High Courts Weekly Round Up

Bombay High Court The conviction of a 45-year old man accused of raping a woman multiple times set aside.The court was hearing an appeal filed by a Satara-based man, challenging his conviction under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant was booked in August, 2008, after a woman, a marketing professional, registered a complaint against him with the local police. Directed the Maharashtra government to give copies of the entire report of the Backward Class Commission on Maratha reservation to petitioners challenging the quota decision. A division bench of Justice Ranjit More and Justice BharatiDangre quelled fears of the state government that certain portions of the report would create communal tension and law and order problems, saying "there is nothing worrisome". Aurangabad bench of the High Court held that a mother cannot alienate/sell property of her minor son, when she is not his legal guardian. The court was hearing a petition filed by the boy through his father, challenging as void and illegal the sale of his property in the year 1989, by his mother Kushavartabai Paul. The defendant, Shivaji Paul to whom the property was sold opposed the plea claiming that it was sold for legal necessity and for the benefit of the minor. Nagpur bench of the High Court followed the Supreme Court's judgment in Sabarimala case to hold that no presumption regarding the existence of customary practise in tribal communities to exclude daughters from inheritance can be drawn.Rejected the apology offered by lawyer Satish Uke, who was punished for contempt of court for filing a petition with "wild and unsubstantiated allegations" against sitting judges and practising lawyers. Asserting that people cannot be compulsorily made voters, the Aurangabad Bench of the refused to direct the Election Commission of India (ECI) to use the list of advocates prepared by the Bar Council of Maharashtra for preparing the list of voters for Graduate Constituency of Maharashtra Legislative Council.The order was passed by a bench comprising Justice TV Nalawade and Justice Sunil K Kotwal, on a petition filed by one Shaikh MajitSardar, who had submitted that since the Bar Council is a statutory body, the list of advocates prepared by it can be used to prepare the electoral roll. Discharged a man accused under Section 377 IPC observing that extra marital consensual sexual relationship is not a criminal offence, in view of Supreme Court judgment in Navtej Singh Johar vs. Union of India.Restrained a UK-based Indian-origin man from continuing divorce proceedings before a Family Court in Manchester and held that if a marriage is registered under the Hindu Marriage Act, then relief cannot be sought under English Personal Law.Ordered the sale of intellectual property rights of the classic children's magazine Chandamama after three former directors of M/s Geodesic Ltd gave their consent with regard to the possession and sale of tangible and intangible assets of M/s Geodesic Ltd. including its subsidiary companies (both Indian and overseas companies). Calcutta High Court Partly allowing a writ petition challenging the Senior Designation Guidelines framed by the High Court, observed that the condition stipulating regular practice in the high court for being considered for designation as a senior advocate should be omitted from the guidelines.Directed the Additional Solicitor General to explain whether a clause of negotiation between MSOs and LCOs in the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) notification for revenue sharing is illusory or not.Rejected a woman's petition to terminate her 26-week-old pregnancy, despite the fact that the baby has a high risk of Down Syndrome, along with problems in the oesophagus, heart and abdomen. Chhattisgarh High Court Observed that the Tribal status will continue even if the tribe converted to Christianity, the said Tribal status shall continue. Justice Goutam Bhaduri observed thus, while dismissing an election petition against Amit Ajit Jogi, filed by SameeraPaikara. Delhi High Court Ruled that when the act of a public servant is ex-facie criminal or constitutes an offence, prior approval of the Government as mandated under Section 17A of Prevention of Corruption Act would not be necessary.Held that copyright registration of an art work is irrelevant for the purpose of ascertaining its use as a trademark.The order was passed by Justice Suresh Kumar Kait on a petition challenging an order passed by the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) Declared that the fixing of the age of superannuation of members of the ranks of Commandant and below in the ITBP, CRPF, BSF and SSB different from those in the ranks above that of the Commandant is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. A Division bench comprising Justice S.Muraleedhar and Sanjeev ...

High Courts Weekly Round Up

Ashok Kini

Tags