News Updates

High Courts Weekly Round-Up

11 Nov 2019 2:43 AM GMT
High Courts Weekly Round-Up
Your free access to Live Law has expired
To read the article, get a premium account.
    Your Subscription Supports Independent Journalism
Subscription starts from
(For 6 Months)
Premium account gives you:
  • Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.
  • Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.
Already a subscriber?

Allahabad High Court

  • Reiterated that a magistrate is obligated to mention his satisfaction as to the existence of a prima facie case, for summoning an accused.
  • Reiterated that once the parties had decided to enter into a compromise, it would be oppressive and prejudicial to continue the proceedings.

Bombay High Court

  • Asked journalist and activist Gautam Navlakha to go before the sessions court seeking anticipatory bail and directed the Sessions Court to expedite hearing in the case. Justice PD Naik was hearing Navlakha's anticipatory bail application under Section 438 of CrPC.
  • Held that ten years after the decree of divorce has been passed, wife is entitled to reliefs under the Domestic Violence Act if she continued to cohabit with her husband(ex) post-divorce.
  • Restricted Dheeraj Wadhwan and Kapil Wadhwan, promoters of the crisis-hit Dewan Housing Finance Ltd (DHFL) from travelling abroad while hearing an application filed by 63 Moons Technologies Ltd seeking recovery of Rs.200 cr owed by DHFL.
  • Refused to restrain Bidvest from selling 13.5% stake in the Mumbai International Airport Ltd (MIAL) to other shareholders and declined any relief to Adani Properties Pvt Ltd which claimed to have a share purchase agreement (SPA) with Bidvest.

Delhi High Court

  • Issued notices to Bar Council of India, Delhi High Court Bar Association, and the Bar Associations of all the district courts in a plea filed by the Ministry of Home Affairs seeking clarification on the court's latest order on the Tis Hazari clash matter.
  • Clarified that the restriction on taking coercive action against lawyers imposed as per order issued on November 3 pertained only to the two FIRs registered on November 2.
  • Clarified the position of law in disqualification of directors under section 164(2) of the Companies Act. Under the said section, directors of companies that have defaulted on filing financial returns for 3 consecutive years are disqualified from being appointed as directors for 5 years.
  • Reiterated the position of law that maximum autonomy should be given in the administration of private unaided institutions as presence of Government interference in the Administration of such Institutions will undermine their independence.
  • Issued notice to the Central Government in a PIL challenging the constitutional validity of certain provisions of the NDPS Act that prohibit the use of cannabis.
  • Held that seeking permission from employer to travel to one country due to medical exigencies but going to different countries instead, amounts to misconduct and disciplinary action may be initiated against such persons. The observation was made Justice Suresh Kumar Kait while deciding the plea of one Anju Bala, whose services as a Manager were terminated by the Respondent, GAIL (India) Limited.
  • Issued notice on a plea challenging the UGC policy of declaring only 6% of those candidates as NET qualified, who appear in both the papers and obtain minimum qualifying marks in aggregate of both the papers.\
  • Held that when a disability certificate is issued by a competent medical authority, the plea demanding the quashing of such certificate cannot be granted by the court of law.
  • Asked the Petitioner to take recourse to good office and settlement before seeking any directions against police officers who participated in the protests against the Tis Hazari and Saket court incidents.
  • Faced with a case where an Advocate was being threatened and assaulted merely for representing his client, the High Court allowed the Advocate's petition, seeking police protection. Since the matter concerned larger issue of "independence of bar" and highlighted police inaction to protect the life and liberty of a young member of Bar, the matter was urgently mentioned before Chief Justice DN Patel on October 24 and it was taken up on board upon assignment before Justice Brijesh Sethi.
  • Reserved order on the regular bail application filed by P Chidambaram in the ED matter against him in INX Media case.

Gauhati High Court

  • Held that members of an unlawful assembly may be held vicariously liable and the only pre-condition to that is a common object of committing the offence.

Gujarat High Court

Directed an 80 year old man to undergo DNA test. The court upheld an order of Family Court in a suit filed by a person who claimed that the man is his biological father.

Jammu & Kashmir High Court

  • Refused to entertain a habeas corpus petition filed on behalf of three persons, after the police stated that they were not under house arrest.

Karnataka High Court

  • Held that if the offence under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) (MMDR) Act is compounded by collecting fine, prosecution under section 379, of Indian Penal Code, does not survive.
  • Came to the aid of a 21-youth who lost his genitals, in an accident. The court increased the compensation to RS 24 lakh from the Rs 2,70,000, awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.
  • Stayed the NCLT proceedings against Flipkart. The Stay Order dated 25th October 2019 was passed by Justice B Veerappa on the strength of submissions advanced by Senior Advocate Dhyan Chinnappa.
  • Refused to stay the order issued by the State Government, cancelling celebrations of Tipu Jayanti, as a state event. However, the court has directed the government to reconsider its decision in a period of two months. Tipu Jayanti is to be celebrated on November 10.
  • While granting anticipatory bail to an accused charged under section 306, said "Mere allegations in the death note that the petitioner and others are responsible for his death, would not be sufficient to come to the conclusion that the petitioner has committed the said offence, unless the overt acts and conduct of accused are stated, in order to prove the case of the prosecution and that is sufficient to drive the person to commit suicide."

Kerala High Court

  • Granted bail in Palarivattom Flyover scam case to T O Sooraj, former Secretary to Kerala Public Works Department, Sumeet Goyal, Managing Director of RDS Projects(contractor) and M T Thankachan, former Additional General Manager of Roads and Bridges Development Corporation of Kerala. The Court had earlier denied bail to the three accused while granting bail to another accused Benny Paul, General Manager of KITCO Ltd.
  • Observed that it is not necessary for the investigating officer to seek any permission from the court to conduct further investigation. Justice R. Narayana Pisharadi also observed that there is no restriction on the power of the investigating officer to conduct further investigation after the commencement of the trial of the case.
  • Asked the Kerala Government to preserve the bodies of two Maoists who were killed in a police encounter in Agali forests last week. Justice Narayana Pisharadi passed the interim direction in an original petition filed by the kin of Karti and Manivasagam challenging the permission granted by Sessions Court Palakkad to cremate the bodies of slain Maoists.
  • Observed that Section 23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act can be invoked even if there was no condition of providing maintenance in the transfer deeds.

Madras High Court

Opining that NEET, instead of giving the expected good results, has benefited only students who spend lakhs of rupees on coaching classes and put rural students at a disadvantage, the High Court advised the Centre, which framed the rules, to take note of it.

Rajasthan High Court

  • Passed a series of directions in order to ensure proper management of environment and traffic in the rapidly developing city of Jodhpur.

Next Story