All High Courts Weekly Roundup: 10 January- 15 January, 2022

The High Court observed that an application under Section 482 CrPC is maintainable to quash the proceedings, which are ex facie bad for want of sanction as required under Section 197 of Crpc (Prosecution of Judges and public servants).

With this, the Bench of Justice Chandra Kumar Rai set aside a summoning order passed by the Judicial Magistrate Farrukhabad against a Lekhpal (applicant number 1) and a Kanoongo (applicant number 2) in the Consolidation department (both public servants) without obtaining necessary sanction as provided under Section 197 of CrPC.

While denying bail to 4 persons accused of fraudulently withdrawing money from the bank account of a retired High Court Judge, the High Court observed that those who deposit money in banks are honest and it is the responsibility of the banks to keep their money safe 'at any cost'. The Bench of Justice Shekhar Yadav also observed that those people who do not deposit crores of rupees in the bank and rather hide the same in the basements of their houses, are responsible for hollowing out the economic prosperity of the country.

It opined that the bank has to take responsibility for such cases wherein the money of their customers is withdrawn by cybercriminals as such customers are more honest towards the country since they put their white money in banks.

4. Aadhaar-Bank Mandatory Linking: Allahabad HC 'Agrees' With Centre's Argument To Seek Review Of Supreme Court's 2018 Verdict

While denying bail to 4 persons accused of fraudulently withdrawing money from the bank account of a retired High Court Judge, the High Court expressed its agreement with a submission made by the Union Government regarding the filing of a review petition against the Supreme Court's 2018 Adhaar Verdict before the SC.

In its 2018 Verdict, the Supreme Court had ruled that the move of mandatory linking of Aadhaar with bank account does not satisfy the test of proportionality.

Essentially, the Bench of Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav was hearing the submissions of RBI, State Government, BSNL, and Union government regarding the measures that could be taken to tackle cyber frauds/cyber crimes/fraudulent withdrawal of money from banks.

Referring to a Supreme Court's Judgment delivered in 2021, the High Court observed that fixing notional income at Rs.15,000/- per annum for a family's non-earning members is not just and reasonable.

The Bench of Justice Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker and Ajai Tyagi was hearing an appeal filed by the parents of a 7-year-old deceased boy, seeking enhancement of quantum, against Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's order awarding Rs.1,80,000 as compensation with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum.

In order to make virtual court proceedings more efficient and user-friendly, the Allahabad High Court has decided to adopt the CISCO WebEx Events platform for video conferencing at Lucknow Bench.

This development comes almost 6 months after the Allahabad High Court (at Prayagraj bench) decided to adopt the CISCO WebEx Events platform for video conferencing at Allahabad in place of the JITSI Meet platform.

Expressing its dismay over the progress of a civil suit and the way the concerned Judge at Mathura Court fixed the dates in the matter, the Allahabad High Court on Monday observed that even during a severe COVID-19 upsurge, judicial function, like many other solemn functions of the State, can't be shut down.

The Bench of Justice J. J. Munir further remarked that for the time being, the CoViD-19 pandemic upsurge is a recurrent feature and thus, it does not mean that the functioning of Courts should come to a standstill.

"The Courts must function and discharge their duties by adopting and adapting ways and means necessary for the dispensation of justice. During a severe CoViD-19 upsurge, judicial function, like many other solemn functions of the State, may be discharged differently, but they cannot be forsaken or the system of justice shut down," the Court observed.

The High Court will hear the arguments in Ashish Mishra's bail plea (filed in connection with a case filed against him on murder charges for the Lakhimpur Kheri incident) on January 18, 2022.

Mishra, the son of Union Minister of State for Home Affairs and BJP MP Ajay Kumar Mishra is the prime accused in the Lakhimpur Kheri Violence case is under police custody and has moved to the Allahabad High Court seeking bail in the case.

The High Court has directed the Sports Authority of India to ensure participation of the Indian Handball national team in the 20th Asian Men's Handball Championship, scheduled to be held from Jan 18 to Jan 31 in Saudi Arabia.

This order was made by the bench of Justice Attau Rahman Masoodi and Justice Narendra Kumar Johari which was hearing the writ plea of a member of the Indian Team, Mohit Yadav.

Essentially, Yadav had moved the High Court highlighting the fact that the budget for sponsoring the Indian team to participate in the tournament was earmarked by the Sports Authority of India, however, the same was not being released on account of some election proceedings taking place to constitute the management body in Handball Federation of India.

As per its SOP from January 10, 2022, the Bombay High Court at its principal seat is functioning for only three hours between 12 pm – 3 pm and hearing only urgent cases.

Case Title: Saiher Supply Chain Consulting Pvt Ltd v. Union of India and Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 6

The Bombay HC quashed and set aside an order of the Assistant Commissioner of CGST refusing refund of GST paid by a private export company on the ground that the company's application was time barred or not filed within the limitation period prescribed under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST) Act.

3. Bombay High Court Allows Age-Barred Law Graduate To Participate In Judges Selection As Recruitments Got Stalled Due To COVID

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 7

In an interim relief to a law graduate from Mumbai, the Bombay High Court has allowed him to participate in the ongoing recruitment process for post of Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate (First Class), despite being "age-barred."

The petitioner contended that he was age-barred as the Maharashtra Public Service Commission (MPSC) did not issue any advertisement for applications last year due to the Covid-19 pandemic.

Case Title: Udaynath Tirkey vs The Director General, Central Industrial Security Force & othrs

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw(Bom) 8

The Bombay High Court has held that being accused of a heinous crime is not a good enough reason not to conduct a departmental enquiry before dismissing a constable from service under Rule 39(ii) of the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) Rules akin to Article 311(2) of the Constitution.

The court quashed the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF)'s orders regarding the dismissal of a constable for allegedly raping a colleague's five-year-old daughter. Instead, it ordered the constable's reinstatement with a rider that CISF was not barred from initiating an enquiry subsequently.

Other Important Updates

1. Lawyer Moves Supreme Court Challenging Bombay High Court Circular Reducing Working Hours To 3 Due To COVID

Case Title: Ghanshyam Upadhyay vs The High Court Bombay

A Mumbai based lawyer approached the Supreme Court seeking to set aside the Bombay High Court's circular reducing its functioning in Mumbai to just three working hours a day owing to the rise in covid-19 cases in the city and state. It further seeks to enforce virtual hearings in all courts in the state.

The PIL under Article 32 of the Constitution of India calls the SOP "unrealistic" and "unreasonable." He states that courts can be made functional through a virtual hearing without reducing the working hours.

2.Judges Protection Act: Plea In Bombay High Court Challenges 'Absolute Immunity' To Judges Even When Justice is 'Wilfully Denied'

Case Title: Sabina Lakdawala vs Komal Singh Rajput

A petition filed in the Bombay High Court challenges Section 3 of the Judges (Protection) Act of 1985 that prevents civil or criminal proceeding against a Judge for anything done in the course of his official or judicial duty.

The plea alleges that the provision confers "absolute immunity to the judges even when they act maliciously and wilfully deny justice; on extraneous and corrupt considerations."

According to Section 3 of the Act, no court can entertain civil, criminal proceedings against a judge for acts or words spoken by him while performing his duty as a judge. However, the Central or State Government, the Supreme Court of India or an High Court can take civil, criminal or departmental action against a judge.

3. 2008 Malegaon Blast Case: Accused Lt Col Prasad Purohit Seeks Ban On Media From Reporting Proceedings

Case Title: State of Maharashtra (Through NIA) vs Pragya Singh Thakur and Others

Case No: NIA Spl Case 1/2016

Lt Colonel Prasad Purohit, a prime accused in the case has sought in-camera hearings in the ongoing trial against him and others, including BJP MP Pragya Singh Thakur. Purohit's plea comes soon after reports of nearly 16 crucial witnesses in the case being declared hostile.

The court has asked the NIA and victim intervenors to file their replies.

4. Custody Required To Seize Mobile Phones – Sessions Court Rejects Pre-Arrest Bail Pleas of former Maharashtra Home Minister Anil Deshmukh's lawyer and 3 others

Case Title: Adv.Inderpal Singh Balbir Singh Purewal & others VS State of Maharashtra

Case No: ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.21 OF 2022

A Sessions Court in Mumbai rejected the anticipatory bail applications of a Mumbai based lawyer Inder Pal Singh, who has been representing former Maharashtra Home Minister Anil Deshmukh before the High Court as well as the Sessions Court.

Singh and three others are accused of outraging the modesty of a female member of the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP). Singh is a former North Mumbai District President of the party. The sections applied against the accused include sections 354 (assault to outrage modesty of woman), 509 (words to insult modesty) and 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code and section 67 (punishment for publishing or transmitting obscene material in electronic form) of the Information Technology Act.

Singh subsequently approached the HC but withdrew his plea after the police submitted that they didn't intend to arrest him if he cooperated.

5. "Better Choice Of Words Expected From Responsible Persons": Bombay High Court Tells BJP MLA Ashish Shelar Over Remarks Against Mumbai Mayor

On January 13, the Bombay High Court issued notice to Mumbai Mayor Kishori Pednekar seeking her response to BJP MLA Ashish Shelar's plea to quash Mumbai Police's FIR against him for allegedly outraging modesty during a press conference on November 30, 2021.

"Such incidents do occur in public life, we are aware. But responsible persons are expected to choose words wisely," the bench observed.

6. Pune Court Grants Pre Arrest Bail to Hindutva Leader Milind Ekbote and 3 others in Hate Speech Case

Less than a week after self-proclaimed religious guru Kalicharan Maharaj was granted bail in a case of hate speech, a Sessions Court granted four other accused anticipatory bail in Pune.

The court allowed the anticipatory bail plea of Hindutva leader Milind Ekbote, for Rs. 25,000 each and one or two sureties of the same amount. Other three who have been granted anticipatory bail are Nandkumar Ekbote, Deepak Nagpure and Mohanrao Shete.

7. Nawab Malik Granted Bail In Second Defamation Case By Former BJP Youth Wing President

On January 12, a Magistrate court granted bail to Maharashtra Cabinet Minister and NCP leader Nawab Malik in the second defamation complaint filed against him by former Mumbai BJP youth wing president Mohit Kamboj Bharatiya.

Case Title: M/s.V.S.Products v. Union of India

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 7

The Karnataka High Court upheld the notification dated July 6, 2019 issued by the Union of India by which Central Excise Duty has been levied on tobacco and tobacco products. Justice S. Sunil Dutt Yadav said, "It needs to be kept in mind that taxation is not merely a source of raising revenue but is also recognised by the fiscal tool to achieve fiscal and social objective."

2: Live Streaming Of Court Proceedings: Karnataka High Court Directs State To Provide Requisite Infra At Subordinate Courts

Case Title: Dilraj Rohit Sequeira v. Union Of India

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 8

The Karnataka High Court directed the State government to expeditiously consider and resolve the infrastructure requirements at district courts in Karnataka, for effective implementation of the Live streaming rules of judicial proceedings.

3. Won't Give Effect To Google Play Billing Policy Clarification Till Oct 31 : Google Tells Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Google India Private Limited v. Competition Commission Of India

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 9

The Karnataka High Court on Monday disposed of the petition filed by Google India challenging an order of the Competition Commission of India rejecting its request for access to the identity of app developers/ start-ups allegedly suffering harm on account of Google Play store payments policy 2020. A single-judge bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit took on record the joint memo filed by the parties–Google, Competition Commission of India and Alliance of Digital India Foundation (ADIF).

Case No: Criminal Petition No.2860/2021

Citation: 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 10

The Karnataka High Court has reiterated that a Court hearing a petition for quashing of FIR/ charge sheet under Section 482 CrPC cannot appreciate evidence as the same lies within the domain of the trial Court. Justice Sreenivas Harish Kumar said, "It is a settled principle that while deciding the petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, evidence cannot be appreciated as it lies within the domain of the Trial Court."

5: Person Working At Mutt Can't Claim 'Tenancy Rights' Over Appurtenant Land Granted For Residential Use: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Sr Admar Mutt v. Yashoda

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 11

The Karnataka High Court has held that a cook, working for the Sr Admar Mutt in Udupi district, cannot claim occupancy over appurtenant land which was granted to him by the Mutt for residential use. A division bench of Justice P S Dinesh Kumar and Justice P Krishna Bhatt allowed the appeal filed by the Mutt challenging the single judge bench order dated April 21, 2011, by which it had confirmed the Land tribunal order granting occupancy to the cook.

6: CID Not Authorized To File Charge Sheet, Proceedings Vitiated: Karnataka High Court Upholds Seer's Acquittal

Case Title: State Of Karnataka v. Shreemad Jagadguru Shankaracharya Shree Shree Raghaveshwara Bharathi Shri Swamiji

Citation: 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 12

The Karnataka High Court has upheld a 2016 order of the trial court by which it discharged/ acquitted Raghaveshwara Bharathi Shri Swamiji, pontiff of the Shree Ramachandrapura Math, accused in a rape case. Justice V. Srishananda noted that the charge sheet in the matter was not filed by the authorized person. It thus observed, "If the charge sheet is filed by a person who is not the authorised person to file a final report as is contemplated under Section 173 of Cr.P.C, entire proceedings would definitely stand vitiated. Consequently, the further proceedings in pursuance of the said charge sheet is to be declared as non est."

7: Victim Can't Invoke Revisional Jurisdiction Against Each & Every Order Of Trial Court, May File Appeal Against Final Order: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: State Of Karnataka v. Shreemad Jagadguru Shankaracharya Shree Shree Raghaveshwara Bharathi Shri Swamiji

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 12

The Karnataka High Court has held that a victim/ complainant does not have the right to challenge each and every order that is passed by the trial Court. The filing of a revision petition itself is not a right which is granted to a party to a criminal trial, Justice V. Srishananda said while dismissing the revision petition filed by the alleged rape victim against the trial court acquitting Raghaveshwara Bharathi Shri Swamiji, pontiff of the Shree Ramachandrapura Math.

8: Essential Commodities Act: Karnataka HC Upholds State's Prerogative To Impose Conditions For Grant Of Authorization/Compassionate Appointment.

Case Title: Manmohankumar V.C v. The State Of Karnataka

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 13

The Karnataka High Court recently upheld the state government's power and prerogative to impose conditions such as restriction of 'age' and 'pass in 10th Standard' while considering the applications for grant of compassionate authorization under the Karnataka Essential Commodities Public Distribution System (Control) Order. Justice P S Dinesh Kumar said, "The State Government's power and prerogative to impose conditions while considering the applications for grant of authorisation is upheld."

9: Karnataka HC Directs State Mental Health Authority To Provide Proper Medical Treatment To Mentally Ill Inmates At Destitute Centres, Asylums, Etc.

Case Title: The Member Secretary v. Chief Secretary, Govt of Karnataka

Citation: 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 14

The Karnataka High Court has directed the Karnataka State Mental Health Authority to take appropriate and necessary steps for providing proper medical treatment to the mentally ill inmates of rehabilitation centres, aged homes, destitute centres, reception centres, asylums, orphanages centres, etc.

10: Enforcement Directorate Can't Seek Custody U/S 167 CrPC: Former Chancellor Of Alliance University Moves Karnataka HC Against Special Court Order

Former Chancellor of Alliance University, Madhukar G Angur, who has been arrested by the Enforcement Directorate in an alleged money laundering case, has approached the Karnataka High Court challenging the special court's order dated January 10, remanding him to ED custody till January 17. The case pertains to alleged money laundering and siphoning off University funds to the tune of Rs 107 crore. Angur has been booked u/s 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

Other Developments

11: Karnataka High Court Issues Notice On Plea By Doctors Challenging One Year Compulsory Rural Service

Case Title: Dr. Keerthi Kurnool v. Union of India

Case No: WP 23258/2021

The Karnataka High Court has issued notice to the Union and State government and other respondents on a petition filed by one Dr. Keerthi Kurnool and 169 others, raising a challenge to Section 4 of the Karnataka Compulsory Service Training by Candidates Completed Medical Course Act, (KCS) 2012, which mandates one year compulsory rural service to all post graduate doctors.

12: Karnataka High Court Asks State To Strictly Implement SOP Banning Rallies, Dharnas Amid Covid Surge

Case Title: Nagendra Prasad A V v. State of Karnataka

Case No: WP 518/2022

The Karnataka High Court on Friday directed the state government to strictly execute the standard operating procedure (SOP) issued on January 4 in all districts in view of Covid-19 pandemic. It clarified that no rallies, dharnas or any other political gathering shall be permitted in the entire state, till the SOP is in operation.

A division bench of Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi and Justice Suraj Govindaraj also took on record the statement made by the Karnataka Pradesh Congress Committee that it has temporarily suspended the 10-day padayatra demanding implementation of the Mekedatu project across the Cauvery river.

13: Frivolous Cases Against Azim Premji: Karnataka High Court Convicts Representatives Of NGO 'India Awake For Transparency'

Case Title: Hasham Investment And Trading Company Private Limited v. India Awake For Transparency Pvt Ltd

Case No: CRL.CCC 9/2021

The Karnataka High Court on Friday convicted Advocate R Subramanian and P Sadanand, who represent the NGO India Awake For Transparency, for criminal contempt in the suo-motu proceedings initiated against them for filing multiple petitions on the same cause of action against former Wipro Chairman Azim Premji and the trust formed by him.

14: Karnataka High Court Asks State About Schemes For Welfare Of Stray Animals, Establishment Of Taluk Shelters

Case Title: High Court Legal Services Committee v. State Of Karnataka

Case No: WP 18628/2019

The Karnataka High Court on Friday directed the State government to inform whether it has notified any scheme for the welfare of stray animals. The Court also inquired whether the state government is contemplating to establish goshalas in each taluk of the state to protect these stray animals and also help the farmers from protecting their crops from these stray animals.

15: 'Project Is Much Delayed': Karnataka HC Seeks Time Bound Plan From BBMP For Construction Of Ejipura-Kendriya Sadana Flyover In Bengaluru

Case Title: Adinarayan Shetty v. State Of Karnataka

Case No: WP 13605/2021

The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday directed the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) to submit a time bound plan in which it would complete the construction of the four-lane Ejipura-Kendriya Sadana flyover in the Koramangala area of Bengaluru. A division bench of Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi and Justice Suraj Govindaraj orally said, "We don't want to hear the problems, we want a solution. We want you to give a date by when you will complete the construction."

Jharkhand High Court

1. Punishment Part Of 'Reintegration Process' With Society: Jharkhand High Court Refuses To Reduce Sentence Of Juvenile Convict

Madhya Pradesh High Court

1. SpiceJet Vs Credit Suisse AG- Madras High Court Dismisses Appeal Against Airline's Admission Of Winding Up

Case Title: SpiceJet Limited v. Credit Suisse AG

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 11

Madras High Court has dismissed the appeal preferred by SpiceJet against a single-judge bench order for admission of its winding up on Credit Suisse AG's Company Petition.

After hearing the counsels appearing for SpiceJet and Credit Suisse at length, a Division Bench of Justices Sathi Kumar Sukumara Kurup and Paresh Upadhyay noted in the order that the Original Second Appeals are dismissed and the Connected Civil Miscellaneous Petitions are accordingly disposed off. Since the stay on the operation of the impugned order is till today, the bench agreed to extend the application of stay order till 28th January so as to afford the appellant an opportunity to approach the Supreme Court.

The grievances of the appellant airlines and the issues framed by the court were pertaining to the alleged errors in the single judge bench order that does the following:

(i) admission of the winding-up petition, which is filed invoking Sections 433 (e) and (f) of the Companies Act, 1956, and

(ii) appointment of the Official Liquidator, High Court of Madras as Provisional Liquidator.

2. Adolf Hitler Was A Vegetarian, Hated Animal Cruelty; Man Can't Be Judged By Outer Appearance: Madras High Court While Upholding Death Penalty

Case Title: The State Represented By Deputy Superintendent of Police v. Samivel @ Raja

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 12

In a case arising out of aggravated sexual assault and cruel murder of a 7-year-old child from a marginalised community, the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court has upheld the death sentence imposed on the culprit by the trial court.

A Division Bench of Justice S. Vaidyanathan and Justice G. Jayachandran confirmed the death sentence of the accused made by Mahila Court, Pudukottai.

The bench held that the brutality of the attack, the barbaric manner in which the deceased child was murdered and the mental agony undergone by the parents makes it one of the 'rarest of rare' cases. The court added that it necessitates the imposition of death sentence, since no other sentence including life imprisonment will be adequate.

The accused was booked for offences under Sections 364, 376, 302, 201 IPC r/w 5(m), 5(j)(iv) and 6 (1) of POCSO Act as well as 3(2)(V) of SC/ ST Act. The case of the prosecution was that the accused developed a friendship with the child belonging to the Scheduled Castes Community and used it to fulfil his sexual desires.

"It is pertinent to mention here that everyone's mind contains a liar, a cheat and a sinner and a man cannot be judged by his outer appearance, as Adolf Hitler, who ordered the execution of some eight million people and was responsible for the deaths of many millions more, hated cruelty to animals and was a vegetarian. If a person like the accused herein is allowed to survive in this world, he will definitely pollute the mind of other co-prisoners, who will be at the verge of release from jail in which he is confined. When the attitude of a man turns into the one of a beast, having no mercy over other creatures, he should be punished and sent to the eternal world", the court noted in the order.

3. 'Publicity' Under Garb Of PIL: Madras High Court Dismisses Plea To Keep TASMAC Liquor Shops Closed On Public Holidays

Case Title: B. Ramkumar Adityan v. The Chief Secretary & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 13

In a plea seeking directions to keep the TASMAC liquor shops closed during public holidays, the Madras High Court has criticized the practice of advocates filing public interest litigations for 'publicity'.

The Bench however refrained from imposing cost and the plea was dismissed as withdrawn.

The petitioner, Advocate B. Ramkumar Adityan, had sought appropriate directions from the High Court to the state government for declaring Pongal, Christmas, Thai Poosam, Republic Day, etc. as 'dry days'.

"Festive mode has become a tragic mode", said the petitioner referring to the untoward incidents allegedly on account of alcohol consumption in those days.

4. Petitioner Cannot File Writ Petition Before Exercising Remedy U/S 17 Of SARFAESI Act; Madras High Court

Case Title: R. Ganesan v. M/s. ASREC (India) Limited

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 14

The Madras High Court, in a Bench comprising of Justice M. Duraiswamy and Justice Sathya Narayan Prasad in R. Ganesan v. M/s. ASREC (India) Limited has reiterated the legal position and dismissed the writ petition filed by the Petitioner due to non-exercise of alternate remedy of appeal under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act.

As per the terms of Section 17, an appeal can be filed to the Debt Recovery Tribunal within 45 days from the date on which the measures referred to under Section 13(4) of the Act are taken.

Relying on the Supreme Court judgments in The Authorized Officer, State Bank of Travancore and another Vs. Mathew K.C. and Agarwal Tracom Private Limited Vs. Punjab National Bank and others, the Bench held that the aggrieved parties cannot challenge proceedings taking place under the SARFAESI Act directly by way of a Writ Petition under Article 226, without exhausting the remedy of appeal available to them.

5. Divorce Decree From French Court; Maintainability Of Suit For Partition Of Dissolved Community Property Before Indian Court: Madras High Court Explains

Case Title: Venkateswarane Sivadjy v. Alice Viala

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 15

In a divorce proceeding characterised by questions on Conflict of Laws, Madras High Court has held that a suit filed for partition and separate possession of the property in India, as per Indian laws is maintainable and will not be barred by virtue of not approaching French Notary for liquidation under Article 1444 of the French Civil Code.

A Division Bench of Justice T. Raja and Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarty was disposing of an appeal filed by the Husband under Section 96 of C.P.C r/w under Order 41 R 1 of C.P.C against the judgment and decree by Family Court, Pudukottai.

The husband and wife, in this case, were French nationals for whom the personal law applicable would be the French Civil Code since it's Lex Patriae. This being the law of nationality of the persons who got divorced in 2005 , it would be applicable to them irrespective of where they are domiciled.

Under French Law, the marital relationship can either be based on a prenuptial contract, and in its absence, the relationship would be governed by Community regime.

The major question that arose before the court was the Lex Causae that's applicable for effecting the manner of partition. The main contention of the appellant was that Article 1444 of the French Civil Code mandates either of the parties to resort to the liquidation proceedings within three months from the date of divorce coming into force, that too, before the Notaries in France. Therefore, the appellant contended that the current suit filed by the wife, eight years after the divorce, before an Indian Court is not maintainable.

The court responded in the judgment to the above submission of the appellant in consonance with the findings of the Family Court. The court added that the manner of effecting partition is a rule of procedure, and therefore, in rules of procedure, lex fori(law of the forum) will apply.The court held that the Indian Law would be lex causae and not the French Code Civil. This would mean that Article 1444 wouldn't apply.

6. Madras High Court Orders 10 Lakh Compensation For Death Of Woman Negligently Shot By Stray Dog Hunter

Case Title: G. Babu v. the District Collector & Others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 16

Madras High Court has ordered to pay compensation to the son of a deceased mother who was shot accidentally in a 'Shoot and Kill' stray dog hunt with the sanction of Eraiyur Panchayat.

A single-judge bench of Justice S.M Subramaniam has ordered the District Collector, Perambalur and the functionaries including the Eraiyur Panchayat President to pay Rs 5 laksh each as compensation to the petitioner son. The court has also censured the authorities for shooting stray dogs, which is an illegal act in itself.

"It is an unusual incident where the responsible Panchayat President and the Councilors have engaged the 8th respondent for shooting out the stray dogs in the Village. The very operation itself is illegal and further the bullet removed from the mother of the petitioner during postmortem confirms that the death occurred due to the bullet injuries. Under these circumstances, this Court is inclined to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of compensation…", the court observed.

7. Pendency Of Cases Involving Large Scale Revenue Causes Loss To Nation: Madras HC Calls For Quick Disposal Of Income Tax, Mining, Excise Matters

Case Title: Dalmia Refractories Limited v. State of Tamil Nadu & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 17

The Madras High Court recently expressed its concern over long pendency of cases involving large scale revenue. Justice S.M Subramaniam observed that cases of Income Tax, Customs, Excise, Mines and Minerals etc. must be disposed of quickly to prevent misuse of nation's property.

Talking about the skewed tactics employed by stakeholders in keeping the writ petitions pending, so as to reap undue benefits of interim orders in force, the court added the following:

"The growing tendency on writ side is that such writ petitions involving large scale revenue, more specifically, Income Tax, Customs, Excise, Mines and Minerals etc., interim orders are in force for several years and the Nation's properties are being looted or misused or taken undue advantage of. Such a situation is absolutely unconstitutional and further anything under the earth belongs to the Government and it is the Nation's property, which belongs to 'We the People of India'. Thus, no one can be allowed to extract without adhering to the Act, Rules and Regulations and any violations are to be treated seriously and all these persons must be liable for all consequences", the court observed.

8. Madras High Court Strikes Down Women Reservation In Excess Of 50% For Chennai Corporation Polls

Case Title: R. Parthiban v. The Chief Secretary & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 18

In a plea against reservation in excess of 50 per cent for women in Greater Chennai Municipal Corporation, Madras High Court has held that reservation can only be based on the total number of seats in the Municipality and not on Zonal wise demarcation.

The bench of Acting Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice P.D Audikesavalu has struck down the 2019 Government Notification which reserved 89 wards out of 200 wards for Women Candidates and another 16 seats for the Scheduled Caste Women, bringing the total tally to 105.

The public interest litigation, calling reservations in excess of 50 per cent discrimination against men and violation of constitutional principles, was filed by Advocate R. Parthiban. The senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, S. Prabakaran, had argued that women are entitled to only 84 seats according to the Tamil Nadu Municipalities (Amendment) Act, 2016 and the Chennai City Municipal Corporation (Amendment) Act, 2016 mandates 'not less than fifty per cent reservation' for women.

9. Sun TV Network Has Exclusive Broadcasting Rights Over 'Jilla' Movie: Madras High Court

Case Title: M/S Sun TV Network Ltd v. M/S Supergood Films Private Ltd & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 19

Madras High Court has allowed a writ petition that sought a declaration of the exclusive copyright of Sun TV Network over the broadcast of 'Jilla' movie, while granting permanent injunction against the defendants from exhibiting/ exploiting the movie in a similar manner.

A single-judge bench of Justice N. Anand Venkatesh observed that the second defendant, United India Exporters, only had the right to exploit the theatrical release of the film outside India as per the agreement between them and Super Good Films Private Limited. It does not include the exclusive rights to make, sell or let out for their copies of the cinematographic film 'JILLA' and broadcast the said film through various mediums of broadcast and transmission outside India.

The court observed that Supergood Films, the producer and exclusive copyright owner of 'Jilla', have assigned the exclusive copyright in favour of the plaintiff Sun TV Network in respect of satellite television broadcast as early as 8^th July 2013. The said agreement was entered into much before the theatrical release rights assigning agreement between Supergood Films and United India Exporters.

Other Developments

1. Air India Disinvestment: Madras High Court Asks Centre To Produce Share Purchase Agreement

Case Title: Air India Corporation Employees Union v. Union of India & Ors. & Connected Matters
In a plea preferred by one of the trade unions of Air India against its disinvestment, the Madras High Court has directed the Central government to produce the contentious share purchase agreement before the court.

Justice V. Parthiban took note of the petitioner's argument that the share purchase agreement is instrumental in deciding the case that involves high stakes for all parties concerned. "The learned Additional Solicitor General is therefore directed to furnish a copy of the share purchase agreement to the Court on or before the next date of hearing," it ordered.

Further, on the request of the petitioner employees' union to go through the contents of the counter statement filed by the Union and file a rejoinder if necessary, the matter was adjourned to 21st January for disposal. The benefit of the interim order for the retention of accommodation and medical facilities has also been extended till the next date of hearing.

2. Madras High Court Seeks Centre's Response On Plea Challenging Vires Of Dam Safety Act

Case Title: S.Ramalingam v. The Union Of India & Another

The Madras High Court has issued notice on a plea challenging the vires of recently enacted Dam Safety Act, 2021, as being violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Indian Constitution.

The bench of Acting Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice P.D Audikesavalu has granted three weeks' time to the Union of India, represented by ASG R. Shankaranarayanan, to file its counter affidavit in the matter.

The petition has been filed by DMK MP from Mayiladuthurai, S. Ramalingam, saying that the Centre, through the impugned legislation, usurps the powers of the state government and disturbs the federal structure. The matter was mentioned before the Court by Senior Advocate P. Wilson last week.

The Senior counsel argued that the Parliament lacks the legislative competence for enacting the legislation. He highlighted that Entry 17 in List II under the 7^th Schedule of the Constitution refers to- Water, that is to say, water supplies, irrigation and canals, drainage and embankments, water storage and water power subject to the provisions of entry 56 of List I.

Wilson also requested that Centre must refrain from constituting the National Dam Safety Authority and National Committee on Dam Safety proposed under the impugned Act, till the writ petition is disposed of.

Punjab High Court

Rajasthan High Court

1. Adarsh Credit Cooperative Society: Rajasthan High Court Orders Expeditious Disposal of Depositor's Claim Application

Case Title: Chetan Choudhary v. Union of India and Ors.

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 7

The Rajasthan High Court on Monday directed the Central government to expeditiously decide on the claim application filed by a depositor of the beleaguered Adarsh Credit Co-operative Society Ltd. It ordered that the said decision has to be taken preferably within a period of 90 days, strictly in accordance with the law.

Justice Dinesh Mehta ordered, "The respondents are directed to take a decision on the application filed by the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of ninety days from the date of receipt of copy of this order strictly in accordance with rules and guidelines governing the field."

The Adarsh Credit Co-op Society allegedly floated several fake companies and siphoned off its depositors money, approximately Rs. 8,000 Crore.

2. Rajasthan High Court Orders NEET Authority to Allot College To A Pakistani Citizen, Despite Not Having Long Time Visa

Case Title: Sandeep Kumar v. Union of India and Ors.

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 8

The Rajasthan High Court has ordered the competent authority of NEET to allot an appropriate college to a citizen of Pakistan, in accordance with his merit, while ignoring the fact that he does not possess a Long Term Visa.

Justice Dinesh Mehta, in his order, observed, "Petitioner appeared in the NEET (UG) Examination and has secured 80% marks, it is hereby ordered that the competent authority of the NEET shall allot appropriate college to the petitioner, of course, in accordance with his merit, however, ignoring the fact that the petitioner is not having Long Term Visa in his favour."

The court further added that the petitioner shall thereafter be permitted to pursue his course, which shall be subject to final outcome of the writ petition. The petitioner, his parents and siblings are Pakistani Citizens and they came to India on October 29, 2011 through valid Passport under Long Term Visa (LTV).

3. Couples Can't Seek Protection As a Matter of Right, Must Muster The Audacity to Persuade Their Families: Rajasthan High Court

Case Title: Shobha and Anr. v. State of Rajasthan and Ors

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 9

The Rajasthan High Court has denied Police protection to a runaway couple, apprehending threat from their families. The court observed that there is no material or reason for it to conclude that the petitioners' life and liberty are at peril.

Justice Dinesh Mehta further observed, "If the petitioners have decided to marry, they must muster the audacity and possess tenacity to face and to persuade the society and their family to accept the step they have taken." In the instant case, it noted that there is not even an iota of evidence to evince that the respondents (relatives of the petitioner No.1) are likely to cause physical or mental assault to the petitioners.

4. Ingredients to Constitute Unlawfully Assembly Lacking, Altercation Has All Trappings of a "Free Fight": Rajasthan High Court Modifies Trial Court Order

Case Title: Madhuram and Ors v. State of Rajasthan, with connected matter

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 10

The Rajasthan High Court has quashed and set aside conviction of five accused persons for allegedly forming an unlawful assembly and causing injuries/ murder, observing that the incident was nothing but a "free fight.

The Division Bench comprising Justices Rameshwar Vyas and Sandeep Mehta observed, "We have no hesitation in holding that the ingredients required to constitute an unlawful assembly are totally lacking in this case and hence, the implication of accused persons by virtue of Section 149 IPC is unwarranted and unsustainable".

Taking note of the facts of the case and the circumstances that led to an altercation between the complainants and the accused, it added, "the incident has all trappings of a free-fight between the two parties without there being any motive for the accused to launch an assault with the intention to commit murder of any person from the complainant party."

5. Employer's Failure to Deposit Contributions Doesn't Disentitle Insured Person's Ward From Availing ESI Quota: Rajasthan HC Grants Relief to NEET Candidate

Case Title: Kunal Sharma and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors.

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 11

The Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench has allowed a NEET Candidate to avail the benefit of ESIC quota (ward of insured person quota) in the counselling process for admissions in MBBS/BDS Course.

Notwithstanding the fact that the requisite contributions to the Employees' State Insurance Corporation were not paid by the employer concerned, the Court held that the candidate cannot be denied the benefit of quota, provided his father, the insured person, had paid his contribution prior to the cut-off date.

Justice Ashok Kumar Gaur observed,

"The non-deposit of contribution in spite of deduction will not make the person disentitle for the benefit of ward of insured person if the insured person had paid the contribution to his employer prior to 31.03.2021."

6. Demolition of Illegal Encroachment On Kotputli Road: Rajasthan High Court Orders Status Quo; Directs Local Authority to Pass Reasoned Order

Case Title: Chunnilal and Anr. v. State of Rajasthan and Ors., with connected matters

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 12

The Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench has directed the Nagar Palika, Kotputli to decide the objections submitted by 25 petitioners pursuant to the notices issued to them for removal of road encroachment.

Justice Inderjeet Singh directed the authority to pass reasoned and speaking order within a period 30 days. "I deem it just and proper to direct the respondent-Nagar Palika to decide the objections submitted by the petitioners pursuant to the notice issued to them, by reasoned and speaking order within a period 30 days," the order stated.

The writ petition was filed by the 25 individuals, all residents of Kotputli District in Jaipur, being aggrieved by the notices issued to them by the respondent-Nagar Palika, Kotputli in Dec 2021 for removal of encroachments from the road.

7. Merely Stating That Case Had Lingered In Court For Long Period of Time Isn't 'Contemptuous': Rajasthan High Court

Case title: Smt Garima Sauda v. Goverdhan Singh and others

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 13

The Rajasthan High Court has observed that merely stating that a particular proceeding had lingered on before the Court for an unduly long period of time, cannot be seen as contemptuous.

Observing this, the Chief Justice Mr. Akil Kureshi and Justice Rekha Borana terminated a Contempt Petition filed by a Rajasthan Civil Judge, Garima Sauda against a practicing Advocate, Goverdhan Singh.

The case of the judicial officer was that in relation to a criminal case that was pending before her, Singh had made a highly objectionable comment on his Facebook page and several people had responded to that comment, and the same were also objectionable and contemptuous

8. No fundamental Right to Carry Out Business With Govt; Court's Interference In Formulating Tender Conditions Restrictive: Rajasthan HC

Case Title: Abhimanyu Sharda and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan and Ors., with connected matters

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 14

The Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, has held that the interference of the Court in tender matters is very restrictive and it should refrain from interfering in the impugned policy decision of the government, pertaining to sale of Run of Mine Lignite.

Justice Inderjeet Singh, while dismissing the plea, ruled,

"In formulating the conditions of tender document, greater latitude is required to be conceded to the State Authorities and if the State or its instrumentalities act reasonably, the interference of the Courts is very restrictive since no person can claim fundamental right to carry out business with the Government".

9. Non-Reporting Of 'POCSO Case': "Sometimes Such Matters Aren't Reported To Save Girl's Reputation": Rajasthan HC Suspends Sentence Of Faculty, Hostel Warden

The Rajasthan High Court suspended the sentence awarded to a Faculty Member in the college and the Hostel Warden booked under Section 21 of the POCSO Act (among other offences) for their alleged failure to report a 'POCSO Case' of the hostel involving a minor girl, as it noted thus:

"Incidents are not uncommon where after deliberations, it is decided in a bonafide manner not to report such matters to the police, lest the reputation of the girl is tarnished. This aspect gains more importance because the hostel warden/higher-ups would definitely have preferred to deliberate with the parents of the girl before taking any such action."

Other Important Updates

1. After High Court Nudge, Indian Citizen's Dead Body To Be Exhumed In Russia & Handed Over To Family In Rajasthan For Cremation

Case Title: Asha v. Union of India

In the case pertaining to burial of an Indian citizen in Russia, the Rajasthan High Court was yesterday informed that his body will be exhumed and repatriated to India for enabling the deceased man's family to perform his last rites.

Justice Dinesh Mehta asked both Union and State to make necessary arrangements and ensure that the dead body of an Indian Citizen is handed over to family members at their Village Godwa, Tehsil Kherwara at the earliest.

The bench ordered, "Once the body is received from the Russian Government, Union of India, so also the State of Rajasthan will make all endeavors to ensure that it is handed over to the petitioners- family members at their Village Godwa, Tehsil Kherwara at the earliest."

2. Can 'Raja/Nawab/Maharaja/Rajkumar' Titles Be Used As Prefix In Constitutional, Lower Courts? Rajasthan HC Asks Centre, State

Case title: Bhagwati Singh (Since Deceased) S/o (Late) Shri Raja Mansingh v. Raja Laxman Singh S/o (Late) Shri Raja Mansingh and connected matter

The Rajasthan High Court has issued a notice to the Central and State Governments asking as to whether any person can put Maharaja, Raja, Nawab, Rajkumar titles as a prefix while filing cases in the High Court or Trial Court.

The Bench of Justice Sameer Jain has sought the reply of the Union and Rajasthan Government after perusing the cause title of a petition, wherein, the Court noted, the respondent No.1 in the matter was titled as "Raja Laxman Singh".

At the outset, the Court referred to the 26th Amendment in the Constitution of India, Article 363-A, and Article 14 [Equality before law] to stress that recognition, titles granted to the rulers of the Indian State no more persist and have been abolished.

3. Deliberate And Wilful Non-Compliance Of Undertaking Is Contempt Under Contempt Of Court Act

Case Title: Ishwardas Alias Ishwar S/o Late Shri Ramchand v. Dr. Heeranand S/o Late Shri Hansaram through LRs

A single bench of Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench observed that breach of written undertaking given to the Court is contempt and is liable to be punished under the Contempt Courts Act, 1971.

Justice Sudesh Bansal, ruled, "As per Definition of civil contempt, described in Section 2 (b) of the Contempt of Court Act 1971, the civil contempt means willful disobedience of any judgment, decree, direction, order, writ or other process of a Court or willful breach of an undertaking given to a Court. In the present case, the respondents have breached the written undertaking given to the Court. Therefore, they are prima facie guilty for committing contempt and liable to be punished under the Contempt Court Act, 1971.

In the present case, a contempt petition is filed alleging deliberate and willful non-compliance of the undertaking, given dated Oct 30, 2019 by the respondents-contemnors - Tulsi Meerchandani and Sehjanand - for vacating the rented shop and handing over the possession of rented shop on or before Oct 13, 2021, pursuant to the final judgment and order of Single Bench in 2019.

Uttarakhand High Court

1. At Home COVID-19 Vaccine Booster Jabs For Senior Citizens: Uttarakhand High Court Directs State