Delhi High Court Weekly Round Up: January 3 To January 9, 2022

SIGNIFICANT JUDGMENTS/ ORDERS THIS WEEK1. Arrest In Breach Of 'Arnesh Kumar' Guidelines : Delhi High Court Sentences Police Officer To One Day ImprisonmentCase Title: RAKESH KUMAR v. VIJAYANTA ARYA (DCP) AND ORSCitation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 1In a significant judgment, the Delhi High Court held a police officer guilty of contempt of court for arresting a man in violation of the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the case Arnesh Kumar vs State of Bihar. The Court sentenced the police officer to one-day imprisonment for contempt of court.Justice Najmi Waziri also imposed a fine of Rupees 2000 on the police officer and directed him to pay costs of Rupees 15,000 to the petitioner, who had suffered incarceration for 11 days before release on bail.In the judgment, the Court observed that subsequent release or acquittal of an innocent is no reparation to the loss of reputation and personal liberty caused by illegal arrest.2. "Mother Cannot Be Deprived Of Freedom To Take Decision To Continue Or Not Continue With Pregnancy": Delhi HC Allows Termination Of 28 Weeks FoetusTitle: xyz v. GNCTDCitation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 2Observing that reproductive choice is a facet of reproductive rights of a woman and a dimension of her personal liberty, the Delhi High Court has allowed termination of 28 weeks foetus of a 33 year old woman. The foetus was suffering from various abnormalities including Tetralogy of Fallot (TOF) with Absent Pulmonary Valve Syndrome (APV).Justice Jyoti Singh also observed that the mother cannot be deprived of the freedom to take a decision to continue or not to continue with the pregnancy in the backdrop of the foetal abnormalities brought forth in the Medical Opinion of the Board."As repeatedly held by the Courts, in the judgements referred above, reproductive choice is a facet of reproductive rights of a woman and a dimension of her 'personal liberty', enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India and thus the Petitioner cannot be deprived of the freedom to take a decision to continue or not to continue with the pregnancy, in the backdrop of the foetal abnormalities brought forth in the Medical Opinion of the Board," the Court said.3. Future-Amazon : Article 227 Can't Be Invoked To Challenge Case Management Orders Of Arbitral Tribunal - Delhi High CourtTitle: FUTURE RETAIL LTD. Vs. AMAZON.COM NV INVESTMENT HOLDINGS LLC & ORS.Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 3The Delhi High Court has held that the High Court, in the exercise of jurisdiction under Article 227, cannot dictate to a duly constituted Arbitral Tribunal, the manner and the procedure of carrying out the arbitration proceedings.On the aspect of the limited scope of interference under Article 227 over Arbitral Tribunal's procedure, Justice Amit Bansal added that there is only a small window for interference with orders passed by the Arbitral Tribunal while exercising jurisdiction under Article 227.The observations came while the Court dismissed the two petitions moved by the Future Group challenging the two orders passed by the Singapore Arbitration Tribunal. The impugned orders deferred the hearing in the plea filed by Future Group seeking termination of the arbitration proceedings instituted by Amazon. Future Group sought a direction that the the Arbitral Tribunal should first hear its applications to abort the proceedings before final hearing of the matter. Turning down this plea, the High Court said that Article 227 cannot be invoked to challenge the case management orders passed by an Arbitral Tribunal.4. Mental Cruelty: Delhi HC Dissolves Marriage On Ground That Husband Treated Wife As 'Overseas Wife' For Temporary CompanionshipCase Title: VANDANA SINGH v. SATISH KUMARCitation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 4The Delhi High Court this week dissolved marriage between a couple on the ground of cruelty, observing that the husband treated the wife as his 'overseas wife', only to use her as a temporary companion and that their marital bond was beyond repair.Observing that continuation of such a matrimonial bond is sufficient to cause immense mental cruelty to the wife, Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Jasmeet Singh said that there was no reason to keep the moribund marriage alive."The objective of the institution of marriage is to bring two souls together, who embark on the adventurous journey called life. They share experiences, smiles, sorrows, achievements and struggles. They uplift and support each other in all situations with their emotional, mental and physical presence. On this journey of life, they create personal, social and spiritual bonds, everlasting memories, future plans, through which they co-exist in the society," the Court said."An essential aspect of marriage is being present in each other's life, physically and emotionally. It is not to say that every marriage, where the couple stays apart from each other for work or other obligations consensually, is a broken one. However, a marriage where there is neither sharing of...

Delhi High Court Weekly Round Up: January 3 To January 9, 2022

Nupur Thapliyal

Tags