Editors Pick

High Courts Weekly Round-up

Apoorva Mandani
11 Oct 2015 2:26 PM GMT
High Courts Weekly Round-up
Your free access to Live Law has expired
To read the article, get a premium account.
    Your Subscription Supports Independent Journalism
Subscription starts from
(For 6 Months)
Premium account gives you:
  • Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.
  • Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.
Already a subscriber?

Delhi High Court

Delhi High Court came to the rescue of a 19 year old NRI transgender, who had approached the Court alleging that her parents had forcibly brought her to India and got her enrolled in an educational institution in Agra so that she could be reformed and taught to be a “normal girl”. The Court directed the Police to escort her to the Delhi Airport so that she could return to the US. Once her passport and her green card is restored, it directed that she would travel unaccompanied and would not be subjected to any harassment upon arrival in San Francisco.

Delhi High Court on Wednesday held that Mumbai based Glenmark Pharmaceuticals was infringing the patent granted to US-based Pharmaceuticals Company, Merck Sharp and Dohme Corp. and restrained it from selling, distributing, marketing or exporting its anti-diabetes drugs Zita and Zita-Met.

A two Judge Bench of Delhi High Court asked the Delhi Government to ensure that the grant-in-aid released is properly utilized by the Corporations for taking all the necessary measures for controlling and prevention of the dengue cases, while disposing a PIL filed by Congress Leader Ajay Makan. A division bench of Chief Justice G. Rohini and Justice Jayant Nath also directed the Government to constantly monitor the steps that are being taken by various Departments in coordination with the Committee constituted under the “National Vector Borne Disease Control Programme.

In a representation made to Delhi High Court Chief Justice G. Rohini, four law students Aastha Sharma, Ishwin Mehta, Paras Jain and Kumar Shanu have highlighted the inconsistency of the Delhi High Court’s RTI rules with the Right to Information Act, 2005. The students have claimed that the discrepancies and incompatibility have worked against the purported objective of the Right to Information Act, denying access to information and affecting Fundamental Rights of citizens.

Madras High Court

The Court on Tuesday issued Guidelines to prevent intrusion of person having criminal antecedents without legally studying bachelor of Law Degree for maintaining the purity in the justice delivery system. It directed the Union of India to consider positively, within six months, to entrust  the functions of the Bar Council of India to an expert body, headed by a retired Supreme Court Judge permanently or till The Advocates’ Act and the Bar Council Rules are revisited, nominating Academicians, Legal Luminaries, prominent social workers,  retired I.A.S Officers , police officers and Doctors as members as the electoral system followed by Bar Council failed to elect appropriate persons as members of Bar Council resulting in making the Council incapable of handling issues properly.

Gujarat High Court

The Court quashed an order of the Family Court, Bhavnagar, which directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.3000 per month towards the interim maintenance of her minor step daughter. The court while construing Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure pertaining to maintenance observed “there is no definition or explanation to the effect that ‘legitimate or illegitimate child’ contemplated in the section would also include a step child and would mean only a child who has been given birth by a woman from whom the maintenance is being claimed”. Further, it was held that relationship by blood (or adoption) is a prerequisite to give rise to moral and legal obligation under the aforesaid section to maintain a person.

Allahabad High Court

The Court on Wednesday, directed that the photo identification system by the Allahabad High Court Bar Association (HCBA) to continue as it was earlier, while hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Uma Shankar Mishra, a High Court lawyer. Earlier, the Court had on September 29th, stayed photo identification system and also use of identification numbers, the provisions as contained in Chapter IV Rule 3 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952. However, by final order passed on Wednesday, the interim stay order has been vacated.

Next Story