All High Courts Weekly Round-Up [18 April 2022- 24 April 2022]

NOMINAL INDEX

Shahida v State Of U.P. And 3 Others 2022 LiveLaw (All) 183

Pawan Singh And Another v. State of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (All) 184

Indian Farmers Fertilizers Cooperative Ltd. v. Manish Engineering Enterprises 2022 LiveLaw (All) 185

Naushad Ali (Second Bail Application) v. State Of U.P.Thru Prin.Secy Home Lucknow 2022 LiveLaw (All) 186

Suresh Chandra Tripathi v. State Of U.P And 2 Others 2022 LiveLaw (All) 187

State of U.P. v. Vasdev Chauhan S/O Brahmchari And Another 2022 LiveLaw (All) 188

Ram Shanker And Another v. State of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (All) 189

Satish Sharma And Another v State of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (All) 190

CG Power and Industrial Solutions Ltd. v. U.P. Power Transmission Corporation Ltd. 2022 LiveLaw (All) 191

Vipin Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another 2022 LiveLaw (All) 192

Km. Sanaya Sharma (Minor) And Another v. State Of U.P. And 4 Others 2022 LiveLaw (All) 193

C/M Anjuman Intezamia Masajid Varanasi v. Smt. Rakhi Singh And 8 Others 2022 LiveLaw (All) 194

Ram Kumar @ Tuntun v. State of U.P. and Another 2022 LiveLaw (All) 195

Mohd. Moin Quraishi v. State of U.P. and others 2022 LiveLaw (All) 196

Surya Udaivir Alias Sonu v. State of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (All) 197

Subodh Kumar Jain @ Subodh Jain v. State Of U.P And Others 2022 LiveLaw (All) 198

Salman @ Mohammad Salman And 2 Others v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others 2022 LiveLaw (All) 199

Muraj @ Muraj Rajbhar v. State of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (All) 200

Shahanshah v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others 2022 LiveLaw (All) 201

Juber v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others 2022 LiveLaw (All) 202

Judgments/Orders of the Week

"Tolerance, Respect For All Communities Essential To Keep Country United": Allahabad HC Dismisses PIL Over Meat Sale Ban In Mathura-Vrindavan

Case title - Shahida v State Of U.P. And 3 Others

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (All) 183

"India is a Country of great diversity. It is absolutely essential if we wish to keep our Country united to have tolerance and respect for all communities and sects," remarked the High Court as it dismissed a PIL plea filed in connection with the decision of the UP Government to ban meat/liquor sale in Mathura-Vrindavan.

The Bench of Justice Pritinker Diwaker and Justice Ashutosh Srivastava, however, restrained itself from commenting anything upon the validity of the order of the UP Government (meat/liquor ban in 22 municipal wards after declaring the same as a pilgrimage site) as it noted that the PIL plea had not challenged the Government Orders.

Concurrent Running Of Sentences Is A Basic Rule Where Accused Is Convicted For 2 Or More Offences Arising Out Of Single Transaction: Allahabad HC

Case title - Pawan Singh And Another v. State of U.P. [CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5086 of 2005]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (All) 184

The High Court has observed that if the accused is convicted for two or more different offences, arising out of one and the same transaction, the basic rule is that the sentences must be directed to run concurrently.

The Bench of Justice Raj Beer Singh also said that Section 31 of CrPC leaves discretion with the Court to order sentences for two or more offences at one trial to run concurrently or consequently, having regard to the nature of offences and attendant aggravating or mitigating circumstances.

Application For Extension Of Time For Passing The Award Lies Only Before The High Court Which Appointed The Arbitrator: Allahabad High Court

Case Title: Indian Farmers Fertilizers Cooperative Ltd. v. Manish Engineering Enterprises, A&C Application U/S 11(4) No. 5 of 2022.

Citation: : 2022 LiveLaw (All) 185

The High Court has held that the Court for the purpose of an application under S. 29A of the A&C Act would only be the High Court that appointed the arbitrator.

The Single Bench of Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal held that the Principal Civil Court does not have the jurisdiction to entertain an application for an extension of time. The Court held that Sub-section 6 of Section 29A allows the Court to substitute the arbitrator(s) and conferring this power on the Principal Civil Court would lead to an inconceivable situation where the mandate of an arbitrator appointed by the High Court could be substituted by an inferior Court.

Allahabad High Court Denies Bail To Man Accused Of Attempting To Rape Own Daughter, Uploading Her Nude Pics On Facebook

Case title - Naushad Ali (Second Bail Application) v. State Of U.P.Thru Prin.Secy Home Lucknow

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (All) 186

The High Court denied bail to a man who has been accused of attempting to rape his own daughter and uploading her pictures on Facebook.

The bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh denied bail to one Naushad Ali considering the relationship between the accused-applicant and the prosecutrix, heinousness of the offence, societal impact of the offence and the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C.

Rejection Of Application By Court Can't Be A Ground To Transfer Criminal Case From That Court To Another: Allahabad High court

Case title - Suresh Chandra Tripathi v. State Of U.P And 2 Others

Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (All) 187

The High Court has observed that merely because an application of the applicant was rejected by the trial Court, it cannot be a ground to transfer a case from that Court to another.

The Bench of Justice Raj Beer Singh observed thus while taking into account the mandate of Section 407 Cr.P.C which deals with the power of the High Court to transfer cases and appeals.

UP Govt Apprises Allahabad High Court Of Its Circular Governing Procedure For Filing Govt Appeals Against Acquittal Orders

Case title - State of U.P. v. Vasdev Chauhan S/O Brahmchari And Another

Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (All) 188

The Uttar Pradesh Government recently apprised the High Court of its circular governing the procedure for filing the government appeal against the order of acquittal.

This was done pursuant to two orders of the High court (the Bench of Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Vikas Kunvar Srivastav) asking the State Government to furnish the details of the concerned policy/government order/circular.

"He Failed To Explain Incriminating Circumstances": Allahabad HC Upholds Life Sentence Awarded To Man For Burning Wife, 3 Children Alive

Case title - Ram Shanker And Another v. State of U.P. [CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2448 of 2009]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (All) 189

The High Court upheld the life sentence awarded to a man for killing his own wife and 3 children by way of burning them alive. The Court noted that the convict had failed to explain the incriminating circumstances pointing towards his guilt.

The Bench of Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Subhash Chandra Sharma observed that the convict was obliged to furnish a proper explanation under Section 313 CrPC with regard to the circumstances under which the deceased met an unnatural death inside the house, however, he failed to do so.

"Complete Lack Of Evidence Of Deceased Being Last Seen Alive With Accused": Allahabad HC Sets Aside Life Sentence Of 2 Murder Accused

Case title - Satish Sharma And Another v State of U.P. [CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5824 of 2010]

Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (All) 190

The High Court set aside the life sentence awarded to two murder accused as it noted that the prosecution had failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the appellants/accused had murdered the deceased, who was allegedly their helper.

The Bench of Justice Manoj Misra and Justice Sameer Jain further observed that was a complete lack of evidence of the deceased being last seen alive with the accused, and therefore, the Court did not find it safe to confirm the conviction of the accused-appellants for the charge of murder of the deceased.

Electricity Act Will Not Apply When Contract Is For Supply Of Materials Simplicitor, Court Can Apppoint Arbitrator: Allahabad High Court

Case Title: CG Power and Industrial Solutions Ltd. v. U.P. Power Transmission Corporation Ltd., CIVIL MISC. Arb. A. 12 of 2021

Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (All) 191

The High Court has held that the embargo under S.86 of the Electricity Act which provides that only the Regulatory Commission can appoint an arbitrator does not apply when the agreement is for supply simpliciter and does not have an element of transmission, distribution, and trading of electricity and the Court can appoint an arbitrator in such cases.

The Single Bench of Justice Sangeeta Chandra held that a party that has supplied some material for the construction of an electricity sub-station would not fall within the meaning of licenecee or supplier under the Electricity Act and when the contract is purely a commercial arising out of a supply contract and does not involve an element of trade in electricity, the provisions of Electricity Act are not attracted.

[Non-Payment Of Maintenance Allowance] Magistrate Can't Issue Arrest Warrant W/O First Issuing Warrant For Levy Of Fine U/S 421 CrPC: Allahabad HC

Case title - Vipin Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 192

The Allahabad High Court recently observed that in the event of any failure on the part of any person to comply with a Court's order to pay maintenance allowance, the correct/appropriate course for the courts is to first issue a warrant for the levy of fine as provided u/s 421 of CrPC for the purpose of realization of the amount.

With this, the bench of Justice Ajit Singh held that in such cases of non-payment of maintenance allowance, the Magistrate has no jurisdiction to issue a warrant of arrest straightway against the person liable, without first levying the amount due as a fine as provided under Section 421 of CrPC.

"Can't Underestimate Power Of Mother's Love, It Must Be Given Unconditionally": Allahabad HC Grants Custody Of 2 Kids To Mother

Case title - Km. Sanaya Sharma (Minor) And Another v. State Of U.P. And 4 Others

Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 193

Stressing that a mother's love must be given unconditionally to establish trust and a firm foundation of emotional intimacy in a child's life, the Allahabad High Court recently granted the custody of two children to their mother.

The bench of Justice Rahul Chaturvedi ordered thus while dealing with a habeas corpus plea moved by one Seema Sharma seeking the custody of her two kids who were in the company of their grandmother.

Vishwanath-Gyanvapi Dispute| Anjuman Masjid's Plea Against Advocate Commissioner's Appointment For Inspection Dismissed By Allahabad HC

Case title - C/M Anjuman Intezamia Masajid Varanasi v. Smt. Rakhi Singh And 8 Others

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 194

The High Court has dismissed a petition filed by the Managing Committee of Anjuman Intezamiya Masjid regarding the Gyanvapi Masjid-Vishwanath Temple dispute in Varanasi.

In their plea, the Majid Committee had opposed the order of the civil court appointing an Advocate Commissioner to present a report after inspecting the idols of Shringar Gauri, Lord Ganesha, Lord Hanuman, Nandi/Nandideva present within the Mosque premises.

Court Can Summon Accused U/S 319 CrPC Even On The Basis Of Examination-In-Chief Of Witness: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Ram Kumar @ Tuntun v. State of U.P. and Another [CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3142 of 2021]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 195

The High Court has observed that a court can summon a person under Section 319 of the Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973, only on the basis of examination-in-chief of witness and the Court need not wait for the evidence of such witness to be tested by cross-examination.

Here it may be noted that as per Section 319 of CrPC, in the course of any inquiry into, or trial of, an offence, a Court has the power to proceed against other persons appearing to be guilty of offence.

Can't Direct Govt To Declare Any Monument To Be Of National Importance: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Mohd. Moin Quraishi v. State of U.P. and others

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 196

The High Court has observed that the Court can't issue a direction to the Government for the purpose of issuing a notification declaring any monument to be of national importance.

The Bench of Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice Piyush Agrawal observed thus while dealing with a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea filed by one Mohd. Moin Quraishi seeking a direction to the State Government to issue a final notification regarding ancient monuments, namely, Haveli of Khan-I-Dauran, Mauza Basai Mustkil (Tajganj), District Agra declaring the same to be of national importance.

"Evidence Of Witness Can't Be Disbelieved On Ground Of Minor Contradictions In Testimony": Allahabad High Court Upholds Murder Conviction

Case title - Surya Udaivir Alias Sonu v. State of U.P.

Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 197

The High Court has reiterated that minor contradictions in the testimony of a witness which do not go to the root of the matter are not material contradictions and on this ground alone, the evidence of such witness cannot be brushed aside/disbelieved.

Observing thus, the bench of Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Sadhna Rani (Thakur) upheld the judgment and order of Sessions Judge, Mainpuri, convicting one Surya Udaivir, under Section 302 I.P.C. with life imprisonment.

Police Officer Can Suo Motu Make Further Investigation In Cognizable Cases, Magistrate's Permission Not Required: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Subodh Kumar Jain @ Subodh Jain v. State Of U.P And Others [CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 6555 of 2021]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 198

The High Court recently observed that police have unfettered powers of investigation and such investigation can continue even after the charge sheet has been filed under Section 173 (2) CrPC and cognizance has been taken thereon.

"...A Police Officer can suo motu make further investigations in cognizable cases...No permission of the Magistrate is required for carrying out further investigation...," the bench of Justice Anjani Kumar Mishra and Justice Deepak Verma further held.

The bench observed thus while dealing with a writ plea moved by one Subodh Kumar Jain who prayed for quashing of an FIR registered under Sections 392, 411 I.P.C.

Allahabad High Court Imposes ₹10K Cost On Woman Who Filed FIR On 'False' Rape Charges Against Husband Before Marrying him

Case title - Salman @ Mohammad Salman And 2 Others v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others [CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 348 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 199

The High Court quashed an FIR lodged pursuant to the false allegations of rape made by a woman (who later on, got married to the accused) as the Court found that the lodging of an FIR was a way to build pressure upon the petitioners so as to get her marriage solemnized.

"The justice delivery system which includes the investigating agency as also the Courts cannot be made an instrument of settling personal score specially when in our country the legal system is already overburdened. Such misuse is only going to further confound the situation eating the precious time of both, the Investigating Agency and the Courts in dealing with false cases and as a consequence, thereof genuine cases are bound to suffer," the bench of Justice Anjani Kumar Mishra and Justice Deepak Verma observed as it 'saddled' Rs. 10K Cost on the alleged victim/first informant.

The Court ordered thus while dealing with a writ plea moved by the accused (now the husband of the first informant).

Annoying Someone By Words, Deeds Or Conduct Which May Provoke Him/Her To Commit Suicide Is Abetment: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Muraj @ Muraj Rajbhar v. State of U.P.

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 200

The High Court has observed that if someone keeps on irritating or annoying the deceased by words, deeds, or conduct, which may provoke or encourage the deceased to commit suicide, it would amount to abetment.

The Bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh observed thus while rejecting the bail application filed by one Muraj who has been booked under Section 306 of IPC as he has been accused of abetting the suicide of a 16-year-old girl, with whom he was in love.

Can't Extern Person Under 'UP Control Of Goonda Act' On The Basis Of A Single Incident: Allahabad High Court Quashes Externment Order

Case Title - Shahanshah v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others [CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10011 of 2017]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 201

The High Court observed that only on the basis of a single incident, an order of externment can't be passed against a person under Section 3 [Externment, etc. of Goondas] of Uttar Pradesh Control of Goonda Act, 1970.

The Bench of Justice Sadhna Rani (Thakur) further observed that one cannot be treated to be a habitual offender unless and until there is a recurrence of the offence and at the most the general reputation of the person is that he is desperate and dangerous to the community.

Allahabad HC Imposes ₹20K Cost On Man Who Sought Reiteration Of A General Mandamus Regarding Protection Against Arbitrary Arrest

Case title - Juber v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others [CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 1135 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 202

The High Court imposed a cost of Rs. 20K on a person who sought reiteration of a general mandamus, which has already been issued by the High Court in the case of Vimal Kumar and three others Vs. State of U.P. and three others 2021.

It may be noted that in the Vimal Kumar case, the Allahabad High Court had directed the Police authorities to desist from making automatic/ routine arrests, especially in dowry cases (498A IPC), and strictly comply with the pre-conditions laid down under Section 41A of CrPC.

Other Updates from High Court/UP Courts

"Hathras Rape Victim's Family Feels Insecure In Hathras & Wish To Relocate To Noida; Brother Wants Job There": Amicus Informs Allahabad High Court

Case title - Suo-Moto Inre Right To Decent And Dignified Last Rites/Cremat v. State Of U.P. Thru Additional Chief Secretary Home And Ors

The family members of the Hathras Rape victim have conveyed to the Allahabad High Court that they wish to relocate to NOIDA as they do not feel safe in Hathras. The brother of the victim girl has also expressed his willingness to take up a government job in Noida.

Essentially, the Bench of Justice Rajan Roy and Justice Jaspreet Singh is hearing a Suo-Moto case instituted over the Hathras Rape and Cremation case to examine the right to decent and dignified last rites/cremation.

"Adverse Remarks Prejudicial To My Reputation": Former UP AAG Jyoti Sikka Moves Allahabad HC Challenging Single Judge Order

Former Additional Advocate General, Uttar Pradesh Jyoti Sikka has moved the High Court challenging an order of the Single Judge (of March 2, 2022) alleging that in the order, adverse remarks were made against her which were capable of having professional repercussions for her.

For the uninitiated, the Bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh had taken an exception to Sikka's failure to seek the permission of the Court before leaving the Court premises on March 2 and for her failure to appear in a matter (the entire controversy and the order of the Court has been explained below).

Allahabad High Court Judge Recuses From Hearing Ex-MLA Mukhtar Ansari's Chargesheet Quashing Plea In Funds Misappropriation Case

Case title - Mukhtar Ansari @ Mokhtar Ansari v. State of U.P. and Another [APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9722 of 2022]

Justice Rajiv Gupta of the Allahabad High Court on Wednesday recused himself from hearing a petition filed by former MLA Mukhtar Ansari (presently in jail) seeking to quash a chargesheet filed against him by the Uttar Pradesh police in connection with a case of misappropriation of MLA Funds fund in the year 2012-13.

"The case stands released. Put up before another Bench after seeking nomination from Hon'ble The Chief Justice/ Senior Judge, if possible on 02.05.2022 as fresh, showing the name of Shri Ratnendu Kumar Singh as counsel for the State," the Bench remarked today when the case came before it for hearing.

Ansari is a former M.L.A. of Mau Sadar constituency of Uttar Pradesh and he continued as M.L.A. from the year 1996 to March, 2022 as in the recent election, he did not contest the election.

Girl Who Had Inter-Caste Marriage Abducted From Advocate's Chamber: Allahabad HC Orders SSP/SP To Look Into 'Unfortunate' Matter

Case title - Smt. Ankita Mishra And Another v. State Of U.P. And 3 Others

Calling it an unfortunate issue, the Allahabad High Court on Wednesday directed the Senior Superintendent of Police, Prayagraj / Superintendent of Police, Jaunpur to produce the girl who had an intercaste marriage and was abducted from the chamber of the advocate forcefully.

The Bench of Justice Umesh Kumar was essentially dealing with the protection plea filed by a Girl who recently married a man from the OBC community and feared for her life and liberty at the hands of her family members.

Allahabad High Court Seeks ACJM's Personal Presence To Explain Failure To Commit Case To Court Of Session For Over 2 Years

Case Title - Suraj Pal v. State of U.P [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4629 of 2020]

The High Court sought the personal presence of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 4, Hardoi to explain his failure to commit a criminal case to the Court of Session for over 2 years.

Essentially, the Bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh was dealing with a bail application moved by one Suraj Pal/Accused against whom, the police, filed a charge sheet under Section 304 of IPC [Punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder], the cognizance upon which was taken by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hardoi on January 3, 2020. The investigation was still on and a further report was also filed on Feb 5, 2020, on which, cognizance was taken by the Magistrate.

Rape Victim's Suicide Abetment Case | Allahabad High Court Seeks UP Govt's Reply On Ex-IPS Officer Amitabh Thakur's Plea

Case title - Amitabh Thakur v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home [APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1935 of 2022]

A 482 CrPC plea has been moved by ex-IPS Officer Amitabh Thakur before the High Court seeking the setting aside of the cognizance order in connection with the case registered against him for allegedly abetting the suicide of a rape victim and her friend who had set themselves ablaze outside the Supreme Court last year.

The 24-year-old woman, who was allegedly raped by Bahujan Samaj Party MP Atul Rai in 2019, had succumbed to burn injuries on August 24. Her male friend, a 27-year-old Delhi University graduate, had died during treatment last week.

Allahabad High Court Again Seeks UP DGP's Personal Affidavit To Curtail Cases Of Fake Lottery Offers, Phone Call Scams, Etc

Case Title - Kuldeep v. State of U.P

The Allahabad High Court has once again sought the personal affidavit of the State's Director General of Police over curtailing the activities of cheats who constantly call up citizens with the fake offers of lotteries and prizes in order to rob them of their hard-earned money.

The Bench of Justice J. J. Munir expressed its displeasure over an affidavit filed by the DGP pursuant to Court's order issued on June 30, 2021. In that very order, the Court had issued the following order:

"The Director General of Police, U.P., Lucknow shall take immediate steps to trace out this widespread racket of hardened criminals, who are cunning cheats, calling up innocent citizens with alluring offers about extension of loans or lucky draws that they have won or rewards relating to TV shows, that have gone in their favour, so as to extract hard earned money from their pockets in these trying times. The Director General of Police, U.P., Lucknow shall immediately issue circulars to the District Police Heads to come down heavily on such cheats and frauds and bring them to book."

Allahabad High Court Judge Recuses From Hearing Swami Chinmayanand's Plea To Quash 2011 Shahjahanpur Rape Case

Case title - Swami Chinmayanand Saraswati v. State Of U.P. And Anr [APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 23160 of 2018]

Justice Rajiv Gupta of the Allahabad High Court on Thursday recused himself from hearing a Criminal Case quashing petition filed by former Union Minister and BJP leader Swami Chinmayanand in connection with a rape case registered against him in the year 2011.

"The case stands released. List before another Bench after seeking nomination from Hon'ble The Chief Justice/ Senior Judge, if possible on 05.05.2022," the Bench remarked yesterday when the case came before it for hearing.

Allahabad HC Directs UP Govt To Form A Committee To Consider Increasing Emoluments Fixed For MGNREGA Technical Assistants/Computer Operators

Case title - Bimal Tiwari And 14 Ors v. State Of U.P. And 2 Ors and connected matters

The High Court recently asked the Uttar Pradesh Government to constitute a committee to look into the grievance of Junior Engineers or Technical Assistants and Computer operators [employed under Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005] with regard to the increase of monthly emoluments.

The bench of Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery ordered thus while hearing writ pleas filed by 32 petitioners, recruited on a contractual basis as Junior Engineers or Technical Assistants under the MGNREGA.

Case Against Siddharth Varadarajan, Ismat Ara Over The Wire's Report On A Protestor's Death: Allahabad HC Issues Notice To Complainant

The High Court has issued a notice to the complainant/informant [Rampur resident, Sanju Turaiha] in the case registered against The Wire's founding editor Siddharth Varadarajan and reporter Ismat Ara for tweeting a report on the death of a protester in New Delhi during the 2021 Republic Day incidents.

Essentially, the bench of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Rajnish Kumar issued this order on a plea filed by Siddharth Varadarajan and Ara seeking quashing of an FIR filed against them under IPC sections 153B (imputations, assertions prejudicial to national integration) and 505(2) (statements creating or promoting enmity between classes) for tweeting a story on Navreet Singh Dibdibiya (farm law protestor who died during the protest in Delhi) and thereby, misleading people.

ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT

1. Hindu Rule Of Damdupat Does Not Apply To The State Of Andhra Pradesh For Any Money Transactions: Andhra Pradesh High Court

Case Title: Edhellacheruvu Balarami Reddy Versus Edhellacheruvu Munaswamy Redd

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AP) 61

The Andhra Pradesh High Court recently observed that the Hindu Rule of Damdupat which specifies that the interest amount charged cannot exceed the principal amount, does not apply to money transactions in the State of Andhra Pradesh.

The suit was filed by the plaintiff for recovery of Rs. 2,48,402/-, principal being Rs. 70,000/- and interest comes to Rs. 1,78,402/-. In the plaint, it was contended that defendant borrowed an amount Rs. 70,000/- on 16.08.2000 and executed a registered mortgage deed and agreed to pay interest at 24% p.a. Since the defendant failed to repay the amount, a legal notice in 2011 was issued and subsequently a suit was filed

2. Relief Of Specific Performance In An Agreement Of Sale Will Not Be Granted If Vendor Has No Absolute Title Over Suit Schedule Property: Andhra Pradesh HC

Nominal Index

Gaurav Suresh Tingre v Priyanka Gaurav Tingre. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 144

Brijmohan Dhirajprasad Mishra v The State of Maharashtra and Others. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 145

Purushottam s/o Tulsiram Badwaik and Ors. versus Anil s/o Hariram Malewar and Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 146

Akanksha Babasaheb Shinde v State of Maharashtra and ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 147

Ambica Fertilisers Versus The Union of India. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 148

Akshay @ Vikas Ramesh Chavan vs Kailas Vitthalrao Shinde and ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 149

Barun Kumar and Ors v. The State of Maharashtra and Ors., and connected matters. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 150

Vijay Anandrao Moghe and ors v The Additional Collector/Sub-Divisional Officer and ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 151

Mayur Vasant Sonawane v. State of Maharashtra & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 152

Dipak Kalicharan Kanojiya v. State of Maharashtra and anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 153

P Varavara Rao v. National Investigation Agency. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 154

Atul Gorakhnath Ambale Versus The State of Maharashtra. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 155

State of Goa vs Tarun Tejpal. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 156

Chetan Iron LLP v. NRC Ltd. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 157

ROUND-UP

1. Non-Custodial Parent Can't Be Deprived Of Right To Spend Quality Time & Enjoy Company Of Children: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Gaurav Suresh Tingre v Priyanka Gaurav Tingre

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 144

The Bombay High Court observed that non-custodial parent cannot be deprived of his right to spend quality time and enjoy the company of the children. Moreover, the children also have right to love and affection of both parents as well as grandparents.

Justice Anuja Prabhudessai stated, "the children also have right to love and affection of both parents as well as grandparents. This is essential for personal development and overall well-being of the children."

The Single Judge permitted the Petitioner-father to four days' access to the children and referred the matter for mediation so that the parties may arrive at an amicable settlement.

2. Number Of Students In Govt Aided Schools Inflated To Divert Public Money: Bombay HC Seeks Action Against Culprits, Appoints Committee To Curb Malpractices

Case Title: Brijmohan Dhirajprasad Mishra v The State of Maharashtra and Others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 145

The Bombay High court recently constituted a committee to curb alleged malpractices in the Maharashtra Education Department while asking the government to continue its belated efforts to remedy the situation by recovering monies.

A bench of Justices Ramesh Dhanuka and Sanjay Mehare appointed a three-member committee on the issue of alleged practice of showing inflated student strength so as to appoint more teachers in aided and private schools.

The petitioner alleged that the numbers of students shown to have been admitted by various schools are inflated by large number of schools in connivance with some of the officers of the State Government who are empowered to grant sanction for grant-in-aid and other facilities to these schools for imparting education to these students resulting in fraudulent diversion of crores of rupees of public money.

3. Court Lacking Jurisdiction To Appoint An Arbitrator, Cannot Do So Based No Objection By The Opposite Party: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Purushottam s/o Tulsiram Badwaik and Ors. versus Anil s/o Hariram Malewar and Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 146

The Bombay High Court ruled that a Court cannot appoint an Arbitrator when the only proceeding before it is an application for grant of interim measures under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, solely on the ground that the opposite party has not objected to the appointment of an Arbitrator.

A single bench of Justice Manish Pitale held that even if an arbitration clause exists, appointment of an Arbitrator can only take place in accordance with the law. The Court added that merely because no objection is endorsed by the opposite party, a Court will not be foisted with the jurisdiction to appoint an Arbitrator.

4. Bombay High Court Orders Issuance Of Provisional Caste Certificate For Higher Studies While Student's Uncle's Caste Certificate Is Under The Scanner

Case Title: Akanksha Babasaheb Shinde v State of Maharashtra and ors

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 147

The Bombay High court held that till final withdrawal of caste certificate of Petitioner's uncle by the competent authority, she is entitled to benefits sought for by relying upon the said Certificate.

A bench of Justices Sunil B. Shukre and G.A. Sanap noted that even though there are genuine concerns regarding the validity of the Petitioner's uncle's caste certificate and the same is under reconsideration, yet until it not withdrawn, the Petitioner is entitled to benefits accruing from it.

5. Dept. To Decide Whether Corrected Form TRAN-1 Would Be Entertained As Per Transitional Provision Under GST: Bombay High Court Allows Taxpayers To Correct Form TRAN-1

Case Title: Ambica Fertilisers Versus The Union of India

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 148

The Bombay High Court bench of Justices R.D. Dhanuka and S.G. Mehare allowed the taxpayers to correct Form TRAN-1. The court directed the department to consider the issue of whether Form TRAN-1 and other forms that would be filed or corrected by the petitioner can be entertained in accordance with provisions of section 140 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and Rule 117 (1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 or not.

The petitioner/assessees filed Form TRAN-1, but inadvertently did not claim approximately Rs. 13,17,956 on the Form TRAN-1. There was no option available to the petitioner to revise the Form TRAN-1 after December 27, 2017. There was also a further condition of revising the form only once before the due date. The form TRAN-1 was not accepted. According to the petitioner, since the petitioner missed out on the claim of approximately Rs. 13,17,956, the petitioner prayed for permission by making a representation to correct the said mistake, which was not allowed.

6. Motor Accident Claim | Can't Compute Compensation On Basis Of 45% Permanent Disability In Case Of 100% Functional Disability: Bombay HC

Case Title: Akshay @ Vikas Ramesh Chavan vs Kailas Vitthalrao Shinde and ors

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 149

The Bombay High court held that the Motor Accident Tribunal at Aurangabad has committed an error in accepting the permanent disability of the claimant of a motor accident at 45% when it is a case of 100% loss of earning capacity due to amputation of leg.

Single judge Shrikant D. Kulkarni also awarded Rs 1 lakh compensation for loss of marriage prospects and another lakh for loss of happiness, amenities and entertainment of life.

7. "Will Impact Students & Staff": Bombay High Court Refuses Closure Of Only Engineering College In Gondia District Of Maharashtra

Case Title: Barun Kumar and Ors v. The State of Maharashtra and Ors., and connected matters

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 150

In a victory for the employees and students, the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court refused to grant closure permission to the only engineering institute in Gondia district of Maharashtra, observing that the management doesn't have an unfettered right to close down an institution at will as the closure would impact the education/studies and staff employed therein.

A division bench of Justices Nitin Jamdar and Anil Pansare, in a judgement on Tuesday, upheld the Vice-Chancellor of University's order, rejecting the closure permission sought by the management of the Manoharbhai Patel Institute of Engineering and Technology – established and run by the Gondia Education Society since 1983-84.

According to the institute's website, Varsha Patel is the president of GES. She is the wife of former union minister Praful Patel and daughter-in- law of late philanthropist and politician Manoharbai Patel.

8. Transfer Of Tribal Land Impermissible Without Collector's Permission Even If Land Transferred To Another Tribal: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Vijay Anandrao Moghe and ors v The Additional Collector/Sub-Divisional Officer and ors

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 151

The Bombay High court recently observed that provisions of Section 36(2) of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code (Code) do not make any distinction based on the status of the purchaser or transferee. Hence, transfer of tribal land is impermissible without Collector's permission even if the land is transferred to another tribal.

Single Judge Rohit B. Deo stated that, "The Legislature has in its wisdom not exempted tribal to tribal transfer from the requirement of previous sanction from the Collector. Presumably, the Legislature was conscious of the fact that a tribal is vulnerable and could possibly be exploited or induced to part with the agricultural land even by a fellow tribal who is in a more dominating position in life. It is precisely to prevent such exploitation that the previous sanction of the Collector is statutorily mandated."

9. Orders Passed By Divisional Commissioner U/S 60 Maharashtra Police Act Are Quasi-Judicial, Must Be Supported By Reasons: Bombay High Court Full Bench

Case Title: Mayur Vasant Sonawane v. State of Maharashtra & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 152

A full bench of the Bombay High Court held that the Divisional Commissioner's orders on externment under the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 are not administrative orders but are quasi-judicial in nature and the officer is duty-bound to give reasons for the same.

Consequently, the matters challenging the order passed under Section 60 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 would lie before a single judge bench and not a division bench under Chapter-XVII of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960. The The Bench comprising of Justices SS Shinde, Prakash D. Naik and Sarang V. Kotwal said –

(i) The power under Section 60 of the Act of 1951 is quasi judicial in nature and the orders passed under that Section are quasi judicial orders.

(ii) There is a duty to give reasons, at least in brief, while disposing the appeals under Section 60 of the Act of 1951.

10. "No Room For Arrogance, No License To Intimidate The Court": Bombay HC Reprimands Advocate Over Allegations Of Bias, Delayed Hearing

Case Title: Dipak Kalicharan Kanojiya v. State of Maharashtra and anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 153

The Bombay High Court observed that while an advocate's frustration over a delayed hearing was understandable, but it didn't give them a license to intimidate the Court and make reckless allegations against a Judge polluting the very fountain of justice.

Justice Anuja Prabhudessai reprimanded a lawyer for making allegations of "partiality" and "unfairness" against the court during a bail hearing and said that the advocate's conduct was "unbecoming of an advocate".

"An advocate as an Officer of the Court is under an obligation to maintain the dignity and decorum of the Court. There is no room for arrogance and there is no license to intimidate the Court, make reckless accusations and allegations against a Judge and to pollute the very fountain of justice."

11. 'Seriousness & Severity Of Crime Would Remain Till Such Time The Accused Is Pronounced Not Guilty': Bombay HC While Rejecting Varavara Rao's Bail Plea

Case Title: P Varavara Rao v. National Investigation Agency

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 154

Refusing to grant permanent bail on medical grounds to Bhima Koregaon - Elgar Parishad accused poet Varavara Rao the Bombay High Court said that prima facie observations regarding "seriousness and severity" of the crime he is accused of would remain till he is pronounced "not guilty."

Therefore, based on Rao's sound clinical summary dated December 15, 2021, and the allegations against him of being the "main conspirator," he was not entitled to medial bail, the court held.

"Seriousness and severity of the crime would remain till such time the accused is pronounced not guilty of the crime alleged to have been committed by him. Role attributed to the accused is serious. He is one of the main conspirators. Therefore, in our opinion, on the medical ground the accused is not entitled to get bail", a division bench of Justices Sunil Shukre and GA Sanap observed.

12. Delay In POCSO Cases Benefits Accused, Minor Victim May Forget Incident With Passage Of Time: Bombay HC Issues Directions For Expeditious Trial

Case Title: Atul Gorakhnath Ambale Versus The State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 155

The Bombay High Court observed that delay in trials in cases of sexual abuse often lead to re-victimization and ignominy, as the trial process itself makes the victim re-live the horrific experience and in cases of small children, due to their vulnerability, it may lead to further trauma.

Single judge Revati Mohite Dere said,"this Court has come across several cases, where the child/victim's evidence is not recorded for years and hence, it would be appropriate to issue some directions to the trial Courts conducting cases under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act ('POCSO')."

13. 'Inferences About Victim's Conduct May Need A Revisit' : Bombay High Court Grants Leave To State To Appeal Against Tarun Tejpal's Acquittal

Case Title: State of Goa vs Tarun Tejpal

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 156

Noting that certain observations by the trial judge about rape victim's conduct need to be revisited, the Bombay High Court (Goa Bench) granted leave to the State of Goa to appeal against the order acquitting Tarun Tejpal in a 2013 sexual harassment case.

The Court rejected Tejpal's preliminary objections against the State's leave to appeal.

A division bench of Justice MS Sonak and RN Laddha also observed that inferences against the victim regarding legal consultation also needed to be looked into.

"Based on this evidence, perhaps, some of the learned Additional Sessions Judge inferences about the victim's conduct may also need a revisit. The inference from the victim's conduct of consulting some lawyers before lodging her complaint may also require a revisit. Finally, the contention about the alleged admissions in the messages or the proper scope of such statements also requires consideration. These are brief reasons, not intended to be exhaustive for a moment", the bench said in the order.

14. Court Can't Grant Interim Relief Under Section 9 Of A&C Act, If The Contract Is Determinable: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Chetan Iron LLP v. NRC Ltd.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 157

The Bombay High Court held that an application for interim relief in the form of specific performance of the contract would not be maintainable when the nature of the contract is determinable.

A single bench of Justice G.S. Kulkarni held that specific performance cannot be granted in respect of an agreement that can be terminated by either of the parties without assigning any reasons. It held that Section 14(1)(c) and Section 41(e) of the Specific Relief Act would be attracted when the interim relief for specific performance is prayed for in respect of an agreement that is in its nature determinable.

CALCUTTA HIGH COURT

Nominal Index [Citations 126- 140]

Debaki Nandan Maiti v. The State of West Bengal and Ors 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 126

Anindya Sundar Das v. West Bengal Taxation Tribunal Bar Association and Others 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 127

Dr. Sudipta Banerjee v. L.S. Davar & Company & Ors 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 128

Rajib Chakraborty and Ors v. The State of West Bengal and Ors 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 129

In the matter of : Ms. Minakhi Mukherjee & Ors 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 130

Prafulla Mura v. The State of West Bengal & Anr 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 131

Shaista Afreen and Others v. The State of West Bengal and Others 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 132

The State of West Bengal v. Union of India & Anr 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 133

Manav Investment and Training Company Ltd v. DBS Bank India Ltd 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 134

Anindya Sundar Das v. Union of India and other connected matters 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 135

Priyanka Tibrewal v. State of West Bengal and Ors Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 136

Pallabi Chatterjee and Ors v. State of West Bengal and other connected matters 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 137

Pallabi Chatterjee and Ors v. State of West Bengal and other connected matters 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 138

Haren Bagchi Biswas alias Harendranath Biswas v. Union of India 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 139

Sukumar Ray v. M/s Indo-Industrial Services and Ors. 2022 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 140

Orders/Judgments

1. 'Not In Poor Financial Condition': Calcutta High Court Upholds Eviction Order Against Daughter-In-Law From Her Father-In-Law's House

Case Title: Debaki Nandan Maiti v. The State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 126

The Calcutta High Court has recently upheld an eviction order wherein the daughter-in-law was directed to vacate the residence belonging to her father-in-law after noting that she is a medical practitioner and is thus not in a poor financial condition. Justice Rajasekhar Mantha observed, "The applicant, Swati Das, is admittedly a medical practitioner. She is neither destitute nor in a poor economic or financial condition, and there is no averment to that effect in the application. Apart from the questions of law raised by the applicant daughter-in-law, she has not able to make out any case for restoration with possession of her father-in-law's house." The Court noted that the applicant had never claimed any right of residence or share of the household against the father-in-law or her husband under the provisions of the the Domestic Violence Act, 2005. It was also noted that the applicant had not asserted any domestic violence or torture perpetrated by either her father-in-law or her husband. Thus, the Court opined that it can exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction of this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to protect the life and liberty of the senior citizen under Article 21 of the Constitution. "In respect of a discomfort expressed by a senior citizen towards his children, a single complaint is good enough evidence. Further, there are no disputed questions of fact in the instant case i.e., that the house admittedly belongs to the father of the writ petitioner", the Court underscored further.

2. Calcutta HC Sets Aside Order Extending Tenure Of Technical Member Of WB Taxation Tribunal, Orders State To Expeditiously Make New Appointment

Case Title: Anindya Sundar Das v. West Bengal Taxation Tribunal Bar Association and Others

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 127

The Calcutta High Court on Monday set aside an order whereby the tenure of the existing Technical Member of the West Bengal Taxation Tribunal has been extended until formal appointment of Technical Member by the Government. A Bench comprising Chief Justice Prakash Shrivastava and Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj directed, "..the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge is set aside, however by making it clear that if a fresh prayer for stay is made before the learned Single Judge, then the same will be duly considered in accordance with law and appropriate order will be passed taking into account the aforesaid relevant aspects of the matter." The Court however clarified that since the Administrative Member of the Tribunal has continued by virtue of the impugned interim order, therefore, the orders passed by him in the meanwhile are saved from challenge on the ground of his continuance as such. The Bench noted that no facts or legal provisions had been referred to in the impugned order passed by Justice Rajasekhar Mantha and was thus liable to be set aside.

3. Time To Re-Look At S.27 Of Indian Contract Act To Protect 'Trade Secrets': Calcutta High Court

Case Title: Dr. Sudipta Banerjee v. L.S. Davar & Company & Ors

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 128

The Calcutta High Court has recently upheld an injunction order passed against former employees of a law firm restraining them from divulging confidential information and trade secrets gathered during the course of their employment. The Court further opined that sharing of such information and communication would not only be unethical but would also constitute a breach of the confidentiality clause in the service contract causing serious prejudice to the law firm. A Bench comprising Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee observed, "The plaintiff as a professional body may not have any trade secrets per se but the persons who were/are in employment of the plaintiff would certainly be privy to privileged information and any sharing of such information and communication would not only be unethical but also a breach of the confidentiality clause which may result in serious prejudice and harm that may be caused to the clients of the plaintiff firm and may expose the plaintiff firm to civil and criminal consequences." Opining that a balance needs to be maintained between the right to freedom of trade and protection of trade secrets, the Court remarked, "The time has possibly come to have a re-look at Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act since times have changed and there is a necessity to impose some restrictions and recognize negative covenants in service contracts especially where it involves specialized knowledge as it must live up to the present needs. While freedom of contract and trade need to be upheld, they must also be balanced. No one should be allowed to take advantage of the trade secrets and confidential information developed by an individual and uses it for their own gain and when confronted, take the shelter of this section. Confidential information and trade secrets are required to be protected by law."

4. Calcutta HC Orders School To Withdraw Notice Preventing Students From Attending Classes For Non-Payment Of Dues, Orders Display Of Order In Notice Boards

Case Title: Rajib Chakraborty and Ors v. The State of West Bengal and Ors

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 129

The Calcutta High Court on Tuesday reiterated that private unaided schools whose names had come up with regards to allegations of arbitrary fee hike during the pandemic cannot deny promotion to any student or withhold report cards for non-payment of fees. The Court further instructed such schools to put up the Court's earlier interim orders stipulating such a direction in a suitable place in their notice boards for the appreciation by all concerned. A Bench comprising Justice IP Mukherji and Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya was adjudicating upon a bunch of PILs alleging that schools in particular G.D Birla Centre For Education have prevented students who have failed to clear their outstanding dues from attending classes or being promoted. Directing G.D Birla Centre for Education to immediately withdraw the impugned notice, the Court observed, "G.D. Birla Centre for Education will immediately withdraw its notice dated 9th April, 2022 and allow the students to attend classes in the usual course immediately. All other schools will also follow the directions in this order."

5. Calcutta HC Grants Anticipatory Bail To Youth Leader Meenakshi Mukherjee In Case Of Alleged Violence During Protest Against Murder Of Anis Khan

Case Title: In the matter of : Ms. Minakhi Mukherjee & Ors.

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 130

The Calcutta High Court on Tuesday granted anticipatory bail to prominent youth leader and president of West Bengal Demorcatic Youth Federation of India (DYFI) Meenakshi Mukherjee in a case pertaining to the incident of alleged violence during a march in Howrah on February 26 to protest the murder of youth leader Anis Khan. Meenakshi and 16 others were arrested and slapped with attempt to murder charges for allegedly inciting violence during the protest to condemn student activist Anis Khan's murder. Khan was found dead at his home in Amta block in Howrah district in the early hours of February 19, 2022. Alleging that four persons had come to their house on Friday night donning police and civic volunteer uniforms, Khan's father has claimed that his son was pushed off the third floor of their house in Amta. A Bench comprising Justice Debangsu Basak and Justice Bibhas Ranjan De ordered, "Considering the nature of injuries suffered and considering the gravity of the offence and the involvement of the petitioners therein, we are inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners."

6. 'Redact Names In Pleadings, File Affidavits In Sealed Covers' : Calcutta HC Issues Directions To Ensure Anonymity Of Victims Of Sexual Offences In Court Records

Case Title: Prafulla Mura v. The State of West Bengal & Anr

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 131

The Calcutta High Court on Monday issued practice directions in order to ensure that the identity of victims of sexual offences including minor victims under the POCSO Act are not disclosed in the pleadings and other records of the Court. The directions were issued while adjudicating upon an appeal filed challenging an order of conviction under Section 6 of the POCSO Act wherein the appellant had arrayed the minor victim as a respondent describing her by name and also disclosing her father's name. A Bench comprising Justice Bivas Pattanayak and Justice Joymalya Bagchi observed that such a disclosure in the petition of appeal runs contrary to the provisions of Section 33(7) of the POCSO Act as well as Section 228A of the IPC. Opining that necessary amendments are required to be made to the rules of this Court to avoid such disclosure of identity of victims, the Court underscored, "In order to avoid illegal publication of identity and other particulars of victim of offences under sections 376, 376A, 376AB, 376B, 376C, 376D, 376DA, 376DB, 376E of the Indian Penal Code as well as minor victims in the pleadings and/or documents filed before this Court, necessary amendments are required to be made to the rules of this Court." Thus, the Court also ordered the Registrar General to place the matter before the Rule Committee of the Court for considering the issue of amendments of the rules of the Court so that the identity of victims of sexual offences including minor victims under POCSO Act are not disclosed in the pleadings and other records of the Court.

7. Hanskhali Gangrape & Murder: Calcutta HC Issues Orders For Witness Protection At State Expense

Case Title: Shaista Afreen and Others v. The State of West Bengal and Others

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 132

The Calcutta High Court vide order dated April 20 has allowed for the filing of a witness protection application before the competent authority as specified under the Witness Protection Scheme, 2018 to protect the family members of the victim in the Hanskhali gangrape and murder case wherein a probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) had been ordered into a week back. A Bench comprising Chief Justice Prakash Shrivastava and Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj ordered, "Having regard to the nature of allegation which have been made in the application it is necessary to extend protection to the members of the family as also witnesses of the incident. Hence, we permit the filing of the witness protection application before the competent authority as specified in Witness Protection Scheme, 2018 and on receipt of such application the competent authority is directed to take a decision and pass appropriate order for witness protection, proportionate to the threat perception, in accordance with the Scheme, without any unnecessary delay." Opining that the State government should bear the expenses of the witness protection as may be directed by the competent authority, the Court ordered, "Considering the peculiar facts of the case we direct respondent State to bear the expenses of witness protection as may be directed by the competent authority."

Also Read: Hanskhali Gangrape & Murder: Calcutta High Court Reserves Order In Plea Seeking Implementation Of Witness Protection Scheme 2018

8. 'Powers Of Central Agency Wider': Calcutta HC Orders Transfer Of Probe Into Birbhum Explosions To NIA

Case Title: The State of West Bengal v. Union of India & Anr.

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 133

The Calcutta High Court has recently ordered the transfer of investigation into explosions in Birbhum district to the National Investigation Agency (NIA) from the Crime Investigation Department (CID) of State of West Bengal by holding that the central agency has precedence in the investigation of scheduled offence. A Bench comprising Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Bivas Pattanayak vacated an earlier stay by a Single Judge on the NIA probe and directed the CID to cooperate with NIA and to transfer all documents related to its probe into the 2019 explosion in two residential houses in Birbhum if required. The Court ordered, "..we are inclined to vary the interim order passed earlier and direct subject to the result of the petition and without prejudice to rights and contentions of the parties, investigation of the aforesaid case be transferred and conducted by N.I.A. State Agency is directed to cooperate with N.I.A. in that regard and if required to transfer all documents pertaining to its investigation to the Central Agency in accordance with law." Opining that the powers of the Central agency are much wider than the State agency, the Court remarked, "Furthermore, investigation by Central Agency, whose powers are much wider than the State Agency, would be more effective and enure to the ends of justice. Hence, balance of convenience also lies in favour of variation/vacating of the interim direction."

9. S.176 Contract Act | Court Should Not Be Used To Prevent Lender From Exercising His Rightful Legal Claim Against Borrower: Calcutta HC

Case Title: Manav Investment and Training Company Ltd v. DBS Bank India Ltd.

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 134

The Calcutta High Court has recently underscored that the Court should not be used to prevent a loan giver from exercising his rightful legal claim against the borrower. Justice Shekhar B. Saraf was adjudicating upon an interlocutory application seeking injunction against the respondent bank from giving any effect to letters dated 23rd February, 2022 vide which the bank had invoked the pledge and had expressed its intention as a pawnee to dispose of the security under Section 176 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 (Act). The Court had earlier passed an order in favour of the petitioner by opining that the notices dated July 17, 2021 previously issued by the respondent bank did not adhere to the requirements laid down under Section 176 of the Act. The Court had averred that the notices did not provide the petitioner with a clear intent of sale as is required under Section 176 and had further held that the phrase 'right to sale mentioned in the notices was insufficient and did not convey an intention to sale. Opining that the petitioner cannot be allowed to nitpick on the notices being issued by the respondent bank, Justice Saraf underscored, "The undisputed fact in the present case is that the petitioners have failed to pay back the amounts due to the respondent bank and is now thwarting each and every step being taken by the bank to obtain its legitimate outstanding dues. In my view, the attempts being made by the petitioner by nitpicking on the notices being issued by the respondent bank is only a ploy to avoid the harsh reality that loans are required to be paid back. The resultant consequences of failure to pay will have to necessarily follow and this court should not be used, rather abused, to prevent the loan giver from exercising his rightful legal claims against the borrower. The balance of convenience and inconvenience is also in favour of the respondent bank, and accordingly, I do not find this to be a fit case to interfere in any manner whatsoever."

10. WB Post Poll Violence: Calcutta HC Directs State Gov To Decide Plea For Compensation Of Deceased BJP Worker Abhijit Sarkar Within 2 Months

Case Title: Anindya Sundar Das v. Union of India and other connected matters

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 135

The Calcutta High Court on Wednesday directed the State government to expeditiously decide an application for compensation moved by the family members of deceased BJP worker Abhijit Sarkar who was allegedly killed by TMC members during the violence that had allegedly taken place post the declaration of the West Bengal assembly elections in May 2021. The Court vide order dated August 19, 2021 had handed over to the CBI the investigation of cases related to murder, rape and crime against women whereas a SIT had been constituted to investigate other criminal cases related to post-poll violence. The parents of Sarkar had moved a plea before the Bench comprising Chief Justice Prakash Shrivastava and Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj seeking compensation from the State as per the Court's earlier directions. The counsel appearing for the petitioner apprised the Court that a representation dated March 11, 2022 had been made before the Chief Secretary, Government of West Bengal and the Secretary, Department of Home and Hill Affairs regarding payment of compensation. However, it was averred that no response has been received on such a representation. Accordingly, the Court directed the State government to take a decision on such an application seeking compensation as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of 2 months.

11. WB Post Poll Violence: Calcutta High Court Constitutes 3-Member Committee To Address Complaints Of Alleged Victims

Case Title: Priyanka Tibrewal v. State of West Bengal and Ors

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 136

The Calcutta High Court on Wednesday constituted a three member committee to conduct an enquiry into the allegation that over 303 victims have been displaced due to the post-poll violence in West Bengal that had allegedly taken place post the declaration of the West Bengal assembly elections in May 2021. The Court vide order dated August 19, 2021 had handed over to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) the investigation of cases related to murder, rape and crime against women whereas a Special Investigation Team (SIT) had been constituted to investigate other criminal cases related to post-poll violence. A Bench comprising Chief Justice Prakash Shrivastava and Justice Rajrashi Bharadwaj was adjudicating upon a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition by petitioner Priyanka Tibrewal wherein it had been submitted that over 303 victims had been displaced due to the alleged violence and had been subsequently prevented from returning to their respective houses and workplaces. On Wednesday, pursuant to the rival submissions, the Court constituted a three member committee comprising of the following persons, (i) a member/ nominee of the National Human Rights Commission; (ii) a member/ nominee of State Human Rights Commission; and (iii) Member Secretary, State Legal Services Authority. The Court further directed the Committee to ensure that appropriate opportunity of hearing is given to the State government before it reaches to any conclusion. The Committee was further instructed to address the complaints of the alleged victims and conduct an enquiry into their right to return to their houses and workplaces.

12. Calcutta High Court Directs IPS Officer Damayanti Sen To Oversee Probe In Namkhana Rape Case Of WB

Case Title: Pallabi Chatterjee and Ors v. State of West Bengal and other connected matters

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 137

The Calcutta High Court on Friday asked IPS officer Damayanti Sen to oversee the probe in the Namkhana rape case wherein a 40-year-old woman was reportedly gang-raped on April 8 by five men in West Bengal's Namkhana village and an attempt had also been made to pour kerosene inside the victim's private parts and set her ablaze. A Bench comprising Chief Justice Prakasha Shrivastava and Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj on Friday took on record the status report as well as the case diary pertaining to the investigation into the rape case. Pursuant to the perusal of the case diary and also the status report, the Court directed, "Having examined the case diary and considering the report in the form of the affidavit and also taking note of the allegations made and progress of investigation, we deem it proper that investigation in this case be carried out under the supervision of Damyanti Sen, Special Commissioner of Police." The Court however observed that in case the IPS officer has any difficulty in supervising the investigation, she will be at liberty to intimate the same to the Court on the next date of hearing. The Court also directed the State government to submit a further status report on the next date of hearing which is slated to take place on May 2.

13. 'Local Influential Person Involved': Calcutta High Court Directs IPS Officer Parul Kush Jain To Oversee Probe Into Pingla Rape Case Of WB

Case Title: Pallabi Chatterjee and Ors v. State of West Bengal and other connected matters.

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 138

The Calcutta High Court on Friday directed IPS officer Parul Kush Jain to oversee the probe in the Pingla rape case wherein an alleged attempt to rape was made on a differently-abled woman by a local panchayat member said to have affiliation to the Trinamool Congress at Pingla in West Midnapore district on April 11. The IPS officer is currently posted as the Inspector General of Police (IGP) of the Traffic department of West Bengal. The direction was issued while adjudicating upon a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition seeking a CBI probe into 5 recent rape cases that are reported in various districts of West Bengal this month. Incidents of rape have been reported to have taken place at Netra and Namkhana villages in South 24 Parganas district, at Pingla in West Midnapore district, at a village near Santiniketan in Birbhum district and at Mainaguri of Jalpaiguri district in West Bengal in the last few weeks. A Bench comprising Chief Justice Prakasha Shrivastava and Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj on Friday took on record the status report as well as the case diary pertaining to the investigation into the rape case. Pursuant to the perusal of the case diary and the status report, the Court observed that the considering the nature of allegations made, the investigation into the rape case should be supervised by a senior lady police officer. Furthermore, the Chief Justice during the proceedings also orally remarked, "We feel that a local influential person is involved" while underscoring the need for the investigation to be overseen by a senior IPS officer.

14. Calcutta High Court Dismisses PIL Praying To Print Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose's Image On Indian Currency

Case Title: Haren Bagchi Biswas alias Harendranath Biswas v. Union of India

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 139

The Calcutta High Court recently dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea seeking directions to print images of Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose on Indian currency notes. The plea had been moved by 94-year-old freedom fighter, one Haren Bagchi Biswas. The bench of Chief Justice Prakash Shrivastava and Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj took into account the decision of the Madras High Court in the case K.K. Ramesh v. Union of India and Ors., wherein, finding no fault in Central Government and RBI's decision to retain only the image of Mahatma Gandhi and of no other personality in the currency notes, the High Court recently had dismissed a plea challenging Centre's rejection of a representation for printing the image of Nethaji Subash Chandra Bose on currency notes. "This Court is not underestimating the fight and the sacrifice made by Nethaji Subash Chandra Bose and other great leaders for freedom moment of this Country. There are many known heroes and unsung heroes. If everybody starts making such a claim there will not be an end", a Bench comprising Justices N. Kirubakaran and M. Duraiswamy of the Madras High Court had observed. Having regard to the above, the Court came to an opinion that no case for issuing the direction as prayed for in the present case was made out. The writ petition was accordingly dismissed.

15. If Original Agreement Contains Arbitration Clause, Subsequent Agreement Extending Just Validity Need Not To Have A Separate Arbitration Clause: Calcutta High Court

Case Title: Sukumar Ray v. M/s Indo-Industrial Services and Ors. A.P No. 70 of 2022

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 140

The High Court of Calcutta has held that a subsequent agreement entered into between the parties need not contain a separate arbitration clause if it is made only to extend the validity of the original agreement that contained an arbitration clause. The Single Bench of Justice Shekhar B. Saraf has held that if the new agreement provides for a specific reference to the terms of the earlier agreement and does not contain any clause other than the extension of the validity of the original agreement then there is no requirement to have an arbitration clause in the new agreement. The Court further held that the arbitration clause contained in the original agreement would not come to an end due to efflux of time merely because the subsequent agreement does not have an arbitration clause.

Important Developments

1. PIL Seeking CBI Probe Into Murder Of TMC Councillor Anupam Dutta: Calcutta HC Seeks State Gov's Response

Case Title: Anindya Sundar Das v. State of West Bengal and Ors

The Calcutta High Court on Monday sought the State government's response in a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition filed seeking a probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) into the murder of Panihati Trinamool Congress (TMC) councillor Anupam Dutta. According to reports, Councillor Anupam Dutta was shot dead on March 12 when he had gone to take stock of work on a park in his area. CCTV footage of the area shows Dutta riding pillion on a two-wheeler when he was shot at point-blank rage. The assailant was seen wearing a blue and white striped T-shirt besides a mask. In a separate incident on the same day, in Purulia district, four-time Congress councillor of Jhalda municipality, Tapan Kundu, was shot dead by unidentified motorcycle-borne persons when he went for a walk near his residence. The High Court had subsequently ordered a CBI probe into the incident by opining that there is a need for instilling faith of the public at large. A Bench comprising Chief Justice Prakash Shrivastava and Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj was apprised by the counsel appearing for the petitioner that a CBI probe in necessary into the brutal murder of councillor Anupam Dutta. The Bench was further informed that a Single Judge Bench had already ordered a CBI probe into the death of former Congress councillor of Jhalda Municipality in Purulia, Tapan Kandu. Pursuant to the submissions by the concerned counsel, the Bench ordered the State government to obtain instructions in the matter within a period of 1 week and listed the matter for further hearing on May 2.

2. Cooch Bihar Firing: Calcutta High Court Seeks Response From State, Centre On Pleas By Victims' Kin Seeking Compensation

Case Title: Aminuddin Khan v. Union of India and other connected matters

The Calcutta High Court sought response from the State government as well as the Union of India in a batch of petitions filed by the legal heirs of those who died due to the alleged firing by CISF personnel on April 10, 2021, at Sitalkuchi in Cooch Behar district during the West Bengal Assembly polls. The petitions alleged that the incident was a result of police firing in the course of electioneering. As a result, an independent probe into the matter had been sought. Consequently, the investigation had been transferred to West Bengal's Criminal Investigation Department (CID). A Bench comprising Chief Justice Prakash Shrivastava and Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj was apprised that the family members of the victims have filed petitions pertaining to the incident seeking various reliefs including compensation from the State. The Court dismissed the PILs as non-maintainable on account of the fact that the legal heirs of the victims had already filed petitions before the Court seeking relief. Taking cognisance of the grievance raised, the Court directed the State government as well as the Union of India to file their affidavits-in-opposition within a period of 4 weeks. Any reply by the petitioners were ordered to be filed within 1 week thereafter. The matter is slated for further hearing on June 13.

3. PIL For CBI Probe In 5 Recent Rape Cases In WB: Calcutta HC Calls For Case Diary & Status Report, Extends Police Protection To Victims & Witnesses

Case Title: Pallabi Chatterjee and Ors v. State of West Bengal

The Calcutta High Court on Tuesday directed the State government to submit the case diary along with a status report pertaining to the investigation into the 5 recent rape cases that are reported in various districts of West Bengal this month. Incidents of rape have been reported to have taken place at Netra and Namkhana villages in South 24 Parganas district, at Pingla in West Midnapore district, at a village near Santiniketan in Birbhum district and at Mainaguri of Jalpaiguri district in West Bengal in the last few weeks. The direction was issued by the Court while adjudicating upon a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition filed by women advocates of the High Court seeking a probe by the CBI or any other independent agency into the rape cases. A Bench comprising Chief Justice Prakasha Shrivastava and Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj on Tuesday noted that most of the rape cases involved minors. Considering the nature of the incidents and the allegations levelled, Bench directed Advocate General S.N Mookherjee appearing on behalf of the State government to produce a report relating to the status of the investigation and also the case diary on the next date of hearing. The Court also ordered the competent authorities to extend full protection to the victims and the witnesses in the rape cases in the meantime.

Also Read: PILs Filed Before Calcutta High Court Seeking CBI Probe Into 5 Rape Cases Reported This Month In West Bengal

4. WB Post Poll Violence: Calcutta HC Asks NHRC & WBHRC If It Can Constitute Committee To Address Complaints Of Alleged Victims

Case Title: Priyanka Tibrewal v. State of West Bengal and Ors

The Calcutta High Court on Tuesday directed the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) and the West Bengal Human Rights Commission (WBHRC) to obtain instructions as to whether they are in a position to conduct an enquiry into the allegation that close to 303 victims have been displaced due to the post-poll violence in West Bengal and have been obstructed from returning to their houses and workplaces. A Bench comprising Chief Justice Prakash Shrivastava and Justice Rajrashi Bharadwaj was adjudicating upon a prayer put forward by petitioner Priyanka Tibrewal to constitute a committee of two Members, one from the NHRC and the State Human Rights Commission to address the complaints of 303 alleged victims of post-poll violence. On Tuesday, the Court directed the counsels appearing for the NHRC and the WBHRC to make their stand clear on the next date of hearing as to whether they are in a position to form the aforementioned Committee and conduct and enquiry into the allegations.

5. Anis Khan Death: Calcutta HC Takes On Record 82 Page SIT Report, Orders Father Of Deceased To Tender Apology For Disparaging Remarks Made Against Court

Case Title: Salem Khan v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

The Calcutta High Court on Tuesday took on record the report filed by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) pertaining to the investigation into the death of student activist Anis Khan. Anish Khan was found dead at his home in Amta block in Howrah district in the early hours of Saturday, February 19, 2022 under mysterious circumstances. Justice Rajasekhar Mantha took on record the detailed 82-page report filed by the State government indicating the steps taken by the SIT towards the investigation. Upon perusal of the report, the Court noted that the investigation into the case is nearing completion. The Court further directed Advocate General S.N Mookherjee to serve a copy of the SIT report to senior counsel Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya appearing on behalf of the petitioner. It was however underscored that confidentiality of the report must be maintained in order to ensure that the ongoing investigation is not jeopardised in any manner. "Let a copy of such report be made available to Mr. Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya, learned senior counsel appearing for the writ petitioner. The confidentiality of the report must continue to be maintained as discussed in the Court in the presence of all counsels. Let the report be resealed and retained in the records of this Court", the order read. Pertinently, the Court took cognisance of certain disparaging remarks that were reportedly made by the petitioner (father of the deceased) against the Court which were subsequently circulated in social media. The petitioner had reportedly remarked that Justice Mantha had not conducted a hearing of the case yesterday due to political pressure from the Chief Minister. Accordingly, Justice Mantha indicated that he was inclined to release the matter. However, the Advocate General as well as senior counsel Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya prayed before the judge to not recuse from hearing the case. "Mr. Bhattacharya has accepted the directions of this Court that an apology should be forthcoming on affidavit from his client. Let such affidavit be filed before this Court on the adjourned date", the Court ordered.

6. WB Post Poll Violence: Calcutta High Court Seeks State's Response On Plea Seeking Compensation For Alleged Victims

Case Title: Anindya Sundar Das v. Union of India and other connected matters

The Calcutta High Court on Wednesday took on record the latest status report filed by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) pertaining to the progress of the investigation with regards to cases of violence that had allegedly taken place post the declaration of the West Bengal assembly elections in May 2021. The Court vide order dated August 19, 2021 had handed over to the CBI the investigation of cases related to murder, rape and crime against women whereas a SIT had been constituted to investigate other criminal cases related to post-poll violence. A Bench comprising Chief Justice Prakash Shrivastava and Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj also sought the State government's response on a plea seeking issuance of directions to the State government to formulate a policy for granting compensation to the victims of post poll violence so that such victims can be given compensation in a time bound manner. The Court also took on record the fifth status report filed by the CBI. The Court was apprised by the counsel appearing for the CBI that as on April 16, 58 cases have been registered and out of the 58 cases, 47 of them have been received from the NHRC. The counsel for the SIT also handed over the latest status report to the Court and further averred that as on April 18, 35 cases have been received from the CBI for investigation. The Court was also apprised that in 31 cases chargesheets have been filed, in 1 case closure report has been filed and that 1 case is under investigation. The Court accordingly directed both the CBI and the SIT to file further status reports on the next date of hearing.

7. Essential To Protect Witness Identity: Calcutta High Court Tells State In PIL Over 4 Rape Cases

Case Title: Sumitra Bhattacharyya v. State of West Bengal and other connected matters

The Calcutta High Court on Wednesday took on record the status report filed by the State government pertaining to the investigation into each of the rape cases in Deganga, Matia, Ingrejbazar and Banshdroni in West Bengal. A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Prakash Srivastava and Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj had earlier asked IPS officer Damayanti Sen to oversee the probe in the rape cases. The Bench had observed that considering the nature of the incidents and the allegations made, a responsible senior lady police officer should be appointed to supervise the investigation. On Wednesday, after perusal of the status report, the Bench noted that the investigation is being carried out under Sen's supervision, as per the earlier directions of the Court. The Court further instructed the Advocate General to supply a copy of the status report to the petitioner after redacting the names of the witnesses, family members and victims within a period of 2 days. The Court underscored that it is essential to protect the identity of the witnesses. The petitioner was further ordered to file a reply to the status report within a week thereafter.

8. Supreme Court Collegium Approves Proposal For Appointing Five Additional Judges Of Calcutta High Court As Permanent Judges

The Supreme Court Collegium has approved the proposal for appointing five Additional Judges of Calcutta High Court as Permanent Judges of the Court. Following are the Judges whose proposal for appointment has been approved: 1. Ms. Justice Kesang Doma Bhutia, 2. Shri Justice Rabindranath Samanta, 3. Shri Justice Sugato Majumdar, 4. Shri Justice Bivas Pattanayak, and 5. Shri Justice Ananda Kumar Mukherjee.

CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT

1. Issuance Reassessment Notice Valid On Ground Disclosure Of Bogus Purchase Bills: Chhattisgarh High Court

The Chhattisgarh High Court bench of Justice Parth Prateem Sahu has held that the reassessment notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act is valid on the grounds of disclosure of bogus purchase bills.

The petitioner/assessee is running a rice mill in the name of M/s Shri Ji Rice Product. The petitioner filed his return for the assessment year 2016-17, declaring his total income as Rs. 13,330,000. His case was selected for compulsory scrutiny based on information received regarding three suspicious transaction reports. Upon examination, it was revealed that the petitioner obtained bogus purchase bills and that his income escaped assessment.

2. SC/ST Act | When The Offence Appears To Be A Misuse Of Law, The Court Has The Power To Grant Anticipatory Bail: Chhattisgarh High Court

The Chhattisgarh High Court recently remarked that when the offence of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 appears to be a misuse of law, the Court has the power to grant anticipatory bail. Having held that Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari granted anticipatory bail to an accused under SC/ST Act,

The accused-appellant had filed an appeal under Section 14 (A) (2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities Act), 1989, for anticipatory bail. The accused is involved in a crime with offences punishable under Sections 294, 323, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 (1) (r), 3 (1) (s), and 3 (2) (va) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

3. Genuineness Of Document Has To Be Proved By Plaintiff Who Relies Upon It, Then It Is On Defendant To Discredit It: Chhattisgarh High Court

The Chhattisgarh High Court has observed that on mere apprehension of breach of peace, without explaining the circumstances, an attachment order under Section 146 CrPC cannot be passed.

The bench of Justice Goutam Bhaduri further asserted that a Magistrate has to satisfy himself as to whether any 'emergency exists' before he passes an order of attachment under Section 146 CrPC.

It may be noted that Section 146 CrPC deals with the power of the Magistrate to attach the subject of dispute and to appoint a receiver, after making an order under Section 145 (1) CrPC, which deals with the procedure where dispute concerning land or water is likely to cause a breach of peace.

Case Title: Jayamati Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors

CITATIONS 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 333 TO 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 360

NOMINAL INDEX

Case Title: Asifa v. State of NCT of Delhi 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 333

Case Title: RISHU AGGARWAL v. MOHIT GOYAL 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 334

Case Title: Neha Pudil v. Union of India & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 335

Title: SNAPDEAL PRIVATE LIMITED v. GODADDYCOM LLC AND ORS. 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 336

Case Title: LIVING MEDIA INDIA LIMITED & ANR. v. SATBIR BHARDWAJ & ORS.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 337

Case Title: INDRA PASRICHA v. DEEPIKA CHAUHAN & ORS 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 338

Case Title: KINRI DHIR v. VEER SINGH 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 339

Case Title: RAJA BERWA & ORS v. STATE & ANR 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 340

Case title: M. Nageswara Rao v. Union of India and Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 341

Case Title: CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION v. STATE 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 342

Case Title: SHRI KUSUM LATA v. STATE (GOVT. OF NCT DELHI) 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 343

Case Title: DR. MANOJ BAJPAI v. MS SEEMA JASSAL 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 344

Case Title: X v. Y 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 345

Case Title: APURV SHANKAR versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 346

Case Title: Delhi Development Authority v. Watcon Water Specialists Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 347

Case Title: DR S S CHAHAR v. SH D K SARRAF & ORS 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 348

Case Title: SHILPA SINGH v. VIKAS KHANNA 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 349

Case Title: Court on its own motion v. GNCTD 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 350

Case Title: National Highways Authority of India versus M/S Abhijeet Angul Sambalpur Toll Road Limited 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 351

Case Title: SOURABH GUGNANI & ORS v. THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 352

Case Title: BRITANNIA INDUSTRIES LTD v. PARLE BISCUITS PVT. LTD & ANR. 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 353

Case Title: ASHUTOSH SINGH v. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 354

Case Title: NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION AND ANR v. OM COLLEGE OF EDUCATION & ANR and other connected matters 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 355

Case Title: SUMANDEEP VIDYAPEETH, AN INSTITUTE DEEMED TO BE UNIVERSITY v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 356

Case Title: VISTRAT REAL ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED v. ASIAN HOTELS NORTH LTD 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 357

Case Title: VEENA GARG v. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 358

Case Title: MR BHAVANISHANKAR H SHARMA THROUGH HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SH SATISH KUMAR TIWARI v. SRS PRIVATE INVESTMENT POWAI LIMITED THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY MR ROHIT DAVE & ORS. 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 359

Case Title: ULTIMATE INFRATECH PRIVATE LIMITED v. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE DELHI & ANR. 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 360

1. Jahangirpuri Violence: Delhi High Court Orders Production Of Juvenile Accused Before Juvenile Justice Board

Case Title: Asifa v. State of NCT of Delhi

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 333

The Delhi High Court has ordered the production before a juvenile justice board, of an accused claiming to be a juvenile aged 16 years, arrested in connection with the clashes that broke out last week in city's Jahangirpuri area during a Hanuman Jayanti procession.

The juvenile accused was sent to one day police custody remand here by a Duty Magistrate of Rohini Courts recently.

A bench comprising of Justice Siddharth Mridul and Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar was dealing with a habeas corpus plea filed by a woman, asserting that her minor brother in law was kept in unlawful detention without proper disclosure of his age, despite being 16 years only.

2. Denial Of Conjugal Relationship Ground For Divorce But Not 'Exceptional Hardship' To Waive Cooling Off Period U/S 14 Hindu Marriage Act: Delhi HC

Case Title: RISHU AGGARWAL v. MOHIT GOYAL

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 334

The Delhi High Court has held that though denial of conjugal relationship is a ground for divorce and tantamounts to cruelty, the same cannot be said to amount to "exceptional hardship" under Section 14 of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955.

Section 14 prescribes a mandatory 1 year waiting period from the date of marriage, before filing for divorce. A proviso to this Section states that the 1 year period may be waived off on the ground that the case is one of "exceptional hardship" to the petitioner or of "exceptional depravity" on the part of the respondent.

A bench comprising of Acting Chief Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Jasmeet Singh observed that the denial of sex by one spouse to the other, or by both of them to each other may certainly constitute "hardship", but it cannot be said to be "exceptional hardship".

3. Delhi High Court Tells Centre To Explore Possibility Of Physically Disabled Candidates Being Able To Pursue Some Disciplines Of Medical Education

Case Title: Neha Pudil v. Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 335

The Delhi High Court has directed the National Medical Commission to explore, in consultation with Central Government, the possibility of physically disabled candidates being able to pursue some disciplines of medical education with the advancement of science and technology, in the next six months.

A division bench comprising of Acting Chief Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Navin Chawla disposed of a plea of a medical aspirant, with disability namely amputation of thumb, index finger and part of middle finger of right hand, who had secured provisional admission in the Maulana Azad Medical College in MBBS course.

She was aggrieved with a disability certificate, issued to her by the Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, Government of India, pegging her disability at 45%.

4. Aaj Tak Trademark Infringement Suit: Delhi High Court Grants Ex-Parte Ad-Interim Injunction Against 'AAJ TAK GURGAON'

Case Title: LIVING MEDIA INDIA LIMITED & ANR. v. SATBIR BHARDWAJ & ORS.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 337

The Delhi High Court has granted ex-parte ad-interim injunction in a trademark infringement suit filed by news channel "AAJ TAK", a part of India Today Group, against "AAJ TAK GURGAON".

Justice Jyoti Singh restrained the defendants to use the trademark 'AAJ TAK' in relation to any goods or services including their print, digital newspaper, publication, website, social media and content sharing platforms including Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Instagram, LinkedIn, and any other location on the internet, till the next date of hearing.

The Court also directed that the domain name registration of the impugned domain name 'aajtakgurgaon.com' be suspended.

5. Third Party Not Absolved From Contempt If They Are Informed That Their Conduct Amounts To Violation Of Court Order: Delhi High Court

Case Title: INDRA PASRICHA v. DEEPIKA CHAUHAN & ORS

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 338

The Delhi High Court has observed that disobedience of an order of the Court, if permitted, will result in striking at the root of the rule of law on which our system of governance is based.

Justice Subramonium Prasad added that the power to punish for contempt is necessary for the maintenance of an effective legal system and the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 has been primarily legislated to prevent interference in the course of administration of justice.

"It is, therefore, well settled that though broadly a person who is not a party to the proceedings cannot be proceeded against for violation of the order, but a third party cannot seek to absolve themselves if they are informed about the fact that their conduct amounts to a violation of the Court order and that despite the information, they choose to wilfully flout the mandate of the Court. If such a conduct is permitted, then it will encourage subversion of judicial orders, which are to be properly understood and complied with," the Court observed.

6. What Is The Special Role That A Family Judge Is Obliged To Discharge As Distinct From General Role Of An Adjudicator? Delhi High Court Answers

Case Title: KINRI DHIR v. VEER SINGH

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 339

The Delhi High Court has enumerated various principles highlighting the special role that a Family Judge is obligated to discharge as distinct from the general role of an adjudicator.

In the 54-page judgment, Justice Yashwant Varma also touched upon the essential qualities of a judge or adjudicator and the tests as propounded by the Indian judiciary in relation to an apprehension of bias.

While the Court noted that the family jurisprudence has progressed over time, it said that the Family Judge is no longer viewed as one who is to act in the capacity of a mere "fault finder".

7. FIR For Non-Compoundable Offences Can Be Quashed In Matrimonial Disputes If Court Satisfied That Parties Settled Disputes Amicably: Delhi HC

Case Title: RAJA BERWA & ORS v. STATE & ANR

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 340

The Delhi High Court has observed that FIR or complaints can be quashed even in respect of non-compoundable offences pertaining to matrimonial disputes if the Court is satisfied that the parties have settled their disputes amicably, without any pressure.

Justice Chandra Dhari Singh observed thus:

"Even in non- compoundable offences pertaining to the matrimonial disputes, if Court is satisfied that parties have settled the disputes amicably and without any pressure, then for the purpose of securing ends of justice, FIRs or complaints or subsequent criminal proceedings in respect of offences can be quashed."

The Court quashed an FIR registered under sec. 498A, 406 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The petitioner no.1 (husband) and respondent no.2 (wife) got married to each other on 20th April, 2003 but due to some temperamental differences between them, they started living separately since May, 2005. There was a girl child born out of their wedlock, who was now major.

8. Delhi High Court Refuses To Interfere In Former CBI Head M Nageswara Rao's Plea For Restoration Of His Twitter Blue Tick

Case title - M. Nageswara Rao v. Union of India and Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 341

The Delhi High Court recently refused to interfere in a writ plea filed by former Central Bureau of Investigation head and Retired IPS Officer M. Nageswara Rao seeking restoration of his Twitter Blue Tick.

The bench of Justice Yashwant Varma however disposed of Rao's writ plea by giving him the liberty to reapply for verification. It may be noted that Rao had moved to the Delhi HC with his writ plea submitting that his account on Twitter did contain a blue tick, but the same was removed in March 2022.

During the course of the hearing, the Court noted that vide communication dated 22 March 2022, Twitter had apprised the petitioner that his account could not be verified since he had failed to confirm his email and phone number. In its communication, the social media platform had also left it open to the petitioner to reapply for verification.

9. Subordinate Court Can't Assume Jurisdiction Under Contempt Of Courts Act: Delhi HC Sets Aside Trial Court Order Issuing Show Cause To CBI Director

Case Title: CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION v. STATE

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 342

The Delhi High Court has set aside a Trial Court order issuing show cause notice to the Director of Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to explain why not a reference of Contempt of Court be made by him against the respective officers of the agency for the purported non-compliance of judicial orders.

Justice Chandra Dhari Singh said that it was "outrightly illegal" for the Special CBI Judge of the Rouse Avenue Court to issue the said order.

" A subordinate court on its own cannot assume jurisdiction under the Contempt of Courts Act and issue show cause notice as to why contempt proceedings should not be initiated," the Bench observed.

10. "Strong Suspicion Of Planned Syndicate Selling & Buying Children": Delhi High Court Upholds Charges Framed Against Medical Professional

Case Title: SHRI KUSUM LATA v. STATE (GOVT. OF NCT DELHI)

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 343

The Delhi High Court has recently upheld charges framed against a woman, a medical professional, under Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, finding a "strong suspicion" of a planned syndicate for selling and buying of children.

Justice Subramonium Prasad upheld the Trial Court order which had framed charges under sec. 120B read with sec. 363 and 370 of IPC as well as sec. 80 and 81 of the Juvenile Justice Act.

11. Litigant Seeking Adjournments From Trial Court Can't Invoke High Court's Supervisory Jurisdiction U/Art 227 For Expeditious Proceedings: Delhi HC

Case Title: DR. MANOJ BAJPAI v. MS SEEMA JASSAL

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 344

The Delhi High Court has observed that it is not permissible for a litigant to seek adjournments before a Trial Court and thereafter invoke the jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution seeking expeditious proceedings.

Justice C Hari Shankar was dealing with a petition seeking a direction to the Additional District Judge, Karkardooma Courts, to decide expeditiously, the application filed by the petitioner-plaintiff under Order XII Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, for decreeing the suit on admissions.

At the outset, the Court noted that out of the five occasions on which the matter was listed before the Trial Court for hearing of arguments on the application, dates were taken by the petitioner on two occasions.

12. Daughter Living With Grandparents Does Not Absolve Father's Responsibility To Provide Maintenance: Delhi High Court

Case Title: X v. Y

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 345

The Delhi High Court has observed that a father cannot deny his responsibility to maintain his wife and daughter even if he has to take care of his parents. It thus upheld a Family Court order directing him to give maintenance to the wife and daughter.

A Bench of Justice Mukta Gupta and Justice Neena Bansal Krishna added that merely because the daughter is living with her maternal grandparents, it cannot be said that the father stands absolved of his responsibility towards his child.

The Court was dealing with a plea filed by a husband challenging the order passed by a Family Court dated 21st February, 2022 directing him to pay maintenance in the sum of Rs. 20,000 per month to the wife and daughter under sec. 24 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

13. 50% Marks In Science In Intermediate Exam Necessary For Foreign Qualified MBBS To Appear In Screening Test & Get Registered In India: Delhi HC

Case Title: APURV SHANKAR versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 346

The Delhi High Court has observed that in view of the provisions of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956, a foreign qualified MBBS is necessarily required to obtain 50% marks in Physics, Chemistry and Biology to be eligible for appearing in Screening Test and get registered as a medical practitioner in India.

Justice Kameswar Rao observed:

"It is clear that in view of the provisions of the IMC Act, 1956, read with the regulations made there under, the petitioner was necessarily required to be eligible for admission to an MBBS course in India, i.e., he should have possessed 50% marks in Physics, Chemistry and Biology taken together for him to be issued the Eligibility Certificate to sit in the Screening Test. The petitioner, admittedly having only 47.83% marks in the three subjects, was ineligible for admission to an MBBS course in India, and as such, could not have been issued the Eligibility Certificate to enable him to sit in the Screening Test"

14. Arbitral Tribunal Cannot Award Interest On Interest: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Delhi Development Authority v. Watcon Water Specialists Pvt. Ltd. and Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 347

The High Court of Delhi has observed that the arbitral tribunal cannot award interest on the amount of interest already granted in the award. It held that pendente lite interest on the amount of awarded interest amounts to awarding of interest on interest.

The Single Bench of Justice Bakhru has held that when the arbitrator has awarded interest on a substantive claim, allowing interest on the awarded interest is not permissible under the law.

The Court reiterated that construction of the terms of the contract falls purely within the domain of the arbitrator and the scope of S.34 is very narrow and the court does not sit in appeal over the award. The possibility of having another view is not a ground to set aside the award.

15. Individual Cannot Stall Entire Functioning Of A Board Because Majority Differs From His View: Delhi High Court

Case Title: DR S S CHAHAR v. SH D K SARRAF & ORS

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 348

"An individual cannot try to stall the entire functioning of the Board by stating that the decision taken by the Board are against his views because the majority differs from his view," the Delhi High Court has recently observed.

Justice Subramonium Prasad was dealing with a contempt petition filed by a Member (Legal) of the Petroleum & Natural Gas Regulatory Board constituted under the Petroleum & Natural Gas Regulatory Board Act, 2006.

In 2009, a Public Interest Litigation was filed challenging the illegal and arbitrary manner in which the Board, which was represented by the Central Government, was being run by the Chairman.

16. Order Of Restraint Against Husband Under Domestic Violence Act Does Not Preclude Family Court From Making Arrangement For Child Visitation: Delhi HC

Case Title: SHILPA SINGH v. VIKAS KHANNA

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 349

The Delhi High Court has observed that the ambit and extent of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and Family Courts Act, 1984, being two competing statutes, must be harmoniously construed so as to avoid a situation of repugnancy and conflict.

Justice Yashwant Varma relied on a 2017 judgment of the Supreme Court in Amit Kumar and another v. Charu Makin wherein it was observed that "The Act of 1984 was specially meant for establishment of special Courts so that matters referred in explanation to Section 7 of the Act can be dealt by the special Courts established for that purpose whereas the object of enactment of the Act of 2005 was to protect the woman from being victim of the domestic violence and to prevent the occurrence of domestic violence in the society."

The Court was dealing with a plea filed by a wife challenging an order dated 2nd April 2022 passed by the Family Judge granting visitation rights albeit supervised and in the concerned Court complex.

17. "No Right To Occupy Place Of Vending Round The Clock": Delhi HC Refuses Impleadment Of Street Vendors In Suo Moto PIL Over Encroachments In Okhla

Case Title: Court on its own motion v. GNCTD

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 350

The Delhi High Court has rejected an application moved by a group of street vendors, seeking impleadment in the suo moto public interest litigation initiated over the issue of illegal constructions and encroachments of public land in city's Okhla industrial area.

A Division Bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Navin Chawla observed that as per Supreme Court's orders, a vendor has no right to occupy the place of vending round the clock or to keep his articles at the place of vending continuously.

" In the garb of vending, you can't set up a stall, keep you goods, lock it everyday and encroach on the area. You can't do that!" it remarked orally.

18. Right Of A Party To File Counter Claims Exists Independently Of Any Liberty Granted To It By The Arbitral Tribunal: Delhi High Court

Case Title: National Highways Authority of India versus M/S Abhijeet Angul Sambalpur Toll Road Limited

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 351

The Delhi High Court has ruled that any matter on which the Arbitral Tribunal has the jurisdiction to pass a final award can also be the subject of an interim award made by it, and the same can be challenged before the Court under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act).

The Single Bench of Justice C. Hari Shankar held that the right of a party to file counter claims before the Arbitral Tribunal exists independently of any liberty granted to it by the Arbitral Tribunal.

19. Criminal Justice Machinery Should Not Be Kept In Limbo, Trial Can't Remain Stayed Due To Non-Availability Of Counsel: Delhi High Court

Case Title: SOURABH GUGNANI & ORS v. THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 352

The Delhi High Court has observed that the criminal justice machinery should not be kept in limbo and that the proceedings before the Trial Court cannot remain stayed because of the non-availability of the counsel.

Justice Chandra Dhari Singh was dealing with a plea seeking quashing of the chargesheet dated 29th January, 2013 in the FIR registered under sec. 306 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with sec. 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

The counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner prayed for an adjournment on the ground that the main counsel appearing in the matter was travelling abroad and thus, was not able to appear before the Court.

20. Disparaging Advertisements: Delhi High Court Directs Parle To Modify Two Ads In Trademark Infringement Suit By Britannia Cookies

Case Title: BRITANNIA INDUSTRIES LTD v. PARLE BISCUITS PVT. LTD & ANR.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 353

In relief to Britannia which runs the product range Good Day Butter Cookies, the Delhi High Court has directed Parle Biscuits to take down two of its advertisements, disparaging the former's products.

Justice Pratibha M Singh directed Parle to ensure that it modifies the ads within 2 weeks by blurring the image of cookies displayed by them, which is similar to those sold and marketed by Britannia.

" Defendants shall ensure that within two weeks from now, the impugned Advertisement No.2 and Advertisement No.3 shall be modified with the blurred image of the cookie and the currently used cookie image would be no longer visible in the said advertisements on any online platforms from 1st May, 2022, onwards, " the order stated.

21. Delhi High Court Grants Relief To OBC Candidate Seeking Admission In DU Based On Non-Creamy Layer Certificate Issued In 2018

Case Title: ASHUTOSH SINGH v. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 354

The Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi University to grant admission to a LLM candidate for the academic year of 2021-22 belonging to the Non Creamy Layer of the Other Backward Castes (OBC category), being aggrieved by University's action in rejecting his candidature in the 'Spot Admission' round on account of the caste certificate.

The caste certificate submitted by the petitioner alongwith his application did not belong to the current financial year. The petitioner had thus impugned the University's action of not giving him anytime to submit the requisite certificate.

Justice Rekha Palli allowed the plea and directed that the petitioner will be permitted to appear in the 1st semester exams along with the exams for subsequent semesters as per the practice being followed by the University.

22. State Govt Can't Cause Impediment In Process Of NCTE To Grant/ Refuse Recognition To Institutes Upon Satisfaction Of Norms: Delhi High Court

Case Title: NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION AND ANR v. OM COLLEGE OF EDUCATION & ANR and other connected matters

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 355

The Delhi High Court has observed that while it is for the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) to grant or refuse recognition to the institutes upon satisfaction of all the norms laid down, the State Government, though is to be consulted, cannot cause an impediment in such process.

A division bench comprising of Acting Chief Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Navin Chawla added that even at the stage of grant of affiliation, the State Government or affiliating body cannot undermine the position of the NCTE and refuse to grant affiliation to the institution on the very same grounds, that have already been scrutinized by, and otherwise fall within the domain of NCTE.

23. Need Of The Hour To Encourage Institutes With Necessary Infrastructure For Running Ayurvedic Medical Colleges: Delhi High Court

Case Title: SUMANDEEP VIDYAPEETH, AN INSTITUTE DEEMED TO BE UNIVERSITY v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 356

Noting that the country has been staunchly promoting the Ayurvedic system of medicine after the outbreak of the covid-19 pandemic, the Delhi High Court has said that it is the need of the hour to encourage institutes which possess the necessary infrastructure for running ayurvedic medical colleges, to contribute to the bigger goal of strengthening the infrastructure of this system of medicine in the country.

Justice Rekha Palli made the observation while allowing a plea filed Sumandeep Vidyapeeth, an Institute Deemed to be University, desirous of starting a new Ayurvedic Medical College with 100 seats in the undergraduate (UG) programme Bachelor of Ayurveda Medicine and Surgery for the Academic Year 2021- 2022.

24. Issue Whether Third Party Is Required To Be Impleaded In Proceedings Is For Arbitrator To Decide: Delhi High Court

Case Title: VISTRAT REAL ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED v. ASIAN HOTELS NORTH LTD

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 357

The Delhi High Court has observed that the issue as to whether any third party is required to be impleaded in the proceedings is covered by the Doctrine of Competence-Competence and that it will be for the Arbitrator to decide the said issue.

Justice Mukta Gupta observed thus:

"Therefore, once a valid arbitration agreement exists between the parties, the issue whether the petitioner is entitled to any relief in the absence of a third party to the agreement or that third party is required to be impleaded in the proceedings, is covered by the Doctrine of Competence-Competence and it will be for the Arbitrator to decide the said issue."

The Court was dealing with a plea seeking appointment of an Arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

25. Bidder Can't Seek For Deviation From Tender Document Which Has Been Accepted On His Own Accord: Delhi High Court

Case Title: VEENA GARG v. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 358

The Delhi High Court has observed that when participating in the tender, a bidder cannot seek for deviation from the tender document which has been accepted on his own accord.

Justice Subramonium Prasad added that it goes against contractual obligations steeped in accepting such a tender, and therefore, violates the principles under Article 14 of the Constitution with respect to other bidders.

The Court was dealing with a plea seeking directions on the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) to refund the amount retained by them to the Petitioner along with interest of 18% p.a. from the date of deposit.

26. S.14 Arbitration Act Does Not Confer Power On Court To Expunge Any Part Of Arbitral Tribunal's Order: Delhi High Court

Case Title: MR BHAVANISHANKAR H SHARMA THROUGH HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SH SATISH KUMAR TIWARI v. SRS PRIVATE INVESTMENT POWAI LIMITED THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY MR ROHIT DAVE & ORS.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 359

The Delhi High Court has observed that a petition filed under sec. 14 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 does not confer any power on the Court to expunge any part of the order of the Arbitral Tribunal.

Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva was dealing with a plea filed under sec. 14(2) read with sec. 15 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act seeking termination of the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal and also for expunging the adverse and prejudicial remarks contained in order dated October 5, 2021 of the Arbitral Tribunal.

The Respondent party had filed the subject claim before the Arbitral Tribunal on March 23, 2021 of the value of approximately Rs. 248 cores besides interest.

27. Assessee Not Immune From Penalty U/S 270AA Income Tax Act Where Proceedings Initiated For Misreporting Of Income: Delhi High Court

Case Title: ULTIMATE INFRATECH PRIVATE LIMITED v. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE DELHI & ANR.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 360

The Delhi High Court has observed that it is only in cases where proceedings for levy of penalty have been initiated on account of alleged "misreporting of income" that an assessee is prohibited from applying and availing the benefit of immunity from penalty and prosecution under Section 270AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

A division bench comprising of Justice Manmohan and Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma was dealing with a plea challenging the order dated 26th March, 2022 passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre Delhi under sec. 270A for the Assessment Year 2017-18.

28. Domain Name Registrars Are "Intermediaries" Under Information Technology Act: Delhi High Court

Title: SNAPDEAL PRIVATE LIMITED v. GODADDYCOM LLC AND ORS.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 336

The Delhi High Court has held that the Domain Name Registrars are "intermediaries", within the meaning of sec. 2(1)(w) of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

Justice C Hari Shankar was dealing with a suit filed by Snapdeal Private Limited regarding "SNAPDEAL trade mark". Defendants 1 to 32 were Domain Name Registrars who provide domain names for parties who may seek to register their respective websites under such domain names. Defendant 33 was the Department of Telecommunications and Defendant 34 is the National Internet Exchange of India (NIXI).

GAUHATI HIGH COURT

1. The Assessing Officer And Inspecting Person Need Not Be Same Person Under The Electricity Act: Gauhati High Court

Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Gau) 26

The Gauhati High Court bench of Justice Devashis Baruah has held that Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 empowers the Assessing Officer as designated to carry out the provisional assessment and pass the order of provisional assessment.

The petitioner/assessee is a consumer of electricity with a contracted demand of 1001 KVA. A technical inspection of the petitioner's electrical installation was undertaken, and after the inspection, an inspection report was prepared by the visiting APDCL officials showing the petitioner's connected load. Thus, as per the inspection report, there was an excess load of 51 KW. Thereupon, the Area Manager/the Assessing Officer issued a provisional assessment order along with a statement showing the reasons on the basis of the assessment in Format 15. Along with the provisional assessment order, an inspection report in Format 14 and a provisional bill were also forwarded to the petitioner. The petitioner filed its objection before the Assessing Officer.

2. Gauhati High Court Refuses Relief To Student Who Was Denied LLB Degree For Failing In 'Taxation Law'

The Itanagar Bench of Gauhati High Court has declined to provide relief to a person who was denied 'LL.B. degree' because of his failure to secure passing marks in one (Taxation Law) out of 37 papers prescribed under the prospectus of his institution.

While dismissing the petition, a Single Judge Bench of Justice Robin Phukan observed,

"Since the petitioner had admittedly failed in a compulsory paper i.e. Paper XXXV (Taxation Law) and since he has not challenged the Academic Council Resolution and the Notification issued subsequently, he cannot file the present writ petition, for issuing direction to the respondent authorities to grant LL.B. Degree to him. Having appeared in all the 37 papers and having been failed in one compulsory paper he cannot challenge the process."

GUJARAT HIGH COURT

NOMINAL INDEX

Bhavinkumar Kantilal Gajera vs State Of Gujarat 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 130

Maheshbhai Govindbhai Patel vs Mother Dairy Fruit And Vegetable Pvt Ltd 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 131

Rameshbhai Dhulabhai Katara Versus State Of Gujarat 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 132

Priteshkumar Bipinbhai Dave vs State Of Gujarat 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 133

Sardar Patel Seva Trust Versus The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner II 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 134

LH Of Late Harijan Shivabhai Bapubhai, Harijan Vinodbhai S/O Late Zaverbhai Shivabhai Harijan Versus State Of Gujarat 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 135

Dharaben Dhansukhbhai Joshi Versus Gujarat Gaun Seva Pasandgi Mandal Through Secretary 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 136

Judgments/Orders of the week

Illegal Mining | Seized Vehicle Must Be Released Without Bank Guarantee If FIR Not Registered Within Time Stipulated Under 2017 Rules: Gujarat HC

Case Title: Bhavinkumar Kantilal Gajera vs State Of Gujarat

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 130

The Gujarat High Court has recently explained in the context of the Gujarat Mineral Rules, 2017 that if the complaint is not registered as envisaged under Rule 12(ii) of the Rules of 2017, the competent authority will have to release the seized vehicle without insisting for any bank guarantee.

The Bench comprising Justice Vaibhavi Nanavati was hearing a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking the quashment of the impugned order which seized the vehicle of the Petitioner.

S.17B ID Act | Employer Liable To Pay Wages To Workman During Pendency Of Appeal Against Labour Court's Order Of Reinstatement: Gujarat High Court

Case Title: Maheshbhai Govindbhai Patel vs Mother Dairy Fruit And Vegetable Pvt Ltd

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 131

The Gujarat High Court has reiterated that when a Labour Court directs reinstatement of any workman and the employer prefers any proceedings against such award in a High Court, the employer is be liable to pay such workman during the period of pendency of such proceedings in the High Court.

Referring to Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act, the Bench comprising Justice RM Chhaya and Justice Hemant Prachchhak observed,

"Section 17B of the Act clearly provides that when the Labour Court directs reinstatement of any workman and the employer prefers any proceedings against such award in a High Court, the employer shall be liable to pay such workman "during the period of pendency of such proceedings in the High Court full wages last drawn by him inclusive of any maintenance allowance admissible to him under any rule if the workman had not been employed in any establishment during such period."

Seized Vehicle Should Be Handled Within 6 Months From Date Of Production Of Vehicle Before Court; Should Not Be Kept In Police Stations For Long: Gujarat HC

Case Title: Rameshbhai Dhulabhai Katara Versus State Of Gujarat

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 132

The Gujarat High Court while making note of the Apex Court's decision in SUNDERBHAI AMBALAL DESAI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT has affirmed that within a period of six months from the date of production of vehicle before the Court, the seized vehicle should be disposed of appropriately and not be kept at police stations for a long time. Further, if the vehicle is not claimed by the Accused, then the insurance company or third person can auction it under the direction of the Court.

The Bench comprising Justice Ilesh J Vora made these observations while hearing a petition invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of the High Court under Art 226 and the supervisory jurisdiction under Art 227 along with the inherent powers of the Court under Section 482 of CrPC for the release of the Muddamal Vehicle.

Post Fell Vacant Before Expiry Of Wait List, Applicant Can't Suffer Due To Lapse Of Administration: Gujarat High Court Grants Relief To PWD Candidate

Case Title: Priteshkumar Bipinbhai Dave vs State Of Gujarat

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 133

The Gujarat High Court has directed its administrative department to grant appointment to the Petitioner, a physically challenged candidate, who had applied for the post of Peon (Class IV) under the Physically Handicapped category.

The Bench comprising Justice Biren Vaishnav considered that two vacancies had arisen before the expiry of the waitlist in which Petitioner's name figured at serial number 67, however, the appointment could not be made since the Recruitment Cell was not informed about the same in due time.

Gujarat High Court Restrains Recovery Under Employee's Provident Fund Act Citing Non-Availability Of Industrial Tribunal To Hear Appeals

Case Title: Sardar Patel Seva Trust Versus The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner II

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 134

The Gujarat High Court has restrained the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner from initiating recovery proceedings against an employer under Section 8(B) and 8(G) of the Employee's Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Act, 1952, citing non availability of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Ahmedabad.

The Bench comprising Justice Biren Vaishnav stated that in the absence of a Presiding Officer at the Tribunal, the appeal filed by the employer against recovery order could not be heard.

Gujarat High Court Directs NHAI To Re-Compute Compensation For Agricultural Land Acquired In 2014 For Vadodara-Mumbai Expressway

Case Title: LH Of Late Harijan Shivabhai Bapubhai, Harijan Vinodbhai S/O Late Zaverbhai Shivabhai Harijan Versus State Of Gujarat

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 135

The Gujarat High Court allowed the writ petition of a land-owner, seeking directions to re-compute the award passed by the competent authority in pursuance of land acquisition proceedings for the purpose of construction of Vadodara-Mumbai Expressway.

The Petitioners sought that the compensation be revised by applying the market value of the land with Multiplier Factor-2 since the land was a 'rural area'. All other statutory benefits under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 including solatium under Section 30(1) and interest under Section 30(3) of the Act.

'Reasonableness Tempered With Mercy': Gujarat HC Removes Ban On Woman From Appearing In Any Competitive Exam For 3 Yrs For Alleged Unfair Means

Case Title: Dharaben Dhansukhbhai Joshi Versus Gujarat Gaun Seva Pasandgi Mandal Through Secretary

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 136

In huge relief to a 29-year old woman bearing the responsibility of her ailing mother while simultaneously trying to build her career, the Gujarat High Court has removed the ban imposed on her by the State Subordinate Services Selection Board, precluding her from appearing in any competitive exam for three years. The coercive measure was taken against the woman after she was found carrying a mobile phone in one of the exams conducted by the Board.

"…was this single act of carrying a mobile phone so reprehensible that she needs to be debarred for a period of three years is the question", the Bench comprising Justice Biren Vaishnav wondered.

The Court was dealing with an Article 226 petition moved by the woman, stating that she did not resort to any unfair means and the carried the mobile inside the exam hall very inadvertently.

Other Updates from the High Court

Gujarat High Court Frames Contempt Charges Against 64 Year Old Man For Using 'Defamatory' Language Against Justice Sonia Gokani

The Gujarat High Court has framed contempt charges against a 64-year-old man (Anand H. Goswami) for using 'defamatory language' against Justice Sonia Gokani in the year 2013.

The Court found that with reference to Criminal Misc. Application No.12353 of 2012, Goswami/Respondent had, in February 2013, cast unwarranted defamatory assertion upon the character and ability of Justice Gokani.

It may be noted that the contempt case against Anand H. Goswami/Respondent was initiated in November 2013, after the HC had come to the prima facie opinion that Goswami had used contemptuous language against Justice Gokani in a communication made by him.

HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT

1. HP High Court Directs Archaeological Survey Of India To Commence Repair Work At 11th Century Mata Mrikula Devi Temple

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has ordered the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to constitute a special team to inspect, submit an estimate and commence necessary repairs to the 11th Century built Temple Mata Mrikula Devi, which is located in the district of Lahaul.

Significantly, in the year 2020, the Court had initiated a suo moto case after taking cognizance of a report presented by the Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Kullu, submitting details of the deteriorating condition of Mata Mrikula Devi Temple.

JAMMU & KASHMIR & LADAKH HIGH COURT

1. Case Of Accused Who Can't Be Made To Understand Proceedings Can Be Referred To HC U/S 341 J&K CrPC Only After He/She Is Convicted: JKL HC

In a significant observation, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has observed that the case of an accused, though not insane, but who cannot be made to understand the proceedings, can be referred to the High Court under section 341 of Jammu and Kashmir CrPC only after the trial has resulted into his/her conviction.

JHARKHAND HIGH COURT

1. Merely Because The Petitioner Has Been Acquitted Later On Does Not Dilute The Allegation Of Suppression Of A Pending Criminal Case: Jharkhand High Court

2. "Approver Can't Be Kept In Jail Indefinitely": Jharkhand High Court Grants Bail To Man In Jail For 3 Yrs Exercising Powers U/S 482 CrPC

In a significant order, stressing that an approver cannot be allowed to remain in jail custody indefinitely, the Jharkhand High Court today ordered the release of an approver-petitioner, who has been in custody for more than three years, by exercising its power under Section 482 CrPC.

The Bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi observed that in exceptional and reasonable cases, the High Court has power under Section 482 CrPC to enlarge the approver on bail or in case there are circumstances to suggest that his detention had been so much prolonged.

3. 'The Tribal Society Too Isn't Untouched By The Winds of Socio-Economic Change': Jharkhand HC Upholds Inheritance By Female Heir

4. Initiation Of Adjudication Proceeding Without Issuance Of Show Cause Notice Is Void Ab Initio: Jharkhand High Court

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Jha) 39

The Jharkhand High Court bench of Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice Deepak Roshan has held that the initiation of an adjudication proceeding without the issuance of a show cause notice is void ab initio.

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

Nominal Index:

Rajkumar And The State Of Karnataka 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 122

WE CARE CHARITABLE TRUST v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 123

Lakshmikanta and Other v. State of Karnataka, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 124

Ms Padmavathi Subramaniyan v The Ministry Of Civil Aviation 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 125

Dr. UMESH P.G v. CENTRAL COUNCIL OF INDIAN MEDICINE 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 126

VASANTH ADITHYA. J v. STATE BY KARNATAKA 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 127

Mohamed Ikbal v. Secretary to the Government of India 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 128

Karnataka State Legal Services Authority v. State Of Karnataka 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 129

K Srinivas V The Karnataka State Election Commission 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 130

Shanthi Nikethan High Court v other v. State of Karnataka 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 131

P Balaji Babu v. State Bank of India 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 132

Judgments/Orders/Reports

1. S.370 IPC Can't Be Invoked On "Presumption" That Accused Indulged Himself In Human Trafficking: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Rajkumar And The State Of Karnataka Case No: Criminal Petition No.6118 Of 2021

Citation: 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 122

The Karnataka High Court has said that Section 370 of the Indian Penal Code cannot be invoked merely on the presumption that an accused indulged himself in human trafficking. A Single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna while quashing criminal proceedings initiated against one Rajkumar said, "What can be gathered from the complaint and the chargesheet that is filed by the police is that, it is presumed that the petitioner had indulged himself in human trafficking and therefore, Section 370 of the IPC was invoked against the petitioner."

2: Power To Decide Applications For School Upgradation Is A "Public Power" Vested With State For Effectuating A Public Purpose: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: WE CARE CHARITABLE TRUST v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 1682/2022

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 123

The Karnataka High Court has said that applications filed before authorities seeking approval for upgradation of the schools should be decided in a time bound manner as the applications are filed for specific academic year and if the decision making authorities take too long a time for disposing of the applications, the academic year itself would have been over rendering the applications irrelevant or infructuous.

3: Nominated Members Of Municipality Have No Right To Vote In Municipal Council's Meeting: Karnataka High Court Upholds Article 243R(2)(a)

Case Title: Lakshmikanta and Other v. State of Karnataka Case No: WP 4457/2022

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 124

The Karnataka High Court while upholding the constitutional validity of Article 243R (2)(a) of the Constitution has reiterated that nominated members to the Municipal Council shall not have right to vote in the meeting of the Council.

A division bench of Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice S Vishwajith Shetty, while dismissing a petition filed by six nominated councillors of the Malur Town Municipal Council said, "The elected members of the Council are chosen by popular vote and carry with them, the mandate of the people, whereas, nominated members of the Council are appointed as Councillors. The elected members and nominated members cannot be said to be belonging to the same class and there is no pleading that differentiation between elected and nominated members is either unreasonable or is arbitrary or that it does not rest on any rational basis. In view of aforesaid enunciation of law, challenge to the validity of Article 243R (2) (a) that it violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India, fails."

4. Air India Is Now A Private Company": Karnataka High Court Refuses To Exercise Writ Jurisdiction U/Art 226 On Employees' Plea

Case Title: Ms Padmavathi Subramaniyan v The Ministry Of Civil Aviation Case No: Writ Petition No.21448 Of 2021

Citation: 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 125

The Karnataka High Court has said that since Air India Limited is now a private Company owned by M/s.Talace Pvt. Ltd., the grievance of the employees can be redressed only before the competent authority which can deal with the question and not under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. A single judge bench of Justice R Devdas made the observation while dismissing a petition filed by petitioner Padmavathi Subramaniyan and two other employees of Air India Limited. The petitioner had approached the court with a grievance in matter of seniority.

5: No Violation Of Fundamental Rights: Karnataka HC Upholds Centre's Decision De-Recognising 'Vaidya Vidwaan' Certificates Awarded Between 1975-2010

Case Title: Dr. UMESH P.G v. CENTRAL COUNCIL OF INDIAN MEDICINE Case No: W.A.No.148/2021

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 126

The Karnataka High Court has upheld the notification dated June 25, 2010 issued by the Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare by which it de-recognize all the "Vaidya Vidwan" certificates awarded by the Andhra Ayurvedic Parishad from 1975 till 2010 as invalid.

6: Law Intern Allegedly Assaulted At Law Firm: Karnataka High Court Refuses To Quash FIR

Case Title: VASANTH ADITHYA. J v. STATE BY KARNATAKA Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3167/2022

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 127

The Karnataka High Court recently refused to quash a case registered by the police against an Advocate under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and Information Technology Act, 2000, on a complaint filed by a Law Intern.

7: Housing For BPL/ EWS Families: Karnataka High Court Asks Centre, State To Ensure Proper Implementation Of Govt Schemes

Case Title: Mohamed Ikbal v. Secretary to the Government of India. Case No: WP 5821/2021

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 128

The Karnataka High Court has directed the Central and State Governments to ensure proper implementation of schemes launched for providing housing to eligible siteless/houseless urban and rural BPL/EWS families belonging to various categories of weaker sections of the society.

8. After Nudge From High Court, Karnataka Govt Installs MRI Scanning Machine At DIMHANS

Case Title: Karnataka State Legal Services Authority v. State Of Karnataka Case No: WP 18741/1996

Citation: 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 129

The Karnataka Government on Thursday informed the High Court that an M.R.I scanning machine has been installed and made operational at the Dharwad Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences (DIMHANS).

A division bench of Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi and Justice S R Krishna took on record the compliance affidavit filed by the government stating that installation of the MRI Scanning machine is complete and trial runs are in progress and even the Medical Superintendent has been appointed.

9. S.16C Karnataka Municipalities Act | Lodging Accounts Of Electoral Expenditure Ensures Transparency & Accountability Of Candidates: High Court

Case Title: K Srinivas V The Karnataka State Election Commission Case No: Writ Petition No.3415 Of 2022

Citation: 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 130

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a petition filed by four persons challenging the order passed by the Karnataka State Election Commission disqualifying them from continuing as the elected members of the Municipality, on failure to lodge a true and correct account of electoral expenditure with the Returning Officer, within prescribed time.

10. Display School Name In SSLC Certificate Issued To Students: Karnataka High Court To State

Case Title: Shanthi Nikethan High Court v other v. State of Karnataka Case No: WP 6532/2022

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 131

The Karnataka High Court has directed the state government and other respondents to show the names of the schools, whose recognition was withdrawn in the middle of academic year, in S.S.L.C. marks card of the students.

11. 'Must Do Justice By Promoting Honesty': Karnataka HC Directs SBI To Refund Forfeited Amount Over Failure To Disclose Encumbrance On Auction Property

Case Title: P Balaji Babu v. State Bank of India Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.46450 OF 2014

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 132

The Karnataka High Court has directed State Bank Of India to refund the amount forfeited by it from a prospective purchaser of a property being sold under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI) as it did not disclose that title of the subject property was not with the original borrower of the loan.

Other Reports

1. Karnataka Cattle Slaughter Prevention Act: High Court Permits Implementation Of S.5 Which Restricts Cattle Transport

Case Title: Mohammed Arif Jameel v. State Of Karnataka Case No: WP 508/2021

The Karnataka High Court on Monday modified its earlier order dated January 21, 2021 and permitted the state government to implement Section 5 (Restriction on transport of cattle) of the Karnataka Prevention of Slaughter and Preservation of Cattle Act, 2020 and rules framed thereunder.

2. Seek Necessary Approvals Before Impact Assessment Of Hubballi-Ankola Rail Project: Karnataka High Court Tells National Board For Wildlife

Case Title: PROJECT VRUKSHA FOUNDATION v. STATE BOARD FOR WILDLIFE (SBWL) Case No: WP 8067/2020

The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday directed the National Board for Wildlife to get the necessary approvals if required from the National Tiger Conservation Authority and under the Forest Conservation Act and thereafter carry out a survey and make an assessment of the effect of laying down a railway line between Hubballi and Ankola on wildlife.

KERALA HIGH COURT

Nominal Index [Citations: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 181 - 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 191]

Muhammed Hasheer Poolakkal v. United Arab Bank & Anr, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 181

Reji K. Joshy & Ors. v. Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 182

Joseph v. State of Kerala, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 183

P. Gopalakrishnan @ Dileep & Ors v. State of Kerala & Anr., 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 184

T.N. Suraj v. State of Kerala & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 185

T.N. Suraj v. State of Kerala & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 186

M/s Bativala and Karani v. K.I. Johny & Anr., 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 187

Deepa Srinivasan & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 188

Suo Motu v. Travancore Devaswom Board, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 189

Suo Motu v. State of Kerala & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 190

Suresh George v. Kochi Metro Rail Ltd & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 191

Judgments This Week:

1. Private Parties Can't Approach Courts Seeking Attachment Of Properties In Foreign States Under Chapter VIIA CrPC : Kerala High Court

Case Title: Muhammed Hasheer Poolakkal v. United Arab Bank & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 181

The High Court has held that the courts in India cannot entertain any request directly from any private parties or institutions to initiate proceedings for attachment of properties in foreign states and added that such requests can only be made by the Centre or appropriate authorities under Section 105 of Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). Upon examining the legislative intent behind incorporating Chapter VIIA of CrPC, Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A took the stand that permitting any individual or establishment to file an application would amount to reading into the provision something which was never intended to be contemplated therein.

2. Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules| No Opportunity Of Hearing U/R 66(5) Before Registrar Accepts Report: HC Full Bench Upholds Precedent

Case Title: Reji K. Joshy & Ors. v. Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 182

The High Court has upheld the position established by its Division Bench in 2010 by agreeing that Rule 66 (5) of the does not contemplate any opportunity being given by the Registrar before accepting any report or initiating any action based on the report. A Full Bench of Justice P.B Suresh Kumar, Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan and Justice C.S. Sudha thereby upheld the law as found in State of Kerala v. Aravindakshan Nair [2010 (3) KLT 11] while adjudicating upon a reference made by the Division Bench doubting the correctness of the proposition of law laid down in the impugned decision.

3. DYFI Muslim Leader Marries Christian Woman, Ignites Political Row: Kerala HC Disposes Habeas Moved By Her Father Alleging Love Jihad

Case Title: Joseph v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 183

The High Court disposed of a habeas corpus plea moved by the father of a Christian woman Jyotsna Mary Joseph, who married a Muslim DYFI region secretary Shejin. The father had claimed that his daughter was taken away against her will and was kept in illegal detention while raising 'love jihad' allegations in the matter. A Division Bench of Justice V.G. Arun and Justice C.S Sudha decided to dispose of the petition after hearing the woman who confirmed that she was not illegally detained and that she had taken the decision voluntarily.

4. Kerala High Court Dismisses Dileep's Plea To Quash FIR In Murder Conspiracy Case

Case Title: P. Gopalakrishnan @ Dileep & Ors v. State of Kerala & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 184

The Court dismissed the plea moved by Dileep to quash the FIR filed by the Crime Branch of Kerala Police against him and five others for conspiring to murder the investigation officials in the 2017 actor rape case, in which Dileep is facing trial as the chief conspirator. Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A opined that even if what is revealed from the allegations is a doubtful case for making out the offences at the stage of FIR, the benefit of the doubt should go in favour of the investigation and not to the accused because interference in the investigation at this stage would foreclose all opportunities for the police to collect materials in support of the allegations.

Also Read: Allegations Against Dileep Prima Facie Suggest Intention To Harm Police Officers : Kerala High Court

5. Kerala High Court Passes Ex-Parte Interim Order Against ReporterTV On Reports Against Dileep's Brother-In-Law

Case Title: T.N. Suraj v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 185

The Court issued an interim ex-parte gag order against Reporter TV restricting it from publishing, broadcasting or telecasting any item concerning or relating to actor Dileep's brother in law, Suraj while reporting about the murder conspiracy case or the 2017 actor sexual assault case for the next three weeks. Suraj had moved the Court alleging that the respondent channel was subjecting him to a media trial and resorting to sensationalism and publication of fabricated allegations against the accused and their associates in the said cases. In his plea, he had sought an injunction to restrain the media from reporting court proceedings.

6. Media Can't Make Suggestions Of Guilt Or Innocence Of A Person Or Credibility Of Witnesses: Kerala High Court

Case Title: T.N. Suraj v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 186

While temporarily gagging Reporter TV from publishing/broadcasting/telecasting any item concerning or relating to actor Dileep's brother in law, Suraj on the murder conspiracy case or the 2017 actor sexual assault case, the Court commented on the detrimental effect media trial has on the legal system. Justice Mohammed Nias C.P remarked that media trials influence public opinion and that they could often lead to loss of faith in the justice delivery system.

7. Res Judicata Not Applicable To Subsequent Arbitral Proceedings If First Award Was Set Aside Due To Incompetence Of Tribunal: Kerala High Court

Case Title: M/s Bativala and Karani v. K.I. Johny & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 187

The Court has held that there is no legal impediment for arbitrating parties to initiate fresh proceedings if the district court sets aside an award on any issue not yet concluded in that award. This implies that the principles of res judicata will have only a limited application in such proceedings under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. A Division Bench of Justice P.B. Suresh Kumar and Justice C.S Sudha observed that even if the earlier award was one set aside not on any ground affecting the competency of the Tribunal, the subsequent arbitral proceedings are not hit by the principles of res judicata.

8. Kerala High Court Permits Couple To Proceed With Non-Commercial Surrogacy

Case Title: Deepa Srinivasan & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 188

The Court came to the rescue of a couple who had approached the Court with a plea seeking permission to a private hospital to facilitate non-commercial and altruistic surrogacy for them. Upon noticing that all necessary precautions were taken by all the concerned parties, Justice N. Nagaresh permitted the couple to proceed with surrogacy while clarifying that further directions are to be given in the case, pending the writ petition. Therefore, the matter will be taken up again on 23 May.

9. Kerala High Court Asks Travancore Devaswom Board To Take Over Sabarimala Virtual Queue Services

Case Title: Suo Motu v. Travancore Devaswom Board

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 189

The High Court ruled that the control over the virtual queue system for Sabarimala darshan should be transferred from the Kerala Police to the Travancore Devaswom Board. A Division Bench comprising Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice P.G Ajithkumar delivered its verdict in a suo motu case and two petitioners, including one Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the legality of the Pilgrim Management System, implemented by the Kerala Police.

10. Substandard Pooja Items Sold In Temple Premises: Kerala High Court Says Temple Advisory Committee Bound To Keep Constant Vigil

Case Title: Suo Motu v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 190

The Court held that the Temple Advisory Committee constituted under Section 31A of the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act is bound to keep constant vigil over the sale of vazhipadu (pooja items) in the stalls on the temple premises, to ensure that the Kuthaka holder (successful bidder) is not selling any substandard pooja items to devotees. A Division Bench of Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice P.G Ajithkumar held that a ritual or pooja in the temple has to be performed by using pure pooja items while disposing of a suo motu matter initiated based on a news item that reported serious irregularities in the sale of Vazhipadu items in Vaikom Sree Mahadeva Temple, particularly in the sale of 'Koovalamala'.

11. Illegal Appointment Will Not Get Legitimised By Efflux Of Time: Kerala High Court Annuls Appointment Of Kochi Metro General Manager

Case Title: Suresh George v. Kochi Metro Rail Ltd & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 191

The High Court has annulled the appointment of Nireesh C, the General Manager of Kochi Metro Rail Limited (KMRL), (marketing, alternative revenue and corporate communications) upon finding that he fell short of the minimum age limit fixed for the post when he was appointed. Justice V.G. Arun annulled the appointment holding that an illegal appointment will not get legitimised by the passage of time and that the Court cannot evade its duty merely because there was a delay in pointing out the illegality.

Other Significant Developments

12. [Bulk Diesel Prices] Maintainability Issue Not Considered: Oil Companies Argue Before Kerala HC In Appeals Against Interim Order In Favour Of KSRTC

Case Title: Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. v. Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

The Court heard the State-owned oil marketing companies in the appeals challenging the interim order issued in favour of Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) wherein the OMCs have been directed to levy the price of High Speed Diesel (HSD) at par with the price available at retail pumps temporarily. A vacation bench of Justice V.G. Arun and Justice C.S Sudha will continue hearing the appeals on Tuesday after recording KSRTC's submission that a contempt petition will not be filed during court vacation.

Also Read: Oil Companies Move Appeals Assailing Interim Order In Favour Of KSRTC

13. Actor Assault Case| Kerala High Grants One More Month For Prosecution To Wind Up Further Investigation

Case Title: P. Gopalakrishnan alias Dileep v. State of Kerala & Anr.

The Court granted one more month's time to the prosecution to conclude the further investigation in the 2017 sexual assault case. Justice Kauser Edappagath granted this extension after noting that the pendrive submitted by the prosecution earlier this month contained two folders containing three voice clips each which were apparently collected by the investigating officers during the course of further investigation and which required careful analysis.

14. In A Rare Move, Kerala High Court Examines Witness At Appeal Stage Allowing NIA's Plea

Case Title: M.H. Faisal v. State of Kerala

In an extraordinary step, the Court allowed witness examination before the Court at the appellate stage. The development happened in the Kashmir terror recruitment case. Generally, witness examinations in criminal appeals are completed at the trial courts and the High Courts only evaluate the evidence gathered by the trial court. While considering appeals filed by the convicted accused and the National Investigation Agency (NIA) against an NIA court decision, the Division Bench of Justice K Vinod Chandran and Justice C Jayachandran allowed the examination of a BSNL official who had issued a call record showing communication between the accused and some persons in Kashmir.

15. Kerala High Court Asks District Judge To Inspect & Submit Report On Trivandrum Mental Health Centre After Reports Claim Inhuman Conditions

Case Title: High Court Legal Aid Committee v. State of Kerala

The Court took notice of the concerns raised regarding the alleged alarming and inhuman condition of the patients in the Thiruvananthapuram Mental Health Centre. Justice Sathish Ninan has sought a report from the Thiruvananthapuram District Judge, who is also the Chairman of the Monitoring Committee of the Mental Health Centre in the district on the functioning of the said Centre.

16. Kerala High Court Notifies Guidelines For Recording Evidence Of Vulnerable Witnesses As Per Supreme Court's Direction

The High Court has issued certain Guidelines for Recording of Evidence of Vulnerable Witnesses in light of the directions issued by the Supreme Court in Smruti Tukaram Badade v. State Of Maharashtra & Anr. In an attempt to provide vulnerable witnesses with a safe and conducive environment to testify fearlessly during a criminal trial, the Court has directed setting up Vulnerable Witnesses Deposition Centres at all courts in the state.

17. 'Police Leaking Privileged Communication Between Advocate & Clients' : Lawyer's Complaint Before Bar Council

A lawyer has filed a complaint before the Bar Council of Kerala seeking appropriate legal action against the police officers who allegedly leaked privileged communication between lawyers and their clients in the cases involving actor Dileep. This is in light of the reports that suggest that calls between Senior Advocate B. Raman Pillai who represents the actor in most cases and Dileep's brother Anoop were leaked to the media.

MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT

1. Arbitration Award Can't Be Challenged In Different Jurisdiction Stating That There Was No Arbitration Agreement: Madhya Pradesh High Court

Case Title: Parenteral Drugs (India) Limited versus Gati Kintetsu Express Pvt Ltd

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (MP) 111

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has ruled that even if a party disputes the existence of an arbitration agreement, an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act) to set aside an arbitral award cannot be filed in a Court not having jurisdiction under the arbitration agreement, solely on the ground that cause of action arose within its jurisdiction.

The Single Bench of Justice Subodh Abhyankar held that the contention that since there was no arbitration agreement between the parties, therefore, the arbitral award could also be challenged wherever the cause of action arose between the parties, would defeat the provisions of Section 16 and Section 34 of the A&C Act and lead to a chaotic situation.

2. MP High Court Suggests State To Consider Categorizing Penalties For Anganwadi Workers Along The Lines Of Service Rules As Major & Minor Punishments

The Madhya Pradesh High Court, Indore Bench recently suggested the State Government to amend the circular governing the service rules of Anganwadi Workers by categorising their penalties as major and minor punishments.

The Court further observed that irrespective of the gravity of mistakes of an Anganwadi Worker, the only recourse available to authorities to take action against them, as per the said circular, was their termination.

3. 'Either IOs Deliberately Leaving Lacuna Or Don't Know Evidence Law': MP High Court Grants Bail To Man Arrested On Confession Of Co-Accused

The Madhya Pradesh High Court, Gwalior Bench recently granted bail to a man arrested on the basis of the confessional statement of a co-accused, observing that lately, it has become a norm for the police department to file charge-sheet against accused persons merely on the basis of a confessional statement made by the other co-accused.

Hearing the bail application moved by the Applicant under Section 439 CrPC, Justice G.S. Ahluwalia noted-

In number of cases, it is being observed that the police is filing charge-sheet against the co-accused persons merely on the basis of confessional statement made by the co-accused. They do not try to collect any substantive evidence against the accused persons. It appears that either the Investigating Officer is deliberately leaving lacuna in the investigation or he does not know the law of evidence.

4. Benefit Of MEIS Scheme Can't Be Availed If Not Opted In Shipping Bill At The Time Of Export: Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Vivek Rusia and Justice Amarnath Kesharwani has held that the benefit of the Merchandise Exports From India Scheme (MEIS) cannot be availed if it is not opted for in the shipping bill at the time of export.

The petitioner/assessee, a private limited company, is in the business of manufacturing automobile parts. The petitioner has sought the declaration for relaxation/condonation of the procedure lapse of non-mentioning of MEIS scheme in the shipping bills at the time of export. The petitioner sought the direction that the MEIS be awarded to the petitioner on exports of their products via Shipping Bills issued in 2017-18 and 2018-19.

5. Madhya Pradesh High Court Relies On 'Two Fingers Test' To Cancel Bail Of Rape Accused

The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently set aside the bail granted to rape accused under the provisions of POCSO Act, observing that although the medical report of the Prosecutrix did not mention any definite opinion of rape, it pointed out that her hymen was ruptured and two fingers were easily going in her vagina, which prima facie corroborated the fact that she was sexually abused.

Dealing with the application for cancellation of bail under Section 439(2) CrPC moved by the father of the Prosecutrix, Justice R.K. Dubey observ

Though, in the medical examination report of the prosecutrix, it is mentioned that no definite opinion can be given regarding rape but apart from that it is also mentioned that the hymen was old torn and two fingers were easily going in the vagina which prima facie corroborates the fact that she was sexually abused.

6. Live-In Relation A By-Product Of Constitutional Guarantee Of Art 21; It Promotes Promiscuity, Lascivious Behavior: Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently termed the bane of live-in-relationship as a by-product of the Constitutional guarantee as provided under Article 21 of the Constitution, and has observed that such relations promote 'promiscuity' and 'lascivious behavior', giving further rise to sexual offences.

"Those who wanted to exploit this freedom are quick to embrace it but are totally ignorant that it has its own limitations, and does not confer any right on any of the partners to such relationship," the bench of Justice Subodh Abhyankar further remarked as it rejected the anticipatory bail of a 25-year-old man who has been accused of raping a woman, with whom he allegedly had a live in relation.

7. S.340 CrPC Can't Be Invoked If False Statement In Application Did Not Impact Its Outcome: Madhya Pradesh High Court

Case Title : Smt. Kamla Sharma and others Vs. Sukhdevlal and others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (MP) 117

The Madhya Pradesh High Court, Gwalior Bench recently held that false statements made in an application under section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, which did not have any impact on the outcome of the said application, cannot be a ground to initiate proceedings under section 340 CrPC.

Justice G.S. Ahluwalia was essentially dealing with an application under section 482 CrPC moved by the Applicants, aggrieved by the order of the lower court, whereby their application under section 340 CrPC was rejected.

8. Madhya Pradesh High Court Grants Temporary Bail To Murder Accused To Take Care Of Pregnant Wife

Case Title: RAVISH SOOD ALIAS AMAN Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (MP) 118

The High Court of Madhya Pradesh recently granted temporary bail to a murder accused for 90 days so that he could take care of his pregnant wife, whose delivery was due in a week.

Justice Sanjay Dwivedi was dealing with a bail application U/S 439 CRPC moved by the Applicant accused for offences punishable U/S 302, 307, 294, 506, 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 34 of the IPC.

9. Madhya Pradesh High Court Dismisses PIL Accusing State Of "Demolishing" Houses Of Accused/ Suspects Without Lawful Sanction

The Madhya Pradesh High Court on Wednesday dismissed a PIL seeking interference of the Court in the recent spree of demolishing houses and other pukka constructions by police in the State, belonging to people allegedly in conflict of law.

10. POCSO Case Pending Since 4 Yrs, Accused Adopting Dilatory Tactics: Madhya Pradesh High Court Directs Trial Court To Conduct Day To Day Hearing

The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently directed a trial court to conduct hearing in a POCSO case as expeditiously as possible, on a day to day basis, taking note that the same has been pending since 4 years and the accused has been adopting dilatory tactics to avert it.

Justice Anand Pathak observed,

"The fact situation of the case and legal position, it is imperative that trial be conducted as expeditiously as possible on day to day basis in view of Section 35(1) and (2) of POCSO Act. Any default or defiance by the accused shall be dealt with sternly by the trial Court as per the different provisions available in Cr.P.C"

11. Madhya Pradesh High Court Converts Wife's Conviction U/S 302 IPC For Burning Husband To Death To S.304, Says Act Committed In 'Heat Of Passion'

Case Title : Rajaram and ors v State Of MP

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (MP) 121

The Madhya Pradesh High Court, Indore Bench recently converted the conviction of the Appellants, including the wife of the deceased, under Section 302 to Section 304 IPC, for burning the deceased to death, observing that the same was done under the heat of passion.

While acquitting the Appellants, the Court also took into consideration that they were first-time offenders and that Appellant/wife had to take care of her children.

12. 'Huge Scam, Hand In Gloves With Govt Officers': Madhya Pradesh High Court Directs DGP To Investigate Irregularities In Procurement Of Paddy

Case Title : BANTU ROHRA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (MP) 122

The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently directed the DGP of the State to handover the investigation of a case related to alleged irregularity in paddy procurement, to a special agency or any responsible officer since prima facie, the case appeared to be a huge scam involving misuse of public money.

Justice Sanjay Dwivedi was essentially dealing with an application for grant of anticipatory bail, moved by the Applicant accused for offences punishable U/S 407, 409 and 420 IPC.

13. Approach Bar Council If Lawyer Not Serious Towards Profession: MP HC Rejects Plea To Recall Witness For Cross-Examination Over Counsel's Absence

Case Title: Vipin Rajput Vs. State of MP

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (MP) 123

The Madhya Pradesh High Court, Gwalior Bench recently dismissed an application moved by Applicant/accused to recall a prosecution witness for cross-examination on the grounds that his lawyer could not cross-examine the witness as the members of the bar were abstaining from work on the date when his case was listed.

Hearing the application under Section 482 CrPC, moved by the Applicant, Justice G.S. Ahluwalia observed-

If the applicant has engaged a lawyer who is not serious towards his profession, then the applicant has a remedy to approach the Bar Council and if the counsel for the applicant was working as per the instructions of the applicant, then the applicant cannot run away from his liability of not cross-examining the prosecution witness Ranjana Chauhan on 28.12.2021, 29.12.2021 and 11.01.2022.

14. Won't Demolish House Without Following Due Process Of Law, MP Govt Tells HC On Plea Of Wife Of Khargone Riots Accused

Case Title : Fareeda Bee V The State Of Madhya Pradesh And Ors

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (MP) 124

The High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Indore Bench, recently received assurance from the State of Madhya Pradesh that the authorities won't proceed with demolition of House of the Petitioner, whose husband was accused in the Khargone riots case, without following due process of law. The Petitioner was allegedly being threatened by the State with an ultimatum of razing down her house because of her husband's arrest.

MADRAS HIGH COURT

ORISSA HIGH COURT

Nominal Index:

1. Kailash Chandra Panda & Ors. v. State of Orissa & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 48
2. Ashish Thakare v. National Commission for Scheduled Tribes & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 49
3. Smt. Bishnupriya Pattnaik & Anr. v. State of Orissa & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 50
4. Kartik Nag v. State of Odisha, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 51
5. Basanta Kumar Sahoo v. Odisha Forest Department Corporation Ltd. & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 52
6. Pradeep Kumar Nath & Anr. v. State of Odisha, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 53
7. Pramesh Pradhan@Rani & Anr. v. State of Orissa, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 54

Judgments/Orders Reported in the Week:

1. S.115 CPC | Decisions Of District Courts Rendered In Appeal/ Revision Are Beyond Revisional Jurisdiction Of High Court: Orissa HC

Case Title: Kailash Chandra Panda & Ors. v. State of Orissa & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 48

The High Court held that a revision petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure is not maintainable before the High Court against an order of District Court which is passed in the appellate or revisional jurisdiction. It clarified that an order must have been made under the 'original jurisdiction' of District Court to attract applicability of the provision. While explaining the true purport of the terms 'other proceedings' appearing under Section 115, a Single Judge Bench of Justice Biswajit Mohanty observed,

"The words "or other proceedings" have to be read ejusdem generis with the words "original suits". In other words, the phrase 'other proceedings' will not cover cases arising out of decisions made in the appeals or revisions. If the District Court has not decided in its original jurisdiction, then such order is not amenable to the revisional jurisdiction of High Court."

2. Orissa High Court Stays Arrest Warrant Issued By NCST Against Keonjhar Collector Ashish Thakare

Case Title: Ashish Thakare v. National Commission for Scheduled Tribes & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 49

The Court stayed an arrest warrant issued by the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes against the Collector & District Magistrate, Keonjhar. While staying the warrant, a Single Judge Bench of Justice Biswanath Rath observed that the Commission has prima facie exceeded its power in issuing warrant to the Collector.

Mr. Ashish Thakare, the Collector & District Magistrate of Keonjhar district, was summoned by the Commission to appear before it on 4^th April 2022 in relation to a case pertaining to non-payment of compensation and employment benefit to a tribal person in a land acquisition case. However, he did not appear. Notably, he had ignored summons of the Commission for at least 'eight times' during the last six months.

3. Orissa High Court Gives Clean-Chit To Jail Authorities In 2007 Kendrapara Custodial Death Case

Case Title: Smt. Bishnupriya Pattnaik & Anr. v. State of Orissa & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 50

The High Court gave clean-chit to the Kendrapara sub-jail authorities in a custodial death case of 2007. It further denied to order compensation to the parents of the deceased as it did not find any foul play on part of the jail authorities. While dismissing the petition, a Division Bench of Chief Justice Dr. S. Muralidhar and Justice Radha Krishna Pattanaik observed,

"There is no material on the basis of which this Court can come to a conclusion that the death of late Susanta Pattnaik was either due to any ill-treatment by the jail officials or due to negligence of the jail officials in not affording any timely medical treatment for his condition."

4. NDPS Act | Orissa High Court Grants Bail To Accused Who Was Not Heard Before Giving Extension To Submit Chargesheet

Case Title: Kartik Nag v. State of Odisha

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 51

The High Court set aside the orders passed by a Sessions-cum-Special Court which granted extension to submit chargesheet without providing hearing to accused and not even releasing him when he was entitled for 'default bail'. A Single Judge Bench of Justice Bibhu Prasad Routray held,

"It is the settled law that right guaranteed under Section 167(2) to the accused is indefeasible. This Court, in the case of Lambodar Bag (supra) after taking into consideration the principles decided in the case of Hitendra Vishnu Thakur v. State of Maharashtra, reported in A.I.R. 1994 SC 2623 and various other decisions, have answered on five points relating to release of an accused in terms of Section 36-A(4) of the N.D.P.S. Act read with Section 167(2) of the Cr.P.C. The answer is in affirmative in favour of the accused for his enlargement on bail for non-completion of investigation within the prescribed period of 180 days on different contingencies relating to extension of such period."

5. "Court Expects It Will Do The Right Thing": Orissa HC Expresses Faith On State Forest Department In A 'Force-Majeure' Dispute

Case Title: Basanta Kumar Sahoo v. Odisha Forest Department Corporation Ltd. & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 52

In an interesting matter, the High Court has expressed faith on the Odisha Forest Department Corporation Ltd. in a dispute concerning a 'force-majeure' clause of a tender agreement. While denying the clause to be a 'mandate', a Single Judge Bench of Justice Arindam Sinha remarked that the petitioner has prayed for consideration as a result of devastation caused by super cyclone. It held, so far as Clause 3 of the tender terms and conditions is concerned, mention of force-majeure does not gain significance since the clause requires acceptance by the tenderer on inspection of the plantation. The super cyclone, being force-majeure, happened after inspection of the lot was taken by petitioner. Thus, it could not have been of information to be obtained on inspection, prior to the allotment. Further, it hoped that Opposite party no. 1 being an authority under Article 12 of the Constitution of India, it will do the right thing.

6. Single Injury To Vital Part Of Body Is Sufficient For Murder: Orissa HC Confirms Conviction Of Couple For Murder Of Relative

Case Title: Pradeep Kumar Nath & Anr. v. State of Odisha

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 53

The High Court has recently held that even a single injury to any vital part of human body can cause death and causing such death, having all knowledge of the most probable result, is murder. While dismissing an appeal preferred by a couple against their conviction for murder of one of their relatives, a Division Bench of Chief Justice Dr. S. Muralidhar and Justice Radha Krishna Pattanaik observed,

"The victim though received a single injury but it was on a vital part. If it had been an injury on any other part of victim's body with no imminent danger of death, things would have been different, even if she had succumbed to it."

7. S. 167(2), CrPC | Only 'Date Of Submission' Of Chargesheet Is Relevant For Default Bail, Not 'Date Of Preparation': Orissa High Court

Case Title: Pramesh Pradhan@Rani & Anr. v. State of Orissa

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 54

The Court has held that 'date of submission' of chargesheet is the only relevant date that should be taken into consideration while granting 'default bail' under Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 'Date of preparation' of chargesheet is immaterial unless it is produced before the Court on the same day. A Single Judge Bench of Justice Bibhu Prasad Routray ruled,

"As per the language used in Section 167, Cr.P.C., the detention is authorized pending completion of investigation and completion of investigation leads to submission of report under Section 173(2), Cr.P.C. The words used in Section 173(2), Cr.P.C. is 'as soon as'. Therefore, the inference is that, the investigation has been completed only when the charge-sheet is submitted to the court. Thus, the date of completion of investigation is the date of submission of charge-sheet and reverse."

Important Developments:

·Orissa High Court Dispenses With Filing Hard Copy Of E-Filed Documents Under E-Filing Version 3.0

The Registry of the High Court, on 19^th April, notified that with a view to streamline matters relating to e-filing, whenever a case is e-filed in the High Court of Orissa through e-filing version 3.0, there shall be no requirement of filing hardcopy of the e-filed documents. Further it clarified, if any dispute arises with regard to any e-filed document or any portion thereof, the concerned advocate or litigant shall physically file the original of the relevant e-filed document.

MEGHALAYA HIGH COURT

1. "Confession Of Accused Corroborated Victim's Version": Meghayala HC Upholds Man's Conviction For Raping Minor Step-Daughter

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Meg) 13

The Meghalaya High Court upheld the conviction of a man for raping his minor stepdaughter as it noted that the confession of the accused as recorded in his statement under Section 164 CrPC had completely corroborated what the victim had to say.

With this, the Bench of Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice W. Diengdoh also held that if the confessional statement fills up any lacuna in the prosecution case, the court can find the basis of conviction in such statement while relying on the overall evidence to satisfy itself that the confessional statement was relevant.

PATNA HIGH COURT

1. Minor Contradictions Or Improvement To Trivial Points In Testimony Not Ground To Reject Evidence; Some Variances Are Natural: Patna High Court

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Pat)10

The Patna High Court recently held that minor contradictions, inconsistency or improvement to trivial points by a witness, could not be made a ground on which the evidence can be rejected in its entirety.

A Division Bench of Justices Sunil Kumar Panwar and AM Badar remarked,

"Some variances are natural from the mouth of the witnesses who were deposing after lapse of a year or that may also depend on the loss of memory. There is no reason to raise doubt the presence of prosecution witnesses at the place of occurrence."

2. 'Unreasonable': Patna High Court Sets Aside Rule Reserving 40% Junior Engineer Posts For Polytechnic Diploma Holders From Govt Institutions Alone

The Patna High Court has set aside the law reserving 40% seats for the post of Junior Engineer for candidates holding Diploma certificate from the Government Polytechnic Institutes within the State of Bihar.

3. PIL Seeks Complete Ban On Chewing Tobacco In Bihar: Patna HC Directs Competent Authority To Take Decision On Representation In 3 Months

PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT

Nominal Index

Sunita Devi v. State Of Haryana and Another 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 78

Mohan Lal v. State of Haryana and Others 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 79

Swaran Kaur v. State of Punjab and others 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 80

Rinky Rani v. Daljit Kumar

Inam v. State Of Haryana

Yoginder Kumar Sud versus Thakur Rajiv Singh and Another

Dainik Bhaskar Corporation Limited Versus State of Haryana and others

Poonam Kalsi v. State Of Punjab And Others

Judgments/ Orders of the Week

1.Ordinarily, Court Does Not Interfere In Compassionate Appointment Matters Of Contractual Employee In Absence Of Any Policy: Punjab And Haryana High Court

Case Title: Sunita Devi v. State Of Haryana and Another

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 78

Punjab and Haryana High Court this court would not have interfered in such a matter of contractual employee in the absence of any policy but in the mitigating circumstances of this case, it is expected from the State to have a compassionate outlook and try to accommodate the petitioner on any suitable post in any class subject to the requirement of services.

Justice Arun Monga stated that a decision needs to be taken as expeditiously as possible since the petitioner and her four minor children continue to live in penury.

2. Person Not Being A Complainant Cannot Ask For Addition Of Offences In FIR: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Case Title: Mohan Lal v. State of Haryana and Others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 79

Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that a no-complainant cannot seek directions of addition of particular offences in a FIR lodged by another person.

The bench comprising Justice H.S. Madaan stated that petitioner can avail the remedy by approaching the Illaqa Magistrate seeking registration of FIR by way of an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. or by filing a private complaint. Upon which the Magistrate may take appropriate action in accordance with the law.

3.Dependant Parents Entitled To Family Pension After Wife & Children Of Deceased Lose Eligibility: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Case Title: Swaran Kaur v. State of Punjab and others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 80

Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that entitlement for the grant of family pension to the dependent parents needs to be seen after the widow or the children loose their eligibility for the grant of the said benefit.

The bench comprising Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi held that the widow initially is entitled to the family pension, after she becomes ineligible the children will be entitled and when children become ineligible, the dependant parents will be granted the same subject to fulfillment of other eligibility criteria.

Court further added that the dependent parent's claim for a family pension cannot be ignored only because the deceased is survived by his widow or children.

4. "Court Shouldn't Be Swayed By Emotions Tilting Towards Fairer Sex": PH High Court Rejects Wife's Plea To Transfer Matrimonial Case

Case Title: Rinky Rani v. Daljit Kumar

The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently dismissed a plea filed by a woman who sought transfer of the matrimonial case to her home district as it observed that merely because the applicant is a wife, the Court should not be swayed by emotions tilting toward the fairer sex.

Justice Fateh Deep Singh observed that the wife cannot be allowed to take undue benefit of her own wrongs and rather the present petition is nothing but a sweet revenge by the wife to force the husband not to seek his rights under the law and more so the invocation of a jurisdiction under Section 24 of the CPC is not to be rightly inferred unless and until there are bonafide compelling reasons for the Court to come to the aid of the applicant and dismissed the plea.

5. Anticipatory Bail Plea On Behalf Of Proclaimed Offender Not Maintainable: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Case Title: Inam v. State Of Haryana

Punjab and Haryana High Court has reiterated that a person against whom a warrant had been issued and is absconding or concealing himself in order to avoid execution of the warrant and is declared as a proclaimed offender in terms of Section 82 of the Code he is not entitled to the relief of anticipatory bail.

6.Once Suit For Permanent Injunction Stood Decreed, Executing Court Cannot Render Said Decree Nugatory: Punjab And Haryana High Court

Case Title: Yoginder Kumar Sud versus Thakur Rajiv Singh and Another

Punjab and Haryana High Court held that once a suit for the permanent injunction was decreed the same cannot be declared nugatory by the Executing Court stating that the petitioner ought to file a suit for partition.

Justice Alka Sarin added that the Executing Court cannot render a decree nugatory once the suit for permanent injunction stood decreed which it did so in the present case and by doing so it has exceeded the jurisdiction vested in it.

7. S.17(2) Working Journalists Act | Notice To Employer Not Mandatory Before Making Reference To Adjudicatory Mechanism: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Case Title: Dainik Bhaskar Corporation Limited Versus State of Haryana and others

Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that whereas adjudicatory mechanism under the Working Journalists Act is intended to provide an opportunity of hearing to the employer qua the question of claim raised by the employee, the employer cannot claim any hearing before making of the reference by the appropriate government under Section 17(2) of the Act.

The bench comprising Justice Rajbir Sehrawat held that the action of the appropriate government in referring the matter to the Labour Court is in tune with the provisions of Section 17 of the Act.

8.Mother Has Preferential Right To Custody Of Minor Below 5 Yrs But Utmost Consideration Is Child's Welfare: P&H HC Rejects Habeas Corpus Against Father

Case Title: Poonam Kalsi v. State Of Punjab And Others

Punjab and Haryana High Court held that Custody of the father as a natural guardian cannot be said to be illegal or unlawful and therefore, it would not be appropriate to issue a writ of habeas corpus in favour of the petitioner.

Justice Sant Parkash further held that while making orders for the appointment of guardians of minors, the most important consideration should be given to the welfare of the minor. Court further added that the legal rights of the mother must be understood subject to provisions of Section 7 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890.

Other case updates

Plea In Punjab & Haryana HC Seeks Postponement Of Haryana JS (Mains) Exam-2021 On Ground Of Clash With MP Civil Judge (Pre) Exam Date

A Writ petition has been moved before the Punjab and Haryana High Court seeking postponement of Mains Examination of Haryana Civil Service (Judicial Branch)- 2021 in view of its clash with the date announced for conducting the Preliminary Exam of Madhya Pradesh Civil Judge, Junior Division (Entry Level) Exam-2021.

In all, 63 petitioners who have qualified Preliminary exam of HCS (Judicial Branch) Pre Exam 2021 have moved the High Court seeking postponement and rescheduling of the Mains Examination in a manner so as to ensure that the same does not coincide/clash with the MP CJ's Preliminary Exam-2021 being conducted by the Madhya Pradesh High Court.

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

Nominal Index

Girdhari Singh Through His Father Kishor Singh v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 134

Haider Khan v. Union of India & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 135

Suresh Balkrishna Jajra Versus Union of India 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 136

Ratna v. State of Rajasthan, Through PP 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 137

Kalu Ram Jangid v. State Of Rajasthan 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 138

M/s.Mangalam Arts through its partner Sh.Rajendra Kumar Rawat v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 139

Sudhir Bordiya v. State, Through Pp 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 140

State Bank Of India v. State Of Rajasthan 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 141

Mahendra Singh & Ors. v. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 142

Prahlad v. State Of Rajasthan, Through PP 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 143

Raman v. State Of Rajasthan, Through PP 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 146

M/s Ultratech Nathdwara Cement Limited Versus Assistant Commissioner 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 147

Shree Basant Bhandar Int Udyog Versus UOI 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 148

Judgments/ Orders of the Week

1. Ensure Convicts' Emergent Parole Applications Are Decided Immediately: Rajasthan High Court To State, Jail Superintendents

Case Title: Girdhari Singh Through His Father Kishor Singh v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 134

The Rajasthan High Court has asked the State's Home Secretary to issue pertinent instructions to the District Magistrates and the Superintendents of jails across the State to ensure that the emergent parole applications submitted by the convicts are not kept pending and are decided immediately on receipt thereof.

A division bench of Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Vinod Kumar Bharwani observed,

"The Home Secretary, Government of Rajasthan shall issue pertinent instructions to the District Magistrates and the Superintendents of jails across the State of Rajasthan to ensure that the emergent parole applications submitted by the convicts are not kept pending and are decided immediately on receipt thereof in terms of the Rule 23 of the Rules of 2021."

2. 'Fanciful & Unrealistic': Rajasthan HC Dismisses PIL Seeking Direction To Centre To Conduct Census In Specified Timeframe; Imposes 25K Cost

Case Title: Haider Khan v. Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 135

The Rajasthan High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation seeking a direction to Union government to conduct the Census in scheduled timeline, without any further delay and also to declare "wherever it may consider it necessary or desirable to do so" in the Section 3 of the Census Act, 1948 as ultra vires.

Section 3 of Census Act, 1948 states that the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, declare its intention of taking a Census in the whole or any part of the territories to which this Act extends, whenever it may consider it necessary or desirable so to do and thereupon the Census shall be taken.

3. Rajasthan High Court Refuses To Exempt Assessee From Personal Appearance Under GST

Case Title: Suresh Balkrishna Jajra Versus Union of India

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 136

The Rajasthan High Court consisting of Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice Sameer Jain has refused to exempt the assessee from personal appearance under Section 70 of the CGST Act.

The petitioner/assessee sought the direction of exemption from personal appearance pursuant to summons issued to the petitioner under Section 70 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 issued by Respondent/department.

The assessee has sought its representation through an authorised representative is required to be duly considered by the respondents.

The assessee submitted that unless it is absolutely imperative, it is not necessary that in all cases, the petitioner should be insisted for personal appearance and he may be allowed to appear through representative also replying to various queries.

4. Rajasthan High Court Grants 15 Days' Temporary Bail To Convict To Perform Daughter's Kanyadan

Case Title: Ratna v. State of Rajasthan, Through PP

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 137

The Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur has granted temporary bail for 15 days to a man to perform 'Kanyadan' & other ceremonies in his daughter's marriage.

Notably, the present application for grant of temporary bail has been filed on the ground that the appellant's daughter is getting married on 28.04.2022 and the presence of the appellant is necessary to perform 'Kanyadan' and other ceremonies in the marriage.

A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice Madan Gopal Vyas, ruled,

"Taking into consideration the ground, on which the temporary bail is sought, we are inclined to allow the application to the extent that the appellant shall be released on temporary bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- along with two local sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. The appellant shall be released on temporary bail for a period of 15 days from the date of release."

5. Married Brother Of Deceased Govt Servant Not A 'Dependent' & Is Not Entitled For Compassionate Appointment: Rajasthan High Court

Case Title: Kalu Ram Jangid v. State Of Rajasthan

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 138

The Rajasthan High Court observed that the petitioner is a married brother of the deceased government servant, and therefore, the petitioner cannot be held to be a dependant and to be entitled for compassionate appointment in terms of the Rajasthan Compassionate Appointment of Dependants of Deceased Government Servants Rules, 1996.

Justice Rekha Borana, while dismissing the writ petition, opined,

"Admittedly, the petitioner is married and therefore, in terms of the Rules of 1996, the petitioner cannot be held to be a dependant and to be entitled for compassionate appointment. In view of the specific provisions of law, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order dated 01.01.2019."

6. Unilateral Deposit Of Amount In Absence Of Allotment Letter Does Not Create Any Rights In Land: Rajasthan High Court

Case Title: M/s.Mangalam Arts through its partner Sh.Rajendra Kumar Rawat v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 139

The Rajasthan High Court observed that merely depositing an amount unilaterally by the petitioner-firm, in absence of any allotment letter, would not create any right to claim allotment of land in its favour.

Justice Ashok Kumar Gaur, while dismissing the writ petition, ruled,

"This Court finds that merely by depositing amount unilaterally by the petitioner-firm, in absence of any allotment letter, would not create any right to claim allotment in its favour."

The court observed that the allotment of industrial plots on "first come first serve" basis is not approved in the interest of the respondent-Corporation and as such, the decision cannot be termed arbitrary.

7. Power Of Revision At The State Of Framing Of Charges Is Very Limited: Rajasthan High Court

Case Title: Sudhir Bordiya v. State, Through Pp

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 140

The Rajasthan High Court observed that at the stage of framing of charge, the scope of interference of the High Court, as a revisional Court is very limited, so much so that the Court must be concerned only with the question whether there is any suspicion against the accused, and not with the proof of the allegation(s).

The court opined that if a strong suspicion exists in the mind of the court at the stage concerned, then the same is sufficient for the court to proceed with the framing of the charge against the accused person(s). And if a prayer for discharge has been made before a revisional court, then the same may only be allowed if the court finds that the materials on record are wholly insufficient for the purpose of trial, added the court.

Dr. Justice Pushpendra Singh Bhati, while dismissing the writ petition and refusing to interfere with the decision of trial court, ruled,

"This Court, therefore, finds that the judicial precedents laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court is clear, and that at the stage of framing of charge, the scope of interference of the Hon'ble High Court, as a revisional Court is very limited, so much so that the Court must be concerned only with the question whether there is any suspicion against the accused, and not with the proof of the allegation(s). And, as an exception to this, the Hon'ble Apex Court, in the case of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335"

8. Coins Worth ₹11 Crore Missing From SBI Branch: Rajasthan High Court Transfers Investigation To CBI

Case Title: State Bank Of India v. State Of Rajasthan

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 141

In a case of 'missing' coins worth Rs. 11 crore from the Mehandipur Balaji branch of State Bank of India (SBI), the Central Bureau has reportedly filed an FIR. The FIR was filed pursuant to the order issued by the Rajasthan High Court whereby, on March 4, 2022, the court had transferred the investigation of the matter to the agency.

As per the reports, an FIR filed by the bank in August 2021 reported a discrepancy in the total value of coins deposited in the bank, and those that were found to be there in an audit conducted by the bank. It was further stated in the FIR that the vendor told the bank that while the audit was underway, one of his employees, who was involved in counting of coins, allegedly had his life threatened by a group of 10-15 armed men.

Notably, the State Bank of India, by way of a criminal writ petition, had approached the Rajasthan High Court seeking direction to the CBI to take over the investigation of the FIR filed in August last year at Police Station Todabhim. It also sought direction to the respondents to pursue the FIR for offence of threat given to the vendor.

9. At The Stage Of Framing Of Charges, Possibility Of Accused Person's Acquittal Not To Considered, Rather It Is To Be Seen Whether Prima Facie Case Is Made Out Or Not: Rajasthan HC

Case Title: Mahendra Singh & Ors. v. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 142

The Rajasthan High Court observed that medical evidence cannot be doubted, that too, at the stage of framing of charges, where as per the settled law laid down by the Supreme Court, the possibility of acquittal of the accused person are not to be taken into consideration, rather it is to be seen whether prima facie case is made out or not.

The present criminal revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 Cr.P.C. has been preferred against the order passed by trial court, framing charges against the present accused-petitioners for the offences under Sections 308, 447, 427, 341, 323 & 325 read with Section 34 IPC.

Dr, Justice Pushpendra Singh Bhati, ruled,

"Such medical evidence cannot be doubted, that too, at the stage of framing of charges, where as per the settled law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the possibility of acquittal of the accused person are not to be taken into consideration, rather it is to be seen whether prima facie case is made out or not; the impugned order passed by the learned trial court clearly reveals that the said proposition, amongst others, has been kept into consideration by the learned trial court, and rightly so."

10. Default Bail- Merely Because Courts Were Closed For Holi Holidays, Prosecution Can't Get Benefit of Filing Charge-Sheet After Expiry of Stipulated Time: Rajasthan HC

Case Title: Prahlad v. State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 143

The Rajasthan High Court observed that merely because the courts were closed for Holi Holidays, the prosecution cannot get the benefit of filing the charge-sheet after expiry of the period of 60 days or the stipulated period of time mandated by law.

The court noted that it is a settled proposition of law that if the contraband recovered is below commercial quantity, the charge-sheet is required to be filed within a period of 60 days and the period of 60 days, in no circumstance, can get enlarged.

Essentially, the petitioner was arrested on 17.01.2022 and the 60 days' period came to an end on 19.03.2022 whereas the charge-sheet was filed on 21.03.2022.

11. Murder Trial | Prosecution Not Required To Seek Corroboration In Form Of Motive & Recovery Where Ocular Testimony Is Convincing: Rajasthan HC

Case Title: Raman v. State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 146

The Rajasthan High Court observed that it is a well settled principle of criminal jurisprudence that in a case of murder, where ocular testimony is convincing, there is no requirement for the prosecution to seek corroboration in the form of motive and recovery.

In the present matter, an application under Section 389 Cr.P.C. was filed seeking suspension of sentence awarded by the trial court, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced with life imprisonment under Sections 302 (Murder) and 323 (Voluntarily causing hurt) IPC. The appellant urged that he has strong case for assailing the impugned judgment and hence, he deserves indulgence of bail during pendency of the appeal.

Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Vinod Kumar Bharwani, while dismissing the petition as it being devoid of merit,

"We have given our thoughtful consideration to the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties. We may state that it is a well settled principle of criminal jurisprudence that in a case of murder, where ocular testimony is convincing, there is no requirement for the prosecution to seek corroboration in the form of motive and recovery."

12. Rajasthan High Court Directs GST Dept. To Reimburse The Pre Deposit In View Of CIRP Of Binani Cement

Case Title: M/s Ultratech Nathdwara Cement Limited Versus Assistant Commissioner

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 147

The Rajasthan High Court bench of Justice Vinod Kumar Bharwani and Justice Sandeep Mehta has directed the GST department to reimburse amounts deposited by Binani Cement as a mandatory statutory obligation to the Ultra Tech Nathdwara Cement.

The petitioner, UltraTech Nathdwara Cement Ltd., has taken over Binani Cement. The petitioner has filed a revision petition assailing the order passed by the Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer, rejecting the applications for a refund of the mandatory statutory obligation pre-deposit with interest made with appeals filed before the Tax Board.

The Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes Department issued VAT assessment orders fixing the liability of Binani Cement Limited for different periods ranging from 2005-06 to 2015-16 and also imposed upon it additional tax and interest. These orders were carried by Binani Cement Limited in an appeal to the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), Commercial Taxes Department, Jodhpur, who dismissed it by separate orders. Being aggrieved by the orders passed by the assessing authority and the appellate authority, Binani Cement Limited preferred appeals before the Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer.

13. Rajasthan High Court Restrains GST Dept. From Recovery Of GST On Royalty Paid On Account Of Excavation Of Sand For Brick

Case Title: Shree Basant Bhandar Int Udyog Versus UOI

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 148

The Rajasthan High Court bench of Justice Madan Gopal Vyas and Justice Vijay Bishnoi has restrained the GST department from recovering GST on royalty paid on account of the excavation of sand for brick.

The petitioner/assessee has filed the writ petition challenging the demand GST on the royalty paid on account of excavation of sand for brick.

The petitioner has submitted that, as per the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of India Cement Ltd. Etc. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, the royalty is separate and distinct from the land revenue and it is not related to the land as a unit. As such, no tax is to be paid upon the royalty.

Other Important Updates

1. S.34 Rights Of Persons With Disabilities Act Challenged Over Exclusion Of Persons With Haemophilia: Rajasthan High Court Issues Notice

Case Title: Ram Prakash Singh v. The Union Of India

The Rajasthan High Court has issued notice to Centre on a plea challenging the constitutionality of Section 34 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 inasmuch as it does not provide benefit of reservation to the persons with disability of Haemophilia .

Haemophilia is a rare bleeding disorder caused by congenital deficiency of certain clotting factors.

The petitioner also sought direction to the respondent authorities to include persons with disability of Haemophilia under section 34 and provide reservation under every government establishment to them. Additionally, the petitioner sought direction to the respondents to give 'benefit of reservation' in employment to him as he is a Haemophilia disabled person with benchmark disability.

Section 34 of the Act provides that every appropriate Government shall appoint in every Government establishment not less than 4 percent of the total number of vacancies filled with persons with benchmark disabilities, of which, 1 percent each shall be reserved for persons with benchmark disabilities of blindness and low vision; deaf and hard of hearing; locomotor disability including cerebral palsy, leprosy cured, dwarfism, acid attack victims and muscular dystrophy; and 1 percent for persons with benchmark disabilities Autism, intellectual disability, specific learning disability andmental illness; Multiple disabilities.

TELANGANA HIGH COURT

1. Person Whose Land Title Is In Dispute Before Civil Court Can't Seek Withdrawal Of Land Acquisition Proceedings: Telangana High Court

The Telangana High Court has held that a person, whose title is in dispute, cannot invoke the provisions of Section 48 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for withdrawal of land acquisition proceedings.

A division Bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili upheld a single judge order which held that once the title is in dispute and a reference has been made to the civil court to determine the ownership, a person, whose title is in dispute, cannot invoke the provisions of Section 48 of the Act.

2. [Land Acquisition] Land Owners Entitled To Rent, Damages & Consequential Benefits From Date Of Dispossession By Govt: Telangana High Court

3. Disputed Issues Under Employees' State Insurance Act Ought To Be Referred To Designated Court Under S.75: Telangana High Court

Case Title: C. Chandra Mohan Reddy v. Union of India

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Tel) 27

The Telangana High Court recently refused to exercise its writ jurisdiction, stating that the petitioner had not exhausted its alternate remedy by filing an application before the Employees' Insurance Court for adjudication of disputed issues under the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948.

4.  Execution Proceedings Not Maintainable Against Decision Of Court In A Petition Filed Under Section 34 Of The A&C Act: Telangana High Court

Case Title : Mrs. Ragya Bee (deceased) and Others versus M/s. P.S.R. Constructions

The Telangana High Court has held that a Civil Court does not have the power to modify an arbitral award in an application filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act) to set aside an arbitral award.

The Bench, consisting of Justice P. Naveen Rao and Dr. Justice G. Radha Rani, ruled that execution proceedings are not maintainable with respect to the decision of a Civil Court in a petition filed under Section 34 of the A&C Act.

5. Invocation Of Writ Jurisdiction Against An Order Of Arbitral Tribunal Is Not Normally Permissible: Telangana High Court

Case Title: Union of India, Rep. by Ministry of Railways versus Krishnapatnam Railway Company Limited

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Tel) 29