High Courts Weekly Roundup

Week Commencing From June 30, 2020 To July 5, 2020 Allahabad High Court 1) 'Even If Will Not Enforceable For Being Void, It Is Not Non-Est & Is Admissible Under Evidence Act S. 32(5) To Decide Pedigree': Allahabad HC [Bhrigurasan & Ors. v. DDC & Ors.] Expounding the difference between the concepts of 'void' and 'non-est', the bench of Justice Salil Kumar Rai held, "Even if the Will is not enforceable for being void or may not be relevant under Section 32(6) of the Evidence Act, 1872 as a Will, it would still be admissible and relevant under Section 32(5) of the Act because the relevant recital in the Will is a statement in writing of the deceased and relates to the existence of a relationship by blood about which the testator had special means of knowledge." 2) Allahabad HC Allows Release Of Prisoners On Personal Bonds Due To Non-Availability Of Sureties During To Lockdown [Ankit Gupta v. State Of UP] The single bench of Justice Abdul Moin ordered that all the accused persons, whose bail applications had been allowed subsequent to March 15, 2020 but had not been released due to non-availability of sureties amid the lockdown, may be released on execution of personal bonds. 3) 'Competing Interest Of Health Of Students & Providing Nursing Services To Common Man': Allahabad HC Seeks UP Govt's Reply In Plea Against Reopening Of Nursing Educational Institutions [Narendra Kumar Singh & Ors. v. State of UP & Ors.] single bench of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra asked Additional Advocate General Manish Goel to seek instructions from the UP Government regarding re-opening of nursing educational institutions in the state. "Considering the competing interest of securing life/ health of students vis-a-vis requirement of providing nursing services to the common man, it would be appropriate to permit the learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State to obtain specific instructions in the matter from the department concerned," the court ordered. 4) Allahabad HC Quashes Non-Bailable Warrant Issued Against Former MP Jaya Prada For Allegedly Making False Statement During Elections [Jaya Prada Nahata v. State of UP & Anr.] Noting that the offences registered against her were non-cognizable, he single bench of Justice Om Prakash-VII quashed the non-bailable warrant (NBW) issued against former MP Jaya Prada by Additional District & Sessions Judge, Rampur in connection to a NCR registered against her for making derogatory remarks against her political opponents during the 2019 Lok Sabha elections. The court Bombay High Court 1) PIL Claims Stigma Attached To Transgender Community Worsened Post Lockdown; Bombay HC Directs Social Justice Dept To Address Concerns [Vikram Ramesh Shinde v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.] Division bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice MS Karnik directed the Principal Secretary to the State Social Justice and Special Assistance Department to consider and dispose of within a fortnight, concerns expressed by an activist working for the transgender community, regarding plight of the members specially after the lockdown and seeking directions for formulation of a welfare scheme for the 40,000 members of the community in the State. 2) Bombay HC Stays FIRs Against Arnab Goswami; Says 'No Prima Facie Case Against Him' [AR Goswami v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.] While granting relief to Republic TV Chief Arnab Goswami against allegations of communalization of the Palghar mob lynching incident, a division bench of Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice Riyaz Chagla observed that "prima facie no case was made out against him". The Court thus suspended proceedings in two FIRs filed against him. Also Read: Cannot Have The Spectacle Of A Damocles Sword Hanging Over A Journalist's Head While Conducting Public Debate; Bombay HC 3) PIL Claims Stigma Attached To Transgender Community Worsened Post Lockdown; Bombay HC Directs Social Justice Dept To Address Concerns [Vikram Ramesh Shinde v. State of Maharashtra & Ors] Division bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice MS Karnik directed the Principal Secretary to the State Social Justice and Special Assistance Department to consider and dispose of within a fortnight, concerns expressed by an activist working for the transgender community, regarding plight of the members specially after the lockdown and seeking directions for formulation of a welfare scheme for the 40,000 members of the community in the State. 4) 'Immediately Test Inmates Who Show Signs Of Discomfort' : Bombay HC Disposes Of PILs After State Accepts Suggestions For Improving Prison Facilities [People's Union for Civil Liberties v. State of Maharashtra & Ors] A division bench comprising Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice MS Karnik disposed of a batch of PILs raising concerns regarding lack of facilities for proper treatment of prisoners lodged in various...

High Courts Weekly Roundup

Akshita Saxena

Tags