Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 3 - June 9, 2024

Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 228 To 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 236 NOMINAL INDEX Rakshika Raj v State of Tamil Nadu and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 228 Deivanayaki v State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 229 J Rajkumar v The Authorisation Committee (Transplantation), 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 230 Antony Clement Rubin v M Vignesh, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 231 ABC v XYZ, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 232 Kanthavel and Others v State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 233 A Kamala v State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 234 Farida Begam v The Puducherry Government, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 235 National Sewing Thread Co. Ltd. vs Superintending Engineer, TANGEDCO and Anr., 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 236 REPORT Madras High Court Quashes Govt Order Giving Reservation To Transgender Persons As Most Backward Class Community, Says NALSA Judgment Not Implemented Properly Case Title: Rakshika Raj v State of Tamil Nadu and Others Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 228 The Madras High Court has struck down a Government Order issued by the Backward Classes, Most Backward Classes & Minorities Welfare (BCC) Department of the Government of Tamil Nadu including transgender persons under the Most Backward Class community for providing reservation. Justice GK Ilanthraiyan noted that the State had failed to implement the judgment of the Supreme Court in the Nalsa case properly. The court noted that by bringing transgender persons into the Most Backward Class community, the state was treating gender as a caste which was against the judgment of the Supreme Court. The court added that only horizontal reservation could be granted to the community for complying with the order of the Apex Court. Duty Of Public Servant's Wife To Discourage Him From Taking Bribe: Madras High Court Refuses To Set Aside Conviction Of Sub-Inspector's Wife Case Title: Deivanayaki v State Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 229 The Madras High Court has refused to set aside the conviction of the wife of a Sub-Inspector of Police accused of accumulating wealth disproportionate to his income. Justice KK Ramakrishnan noted that though the Public Servant was no more, his wife should face consequences under Section 109 read with Sections 13(1)(e) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The court added that it was the duty of the wife to discourage her public servant husband from receiving bribes. The court remarked that corruption had pervaded to an unimaginable ratio and if homemakers also become party to corruption, there would be no end to it. The court thus observed that the appellant, whose life was a “bed of roses” with the ill-gotten money should face the consequences also. “Medicare IsA Huge Business”: Madras High Court Calls For Uniform Liberal Approach While Dealing With Applications For Approval Of Organ Donation Case Title: J Rajkumar v The Authorisation Committee (Transplantation) Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 230 The Madras High Court has called for taking a uniform liberal approach while dealing with applications for transplantation of Human organs. Calling Medicare a huge business, Justice GR Swaminathan noted that while the applications from some hospitals were easily accepted, the applications from some hospitals were rejected. The court added that it was necessary to comply with the principles of natural justice as the rights of the patients were at stake. Madras High Court Directs Govt To Consider Representation Seeking Regulation Of Pet Boarding Facilities Across State Case Title: Antony Clement Rubin v M Vignesh Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 231 The Madras High Court has directed the state government to consider a representation for regulating the Pet Boarding Facilities in the state. The bench of Acting Chief Justice R Mahadevan and Justice Mohammed Shaffiq thus disposed of a plea field by Antony Clement Rubin, an animal rights activist. The court directed the State to consider Rubin's representation and pass orders on merit within eight weeks. In his plea, Rubin highlighted that post Covid- there has been a substantial increase in the number of pet owners who would require pet boarding facilities for a number of reasons. He added that with the increase in demand for pet boarding facility, there was also an imperative demand that these facilities be governed by a separate set of rules and regulations to prevent the horrendous abuse of the animals. Wife Merely Filing Dowry Demand Complaint Against Husband Not Cruelty Unless Shown That It Is False: Madras High Court Case Title: ABC v XYZ Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 232 While denying relief to a husband seeking divorce on the grounds of cruelty, the Madras High Court has observed that a wife merely filing a complaint in the police station would not amount to cruelty, unless the husband proves that the complaint was a false dowry demand complaint. Justice R Subramanian and Justice R Sakthivel thus...

Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 3 - June 9, 2024

Upasana Sajeev

Tags