High Courts Weekly Roundup [Nov 23 – Nov 29]

Allahabad High Court 1. "Right To Choose A Partner Of Choice A Fundamental Right": Allahabad High Court Says The Judgments Which Held "Conversion For The Purpose Of Marriage Only" Not Good Law [Salamat Ansari & Ors. v.State of UP & Ors. ] A Bench of Justice Pankaj Naqvi and Justice Vivek Agarwal specifically observed that "Right to live with a person of his/her choice irrespective of religion professed by them, is intrinsic to right to life and personal liberty." It remarked, "We fail to understand that if the law permits two persons even of the same sex to live together peacefully then neither any individual nor a family nor even the state can have an objection to the relationship of two major individuals who out of their own free will are living together." The Bench held that a Single Judge's recent order stating that conversion only for the purpose of marriage is not unacceptable, is bad in law. Also Read: Plea In Supreme Court Against Allahabad HC Order Which Denied Protection To Couple Holding That Conversion For The Purpose Of Marriage Unacceptable Also Read: UP Governor Promulgates Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Ordinance 2020 2. 'ICMR Confident About Availability Of Covid Vaccine In Near Future': Allahabad High Court Orders 24x7 Vigilance For Wearing Of Masks In 6 Cities [In-Re Inhuman Condition At Quarantine Centres…] A Division Bench of Justices Siddhartha Varma and Ajit Kumar ordered the Police authorities to ensure that people moving in public spaces mandatorily wear masks, to prevent the spread of Covid-19 virus. The order states, "The Court is of the view that vigilance viz-a-viz wearing of masks should continue for at least 30 more days. On the next date fixed the learned Additional Advocate General may also inform regarding the surveillance which would be done by Drones. This surveillance should be done by the available drones in crowded areas on a 24 x 7 basis. The Bench also spoke to Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) which assured the COurt that a vaccine to prevent further spread of the virus shall be available in the 'near future'. 3. Health Hazards Of Online Classes: Allahabad High Court Seeks Response On Plea For Promotion Of Students Upto Class VIII Without Exams [Masoom Bachpan Foundation v. State of UP & Ors.] A Division Bench comprising of Chief Justice Govind Mathur and Justice Siddhartha Varma asked the relevant government authority to respond to a plea seeking "no examination system" for promotion of students upto 8th standard, until physical classes resume. The plea has been filed in the backdrop of 'health hazards' among children caused due to online classes and prolonged exposure to electromagnetic waves emitted by laptop/ computer/ mobile screens. Also Read: PIL In SC Seeks Order To Stop Online Classes Until Formulation Of Comprehensive Guidelines For Hosting In Encrypted And Safeguarded Manner 4. Demolition Of Advocates' Chambers In Lucknow Without Prior Notice: Allahabad High Court Seeks Govt's Response On Rehabilitation Scheme [Adv. Anand Kumar Shukla & Ors. v. State of UP & Ors.] A Division Bench of Justices Pankaj Mithal and Manish Kumar asked the UP Government to file an affidavit indicating the steps taken by it to rehabilitate the lawyers whose chambers were recently demolished, allegedly without any prior notice. The direction was made by in a plea filed by several Advocates whose chambers in the Sadar Tehsil at Lucknow were demolished all of a sudden on November 16, 2020. The Court observed that even the Standing Counsel was not in a position to assign any reason as to why the chambers had been demolished and whether any notice or opportunity of hearing was given to the lawyers before undertaking the exercise of demolition. In view thereof, it ordered the Standing Counsel to obtain necessary instructions in the matter within two weeks, and file a counter affidavit. 5. Mass Disaster/Pandemic May Severely Obstruct Our Life But Doors Of Courts Must Remain Open For Protection Of Article 21: Allahabad High Court [Abhishek Srivastava v. State of UP] While observing that "non-performance of duty owing to holidays is a serious dereliction of duty on the part of the Session Judges/magistrates", a Bench of Justice Attau Rahman Masoodi rapped the Magistrates/Session Judges from the district Lucknow/Hardoi and the State for failure to perform its duty and rejecting the Petitioners' plea for default bail under Section 167 of CrPC. The Court specifically observed, "A mass disaster or Pandemic may severely obstruct our life and governing systems in many ways but the doors of the courts of law must remain open for the protection of Article 21 of the Constitution of India." 6. Minor Missing Since 2017: It Shows Negligent Attitude And Incompetence Of UP Police In Cases Of Missing Children: Allahabad High Court [Anchal @ ...

High Courts Weekly Roundup [Nov 23 – Nov 29]

Akshita Saxena

Tags