High Courts Weekly Round Up

Bombay High Court Held that under the law, every prisoner who not a foreigner or a convict sentenced to death is eligible for emergency parole of 14 days for the death of parents, spouse, grandparents etc., and no authority can reduce the period of 14 days without recording valid reasons for the same.Held that merely because cognizance of a complaint under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crimes (MCOC) Act, 1999 is taken, it does mean that the concerned trial court or special court designated under the MCOC Act can frame charges against the accused under the said Act.Held that marginal delay in payment of the deposit of court fees cannot be a ground to deprive the opportunity to prosecute suit on merits. Delhi High Court Sought response of the Ministry of Ayush on a petition challenging its decision to bring in Aadhaar-based attendance in Ayurvedic, Homeopathic, Unani and Siddha Colleges and making it mandatory for them to recruit staff registered in the particular state in which they are located.Issued notice to the CBI on a petition moved by Abhay Singh Chautala, the leader of Opposition in Haryana Assembly, seeking transfer of the disproportionate assets case against him from the Special CBI court, which was designated as one of the two courts in Delhi to try cases against MPs and MLAs, to some other court apprehending he would not get fair trial.The Division bench of the High Court granted interim relief to a Pakistan citizen, married to an Indian citizen, who was served with a 'Leave India Notice'. The bench comprising the Chief Justice Rajendra Menon and Justice AnupJairamBhambhani directed the authorities not to take any coercive action against her till March 25th.Dismissed Advocate Mathews J. Nedumpara's plea seeking to 'disqualify' eminent lawyer and Senior Advocate Fali S. Nariman from appearing before the Supreme Court.The bench comprising Chief Justice Rajendra Menon and Justice V. Kameswar Rao observed that a lawyer is only barred from appearing before a particular Court where relative of a lawyer is a Presiding Judge, and not before the 'entire court'. Jharkhand High Court The Single Bench of the High court while considering a writ petition under Article 227 held that the High court cannot interfere with order of inferior courts or tribunals to correct mere errors of fact or law while exercising the power under Article 227. Karnataka High Court Cautioning the media against violating privacy of parties involved in marital dispute, the High court observed that the publication or telecast of information involving the marital relationships of the parties to litigation is prohibited under law. Justice B. Veerappa said that the media attention should be towards exposing corruption, nepotism, law breaking etc. rather than intruding into the personal life of individuals. Kerala High Court Banned the use of flex and other non-biodegradable materials for campaigning throughout the state ahead of the Lok Sabha elections. The division bench of Chief Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Justice A K JayasankaranNambiar passed the interim order in a PIL seeking prohibition of use of Poly Vinyl Chloride(PVC) Flex Boards and other ecologically harmful materials for the upcoming polls.Quashed a criminal 'cheating' case against a man accused of not paying Mobile bills, observing that the transaction involved as between the mobile operator and the customer is one arising out of a civil dispute.Reiterating that the Church and the cemetery cannot be confiscated by anybody, the High Court held that, irrespective of his allegiance, a parishioner cannot be deprived of his/her right to burial in the church of which he/she is the parishioner.A girl is having equal freedom similar to a boy, said the High Court while striking down a stipulation in Hostel Rules which barred girl boarders from going for the first and second show movies. Justice A MuhamedMustaque, striking down the said stipulation in Rules of Girls' hostel attached to Sree Kerala Varma College noted that there is no such restriction in the boy's hostel. The Court, partly allowing the petition filed by Anjitha K Jose observed: Madras High Court Confirmed death sentence to a man accused of brutal murder of a love couple. The bench comprising Justice R. Subbiah and Justice B. Pugalendhi confirmed the conviction and death sentence awarded to the accused by the Trial Court. The Madurai Bench of the High Court has expressed hope that the Tamil Nadu Government would take appropriate measures to bring back prohibition, which was in force from 1937 to 1971 in the State.Taking serious note of Government Doctors who abandon their duties for developing their private practice and 'personal enrichment', the High Court directed the State Government to constitute a 'Monitoring Committee' to supervise the...

High Courts Weekly Round Up

Ashok Kini

Tags