Top
Begin typing your search above and press return to search.
News Updates

High Courts Weekly Round-Up [May 17, 2020 To May 23, 2020]

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK
23 May 2021 4:12 PM GMT
High Courts Weekly Round-Up [May 17, 2020 To May 23, 2020]
x

Allahabad High Court 1. Entire Medical System In Smaller Cities And Villages In UP is Like "Ram Bharose", Says Allahabad High Court in COVID19 Suo Moto Case [In-Re Inhuman Condition At Quarantine Centres…] A Division Bench of Justices Siddhartha Varma and Ajit Kumar said that the condition of medical and health infrastructure in small towns and rural areas of Uttar Pradesh is...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
To read the article, get a premium account.
    Your Subscription Supports Independent Journalism
Subscription starts from
599+GST
(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

1. Entire Medical System In Smaller Cities And Villages In UP is Like "Ram Bharose", Says Allahabad High Court in COVID19 Suo Moto Case [In-Re Inhuman Condition At Quarantine Centres…]

A Division Bench of Justices Siddhartha Varma and Ajit Kumar said that the condition of medical and health infrastructure in small towns and rural areas of Uttar Pradesh is 'Ram Bharose' (at the mercy of God).

The remarks were made in light of a Covid-patient who was reported to be missing from a District Hospital in Meerut District. The Court also issued several directions for development of the medical infrastructure in the State.

Also Read: If This Is The State Of Affairs, We Are Leading People Of Uttar Pradesh Towards Third Wave Of Covid-19: Allahabad High Court

2. Can't Understand Why Govt Is Not Trying To Manufacture COVID19 Vaccine Itself, Allahabad High Court Asks [In-Re Inhuman Condition At Quarantine Centres…]

Amid the rampant shortage of vaccine doses across the nation, a Division Bench of Justices Siddhartha Varma and Ajit Kumar said, "one cannot understand as to why the Government of ours which is a welfare state is not trying to manufacture the vaccine itself on a large scale."

It suggested that big medical companies which are working in the country and may not have their own vaccines—may take the formula from just any of the vaccine manufacturers in the world and start producing the vaccine. "In this way, they would help the country to meet the shortage of vaccines which it is facing today," the Bench remarked.

3. Covid-19 Vaccines Not Available For Age Group 18-45: Allahabad High Court Directs State Counsel To Seek Instructions From UP Government [Hari Pasad Gupta v. State of UP & Ors.]

A Division Bench comprising of Justices Rajan Roy and Saurabh Lavania asked the Additional Chief Standing Counsel of Uttar Pradesh to seek instructions with respect to availability of Covid-19 vaccines in the state, especially with respect to the persons falling in age group of 18-45.

"Though the Government has announced for vaccination for the persons of the age-group of 18-44 years, but fact of the matter is that vaccines are not available for this age group," the Petitioner had informed the Bench.

4. Allahabad High Court Sets Aside Suspension Of Covid Positive Employee; Says Suspension Order Can't Be Passed During Pendency Of Preliminary Inquiry [Gaurav Bansal v. State of UP & Ors.]

A Single Bench of Justice Rajnish Kumar quashed an order passed by the concerned authorities of UP Government, suspending the services of one Gaurav Bansal who failed to resume office after completion of his casual leave period, on account of contracting Covid-19.

The suspension order has been set aside on the ground that the preliminary inquiry into the Petitioner's conduct is still pending.

Andhra Pradesh High Court

1. Andhra MP Krishnam Raju's Arrest :AP High Court Initiates Suo Moto Contempt Over Non-Compliance Of Orders On Medical Examination [Suo Moto v. State of Andhra Pradesh]

In a dramatic development in the case relating to the arrest of YSRCP MP K Raghu Rama Krishnam Raju, a division bench comprising Justices Lalitha Kannengati and C Praveen Kumar has initiated suo moto contempt proceedings against officials for not implementing the orders passed by it for the medical examination of the arrested legislator.

It has initiated suo moto contempt proceedings against the Additional Director General of Police(CID), DGP Office, Guntur, Station House Officer, CID Police Station, Mangalgiri, Guntur District and Superintendent of Government Hospital, Guntur.

The contempt action is in relation to the non-compliance of the directions passed by the bench on May 16 to get the medical examination of Raju - who was arrested for alleged sedition and promotion of communal hatred over his speeches - done by Ramesh Hospital, Guntur, as was directed the Magistrate in an earlier order passed on May 15.

Also Read: 'Arguments Of Additional Advocate General Prima Facie Contemptuous' : AP High Court Says In Case Related To Krishnam Raju's Arrest

2. Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Local Body Elections As SEC Did Not Give 4 Weeks Model Code of Conduct [Janasena Party v. State Election Commissioner]

A Single Bench of Justice M. Satyanarayana Murthy set aside the elections held to Mandal Parishad Territorial Constituencies (MPTC) and Zilla Parishad Territorial Constituencies (ZPTC) on April 8 on the ground that there was no mandatory gap of four weeks of Model Code of Conduct between the election notifications and the date of elections.

The High Court dubbed the decision of the State Election Commission to resume local body polls in Andhra Pradesh without imposing Model Code of Conduct for four weeks prior to the notified date of polling as "hasty". It has ordered the SEC to issue notification afresh resuming the election process for MPTCs and ZPTCs from where it was stopped, giving 4 weeks time gap for MCC.

3. Excessive Fees Charged By Private Hospitals From COVID19 Patients: Andhra Pradesh High Court Orders Payment Be Made Through Nodal Officers To Keep A Check [Thota Suresh Babu v. Union of India & Ors.]

A Division Bench of Justices C. Praveen Kumar and Lalitha Kanneganti directed the State Government to work out modalities for payment of private hospital bills of Covid-19 patients through a Nodal Officer, in order to avoid exorbitant charges being levied by them.

During the hearing, one of the Petitioners— All India Lawyers Union suggested that in order to curb the menace of excessive treatment bills, instead of paying the money directly at the counter of the Hospital, the same can be routed through the Nodal Officer/Help Desk Manager, so that in case of excess billings, the same can be checked at that stage itself. "This suggestion, in our view, will definitely check collection of excess money or excess billing contrary to Government guidelines," the Bench said.

Bombay High Court

1. 'We Would Cease To Be Vacation Judges At The Stroke Of Midnight' : Bombay High Court Adjourns Param Bir Singh's Plea, Grants Protection

After hearing cases late into night, a vacation bench of the Bombay High Court adjourned to Monday the plea filed by Ex- Mumbai Police Commissioner Param Bir Singh, when the clock struck 12 midnight.

Param Bir Singh has filed the case for quashing of an FIR under investigation by the Thane Police, against him and 32 others, for offences under SC/ST Act, Civil Rights Protection Act, Maharashtra Police Act and IPC.

While noting that they would "cease to be vacation Judges at the stroke of midnight", a division bench comprising Justices SJ Kathawalla and SP Tavade adjourned the case to Monday while asking the State of Maharashtra not to arrest Param Bir Singh till then.

Also Read: 12 Hours Plus Marathon Sitting : Bombay High Court Sits Late Into Night Till 11.15 PM To Hear Cases

2. Don't Wait For Centre's Permission For Door-To-Door Vaccination, We Will Allow: Bombay High Court Tells BMC [Dhruti Kapadia v. UOI & Ors.]

After repeated directions to the Union of India to consider a door-to-door vaccination policy, a division bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice GS Kulkarni asked the BMC if they could introduce such a program for citizens above 75-years, the differently-abled and bed-ridden.

"We request the Municipal Commissioner or the Additional Municipal Commissioner of the Corporation to apprise us whether disinclination of the Central Government to formulate door-to-door vaccination policy for elderly and disabled citizens notwithstanding, the Corporation is prepared to introduce door-to-door vaccination for such citizens," the bench said. It further orally observed that if the Corporation was willing, the court would grant permission irrespective of the Union's stand.

Latest Update: 'Will Implement Door-To-Door Vaccination Once Centre Issues Guidelines': BMC Tells Bombay High Court

Also Read: 'Instead Of People Chasing Vaccine, You Should Chase People' : Bombay High Court Seeks NEGVAC Policy On Door-to-Door Vaccination

Also Read: COVID Vaccination - Ensure That Elderly Citizens Are Not Made To Stand In Queues, Give Online Registrants Preference Over Walk-Ins : Bombay High Court

3. "If Unrestricted Entry Into Goa Would Be Allowed, Medical Infra Would Collapse": Bombay HC Dismisses Govt's Request Seeking Entry Relaxations [Armando Gonsalves & Anr. v. State of Goa]

A Division Bench of Justices MS Sonak and MS Jawalkar dismissed two application filed by the Government of Goa seeking vacation/modification of Court's order which directed the State to ensure that persons entering into the State possess a COVID negative certificate.

The Court observed that on one hand, there was material on record that the medical infrastructure in the State is quite over-stressed, while on the other hand, if there are no restrictions, whatsoever on the entry into the State of Goa, then, this medical infrastructure will completely collapse.

4. "You Are Playing With Peoples Lives" Bombay HC Confronts Centre, State For Their Response To Politicians & Celebrities Distributing COVID Drugs When State Faces Shortage

A division Bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Dutta and Justice GS Kulkarni pulled up both the Central government and the State of Maharashtra for their response to allegations of drugs like Remdesivir and Tocilizubam being procured and distributed by politicians and celebrities while the State continues to complain about a shortage in official supply.

The Bench confronted the Maharashtra government for only issuing show-cause notices to actor Sonu Sood's foundation and MLA Zeeshan Siddiqui, and not submitting a report before the Court, as directed. Further, the court also asked why the statements of these people have not been recorded yet. It also asked the Centre why no report was filed by them and details from manufacturers about the supplies made not placed on record.

Also Read: "Medical Education Policy Has to Be Re-looked, High Time For Policy Makers And Government To Apply Their Mind" Bombay High Court

5. "Nothing Wrong If This Becomes A Precedent In Present Times": Bombay High Court Directs DU Prof Hany Babu To Be Shifted To Breach Candy Hospital

A division bench of Justices SJ Kathawalla and SP Tavade directed Delhi University Associate Professor Hany Babu, who is covid -19 positive and suffers from black fungus infection, be shifted to Breach Candy hospital by tomorrow. Babu was arrested in the Bhima Koregaon – Elgaar Parishad case on July 28 2020, by the National Investigation Agency.

The Court observed that the patient deserves to be treated in a hospital of his choice in the current situation when NIA tried to oppose the plea saying it would become a precedent. It also permitted the family to have access to doctors and the patient.

6. Bhima Koregaon Case: Constitute Committee To Examine Father Stan Swamy -Bombay High Court To JJ Hospital Dean

A Division bench of Justices SJ Kathawalla and Surendra Tavade directed the Dean of JJ Hospital to constitute a committee of experts to examine the health of Father Stan Swamy, an 84-year-old tribal rights activist accused in the Bhima Koregaon – Elgar Parishad Case.

The bench ordered the Superintendent of Taloja Central Prison to arrange to send Father Stan to JJ Hospital at 12 noon tomorrow. It further asked the JJ Hospital committee to submit their report by 11 am on Friday.

Also Read: 'I Would Rather Suffer, Possibly Die Very Shortly If This Were To Go On' : Stan Swamy Pleads For Interim Bail In Bombay HC

Also Read: 'Ayurvedic Doctor At Prison Prescribed Allopathic Antipsychotic Drug' :Stan Swamy Tells Bombay High Court

7. 'In The Name Of Pandemic, We Can't Spoil Children's Future' : Bombay High Court Slams Decision To Cancel Maharashtra SSC Exams [Dhananjay Kulkarni v. Union of India & Ors.]

A division bench of Justices SJ Khathawalla and SP Tavade came down heavily on the Maharashtra Government for its decision to cancel the Secondary School Certificate Examination for Class X. "In the name of pandemic, we can't spoil career and future of our children. The Framers of education policy should know that in the state. This isn't acceptable at all" Court orally said.

The bench asked the State Counsel if they are thinking of promoting these students without exams. "Then God save the education system in this country, your state" Justice Khathawalla remarked.

8. Why Maharashtra Governor Hasn't Decided On Nominations To Legislative Council? Bombay High Court Asks

A division bench of Justices SJ Kathawalla and SP Tavade sought an explanation on why the Governor has still not decided on the nomination of members to Maharashtra's Legislative Council (MLC), despite the 12 names submitted by Council of Ministers on November 6, 2020. It also asked the State to set out by when the Governor would consider the nominations and dispose of the matter.

The Court was hearing a plea alleging that Governor, in breach of his constitutional obligation, failed to act on the recommendation of the Council of Ministers and has till date not nominated said 12 members to LC. The petition notes that, "Article 171(5) establishes that the object and purpose of such members to be nominated by the Governor to the LC was that the Council would have the benefit of nominees having special knowledge or practical experience in the fields of literature science, art, and social service."

Other developments:

Calcutta High Court

1. Calcutta High Court Orders House Arrest Of 4 TMC Leaders In Narada Case After Judges Disagree On Interim Bail

Following a split in the Calcutta High Court Bench hearing the case pertaining to bail of four Trinamool Congress leaders, who have been in custody since May 17 since their arrest by the CBI in the Narada Scam Case, the matter has been referred to a larger Bench.

In the meanwhile, the division bench of Acting Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice Arijit Banerjee ordered that the four leaders— Ministers Firhad Hakim and Subrata Mukherjee, MLA Madan Mitra and Sovan Chatterjee- be kept in house arrest and all medical amenities will be given to them.

Since two of the arrested persons are Ministers in the newly-elected State Government and one of them is an MLA, the Court has permitted them to access files and meet officials through videoconferencing while under house arrest, to discharge their functions.

Also Read: 'Legal Issues Can't Be Raised And Settled In Streets' : Acting CJ Rajesh Bindal Of Calcutta HC Refuses Interim Bail To TMC Leaders In Narada Scam Case

Also Read: 'Haven't Understood How Custodial Detention Is Necessary': Justice Arijit Banerjee 's Reasons For Granting Interim Bail To TMC Leaders In Narada Case

2. Alleged Violence Against BJP Worker- "Ensure No Atrocities Against Her; Article 19 Guarantees Free Movement": Calcutta High Court To Police [Sankari Das v. State of West Bengal & Ors.]

While dealing with a complaint of a member of Bhartiya Janta Party, who alleged that due to her political affiliation, she became the victim of post-poll violence, a Single Bench of Justice Biswajit Basu directed local Police Station to give her protection.

Noting that allegedly her house had been destroyed and she was unable to enter into her locality, the Court observed, "Article 19(1)(d) of the Constitution of India guarantees free movement of every citizen throughout the territory of India."

Chhattisgarh High Court

1. Redistribution Of Unutilised Covid-19 Vaccines At Vaccination Centres: Chhattisgarh High Court To Consider Issue [Suo Moto PIL v. State of Chhattisgarh]

A Division Bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Parth Prateem Sahu has decided to address the 'important issue' of non-utilization of Covid-19 vaccines that are left at vaccination centres at the end of a day.

It was submitted that often it happens that the vaccine quantity allocated to one group remains unused and at the same time the quantity allotted to another group is exhausted and there is no policy for redistribution of such unutilized quantity for the benefit of other groups where more persons are willing to be vaccinated.

Delhi High Court

1. Delhi High Court Reserves Judgment On Plea To Suspend Central Vista Project Work Amid COVID

A Division Bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh of the Delhi High Court today reserved judgment in a plea seeking temporary suspension of work on Central Vista Redevelopment Project in light of second wave of Covid-19.

Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra appearing for the Petitioners pleaded that right to life and health is of paramount significance and hence, the project may be halted in view of rising number of Covid-19 cases. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appearing for the Central Government assured the Court that the project is being undertaken in accordance with law and measures have been taken to check the health and wellbeing of individuals.

2. Decide Representations Seeking FCRA Exemption For COVID Relief, Delhi High Court Directs Centre [Karmodaya Charitable Trust v. Union of India & Anr.]

A division bench comprising of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh directed the Competent Authority to treat as representation a plea seeking directions to the Centre to exempt registered associations, organizations and individuals, prior permission under Section 11 of the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010 to receive foreign contributions in the form of covid life-saving equipment.

It observed that exemptions and relaxations are not a matter of right, and the same was the prerogative of the Government. "It is a settled law that exemptions and relaxations under different Statutes are not a matter of right. It is the prerogative power of the Government to exempt or give relaxations with or without stringent conditions. It is not for the Court to direct the Government to exercise the power in a particular manner. It is evident from the pleadings and not denied by the learned counsel for the Petitioner during the course of hearing that before filing the present petition, Petitioner has not approached the Competent Authority seeking exemption under the Act."

Also Read: Delhi High Court Directs SBI To Open FCRA Accounts Of NGOs Within 10 Days Of Receiving Centre's Approval

3. Treatment To Accused Must Be Provided In Another Hospital Not Being Covid Facility When Referral Hospital Is Fully Dedicated Covid Facility: Delhi High Court

A division bench comprising of Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Jasmeet Singh directed the Delhi Government to ensure that an accused person must be provided the treatment required by approaching an alternative hospital not being a dedicated covid Facility when the same cannot be done in the referral hospital for the reason of it being a 100% dedicated covid Facility.

It was considering a bunch of petitions concerning decongestion of prisons, neglected treatment of non covid patients and non functioning of Undertrial Review Committee. "We direct the State to ensure that whatever treatment/investigation is required by accused must be provided by approaching another hospital which is not 100% covid facility in case the referral hospital is 100% covid Facility," the Court directed.

4. Delhi High Court Issues Notice In Plea Challenging Govt's Permission Given For Conducting Phase II, III Clinical Trials Of Covaxin In Age Group Of 2-18 Years

The High Court issued notice in plea challenging the notification issued by the Central Government for conducting phase II and III clinical trials of covaxin in the age group of 2 to 18 years stating them to be "healthy volunteers". The plea also seeks directions on the State to criminally prosecute persons involved in the trials in the event of death or loss of life of any minor or toddler.

Stating that the order is prima facie unlawful and arbitrary, the plea states thus: "A person can offer to do anything only if he/she is capable of understanding the consequences of his/her act. In the present case, the subject matter of clinical trials being minors (even toddlers who- for the reason of their age only- are not capable of even speaking and understanding languages in proper manner) cannot be supposed to Volunteer for the aforesaid clinical testing."

Also Read: "Fashion To Translate Ideas Into Writ Petition": Delhi HC Imposes 10K Cost On Plea Seeking Details Of Foreign Vaccine Makers Asking For Approval In India

5. Delhi High Court Issues Notice In Another Plea Challenging Vires Of GNCTD Act Enhancing Powers Of Delhi LG

A division bench comprising of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh issued notice in another plea challenging the vires of GNCTD Act, 2021 enhancing powers of the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi as being unconstitutional.

The plea filed by Vishwanath Agarwal, a practicing Advocate and moved by Advocate KC Aggarwal states that the aforesaid enactment runs contrary to the judgment of the Apex Court in NCT of Delhi v. Union of India and also to the "principle of Republican and Democratic System" as elucidated in Keshvananda Bharti case.

6. Malayalam Film "Aquarium": Delhi HC Directs Authorities To Decide Petitioner's Representation To Stop Release On OTT Platform [Sr. Jessy Mani v. Union of India & Anr.]

A division bench comprising of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh directed the Authorities concerned to decide the representation of the petitioner made to the Secretary of Ministry of Information and Broadcasting by the petitioner to stop the release of malayalam movie "aquarium".

The development came in a plea filed by a Catholic nun urging for issuance of directions to stop the release of the film on the grounds that it is "blasphemous" in nature and would hurt the religious sentiments of the Christian community at large.

7. IGST Imposition On Import of Oxygen Concentrators As Gift For Personal Use Unconstitutional: Delhi High Court

A division bench comprising of Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Justice Talwant Singh held that the imposition of IGST on the import of oxygen concentrators by individuals for personal use is unconstitutional. "We've held that imposition of IGST on the oxygen concentrators imported by individuals and are received by them as gifts, for personal use is unconstitutional. Given this declaration, notification no 30/2021 dated 1/5/2021 is quashed." the Bench said.

To avoid misuse of oxygen concentrators, the Court said that people procuring concentrators will have to furnish an undertaking to officer designated by the State, so same is not commercially used.

Also Read: "This Is A George Floyd Moment For Citizens Of This Country": Delhi HC Strikes Down IGST Imposition On Oxygen Concentrators Imported By Individuals

8. Due To Delhi Health Infrastructure's Unpreparedness, Many Citizens Compelled To Seek Medical Attention In Neighboring States: Delhi High Court [Manan Singh v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.]

A Single Bench of Justice Rekha Palli observed that due to the unpreparedness of the health infrastructure in Delhi, many desperate citizens of the NCT of Delhi, had to seek admission/medical attention at hospitals in the neighbouring states.

The Court was dealing with a plea by the petitioner, whose father is suffering from COVID-19 and he sought a direction that he be provided seven doses per day of Liposomal Amphotericin B Injection/Amphonex-50 mg for his father.

It was the petitioner's case that his father had been hospitalised for COVID-19 treatment for over a month now and he was prescribed the injection over six days ago. Further, it was stated that ever since then, the petitioner had been desperately petitioning the respondents and the health departments of the Central Government and the Government of Haryana to help him get the medicine, to no avail.

Also Read: "How Can There Be Sudden Supply Shortage?" HC Seeks Delhi Govt's Response On Stocks Held And Distribution Of Drug Used For Treating Black Fungus

9. "Very Difficult For Bureaucracy, Political Leaders To Accept Failures And Inability, Not In Their Veins": Delhi High Court

A division bench comprising of Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Jasmeet Singh remarked that it is very difficult for the bureaucracy and the political leaders of the day to accept failures and their inability and that the same is not in their veins.

The Bench was dealing with an application filed by Delhi Judicial Members Association seeking directions to ensure that judicial members and their family are provided with adequate covid care facilities by establishment of a centralized mechanism within districts and attachment of hospital in each district.

Also Read: Politicians Have No Business To Hoard COVID Drugs; Medicines Be Surrendered To DGHS : Delhi High Court

Also Read: Delhi High Court Calls For Meeting For Installation Of PSA Plants By Large Hospitals Having Oxygen Capacity Twice The Normal Requirement

10. "Doubling Production Will Not Suffice": Delhi HC Seeks Centre's Response On Production Capacity, Steps Taken To Import Drug To Treat Black Fungus

Observing that doubling the present production capacity of Amphotericin B drug, used to treat Black Fungus may not be sufficient, a division bench comprising of Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Jasmeet Singh directed the Centre to file status report indicating the present production capacity of the medicine, along with the enhanced production capacity of producers who have been licensed to produce the aforesaid drug. It also directed the Centre to put on record the steps taken for import of Amphotericin B for its availability throughout the country.

The Court ordered thus: "Let a status report on aspect such as present production capacity, producers who have been licensed to produce and their present capacity, their enhanced capacities. Let the affidavit be filed within 3 days. Government may put on record the steps taken for import of medicines for availability of the medicine throughout the country."

Also Read: COVID19: Delhi High Court Issues Notice In Plea Seeking To Formulate Plan For Facilities Pertaining To Dead Bodies In Wake Of The Pandemic

Other developments:

Gauhati High Court

1. Due To Shortage Of Vaccines, Registration Of Persons Between 18-44 Yrs Of Age Isn't Being Done: Assam Govt. To Gauhati High Court [Lawyers Association, Guwahati v. State of Assam & Ors.]

The Assam Government submitted before a Bench of Chief Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Achintya Malla Bujor Barua that registration of persons between 18 to 44 years of age, for the purpose of vaccination, was not being done due to shortage of Vaccines.

As regarding difficulties being faced by the villagers in getting themselves registered for vaccination on-line, the Assam Government submitted that apart from online registration, there are walk-in registration centers in the vaccination centers itself. However, it was also added that as of now registration was being done only for persons above 45 years of age and due to shortage of vaccines, registration of persons between 18 to 44 years of age is not being done but it is expected that the same will be started shortly.

Also Read: COVID: Give Details Of Prisoners Lodged In Jails Who Are Liable To Be Released As Per SC Order: Gauhati High Court To State Govt

Gujarat High Court

1. "Specify Preparedness To Combat Mucormycosis/Black Fungus & Policy To Procure Injections/Medicines": Gujarat High Court Asks Govt [Suo Moto v. State of Gujarat]

A Division Bench of Justice Bela Trivedi and Justice Bhargav D Trivedi observed that the second wave of the COVID Pandemic was spreading fast in the rural areas because of lack of availability of RT­PCR facilities and other infrastructural facilities. It also directed the Central Government to place on record the information of the general public at large, about the vaccination policy adopted by the Central Government.

Significantly, the Court also took serious note of the new challenge being faced by the State with regard to the rapid increase in the cases of flesh-eating Black Fungal infection called 'Mucormycosis'.

2. Gujarat High Court Issues Notice On Plea Seeking Permission To Perform Dokhmenashini, The Practice Of Disposing Dead Bodies In Parsi Community

The High Court issued notice on a petition filed by Surat Parsi Panchayat Board seeking permission to perform Dokhmenashini, a customary practice among the Parsi community of putting the dead body in a tower of silence, even for those who succumb to Covid-19.

It is submitted that presently, there is no law or notification which explicitly prohibits Dokhmenashini. However, the Central Guidelines on management of Covid-19 dead bodies prescribe only cremation and burial as the two modes of disposal, and it is completely silent on other religious practices.

"There is no evidence of corona virus being spread through dead body. Therefore, there is no reason to deny the decent funeral to the petitioners' members…By not allowing the petitioners to follow their religious mandate, the fundamental rights as protected under Articles 14,19,21,25,26 and 29 are being violated without any reason, whatsoever," the plea states.

Jammu & Kashmir High Court

1. COVID Management- Advocate General Will Respond To Each And Every Grievances Within Two Weeks: Jammu And Kashmir High Court [Court on its own motion v. Govt of India]

Dealing with a suo moto case registered for protecting the life of the citizens by ensuring adequate medical help both in terms of medical advice and life-supporting material amid the Covid-19 pandemic, a Division Bench comprising of Chief Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice Sanjay Dhar directed the Lawyers to submit their suggestion to the Advocate General.

It further directed AG to respond to each and every grievance and suggestion within two weeks and if necessary, to take up those matters with the State Government and try to resolve them as early as possible.

Karnataka High Court

1. Application Under Section 12 Of Domestic Violence Act Not Barred By Limitation Under Section 468 CrPC : Karnataka High Court [Puttaraju v. Shivakumari]

A single bench of Justice KS Mudagal held that an application made under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act is not barred by period of limitation under section 468 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

It said "When the application under Section 12 of the DV Act is not covered under the term 'offence', section 468 of Cr.P.C is inapplicable. Therefore the application of Section 468 of Cr.P.C. to an application under Section 12 of the DV Act is clearly a misconception."

The court noted that Section 468 (1) and 468(2)(b) of Cr.P.C. themselves show that the bar of limitation for taking cognizance is intertwined with an offence. Section 468 of Cr.P.C. comes into picture only if there is an offence. If there is no offence, there is no limitation.

2. Karnataka High Court Urges State To Constitute SIT To Probe Child-Trafficking Cases In Bengaluru

Observing that there are serious cases of child trafficking in the Bengaluru, a division bench of Chief Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Suraj Govindaraj recently directed the state government to consider whether it wants to constitute a special investigation team for probing cases of child trafficking.

The Court said "Now the State Government will have to come out with its plans on the recommendations made by Karnataka State Legal Services Authority (KSLSA) for dealing with the serious issue of trafficking of children. The State Government will have to consider whether it wants to constitute a special investigation team. It is only after taking the response of the State Government, we propose to issue detailed directions."

3. Karnataka High Court Issues Plea Seeking GST, Royalty Exemptions For COVID Vaccines

A division bench of Chief Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Aravind Kumar issued notice to the Union of India and others in a petition filed by Professor S. Chandrashekar, a former Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) employee, seeking directions to the government to ensure that adequate steps and facilities are in place to upscale the production, distribution and supply of vaccines and that no royalty, Goods and Services Tax or any other taxes shall be imposed on the vaccine's manufacturers in India.

The petition seeks directions to the Government of India to also invoke the provisions of section 92 of the Patent Act read with Section 66. However, before doing so, the respondent should allow the various global manufacturers of the COVID-19 vaccine to voluntarily execute licences to manufacture COVID-19 vaccines in India. Also to constitute a rapid action task force to oversee the upscaling of the manufacturing of vaccines, the rapid inoculation of people and for regulating the price of the vaccines.

Also Read: 'Don't Give False Hope To People That They'll Get Vaccine' : Karnataka HC Directs State To Inform Steps Taken To Procure Second Doses

4. 'Oxygen Supply Still Doesn't Meet State's Requirements' : Karnataka HC Seeks Data On Procurement

A division bench of Chief Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Aravind Kumar directed the state government to place on record the actual requirement of Oxygen from May 17 to May 24 in the state and the actual quantity of oxygen procured by it. It issued the direction after the state government informed the court that the Government of India has allocated 1015 MT LMO to Karnataka and the actual supplies are about 850-950 MT per day over the last few days. Further as per a letter addressed on May 15, it is requested allocation of 1396 MT of Oxygen, based on the projection that active COVID-19 cases may reach 6 lakhs.

The bench in its order said "Still the supply of oxygen does not meet the requirements of the state. The figures of May 17 and May 18, indicate that the state government has not procured the entire quota allotted. Though the order of the Supreme Court dated April 30, directs creating buffer stock in each district, still there is no compliance of the same."

Also Read: 'What Have You Done For Public? Have You Set Up Oxygen Plants? Provided Beds?' Karnataka HC Slams Politicians' PILs On COVID Relief

Kerala High Court

1. Calculated Acts Of One Parent To Alienate Child From Other Parent Amount To "Mental Cruelty": Kerala High Court [X v. X (redacted)]

A Division Bench of Justices A Muhamed Mustaque and Dr Kauser Edappagath ruled that any act by a parent that resulted in a denial of a child's love and affection to the other parent by alienating the child amounts to mental cruelty.

Deciding a matrimonial appeal filed by a husband accusing his wife of cruelty, it said, "Nothing can be more painful than experiencing one's children—one's own flesh and blood—rejecting him/her. The above acts of the respondent willfully alienating the child from the appellant, no doubt, constitute mental cruelty..."

2. MLAs' Spouses, Relatives 'Not Indispensable' For Swearing-In, Presence Not A Necessity Though It Is A Proud Moment: Kerala High Court [Chikitsasaneethi v. State of Kerala & Ors.]

Faced with PIL petitions challenging the Kerala government's decision to organise a swearing-in ceremony with more than 500 persons in attendance, a Division Bench of Chief Justice S Manikumar and Shaji P Chaly was required to answer this primary question – "Whether all the invitees needed to be present for the performance of the ceremony…" It was hearing a petition filed by Chikitsasaneethi against the decision allowing more than 500 persons at the swearing-in.

While the Court took the view that it was for the political party/-ies to decide whether the presence of its/their elected MLA was required at the swearing-in, the presence of spouses/relatives was "not indispensable", in view of the Covid surge in the state. "We are unable to understand as to why the spouses or relatives of each of the MLAs are required to be present in the ceremony and when they are not, indispensable, either for the performance of the ceremony or for witnessing. Considering the present COVID-19 Pandemic situation, velocity and vigour of the virus, Test Positivity Rate in various Districts, uncontrolled rise in the death, etc., we are of the view that such persons ought not to have been included in the list of participants", the Court said.

Also Read: Kerala High Court Allows Physical Swearing-In Function Of LDF Govt, Imposes Further Restrictions

Also Read: 'Dignity Will Not Be Lost When Witnessed From Home': Kerala High Court Says COVID Norms Should Not Be Diluted For Government's Swearing-in

3. Kerala High Court Seeks Statement From State On Plea Seeking Inclusion Of Advocates In Vaccine Priority Group

A Bench of Chief Justice S Manikumar and Justice Shaji P Chaly sought a written statement on the State Government's stance on a petition for including advocates and judicial officers in the priority group for vaccinations.

The Counsel for the petitioner, Advocate Saiby submitted that his prayer was to treat judicial officers and lawyers in the frontline category, on priority, at least for the purpose of vaccination. He asserted that unlike other professions, advocates are supposed to work 'round-the-clock.'

4. Rule 12(9) Of Kerala Wetland Rules Prima Facie Ultra Vires To Extent It Charges Fee Depending On Area Of Proposed Building: Kerala High Court [Abad Builders v. State Of Kerala]

A Single Bench of Justice PB Suresh Kumar declared that Rule 12(9) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules (Rules) is prima facie ultra vires its parent Act, the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 (Act) in so far as it charges a fee depending on the area of buildings exceeding 3000 square feet proposed in 'un-notified' lands.

Justice Suresh Kumar agreed that Section 27A of the Act is a provision intended to permit owners of un-notified lands to utilise the same for residential or commercial or other purposes. "The grant of permission provided for under Section 27A of the Act being a service rendered by Government officials to individuals, though not as a privilege, levy of a fee for the same cannot be said to be ultra vires the provisions of the Act. But, the pointed question is as to whether such a fee could be levied having regard to the area of the building proposed in such lands", the Court posed.

5. 'Let Us Join Hands, Let Us Try It': Kerala High Court Judge Urges Advocates To Try E-Filing Rules On Experimental Basis

Prior to taking up cases listed before him today, Justice AK Jayasankaran Nambiar appealed to the Bar to lay aside their apprehensions regarding the new E-filing Rules and adopt it on an experimental basis. "We were all searching for something...Let us try it as a body and if it is working, it is ultimately going to benefit all of us. Right? That is the philosophy that should inform the decision"

"Let us join hands, let us try it", the Judge urged the Bar. The Judge also stated that he was authorised to address the General Body of the Kerala High Court Advocates Association on the question of e-Filing.

The E-Filing Rules, introduced by the High Court last week, has seen many lawyers' groups voicing their concerns at the lack of a consultative process before finalising the rules, while others expressed reservations about the technological and other processes involved in the newly-introduced e-filing system.

Also Read: Kerala High Court Allows Physical Filing, KHCAA To Provide Physical Filing Assistance

6. Kerala High Court DB Sets Aside Single Bench Judgment Which Quashed Rules Regulating Other-State Lotteries [State of Kerala v. Future Gaming & Hotel Services]

A Division Bench of Justices SV Bhatti and Bechu Kurian Thomas set aside the judgment of a Single Judge Bench that quashed the rules brought by the Kerala government to regulate sale of other-state lotteries.

"We are of the view that the except for rule 4(4) of the Amended Rules and to the extent indicated above, all the other rules enacted in 2018 by the State of Kerala are valid and do not contravene any provision of either the Constitution or the parent Act," it observed. The Court upheld the State Government's competence to enact rules for monitoring the conduct of lotteries by the Organising State within the territory of the Host State.

Madhya Pradesh High Court

1. Accused Entitled To Seek Bail On Sole Ground Of Arrest Violating 'Arnesh Kumar' Guidelines : Madhya Pradesh High Court [In reference suo moto v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.]

Days after it observed that the need of the hour is to immediately decongest jails, a Division Bench of Chief Justice Mohammad Rafiq and Justice Atul Sreedharan directed the High-Powered Committee to consider the suggestions received by it and make its recommendation regarding the release of prisoners.

During the hearing, the Bench was informed that despite direction issued by the Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and another (2014) 8 SCC 273, the police in the State was not following the guidelines. The Court then directed the Director-General of Police to immediately issue fresh direction to all the Police Stations in the State to adhere to the guidelines issued by the Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar in letter and spirit.

2. "Citizens Being Looted, Their Pain Is Our Pain": MP High Court Questions Govt On Amicus' Report Saying Ventilators Were Lying Uninstalled/ Unused [Suo Moto v. Union of India & Ors.]

Hearing the matters filed in connection with COVID Management in the State of Madhya Pradesh, a Division Bench of Chief Justice Mohammad Rafiq and Justice Atul Sreedharan expressed its concerns regarding the issue of hospitals overcharging COVID patients. It orally remarked, "Janta ko loota jaa raha hai, unka dard humara dard hai (Citizens are being looted, their pain is our pain)."

"Place on record a report showing as to how many ventilators were obtained under the PM Cares Fund and how many are procured by the State Government on its own and how many of them are functional. The data shall be produced on record as to the availability of ventilators in all the Government/District Hospitals of the State," it ordered.

Also Read: Global Tenders For COVID Vaccines: Madhya Pradesh High Court Seeks Response Of Centre & MP Government

Also Read: Ensure No Wastage Of Genuine Remdesivir Injections: Madhya Pradesh High Court To Govt

Madras High Court

1. Exempting Automobile Industry From Lockdown A Policy Decision, Can't Interfere: Madras HC

Hearing a plea challenging the government's decision to allow the automobile industry to function during the lockdown, a Division Bench of Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy observed, "It is a policy decision and unless it is shown that such decision is absurd to the meanest mind, the Court in the exercise of the authority under Article 226 of the Constitution may not seek to interfere in such a case."

It however asked the State to take immediate appropriate steps if it finds that COVID protocol not being maintained at the exempted manufacturing units.

Also Read: Ensure All Covid Government Orders Are Uploaded Chronologically On Govt Website: Madras High Court To State Government

2. "Of Great Concern": Madras High Court Seeks State Government Response On Covid Treatment Rates At Pvt Nursing Homes, Polyclinics, Hospitals [DI Nathan v. Chief Secretary]

A division bench of Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice Senthil Ramamoorthy issued notice to the State Government on a petition seeking free Covid treatment at all private Nursing Homes, Polyclinics and Hospitals in the State of Tamil Nadu.

"It is a subject of great concern, in various states, whether directly or through another body, there are caps which are put," it observed.

Also Read: Plea Seeking COVID Cash Relief To Transgender Persons Not Holding Ration Cards: Madras High Court Seeks Govt's Response

3. Travails Of Stray Animals Understated Amid Pandemic: Madras High Court Sets Up Committee To Plan For Care & Nutrition Of Stray Animals [VE Shiva v. The Director]

Pointing out that the travails of stray animals was lost amid the legitimate attention given to critical issues surrounding the pandemic, a Division Bench of Justices Dr Anita Sumanth and Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy constituted a Committee to ensure that stray animals were cared for. While directing the constitution of the Committee, stressed that it was vital to ensure that the needs of stray animals were addressed in an organised manner.

"The COVID -19 pandemic has impacted all sections of society and animals are no exception. In fact, the travails of stray animals, particularly today, remains somewhat understated, often lost in the legitimate attention being given to other critical issues. It is however vital that the needs of the stray animals are addressed in an organised manner to ensure that that the least distress and dislocation is caused to them in these trying times," the Bench said.

4. 'We Must Not Drop Our Guard And Say "Second Wave Is Gone", We Have To Plan For Future So We Are Not Caught Napping': Madras High Court [Suo Motu v. Union Govt. Of India]

In the course of its suo motu proceedings instituted to track Covid management in Tamil Nadu, a Division Bench of Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice Senthil Ramamoorthy urged that preparations would have to be made for the future when the State Advocate General's submission that there was an improvement in the Covid situation in the state.

"We have to plan for the future also. We must also not drop our guard, and say 'second wave is gone'! We have to prepare for the future, so next time we are not caught napping", the Chief Justice said.

Also Read: Accurate Numbers Of Covid Cases Needed To Ensure Supplies Of Oxygen, Drugs, Vaccines Are Based On True Figures: Madras High Court

Manipur High Court

1. COVID Crisis- "Address Issue of Financial Assistance To Manipur": Manipur High Court To Centre [Naresh Maimom v. Union of India & Ors.]

A Division Bench of Chief Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice Kh. Nobin Singh asked the Union of India to address the issue of providing adequate financial assistance to the State of Manipur to meet the crisis occasioned by the second wave of this pandemic.

Noting that there is no machinery as on date to monitor the treatment of patients inside a hospital, it directed the State Government to take necessary steps in that regard.

Patna High Court

1. "Admittedly There Was No Test Identification Parade": Patna High Court Acquits All 13 Accused In 1999 Senari Massacre Case [State of Bihar v. Bachesh Kumar Singh & Ors.]

A division bench comprising of Justice Ashwani Kumar Singh and Justice Arvind Srivastava acquitted all 13 accused persons in connection with 1999 Senari Massacre case killing 34 persons after observing that the circumstances in which the Test Identification Parade was conducted makes it "weak and without any corroboration". It set aside the trial court judgment dated November 15, 2016 and the sentencing order against accused persons thereby directing all 13 of them to be released forthwith.

Observing that the identification of the accused persons bythe witnesses cannot be relied upon to convict them, the Court ordered thus: "The miscreants have been identified in the dock for the first time more than seven years and extendedup to about 16 years after the occurrence. The circumstances inwhich the identifications were made, as discussed above, makesuch identification rather weak without any corroboration. Thedock identification was based on recollection of the events,which took place long back."

2. COVID Death Data: Verify Facts Before Placing Them In Court, Else It Would Amount To Filing Of False Affidavit: Patna HC To Govt [Shivani Kaushik v. Union of India]

Observing that in Buxar District of Bihar, if in 10 days only in one crematorium, 789 persons were cremated, then what would be the position in the entire District, a Division Bench of Chief Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice S. Kumar directed the State Government, "All facts first must be verified from all sources and then only placed before us, else it will amount to filing of false/incomplete affidavit".

The Court also directed Government that the official Website maintained by the State of Bihar for recording the births and the deaths be regularly updated.

Punjab and Haryana High Court

1. Social Acceptance For Live-In-Relationships On Rise, No Difference Between Married & Live In Couple Seeking Protection: Punjab & Haryana HC [Pardeep Singh & Anr. v. State of Haryana & Ors.]

A Single Bench of Justice Sudhir Mittal held that an individual has the right to formalize the relationship with the partner through marriage or to adopt the non-formal approach of a live-in relationship. It observed thus in a matter pertaining to a live-in-relationship couple, who are both major and decided to enter into such a relationship as they are sure of their feelings for each other.

This significant observation from the Punjab & Haryana High Court came days after the High Court refused to grant protection to a live-in couple who allegedly faced threats from the girl's family since their elopement while noting that "if such protection as claimed is granted, the entire social fabric of the society would get disturbed.'"

Also Read: Live-In Relationships May Not Be Acceptable To All But Living Together Without Marrying Doesn't Constitute An Offence: P&H High Court

2. "Concern Is Regarding Preventive Steps": P& H HC Seeks Assistance Of States Of Punjab, Haryana, UT Of Chandigarh On Preventing Spread Of Black Fungus [Rishi v. State of Haryana & Ors.]

A division bench comprising of Justice Rajan Gupta and Justice Karamjit Singh sought assistance of States of Punjab, Haryana and UT of Chandigarh on the steps to curb the spread of black fungus after expressing concern regarding preventive steps. It also directed that the U.T. of Chandigarh may impress upon the private diagnostic centers to reduced price of HRCT test to Rs. 1800.

"It is evident that States of Punjab, Haryana and U.T. Chandigarh have placed orders for the supply of drug known as Amphotericin B for the treatment of patient stricken by black fungus. As per the stand of Government of India, five more companies have been licensed to manufacture the drug. At present eleven pharmaceutical companies have been licensed to manufacture the said drug. However, concern of this court is as regards preventive steps, if any, possible. State of Punjab, State of Haryana, U.T. Chandigarh and the Union of India would assist this court on the issue," it observed.

Rajasthan High Court

1. 'High-Handed, Vindictive' : Rajasthan HC Sets Aside ICAI's Decision To Cancel CA Student's Result For Questioning Exams During COVID [Risha Lodha v. Institute Of Chartered Accountants Of India & Anr.]

A Single Bench of Justice Dinesh Mehta set aside a 'vindictive' and 'extremely oppressive' decision of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI), cancelling the CA intermediate exam result of a 21-year old woman over alleged 'derogatory' remarks that she had made in an email to the institute.

The petitioner Risha Lodha had written an email to the ICAI President in November 2020 highlighting the situation of spread of Covid-19 and cautioned that if the examinations are held between November 21st and December 14th, 2020, it will lead to exponential growth in number of Covid cases. 'Do you not understand the seriousness of the situation or are you just ignorant?' she had written.

Stating that there is hardly anything in the e-mail for which it can be construed to be derogatory, the Court observed, "The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India is a statutory body. Hence, its decisions, actions and adjudication are supposed to conform to the standards expected of State or instrumentality of a State. A State that suppresses freedom of speech and inflicts or imposes extreme punishment treating an act or attempt of criticism and/or if it treats any suggestion for improvement as a challenge to its authority or supremacy is a State, that disregards rather violates fundamental rights of a citizens guaranteed by Article 19(1)(a) of our Constitution."

2. Rajasthan High Court Issues Notice On Plea Seeking 50 Lakh Ex-Gratia For Private Doctors Who Succumb To Covid-19 [Urmila v. State Of Rajasthan]

A Single Bench of Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma issued notice on a petition seeking ex-gratia payment of Rs. 50 Lacs to the families/ dependents of private doctors who succumb to Covid-19 infection.

The petition has been filed by the wife of a practicing Homeopathic doctor who succumbed to Covid-19 infection last year. She has stated that her husband was constrained to keep his Clinic functional throughout the lockdown in view of guidelines issued by the Centre as well as Rajasthan Government.

3. Rajasthan High Court Dismisses Asaram's Plea For Temporary Suspension Of Sentences, Jail Admin Directed To Ensure His Proper Treatment [Asharam @ Ashumal v. State of Rajasthan]

A Division Bench of Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Devendra Kachhawaha dismissed Self-styled godman & Life convict in a sexual assault case, Asaram's [or Asharam] plea for temporary suspension of sentences to pursue medical treatment.

It however, directed the district and jail administration to ensure that Asaram is provided with proper treatment, a nutritious diet, and a safe environment looking to his old age and medical condition.

The Court refused to grant him the relief, after the perusal of the rape convict's medical report submitted by the All India Institute of Medical Sciences in Jodhpur, where he was admitted after contracting COVID-19.

Also Read: Rajasthan High Court Summons Medical Report Of Asaram Bapu

1. Rajasthan High Court Restrains Police From Arresting Accused Charged With Offences Carrying Upto 3 Yrs Jail Term Till July 17, 2021 [Than Singh v. State of Rajasthan]

A Single Bench of Justice Pankaj Bhandari restrained the Police, for the time being, from making the arrest of the accused persons, who are charged with an offence where the maximum sentence is up to three years, till 17th July, 2021.

It directed the DGP to issue instructions to all the officers concerned in the State of Rajasthan not to make the arrest of persons in cases where the accused is charged under an offence where the maximum sentence extends up to three years and the offence is triable by First Class Magistrate.

Sikkim High Court

1. Up RT-PCR Testing; Bring Dedicated Ambulances, ICUs: Sikkim High Court Urges State To Take Steps On A War Footing Against Covid19 [In Re: Covid 19 Management]

A Division Bench of Chief Justice Jitendra Kumar Maheshwari and Justice Bhaskar Raj Pradhan urged the State Government take all necessary steps to augment its resources to meet the present situation of Covid-19 pandemic on a "war footing". It has taken note of various shortcomings in the medical resources in Sikkim.

Firstly, it has expressed concern over non-availability of testing Labs, purportedly due to lack of trained manpower, including Microbiologists. Secondly, the Court noted that there is no Covid ICU at District Hospitals in Namchi, Mangan and Singtam (near Gangtok) (capital cities of 3/4 districts in the State). So far as supply of medical Oxygen in the State is concerned, the Court has asked the Government to come out with a specific time line for setting up of proposed PSA (Pressure Swing Absorption) Oxygen Generating Plant and the proposal for obtaining D –Type and B-Type Oxygen Cylinders.

Telangana High Court

1. 'Polling Officers Infected With Covid-19 During Election Duty Be Treated At Par With Covid Warriors': Telangana High Court

A Division Bench of Chief Justice Hima Kohli and Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy observed that polling officers who have been infected with Covid-19 during the recent municipality elections in the State must be treated at par with Covid-warriors. It ordered that the State must ensure that such polling officers are given adequate medical treatment and all such benefits that are offered to a Covid-warrior.

2. 'Put Your House In Order': Telangana High Court Seeks Strategy To Combat Third Wave Of COVID19; Appreciates Lockdown Implementation By Police [R. Sameer Ahmed v. State of Telangana & Ors.]

A Division Bench of Chief Justice Hima Kohli and Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy asked the State Government to put its house in order and ensure that the directions issued by the Court with respect to Covid-19 issues in the State are complied with scrupulously.

It has also sought an affidavit giving detailed strategy that State has chalked out for dealing with 3rd wave of Covid-19 that is being predicted by health experts so that the Government is not caught Napping this time.

The Court has also issued notice to the National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority (NPPA), which is responsible for fixing the ceiling prices of non-scheduled drugs, some of which are being used for treatment of Covid-19. The Court proposes to include Covid-related medicines in national essentials medicines list maintained by NPPA.

3. 'RTPCR Report Not Mandatory In Emergency Cases': Telangana High Court On Reports Of Pregnant Woman Dying Due To Denial Of Hospital Admission [R. Sameer Ahmed v. State of Telangana & Ors.]

A Division Bench of Chief Justice Hima Kohli and Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy made it cleat that the Government Hospitals should not insist on RT-PCR reports of patients who are brought in an emergency situation. The remarks were made in view of reports of a pregnant woman, who died in an ambulance in Hyderabad on Friday, after being denied admission by several hospitals.

The Court has asked the State to ensure that citizens are not made to run for hospitals and to advise all Government hospitals to not insist on RTPCR report before admitting an emergency case for treatment. It has also asked the Director General of Police to ensure that all the Commissioners / Superintendents of Police and other Senior officers of Police sensitize their units at all filed levels, to ensure that anybody approaching them for admission to a Government hospital are given all necessary assistance to avoid loss of life.

Tripura High Court

1. COVID In Orphanages & Jails- Test Maximum Number Of Children & Ensure Health Of Jail Inmates Isn't Jeopardized: Tripura High Court To Govt [Court on its own motion]

While dealing with a PIL concerning the preparedness of the State-administration to deal with emerging Covid related situation, a Division Bench of Chief Justice Akil Kureshi and Justice S. Talapatra asked the State Government to ensure maximum possible testing of the children in Orphanages.

The Court further directed the State Government to ensure that the health of inmates is not jeopardized on account of being kept confined. It has also asked the state government to file an affidavit stating what is the current requirement of oxygen per day of the State of Tripura.

Uttarakhand High Court

1. 'First We Allowed Kumbh Mela, Now Char Dham': Uttarakhad High Court Says Govt Careless About COVID Protocols

A Division Bench of Chief Justice Raghvendra Singh Chauhan and Justice Alok Verma made critical observations against the State Government for allowing the 'Kumbh Mela', in which over 10 million devotees congregated over several weeks, during the COVID-19 pandemic. also slammed the state government for not informing about the steps to implement the SOP for Char Dham.

"First we allowed Kumbh Mela 2021 and now this is being done (Chardham). Please get a chopper and visit Char Dham, go to Kedarnath and Badrinath and see for yourself, what is happening," it orally observed.

2. Centre Maintaining 'Studied Silence' On Oxygen Related Reasonable Requests Of State 'Surprising': Uttarakhand High Court Seeks Explanation

Stressing that in a quasi-federal country like ours, it is the constitutional duty of the Central Government to rush to the rescue of the State Government, a Division Bench of Chief Justice Raghvendra Singh Chauhan and Justice Alok Verma recently called it 'surprising' that the Centre was maintaining 'studied silence' on State Govt's oxygen-related 'reasonable' demands. It observed that the least that is expected from the Central Government is to respond to the repeated letters being sent by the State Government.

Also Read: Oxygen Concentrators Not Classified As 'Essential Commodity': Uttarakhand High Court Seeks Centre, State Govt. Response

3. "Nepali Citizens In Uttarakhand Not Being Vaccinated For Not Possessing Aadhar Card": Uttarakhand HC Treats Letter As 'Letter Petition'

A Division Bench of Chief Justice Raghvendra Singh Chauhan and Justice Alok Kumar Verma treated a letter as a 'Letter petition' which a Law Student pointed out that while the vaccination process had commenced for battling the COVID-19 pandemic, many of the Nepali citizens couldn't be vaccinated as they have not been issued the Aadhar Card.

The Court received a letter from one Medha Pandey, Student of Faculty of Law, University of Delhi, pointing out that many of the Nepali citizens, who continue to stay in India, couldn't be vaccinated as they have not been issued the Aadhar Card, which is required for registration for the purpose of inoculation which is required for registration for the purpose of inoculation.


Next Story
Share it