
Case Title: Mohd. Tahir & other connect bail pleas v. State
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 31
"It is the Constitutional duty of the Court to ensure that there is no arbitrary deprivation of personal liberty in the face of excess of State power," observed the Delhi High Court while granting bail to 6 accused persons in a riots case.
Justice Subramonium Prasad granted bail to Mohd. Tahir, Shahrukh, Mohd. Faizal, Mohd. Shoaib, Rashid and Parvez in a case alleging that a mob caused vandalism, put on fire a sweet shop as a consequence of which a 22 year old boy namely Dilbar Negi died after sustaining burn injuries. (FIR 39/2020 PS Gokulpuri)
12. Filling Of Claim Before IRP Does Not Absolve Director From Liability Under Settlement Decree Signed In Personal Capacity: Delhi High Court
Case Title: Naresh Kumar Gupta v. Satya Pal & Ors., CM (M) 66/2022 and connected matters
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 32
The Delhi High Court recently observed that filling of claim before Interim Resolution Professional ('IRP') does not absolve the Director from his liability under a Decree when he is party in person as well.
The Petitioner, Managing Director of company Shree Shyam Pulp and Board Mills Ltd. had signed a Settlement Agreement where he and the Company were jointly described as "the second party".
The Agreement was to fix non-payment of rent by the Company and vacate the lease premises. When the Company failed to vacate the premises, the Landlords filed execution petitions.
13. Woman Marries Against Wishes Of Parents: High Court Directs Delhi Police To Provide Safe Travel Passage For Uniting Her With Husband
Title: NEMI CHAND GOD v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) AND ORS.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 33
The Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi Police to provide a safe travel passage to a woman who had married a man against the wishes of her family. The husband was employed in Chennai.
Uniting the woman with her husband, Justice Siddharth Mridul and Justice Anup J. Bhambhani took note of the fact that both were major individuals and that the woman had married with her own free will and volition, although against the wishes of her parents.
The Court also took note of the marriage certificate dated November 22, 2021 issued by an Arya Samaj Mandir as an evidence of their marriage.
Title: MOHIT BANSAL v. INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA & ANR.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 34
The Delhi High Court has observed that there is a clear need for the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India to create a framework wherein there is proper disclosure by candidates who apply to become Chartered Accountants, at the inception itself.
Justice Pratibha M Singh said that there is also a need for a continuing disclosure, may be on an annual basis for members to inform the ICAI if there are any criminal cases or conviction against them, so that the ICAI is not kept in the dark.
"The power, discretion and duty of ensuring the purity of the Register of Members is upon the ICAI. Thus, in the case of convictions, the factum of the said conviction and the offences qua which the applicant was convicted ought to be disclosed," the Court said.
15. Woman Marries Against Wishes Of Parents: High Court Directs Delhi Police To Provide Safe Travel Passage For Uniting Her With Husband
Case Title: THE STATE, GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI v. UNIQUE IDENTIFICATION AUTHORITY OF INDIA (UIDAI)
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 35
The Delhi High Court has directed the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) to disclose information of over 400 aadhar card holders who were allegedly issued fake aadhar card certificates for the purpose of enrolment in civil defence training in the city.
Justice Chandra Dhari Singh was dealing with a case wherein the investigation revealed that in the year 2019, the then District Magistrate of Shahdara, along with others public servants had committed criminal misconduct by abusing their official position with an ulterior motive to give benefit to ineligible persons, approximately 450 candidates with fake Aadhar Cards who had enrolled for training in Civil Defence.
The case emerged after a complaint was received by city's Anti Corruption Branch alleging that the manner of recruitment of marshals for DTC buses was illegal. It was alleged that the recruitment process was manipulated by the District Magistrate who had issued fake certificates, certifying as Delhi residents for making Aadhaar Cards, to over 400 people from his home state of Rajasthan.
16. S. 37 NDPS Act| Court's Prima Facie Satisfaction In Favour Of Accused Must Be Based On 'Reasonable Grounds': Delhi High Court
Case Title: PRAMOD v. STATE OF NCT DELHI
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 36
The Delhi High Court has observed that while granting bail under Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, a Court must have "reasonable grounds" to believe prima facie innocence of the accused and that the accused will not commit a similar offense while on bail.
Section 37 of the Act deals with classification of the offences contained within the Act and provides for cases where bail can be granted to the accused person. It provides dual conditions for bail in case of certain offences: one, prima facie opinion of the innocence of the accused and two, the accused will not commit a similar offense while on bail.
17. S. 37 NDPS Act| Court's Prima Facie Satisfaction In Favour Of Accused Must Be Based On 'Reasonable Grounds': Delhi High Court
Title: FLICK STUDIOS PVT. LTD v. GRAVITY ENTERTAINMENT PVT. LTD
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 37
The Delhi High Court has held that unsigned invoices can be a valid basis to file suit under Order 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Order 37 of the Code talks about summary procedure and institution of summary suits.
Justice Amit Bansal was dealing with a petition challenging the order dated 12th October, 2021 passed by the District Judge of the Saket Courts whereby the commercial suit filed on behalf of the petitioner was converted from a suit under Order XXXVII of the CPC to an ordinary suit for recovery.
This was done on the ground that the invoices raised by the petitioner on the respondent did not bear the signatures of either parties.
IMPORTANT WEEKLY UPDATES
1. Marital Rape - Expectation Of Sexual Relations Cannot Lead To Husband Having Forcible Sex With Wife: Rebecca John To Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court this week continued hearing a batch of petitions challenging the exception to Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, which exempts forceful sexual intercourse by a man with his own wife from the offence of rape.
Senior Advocate Rebecca John appearing as amicus curiae in the matter told a bench of Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Justice C Hari Shankar that expectation of sexual relations in a marriage cannot lead to a husband having forcible sex with his wife.
Adding that both the parties in a marriage may have expectations of conjugal relations, however, John argued that such expectation cannot result in the husband having forcible sex with wife.
Also Read: Marital Rape - Removal Of Exception From Sec 375 IPC Will Uphold Woman's Bodily Integrity: Rebecca John To Delhi High Court
Also Read: Marital Rape| 'Consent' An Implicit Condition In Exceptions To S. 375 IPC: Amicus Curiae Rebecca John To Delhi High Court
Also Read: Marital Rape - Striking Off Exception To Sec 375 IPC Won't Amount To Court Creating A New Offence : Amicus To Delhi HC
Also Read: Marital Rape : Are There Precedents Of Courts Striking Down A Provision To Create An Offence? Delhi High Court Asks
2. Delay In Constitution Of State Consumer Welfare Fund Is A Violation Of Statute, Causing Inconvenience To Public At Large: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has observed that the delay in constitution of State Consumer Welfare Fund is a violation of the statute which is causing inconvenience to the public at large.
Perusing the status report as well as the correspondence exchanged between the Delhi Government and the Centre, Justice Manmohan and Justice Navin Chawla observed thus:
"…it seems that none of the parties is cognizant of the fact that the State Consumer Welfare Fund is a statutory fund which is urgently required to be incorporated."
It added:
"Delay in its constitution is a violation of the statute and is causing inconvenience to public at large. The stop gap arrangements now suggested by GNCTD in its status report is not sanctioned by the statute and cannot be countenanced by the Court."
3. Delay In Constitution Of State Consumer Welfare Fund Is A Violation Of Statute, Causing Inconvenience To Public At Large: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court will hear on February 3, a plea filed by Delhi State Legal Services Authority (DSLSA) seeking recovery of Rs. 20 lakh cost imposed on Bollywood actress and environmentalist Juhi Chawla and others dismissing their civil suit against 5G Roll out as being defective and not maintainable.
Hearing in the execution petition, which was listed before Justice Amit Bansal, was deferred after the counsel appearing on behalf of Chawla apprised the Court that an appeal against dismissal of the said suit is pending before a division bench and the same is to come for hearing next on January 25.
4. "Liberty Of Individuals Gets Hampered": Delhi High Court Expresses Concern Over Non-Filing Of Status Reports In Bail Pleas
The Delhi High Court has expressed its concern over the non filing of status reports by the concerned officers in the pending bail applications, orally remarking that delay in the same hampers the liberty of an individual.
Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri was hearing two matters wherein the Court had earlier adjudicated upon the aspect of filing of status reports by the prosecuting agencies so as to ensure that there is no delay in the same. Earlier, the Court was informed that necessary sensitization programmes of the Investigating Officers with respect to timely filing of Status Reports had been carried out.
5. District Courts Expected To Follow Orders Regarding Virtual & Hybrid Hearings In Letter & Spirit: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has said that it expects the judicial officers of the district and sessions courts to follow the order passed by it regarding holding of virtual and hybrid hearings in letter and spirit.
A Bench of Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Jasmeet Singh also said that all such courts should keep their weblinks open on every working day from the start of the Court functioning i.e. 10 AM till such Court holds its sittings, so that any counsel or party wishing to join virtually is able to join the proceedings even without any prior intimation.
6. VVIP Chopper Scam: Delhi High Court Inquires How Christian Michel's Presence Can Be Secured If He Is Released On Bail
The Delhi High Court this week inquired from the CBI how the presence of Christian James Michel, accused in the Rs 3,600 crore AgustaWestland Chopper Scam, can be secured in case he is released on bail.
Justice Manoj Ohri asked CBI's counsel DP Singh to submit, without prejudice to his arguments on merits, the bail conditions that can be imposed on Michel. The development ensued during hearing of the British national's bail plea.
7. "Redevelopment Activity Falling In Disrepair, Bus Stop Converted Into Vending Zone": Delhi High Court On Chandni Chowk Encroachment
The Delhi High Court this week expressed its concern over the rampant illegal encroachment by the hawkers and vendors in city's Chandni Chowk area. It remarked that the redevelopment activity of the area is already 'falling in disrepair'.
A Bench of Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Jasmeet Singh was dealing with a plea concerning illegal encroachments in Chandni Chowk area, being a no hawking and no vending zone.
8. Uphaar Tragedy- Should Ansal Brothers Be Out During Pendency Of Appeal When A Court Has Already Found Them Guilty?: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court this week continued the hearing in the plea filed by real estate barons Sushil Ansal and Gopal Ansal, seeking suspension of their seven-year jail terms in the evidence tampering case in connection with the Uphaar fire tragedy that happened in the year 1997.
During the course of the hearing, the Bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad stressed that the instant case related to the tampering with the evidence inside the court and that too, by the persons who belong to rich and powerful strata of society.