High Courts Weekly Round-Up

Allahabad High Court The Lucknow Bench of the High Court directed the Centre and the UP State government to decide whether or not the existing Shia and Sunni Wakf Boards in UP should be set aside to establish a Single Wakf Board instead.In the backdrop of Delhi-NCR gasping for fresh air due to severe pollution, the High Court pulled up Uttar Pradesh administration for failure to stop the operation of illegal brick kilns without Environmental Clearance and asked the administration to show cause as to why contempt proceedings must not be instituted against it.Reserved order on the bail application filed by former Union Minister and BJP leader Swami Chinmayanand, who was accused of raping a law student.Took in hands the conduct of an uncanny District Judge who tried to bring down the majesty of the high court and its judges by commenting adversely on their functioning.In a major setback for BSP MP Atul Rai, the High Court rejected his bail plea in connection to a case of sexual exploitation and rape. The high court said that keeping in mind the principle of fair and speedy trial, Rai should not be granted bail and the Trial Court should be allowed to frame charges against him. The order was passed by Justice Ramesh Sinha.Reiterated that at the stage of framing of charges, the trail court has to merely ascertain the existence of a prima facie case against the accused and that it is not required to assess all the evidence that has been collected by the Investigating Officer. Bombay High Court Set aside penalty of Rs.432 cr imposed by Mumbai Metropolitan Regional Development Authority (MMRDA) on Reliance industries and Raghuleela Builders for supposed delay in completion of construction of a building called "One BKC" at Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai, calling it arbitrary, discriminatory and without any basis.Refused relief to two law aspirants who sought admission to law colleges after qualifying the Common Entrance Test but were denied admission as they failed to fulfil the eligibility criteria introduced in 2015 making a minimum requirement of 45% marks in every year of graduation a must for being eligible to be included in the Common Admission Process (CAP). Division bench of Justice SC Dharmadhikari and Justice RI Chagla heard the two writ petitions filed by Purva Ingle and Vinay Kothari. Court dismissed both the petitions after concluding that both students were not eligible to be given admission. Chhattisgarh High Court Made certain crucial observations with regards the stature of powers enjoyed by the Central and the State government under the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008. Delhi High Court Allowed the Instagram account holder, who posted complaints of sexual harassment against Subodh Gupta on Instagram account 'Herdsceneand', to maintain interim anonymity by allowing the filing of vakalatnama and written statements in a sealed cover.Clarified that the order rejecting bail to P Chidambaram contained no 'cut-paste' from the judgment in Rohit Tandon's case. Justice Suresh Kumar Kait issued this clarification after taking suo moto notice of the report published by "The Hindu" on November 17 that the November 15 order in Chidambaram's case had copy pasted certain facts from Rohit Tandon's case.Allowed the application filed by Enforcement Directorate (ED) to correct "inadvertent factual errors" and "accidental slips" in the order denying bail to P Chidambaram in the INX Media case and issued clarifications.Rejected an application seeking quashing of a rape case, filed under section 376 of IPC, on the ground of a settlement being reached between the victim and the accused. Refusing to exercise the inherent power under section 482 of CrPC, Justice Brijesh Sethi held that rape not only causes serious injury to a woman's body, but also to her honour and dignity. Therefore, even if such an offence is settled by the offender and victim, this offence being not private in nature, and having a serious impact on the society, cannot be quashed.Held that the order of the trial court on charge need not be a lengthy or a detailed one. Such an order should indicate that in the opinion of the trial court a prima facie case is made out. The court made this observation while disposing off a revision petition filed under section 397, read along with section 401 of CrPC wherein the Petitioner had challenged the order of the Additional Sessions Judge on framing of the charges against him.Almost a year after a Delhi Commission for Women (DCW) rape counsellor was found hanging at her matrimonial house within five months of marriage, the High Court denied bail to the father-in-law of the deceased while taking note of the fresh injuries found on her person and her WhatsApp messages wherein she had spoken of harassment at her matrimonial house.Refused to provide relief to students who were given a year ...

High Courts Weekly Round-Up

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags