High Courts Weekly Round-Up
Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court recently opined that burning the effigy of a living person prima facie does not amount to organising a mock funeral, which is an offence under Section 6 of the United Provinces Special Powers Act, 1932.
Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court ruled that when employees of newspapers under the Working Journalists and Other Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1955, claim recovery of dues from their employer and same is denied by the employer, then the state or its delegate must refer the matter to a Labour Court.
The High Court on Tuesday issued directions for enhancing the safety of beaches. The directions were issued by a Bench comprising Justice Shantanu Kemkar and Justice Sarang V. Kotwal on a PIL filed by non-profit Janhit Manch, highlighting drownings in the sea and the absence of warning signs and rescuers on the seafronts.
In an unusual case, the Bombay High Court dismissed an execution application argued pro se by an eccentric litigant who sought physical possession of the high court building as well as two wards in Bombay city.
Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court confirmed the conviction and life term of a man for murdering his wife by setting her ablaze after their three children testified against their father.
In a big relief to several MBBS aspirants, the High Court directed grant of admission to candidates who had passed Class XII with biology/biotechnology as an additional subject and had qualified in the NEET exams.
On Tuesday, the High Court dismissed a petition filed by a judicial officer challenging the criteria adopted by the Delhi High Court for promotion to posts of District and Sessions Judges as being non-transparent.
The High Court on Tuesday, also agreed to quash an FIR against a petitioner, subject to payment of Rs. 15,000 towards Chief Minister’s Disaster Relief Fund for the State of Kerala.
The Delhi High Court on Tuesday issued notice on a petition filed by IP Academic Prof. Shamnad Basheer alleging a violation of the fundamental right to privacy as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution and as affirmed in Justice KS Puttaswamy v Union of India due to Aadhaar data breaches.
The High Court held that an investigating officer or agency has the power to place before the court any material that supports its case, at any stage of the trial. Justice Manish Pitale of the Nagpur bench passed the judgment in a writ petition filed by one Rajesh Thakur and others, accused under Section 67-A of the Information Technology Act, 2005 and Sections 509 and 292 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
On Friday, the High Court directed the Delhi University’s Law Faculty to declare within three days the results of students who were allowed to sit for their semester exams on court orders due to a shortage of attendance and ordered that those who have failed can take supplementary examinations to be conducted soon.
The High Court on Friday also sought to know the stand of the Centre, LIC, RBI, SEBI, IDBI Bank Ltd and Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India on a petition against the government reducing its stake in the Industrial Development Bank of India (IDBI) and LIC acquiring over 51 stake in the public sector bank which, it says, will result in “loss of status” of the bank and cause hardship to its employees.
On Friday, he High Court held 20 more people guilty of killing a 60-year-old Dalit man and his physically-challenged daughter at Mirchpur village in Haryana’s Hisar district in 2010, while dismissing the appeals filed by 15 convicts against the various sentences awarded to them.
Two rooms without the basic facility of the kitchen cannot be called a house, the High Court reiterated while asking the government to decide the plea of a woman for an alternate plot in lieu of acquired land.
The High Court opined that the Medical Council of India (MCI) should frame a policy with regard to punishment to be accorded to delinquent doctors for infractions committed by them and has asked the statutory body to report on this aspect within three months.
Kerala High Court
The High Court of Kerala put forth certain suggestions to the State Government for consideration while carrying out relief and rehabilitation operations in the flood affected regions.
The High Court held that proceedings for detaining a ship for enforcement of a maritime claim would not be maintainable before the high court when the foreign vessel is berthed in a port which is within the jurisdiction of another high court.
Madhya Pradesh High Court
The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently commuted death penalty imposed on a youth accused of rape and murder of a 9-year-old girl.
For restoration of a petition which got dismissed for default, the Madhya Pradesh High Court imposed a condition of payment for Kerala flood relief, observing that “people of Kerala are facing the natural calamity in the form of severe flood”. The order was passed by Justice Anand Pathak of Gwalior Bench of MP High Court.
Madras High Court
The Madras High Court upheld the claim of a teacher of her conversion from Christianity to Hinduism can be very well accepted as her conversion has been accepted by Vishwa Hindu Parishad which, being an internationally acclaimed organisation for Hindu Religion, performed the ‘Suthi Satangu’ Pooja for her way back in 1998.
While considering a plea of a man seeking passive euthanasia to his son in the persistent vegetative state (PVS) since birth, the Madras High Court constituted a three-member committee of doctors to nominate three expert doctors according to the needs of the patient in this case.
Patna High Court
The Patna High Court restrained all print and electronic media from reporting anything with respect to Muzaffarpur shelter home case, particularly the investigation of the case, on the ground that media reportage will hamper investigation. The case pertains to alleged rape and sexual abuse of children in Muzaffarpur shelter home.
Punjab & Haryana High Court
While deciding a bail application in a drug trafficking case, Justice Rajbir Sehrawat of Punjab and Haryana High court ventured an in-depth analysis of constitutionality of the provisions of NDPS Act, which puts conditions on grant of bail. Though the Judge did not hold that the provision is unconstitutional, as he was only considering a bail application, he made several observations in the judgment to the effect that it is discriminatory, irrational and defy human logic.
Uttarakhand High Court
The Uttarakhand High Court on Tuesday took suo motu cognizance of the rape and murder of a twelve-year-old girl in Uttarkashi. The Bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Rajiv Sharma and Justice Manoj K. Tiwari also appointed Advocates Sanjay Bhatt and Lata Negi as the amicus curiae in the case.
“Pavan paani dharati aakas ghar mandar har bani”, (Air, water, earth and sky are God’s home and temple), quoted the Uttarakhand High Court from Sikh’s religious scripture Guru Granth Sahib as it directed against free movement of tourists in the alpine meadows in Garhwal region of district Chamoli in Uttarakhand while ordering only local shepherds to graze their cattle there.
The High Court imposed a cost of Rs 25,000 on the Centre for misleading the principal bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal in New Delhi into staying proceedings in a service matter instituted by IFS officer Sanjiv Chaturvedi before the Nainital bench wherein he had sought quashing of his poor appraisal report for year 2015-16 during which time he had served as CVO, AIIMS, on central deputation and highlighted several cases of corruption in the country’s premier medical institute.
The High Court passed several directions to the state government and hospitals/clinical establishments in the state to strictly adhere to the Clinical Establishment (Registration and Regulation) Act, 2010.