High Courts Weekly Round-Up

Allahabad High Court Held that the disciplinary authority was erroneous in assuming a situation without supporting evidence and that the principle of preponderance of probability could not be relied upon in a case of no-evidence.Held that mere pendency of a criminal case is not a valid reason for impounding a person's passport. Bombay High Court Granted relief to one Afzal Jaffer Khan and suspended a look out notice issued against him by Central Bureau of Investigation ACB Office allowing him to travel to Saudi Arabia and UAE for pilgrimage. A division bench of Justice Ranjit More and Justice NJ Jamadar were hearing a petition filed by Khan seeking details of the look-out notice issued against him dated June 22, 2018 and quashing of the same.Directed the release of one ArvindkumarDhakad who was arrested by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence on allegations of smuggling gold. Division bench of Justice IndrajitMahanty and Justice NB Suryawanshi heard a writ of habeas corpus filed by Dhakad's son Mayank alleging that his father's arrest was in violation of Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India and S. 104 of the Customs Act, 1962.Directed the release of one ArvindkumarDhakad who was arrested by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence on allegations of smuggling gold.Clarified that all licensed restaurants can serve herbal or tobacco-free hookah and no action will be taken against them by the police. Division bench of Justice Ranjit More and Justice NJ Jamadar were hearing a bath of petitions filed by various restaurant owners who claimed to be harassed by police authorities for trying to serve herbal hookah at their place after the high court in July allowed Ali Abdi, owner of SheeshaSkylounge to serve herbal hookah at all his outlets.Directed the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Mumbai Metro Rail Corporation Limited to file their reply in a petition filed by Zoru Darius Bathena challenging Tree Authority's resolution to remove 2646 trees at Aarey Forest, Goregaon in Mumbai.Allowed a petition filed by New Delhi Television Ltd and set aside orders passed by the Securities and Exchange Board of India rejecting NDTV's applications for condonation of delay in filing settlement applications after SEBI initiated adjudication proceedings against the channel for alleged violations of the Securities Contract (Regulation) Act, 1956.Granted ad-interim relief to KPMG's arm BSR and consultants restraining the Ministry of Corporate Affairs from continuing its proceedings before NCLT, Mumbai under Section 140(5) of the Companies Act, 2013 seeking a 5-year ban on the accounting firm.Refused to interfere with a Government Resolution directing all Municipal Commissioners in the State of Maharashtra to ensure that all abattoirs and meat selling shops are shut during the ParyushanParva celebrated by the Jain community.The Aurangabad bench allowed a Hindu to observe Moharrum at his house and directed the Police to ensure that his observance of the religious event was not obstructed by anyone. Calcutta High Court Exonerated a convict from the charge of Murder under Section 302 of IPC, stating that Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act does not discharge the prosecution from proving its case beyond reasonable doubt and that an accused has the right to silence without being adversely affected by such silence. Delhi High Court Refused to intervene in the acquittal order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge wherein a man was acquitted of charges under section 6 of the POCSO Act for having consensual sexual intercourse with a woman who misrepresented her age before the said man.Refused to intervene in the acquittal order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge wherein a man was acquitted of charges under section 6 of the POCSO Act for having consensual sexual intercourse with a woman who misrepresented her age before the said man.Dismissed a PIL seeking directions to be issued to the government to take measures for population control, including the two-children policy. The Division Bench of Justice DN Patel and Justice Hari Shankar refused to entertain the plea citing that making any policy on child control is the prerogative of the government.Held that mere demand of money or property unaccompanied by any harassment would not warrant registration of offence under Section 498A of IPC. Division bench of Justice Ranjit More and Justice NJ Jamadar were hearing a criminal writ petition filed by relatives of one Krishna Lohiya whose wife Priyanka had filed an FIR against them.Directed Delhi Development Authority to scrutinise applications received from various colleges for construction of girls hostels efficiently, and in accordance with law. The court was hearing a PIL seeking construction of more hostels for girls studying in the Delhi University.Reiterated that remedies available...

High Courts Weekly Round-Up

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags