High Courts Weekly Round-Up

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...

High Courts Weekly Round-Up

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags