- Home
- /
- News Updates
- /
- High Courts Weekly Roundup...
High Courts Weekly Roundup [November 22, 2021 To November 28, 2021]
LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK
28 Nov 2021 2:39 PM GMT
![High Courts Weekly Roundup [November 22, 2021 To November 28, 2021]](https://www.livelaw.in/h-upload/2021/05/09/750x450_393155-high-courts-weekly-roundup.jpg "High Courts Weekly Roundup [November 22, 2021 To November 28, 2021]")
Allahabad High Court1. Oral Sex With 10-Yr-Old Boy Not An 'Aggravated Sexual Assault' But 'Penetrative Sexual Assault' Under POCSO Act: Allahabad High Court [Sonu Kushwaha v. State of Uttar Pradesh] While dealing with the appeal of a POCSO Convict, accused of committing oral sex with a 10-year-old boy, the High Court observed that putting the penis into the mouth does not fall in...
Allahabad High Court
1. Oral Sex With 10-Yr-Old Boy Not An 'Aggravated Sexual Assault' But 'Penetrative Sexual Assault' Under POCSO Act: Allahabad High Court [Sonu Kushwaha v. State of Uttar Pradesh]
While dealing with the appeal of a POCSO Convict, accused of committing oral sex with a 10-year-old boy, the High Court observed that putting the penis into the mouth does not fall in the category of aggravated sexual assault or sexual assault. It comes into the category of penetrative sexual assault which is punishable under Section 4 of the POCSO Act. Pursuant to the perusal of the specific provisions of the POCSO Act, the Bench of Justice Anil Kumar Ojha observed that the Act [putting a penis inside the mouth of a child] falls under the category of 'penetrative' sexual assault punishable under Section 4 of the POCSO Act 2012.
2. "Evidence Of Victim Being Last Seen With Accused Not Convincing": Allahabad HC Acquits Man Facing Death Penalty In Minor Murder, Rape Case [Bal Govind Alias Govinda v. State of U.P.]
The High Court acquitted a man convicted for raping and murdering a minor girl and facing the death penalty, having found the evidence of the deceased being last seen with the accused-appellant before the alleged incident as not convincing. Importantly, the Bench of Justice Manoj Misra and Justice Sameer Jain also observed that there must have been immense pressure on the police to solve the case and opined that the accused-appellant was named on mere suspicion, and not on evidence, to solve the case.
The High Court (Lucknow Bench) directed Uttar Pradesh Government authorities to take immediate steps for change of name and gender of a Transgender in her educational mark-sheets and certificates.The Bench of Justice Vivek Chaudhary also ordered the issuance of fresh changed mark sheets and certificates to her, as per the certificate issued by the District Magistrate to the petitioner.
The High Court has granted its sanction to the CBI to prosecute its former Judge, Justice SN Shukla, in the medical college bribery case, reported the NDTV.The CBI has alleged that Justice Shukla took illegal gratification for passing a favourable order in matter regarding Prasad Institute of Medical Science, Lucknow.With this sanction, CBI can now moved ahead and prosecute Justice SN Shukla.
Informing the High Court that Atiq-ur-Rehman, a UAPA Accused has been admitted to the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) for his medical treatment, the Uttar Pradesh Government has tendered an unconditional and unqualified apology in the High Court.Essentially, in compliance with the High Court's November 23rd Order, the Jailor, District Jail, Mathura today filed an affidavit informing the Court that Rehman has been admitted to AIIMS on November 24th and he is presently under the supervision of Doctors of AIIMS, Delhi.
The High Court asked the Uttar Pradesh Government as to how long would it take to provide the arrangements with regard to security, biometric, and CCTV cameras in respect of all the Judgeships in the State of Uttar Pradesh.Essentially, the query was raised by the Bench of Justice Suneet Kumar and Justice Samit Gopal in a suo moto PIL titled In Re Suo Moto Relating To Security And Protection In All Court Campuses In The State Of U.P., initiated after the incident of open firing in Bijnor district court.
Bombay High Court
1. Nawab Malik Approaches Division Bench Seeking To Quash Single Judge's Ad-Interim Order
Nationalist Congress Party leader and Maharashtra Minister Nawab Malik has approached the division bench and sought to quash the single judge's ad-interim order with consent of NCB Zonal Director Sameer Wankhede's father Dhyandev, while continuing with his statement to not tweet anything against the family.Malik's Advocate, Karl Tamboly, tendered draft consent terms before the division bench of Justices SJ Kathawalla and Milind Jadhav on Friday and pleaded that the case be remanded back to the single judge as per the current assignment and be heard afresh.
The High Court took exception to the 'degrading' and 'unscientific' "two-finger" test performed by doctors of the largest Maharashtra state-run hospital on one of the two survivors in the 2013 Shakti Mill gang rape case.
"We hope that the State of Maharashtra would take necessary steps to shun all such unscientific and heavily criticized "two finger tests". It appears that the Government of Maharashtra has formulated some guidelines. We expect and hope that the State will strictly adhere to the same," the court observed.
3. Rape-Murder Of 3-Yr-Old Girl- "Crime Smacks Of Degradation Of A Girl Child": Bombay High Court Confirms Death Sentence[The State of Maharashtra vs. RamkiratMunilal Goud]
The High Court confirmed the death sentence awarded to a convict who raped and murdered a 3 year 9 months old girl, who had ventured out of her house to play with her dog.
Confirming the death sentence awarded by Special POCSO Judge, Thane, the Bench of Justice Sadhana S. Jadhav and Justice Prithviraj K. Chavan observed thus:
"A bud of rose was crushed before it bloomed, a kite was torn when about to fly, the budding flower was crushed to ashes and the kite took the soul away."
This is yet another sad saga of a three-year-old girl child, who was playing with her little dog, when she was noticed by a knave man who was driven by a desire of lust upon the sight of a little happy harmless child playing in her own world."
4. "Not Death, But Every Day The Rising Sun Would Remind Them Of The Barbaric Acts Committed By Them": Bombay High Court On Commuting Death Sentence In Shakti Mills GangRape [The State of Maharashtra v. Vijay Mohad Jadhav &Ors.]
Setting aside the death penalty of three convicts in the 2013 Shakti Mills gang rape case the Bombay High Court observed that while rape is a "heinous offence" punishments could not simply be based on "public outcry" and it was the court's duty to view cases "dispassionately" and ensure procedure under law is followed.The court thus set aside the first death sentence under section 376E of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The section provides for life imprisonment or death for repeat offenders of rape and was added to the IPC through the Criminal (Law) Amendment Act 2013.
After a division bench of the Bombay High Court took strong exception to NCP leader and Maharashtra Minister Nawab Malik's tweets and public statements against NCB officer Sameer Wankhede and his family, Malik undertook not to make public statements against them till December 9.
"What is this media publicity he wants everyday? Especially after his son-in-laws arrest… He is a Minister, does it befit him to do all this?," Justice Kathawalla said after being informed that Malik tweeted without even filing an official complaint against the Wankhedes.
The High Court commuted to life imprisonment the death penalty awarded to three repeat offenders in connection with the gang-rape of a photo-journalist inside Mumbai's defunct Shakti Mills compound, in 2013.Justices SS Jadhav and Prithviraj Chavan pronounced the order.
The court held that the photojournalists' case cannot be considered their second offence as both cases were tried simultaneously. And therefore conviction under 376(E) would not sustain.
Four and a half months after Father Stan Swamy's demise, the Bombay High Court has allowed the Jesuits to initiate separate proceedings to clear the odium attached to his name and reputation because of the Bhima Koregaon – Elgar Parishad case.A division bench of Justices Nitin Jamdar and Sarang Kotwal disposed of as withdrawn Swamy's bail appeal and another petition challenging his prosecution under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.
8. Bombay High Court Rejects Tarun Tejpal's Plea For In-Camera Hearing Of Rape Case Appeal
The High Court at Goa rejected an application moved by journalist Tarun Tejpal under Section 327 CrPC for conducting hearings through in-camera proceedings against his acquittal in a 2013 rape case. Tejpal, co-founder and former Editor-in-Chief of Tehelka Magazine, was acquitted of all charges on May 21 by a fast track court in Mapusa, Goa. He was accused of forcing himself on his junior colleague inside an elevator of the Grand Hyatt, Bambolim, Goa on November 7 and 8, 2013, during the magazine's official event - the THiNK 13 festival. In her 527-page judgement, Special Judge Kshama Joshi had extensively commented on the woman's non-rape victim like behaviour and faulty investigation to grant Tejpal the benefit of the doubt.
9. Sameer Wankhede Vs Nawab Malik Defamation Suit- "Public Have Right To Examine And Comment On Actions Of Public Officials, After Reasonable Verification Of Facts": Bombay HC[DhyandevKachruji Wankhede v. Nawab Malik]
Maharashtra Cabinet Minister Nawab Malik has raised very important issues concerning the acts and conduct of NCB officer Sameer Wankhede who is a public official, the Bombay High Court said in its detailed order refusing ad-interim relief in the defamation suit filed by Dhyandev Wankhede. The court refused to temporarily restrain Malik from making public statements or social media posts against NCB's Zonal Director Sameer Wankhede and his family.
Calcutta High Court
1. Calcutta High Court Issues Notice On Plea Challenging Centre's Power To Decide Jurisdiction of Border Security Force[Sayan Banerjee v. Union of India]
The High Court issued notice on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition challenging the Central government's power to decide the jurisdiction of the Border Security Force (BSF). The petition challenges Section 139(1) of the Border Security Force Act, 1968 (BSF Act) for being ultra vires to the Constitution to the extent that it provides 'unbridled, unrestricted and arbitrary' powers to the Central government for fixing the territorial jurisdiction of the BSF.
2. No Right To Get Salary': Calcutta HC Orders State Gov To Stop Payment Of Salary To Illegally Appointed 'Group-D' Non-Teaching Staff[Sandeep Prasad &Ors v. State of West Bengal &Ors]
The High Court ordered the West Bengal Central School Service Commission to immediately stop the payment of salary to the 25 appointees of Group-D' (non-teaching staff) who had been allegedly been appointed after the expiration of the panel prepared for giving appointments to the post of Group-D in the Education Department. The Court was adjudicating upon a batch of petitions contending alleged irregularities in the appointment of 'Group-C' and 'Group-D' (non-teaching staff) in sponsored Secondary and Higher Secondary schools under the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education (WBBSE) on the purported recommendation by the West Bengal Central School Service Commission (WBSSC).
3. Rejection Of Muslim Women's Candidature For Hijab Clad Photos: Calcutta HC Makes Result Of WB Police Recruitment Process Subject To Its Orders[Hapija Khatun &Ors v. State of West Bengal &Ors]
Following rejection of candidatures of several Muslim women from the West Bengal Police Recruitment process for annexing hijab (headscarf) clad photographs in their application forms, the Calcutta High Court on Monday made it clear that the recruitment process will be subject to its orders in the petition filed by aggrieved candidates."The petitioners question the rejection of their candidature for having applied with their respective photographs with head gear (hijab) as part of their religious practice when the face in the photograph is clear for necessary identification," Justice Arindam Mukherjee noted at the outset.
The High Court stayed a Single Bench order for 3 weeks wherein a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe had been ordered into the alleged irregularities in the appointment of 'Group-C' and 'Group-D' (non-teaching staff) in sponsored Secondary and Higher Secondary schools under the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education (WBBSE) on the purported recommendation by the West Bengal Central School Service Commission (WBSSC).
The West Bengal government moved the High Court challenging a Single Bench order wherein a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe was ordered into the alleged irregularities in the appointment of 'Group-C' and 'Group-D' (non-teaching staff) in sponsored Secondary and Higher Secondary schools under the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education (WBBSE) on the purported recommendation by the West Bengal Central School Service Commission (WBSSC).
6. Calcutta High Court Seeks State Gov's Response On Plea Alleging Irregularities In 'Swasthya Sathi' Health Scheme[People For Better Treatment (PBT) v. State of West Bengal]
The High Court sought response from the West Bengal government on the medical services provided under its 'Swasthya Sathi' scheme. 'Swasthya Sathi' scheme is a subsidized state government insurance plan that was launched in the year 2016 and offers health coverage for secondary and tertiary care up to Rs 5 lakh per annum per family.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice Prakash Shrivastava and Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj was adjudicating upon a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition moved by Kunal Saha, a US- based doctor and chairman of the organization People for Better Treatment alleging malpractices and irregularities in the implementation of the scheme. It was contended that many patients did not get any financial assistance despite applying for the scheme.
7. Corruption Writ Large': Calcutta High Court Orders CBI Probe Into Irregularities In Non-Teaching Staff Appointments In WB Gov Sponsored Schools[Sandeep Prasad &Ors v. State of W. B. &Ors]
The High Court ordered the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to conduct a preliminary inquiry into the alleged irregularities in the appointment of 'Group-C' and 'Group-D' (non-teaching staff) in sponsored Secondary and Higher Secondary schools under the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education (WBBSE) on the purported recommendation by the West Bengal Central School Service Commission.
Chhattisgarh High Court
A writ petition has been moved before the Chhattisgarh High Court challenging the 'senior designation' conferred on 12 advocates alleging that the decision was made by applying the pick and choose method which suffers from biases, favoritism, nepotism and is against the settled principles of law.Chhattisgarh High Court Confers 'Senior Designation' On 12 Advocates
The plea has been moved by Badshah Prasad Singh, an advocate by profession, who himself applied in the process and gave the interview, however, he wasn't chosen for the 'senior' advocate designation.
Delhi High Court
1. Impossible To Navigate Through Applications': Delhi HC Asks Registry To Issue Practice Directions For Maintaining Records Of Company Matters[Assets Care & Reconstruction Enterprise Ltd. v. M/S Crew B.O.S Products Ltd]
The High Court has recently directed it's Registry to take steps for ensuring that separate record of pending as well as disposed of applications in company matters is maintained in order to save Court's time. Justice C Hari Shankar, while dealing with a company matter, expressed his concern over the fact that that applications and order sheets in such cases run into several volumes and that the Applications which are disposed of long back and no longer survive for consideration were being shown on the electronic files making it an impossible task to navigate through the applications.
"In the opinion of this Court, one solution to this problem- which otherwise will become insurmountable – is that all applications which stand disposed of should be placed in a separate folder and only those applications should be reflected in the main folder which are still pending. The Registry is directed to take steps as expeditiously as possible to do this, so that Court time is not wasted unnecessarily," the Court said.
2. An Advocate Can't Be Both Power Of Attorney Holder Of Client & His Counsel: Delhi High Court[Anil Kumar And Anr v. Amit And Other Connected Matters]
The High Court has observed that the practice of advocates acting as power of attorney holders of their clients and also as advocates in the matter, is contrary to the provisions of the Advocates Act, 1961.Observing that the said aspect has to be scrupulously ensured by all the Trial Courts in the city, Justice Pratibha M Singh directed that a copy of the order is circulated to all the lower courts by the Registry.
3. "Directions Fallen On Deaf Ears": Delhi High Court Expresses Displeasure On Municipal Corporations' Failure To Control Dengue[SDMC v. GNCTD]
The High Court expressed displeasure on the failure of municipal corporations to control the surge of vector borne diseases like Dengue, malaria and Chikungunya in the national capital, observing that it's earlier directions to control the same had fallen on deaf ears.
A division bench of Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Jasmeet Singh was dealing with a petition filed by South Delhi Municipal Corporation assailing the Delhi Government's decision dated 03.01.2019 directing retrospective recovery of grants in aid on the SDMC and other local bodies with effect from 01.04.2016 as being arbitrary and void.
4. High Court Seeks Delhi Govt's Stand On Plea Over Non-Payment Of Margin Amount To Fair Price Shop Owners As Per National Food Security Act[Delhi Ration Dealers Union &Ors V. Government Of Nct Of Delhi &Anr]
The High Court sought the stand of the Delhi Government in a plea against non-payment of margin amount to fair price shop owners as per the mandate of the National Food Security Act, 2013.Justice Yashwant Varma asked the counsel appearing for the Delhi Government to take instructions in the petition filed by Delhi Ration Dealers Union, comprised of more than 700 fair price shop owners, through Advocates Yash Aggarwal and Chitrakshi.
5. Fair Price Shops Will Continue To Exist In Doorstep Ration Delivery Scheme: Delhi Govt Tells High Court[Delhi Sarkari Ration Dealers Sangh Delhi V. Commissioner Food And Supplies Govt Of Nct Of Delhi &Ors.]
The Delhi Government has informed the Delhi High Court that the fair price shops will continue to exist in its proposed Doorstep Ration Delivery Scheme.
"Beneficiaries who opt for doorstep delivery but miss the scheduled delivery or wish to collect the packages SFAs on their own will be able to collect it from the Circle level FPS set up by the Delhi Consumer's Cooperative Wholesale Store Ltd. (DCCWS). Beneficiaries who do not opt for home delivery will be able to collect their dry ration from the existing FPS. Therefore, it is a misconception that the GNCTD is seeking to do away with FPS," the Delhi Government has informed.
6. Arrest On Mere Allegations Has Potential To Destroy Reputation Of An Individual, Necessary To Apply Great Care At Pre-Conviction Stage: Delhi HC[Radhe Shyam v. State]
The High Court has recently observed that the arrest of a person based on mere allegations has the potential to destroy his reputation and thus it is necessary to apply great care while dealing with arrest at a pre-conviction stage.
Justice Subramonium Prasad observed so while granting anticipatory bail to one Radhe Shyam in an FIR filed by a woman working in the HR department of his company alleging that he induced and pressurize her and other female employees to have physical relations with him.
7. Delhi High Court Stays Summons Issued To BJP MLA Vijender Gupta In Criminal Defamation Case By AAP's Kailash Gahlot[Vijender Gupta v. State of NCT of Delhi &Anr.]
The High Court stayed a trial court order by which summons was issued to BJP MLA Vijender Gupta in a criminal defamation case filed by Delhi Cabinet Minister Kailash Gahlot for allegedly making defamatory remarks about him over procurement of 1,000 low-floor buses.
Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri sought response of Gahlot on Gupta's plea seeking quashing of the summoning order.
8. Scrutiny, Inspection & Analysis A Must While Determining Age Of Accused Under JJ Act': Delhi High Court On Probable Manipulation Of Documents[Vishal @ Johny V. State (Nct Of Delhi)]
The High Court observed that scrutiny, inspection and analysis is a must while examining the question of determination of age of the accused under Juvenile Justice Act, 2015.
Justice Chandra Dhari Singh added that the issue of determination of age is one that requires to be given due significance and forethought, especially in cases where the Accused is close to the borderline age to be declared as a juvenile.
9. "Nobody Asked Them To Read It": Delhi High Court Dismisses Plea Against Salman Khurshid's Book 'Sunrise Over Ayodhya'[Vineet Jindal v. Union of India &Ors.]
The High Court dismissed a plea seeking directions to stop the publication and sale of the book "Sunrise Over Ayodhya" written by Congress Leader and Former Union Minister Salman Khurshid.
"Ask people not to buy the book or read it," Justice Yashwant Varma said while dismissing the petition filed by Advocate Vineet Jindal through Advocate Raj Kishor Choudhary, alleging that Khurshid had compared Hindutva to groups like ISIS and BOKO HARAM in his book.
Also Read: High Court Asks Delhi Police To File Latest Report On Investigation Progress In Riots Cases
10. Is 'Denial Of Sex' Sufficient Cause To Condone 1Yr Waiting Period For Filing Divorce Under Hindu Marriage Act? Delhi High Court To Examine[Rishu Aggarwal V. Mohit Goyal]
The High Court is set to examine whether denial of sex by married parties to each other itself is sufficient to cause 'exceptional hardship' under Section 14 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, so as to waive off the one year waiting period for filing a divorce petition. Observing that the issue needs consideration, Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Jasmeet Singh appointed Senior Advocate Pritesh Kapur as the Amicus Curiae in the matter.
The High Court sentenced a man to simple imprisonment for a period of three months including imposition of a fine of Rs. 2000 for wilful disobedience of repeated Court directions in a matrimonial dispute requiring him to pay maintenance to his wife.
Observing that the actions or omissions of the husband in choosing to show complete disregard to the orders of the Court cannot be countenanced, Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Jasmeet Singh said that if such action is permitted, it will lead to anarchy and the Rule of Law would become a casualty and that the orders of the Courts would be taken lightly and breached at the own sweet will of the individual concerned.
12. No Fairness In Trial If Investigating Agency Enters Domain Of Prosecution': Delhi Govt On LG's Decision Appointing Prosecutors At Police Recommendation[GNCTD v. LG]
The High Court granted further time to the Lieutenant Governor for filing response to a petition filed by Delhi Government against his order appointing a panel of police chosen lawyers as special public prosecutors to argue cases related to Farmers Protest and Delhi Riots.
"LG has gone completely contrary to the Supreme Court judgment and made the impugned appointments," Senior Advocate Rahul Mehra appearing for GNCTD argued today.
The High Court expressed strong displeasure over the inaction of North Delhi Municipal Corporation in preventing unauthorized constructions within its jurisdiction.
"Are your officers who are supposed to be on ground sleeping during their job?" Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva orally remarked while hearing the plea filed by one Asha Jain, aggrieved by erection of an illegal building in the area.
14. "He Deserves 'Super Nobel Prize'": ASG Comments About Petitioner Seeking Govt Grant To Implement His Ideas For Clean Environment[Trilok Goyal v. Union of India]
"I think he deserves a "super nobel prize" before we give him any grant," Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma commented today about a petitioner seeking review of a Delhi High Court's order dismissing his plea for grant of ₹70,000 crore from the Centre for implementing his project to clean environment.
When the matter came up for hearing, the Division Bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh turned to the ASG who was appearing in another matter and asked,
"What do you think of this plea Mr. ASG? The petitioner claims that he has such nice plan for cleaning the air and water of this entire country that your Government does not have."
The Bench further informed the ASG that the original petition was dismissed by it with ₹50,000 cost for "wasting judicial resources".
15. What Is It Supposed To Look Like?': Delhi High Court Asks Centre, SDMC To Indicate Technical Specifications Of 'Tower On Wheels'[Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Co. Ltd. v. Secretary,Department of Financial Services &Ors.]
The High Court has granted six weeks time to the Central Government for coming up with the Rules to deal with high value cases, where the recovery is in excess of Rs. 100 crores in relation to the Debt Recovery Tribunals.
Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Jasmeet Singh also directed the Secretary, Department of Financial Services to communicate to all the Non Banking Financial Compnies, Asset Reconstruction companies, DRTs, DRATs, Indian Bank Association and RBI, the suggestions and objections uploaded on the Ministry's website in order to enable them to access the same and to contribute in the process.
16. 'Environment Impact Assessment' Draft Translated In 22 Vernacular Languages: Centre Tells Delhi High Court[Vikrant Tongad v. UOI]
The Central Government informed the Court that it has translated the Draft EIA (Environment Impact Assessment) in 22 vernacular languages.
A bench comprising of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Prateek Jalan was dealing with a revision petition filed by the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change against the order passed by the court on June 30, whereby the Ministry was directed to extend the deadline for seeking public comments on the Draft Environment Impact Assessment Policy 2020.
17. Whether Adequate Measures Provided In Child Care Homes To Ensure Children Don't Escape? Delhi HC To Issue Directions For Better Functioning[Rajesh Kumar v. State (Govt. Of NCT Of Delhi) &Ors.]
The Court is set to issue directions for better functioning of child care institutions in the city, following reported incidents of escape/ kidnapping from one such institution.
Justice Subramonium Prasad was dealing with a plea seeking a magisterial enquiry into an incident concerning escape of five minor girls in March this year from a children home at Bakhtawarpur and other similar incidents reported in the past.
18. What Does He Know?' : Delhi High Court Slams 19-Year Old Petitioner Who Alleged SEBI Irregularities In IPO Approvals [Ketan Kumar v. SEBI &Anr.]The Court slammed a petitioner for alleging that the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) is approving IPOs (initial public offerings) in a hasty manner, without proper scrutiny.
Noting that the Petitioner, who sought the constitution of a fresh body for IPO approvals, was aged merely 19 years and there was little to no likelihood of his understanding the complexities of a securities market, the Division Bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh remarked,
"We want to cross examine this boy. If we ask you one question Mr. counsel, you'll not be able to answer. How will this 19 years old boy know anything?"
19. "Concretization Of Trees Is Worst Kind Of Human Rights Abuse, You Are Changing People's Neighbourhood": Delhi High Court Slams SDMC[Bhavreen Kandhari V. Gyanesh Bharti &Ors]
The Court pulled up the South Delhi Municipal Corporation over the issue of concretization of trees in the national capital, observing that it amounts to worst kind of human rights abuse for the reason that it changes the whole environment of people.
Justice Najmi Waziri was dealing with a plea highlighting the inaction of the authorities for preservation of trees in city's Vasant Vihar area.
Gujarat High Court
The Court disposed of a plea filed by Mahatma Gandhi's great-grandson Tushar Gandhi challenging the decision of the Gujarat government to revamp/redevelop Sabarmati Ashram in Ahmedabad at the estimated cost of ₹1,200-crore.
The Bench of Chief Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice Ashutosh J. Shastri observed that all the fears and apprehensions of the Petitioner stood allayed in the Order of the Government itself.
Gauhati High Court
1. Foreigners' Tribunal Declares 5 Members Of A Family 'Foreigners' As They Failed To Appear Before It: Gauhati HC Sets Aside Order[Rajendra Das and others v. The Union of India]
The Court set aside an order/opinion of the Foreigners Tribunal declaring a man and his family members as 'Foreigner' as the head of the family failed to appear before the Tribunal after being served notice and also did not file a written statement after seeking time.
The Bench of Justice Malasri Nandi and Justice N. Kotiswar Singh set aside the ex-parte order passed by the Tribunal as it noted that the Order would have a cascading effect on other members of his family i.e. his wife and minor children, as the rest of the family members are dependent on the petitioner No.1 (who failed to appear before the tribunal).
Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court
1. Employer Is Justified In Excluding Candidates With Higher Qualification For Recruitment To A Particular Post: J&K&L High Court[Firdous Ahmad Ganai v. State of JK &Ors]
The Court has recently observed that any higher qualification than the one prescribed for a particular post may not be a suitable qualification and that the employer, in its wisdom, is justified in excluding candidates with higher qualification from the ambit of selection.
The Bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar and Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey observed that the laying down of the criteria of the minimum and the maximum qualification for the Class-IV post as matric and 10+2, respectively, is neither irrational, unreasonable nor arbitrary
Karnataka High Court
1. Risking Money By Betting On 'Unknown Result' Of A Game Of Skill Amounts To Wagering: State Tells Karnataka High Court[All India Gaming Federation v. State Of Karnataka]
The government submitted before the High Court that betting on the outcome of a game, whether of chance or of skill, amounts to 'wagering' since such outcome is not known.
"Wagering or betting, to put it in simple words is collection or soliciting bet from someone or I receive or distribute the prices either in money or otherwise, then wagering and betting is done. If anybody risks their money by soliciting or betting on an unknown result of an event, either in money or otherwise amounts to wagering and betting. Unknown result can be a game of chance or game of skill," submitted Advocate General Prabhuling K Navadgi while opposing the pleas challenging constitutional validity of the Karnataka Police (Amendment) Act 2021, by which the state government has banned all online gaming.
2. Karnataka High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail To Medical Representative Accused Of Black Marketing Remdesivir During Covid-19[Chetan C V v. State of Karnataka]
The Court recently dismissed an application for anticipatory bail filed by a Medical Representative who is charged for black marketing of remdesivir injections during the second wave of Covid-19 in the month of May. Justice K Natarajan while dismissing the plea filed by Chetan CV said,
"It cannot be said that it is a simple offence as it was disaster time and cheated the public at large and also created panic in the public. The petitioner is required for custodial interrogation. Hence, he is not entitled to anticipatory bail."
3. In Heinous Offence Of Rape, Proceedings Cannot Be Quashed Even If Parties Have Reached Settlement: Karnataka High Court[Anil S/o VenkappaKushalkar v. State of Karnataka]
The Court recently held that in a case of heinous offence of rape, even if the parties have settled the dispute, the same cannot be accepted and the proceedings cannot be quashed since it will have serious impact on the society.
Justice HP Sandesh while rejecting the petition filed by a couple said,
"Considering the object and scope of special enactment of POCSO Act, exercising power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, does not arise."
The Court by way of interim relief stayed the operation, execution and all further proceedings which may be initiated against Bengaluru Police Commissioner Kamal Pant and two other police officers, pursuant to the order dated November 23, passed by the Magistrate court.
Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate court had directed the Cubbon park police to investigate a private complaint filed against them (police officers) under section 156 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) for allegedly delaying registration of First Information Report in the alleged sex CD scandal involving former Minister Ramesh Jarkiholi.
5. Rules Framed For Inquiry & Counselling In Cases Of Surrender Of Children By Parents: State Tells Karnataka High Court[Letzkit Foundation v. The State of Karnataka]
The government informed the High Court that it has framed rules under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, for providing the procedure for inquiry and counselling to be followed by Child Welfare Committees, in cases of surrender of a child by parents/ guardians to the Committee.
A division bench of Justice B.Veerappa and Justice K S Hemalekha was informed that the cabinet is likely to decide on the same within four weeks.
6. Right Of A Woman To Exercise Her Reproductive Choice Is A Dimension Of Personal Liberty Under Article 21: Karnataka High Court[Kumari D v. State of Karnataka]
The Court has said that the right of a woman to exercise her reproductive choice is a dimension of "personal liberty" as understood under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and she has a sacrosanct right to have her bodily integrity protected.
A single judge bench of Justice N S Sanjay Gowda said that,
"The act of forcing a woman to bear with an unwanted intrusion on her body and endure the consequences of that intrusion would be a clear transgression of her inviolable fundamental right of "personal liberty" guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution."
7. Karnataka High Court Permits KSLU To Conduct Intermediate Semester Examination For LLB Students[Karnataka State Law University v. Mr Naveen Kumar H C]
The Court permitted Karnataka State Law University (KSLU), to hold the intermediate semester examination for LLB students. However, the results of the examinations shall be subject to further orders of the court.
A division bench of Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi and Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum while hearing an intra-court appeal filed by the University challenging the interim order passed on November 12, whereby, as an interim measure, the Single Judge stayed the impugned circular dated 17.09.2021 and also all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned circulars till the next date of listing. The University examinations was scheduled to be held from November 15.
Kerala High Court
1. Kerala High Court Admits Plea Challenging Prime Minister's Photo On Vaccination Certificate; Notice Issued To Centre, State[Peter Myaliparampil v. Union of India &Anr.]
The Court admitted the plea challenging the photograph of Prime Minister Narendra Modi being affixed on the vaccination certificates issued to the citizens upon being vaccinated against Covid-19.
Justice N. Nagaresh issued notice to the respondents in the matter. During the last hearing of the case, the Court had discouraged the petition on the ground that this could have serious implications on a national scale.
2. Kerala High Court Issues Notice To Centre, RBI On Plea Against Amendments To Banking Regulation Act[Tiruvalla East Co-operative Bank v. Union of India]
The Court will consider if the Banking Regulation (Amendment) Act, 2020 takes away the legislative power of States under item 32 in List II in the 7th schedule of the Constitution and whether it is liable to be declared as unconstitutional.
Justice Devan Ramachandran recently issued notice to the Centre and Reserve Bank of India in the matter and posted it for hearing after a month.
A helpless mother has approached the Court alleging that her daughter, a survivor of sexual harassment, is being denied admission to a Government School.
Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. directed the Government Pleader to get instructions and submit as to why the victim child cannot be accommodated in the respondent School.
4. Kerala High Court Issues Notice On Plea Challenging Kerala LalitakalaAkademi Recognition To Cartoon[Haindaveeyam Foundation v. Union of India]
A plea has reached the Court condemning the Kerala LalithakalaAkademi for selecting a cartoon for its Honourable Mention Award. Justice N Nagaresh on Monday issued notice in the matter.
Kerala LalithakalaAkademi was established in 1962 to conserve and promote visual arts: painting, sculpture, architecture, and graphics. It is an autonomous cultural organization of the State.
5. High Time We Realise We're Governed By 'Rule Of Law': Kerala High Court Proposes Action Against Illegal Flag Masts Under Land Conservancy Act[Mannam Sugar Mills Cooperative Ltd v. Deputy Superintendant of Police]
The Court ruled that every unauthorized flag mast will have to prima facie be made subject to provisions of the Kerala Land Conservancy Act, 1957, and the penalties and prosecution as ordered therein will have to be pursued against the perpetrators.
Justice Devan Ramachandran condemning the inaction since the last direction of the Court, orally remarked:
"I don't see a single flag mast gone since the last hearing. In fact, I come across a few of them every day on my way. I gave one opportunity to everyone. Now we'll start removing them under the Act imposing the requisite penalties."
6. Awaiting Centre's Clarification If Families Of Non-Resident Keralites Who Died Of COVID -19 Abroad Are Entitled To Compensation: State To High Court[Pravasi Legal Cell v. State of Kerala]
The State government informed the Court that the question of whether families of non-resident Keralites who died abroad due to COVID-19 were eligible for ex-gratia relief of Rs 50,000 was to be clarified by the Centre.
Justice N. Nagaresh was adjudicating upon a plea filed by an NGO seeking a declaration that such family members were entitled to compensation of Rs. 50,000. The petition was filed through Advocate E Adithyan.
7. Police Officers Bound To Wear Uniform While On Duty: Kerala High Court Reiterates[Avinash v. State of Kerala]
The Court has accentuated the fact that police officers must comply with the relevant statutory provisions/guidelines making it mandatory to wear the uniform while on duty except when it is permissible under law to deviate from the said mandatory requirement.
Justice Mohammed Nias C.P while quashing proceedings against a man for questioning an officer in plain clothes, reiterated that the requirement of the police officer to wear the uniform while on duty is to be enforced without exception.
8. Sabarimala Spoiled Jaggery Row: Kerala High Court Asks Petitioner To Analyse Concept Of 'Halal' Before Arguing The Case[SJR Kumar v. Travancore Devaswom Board]
The Court questioned the petitioner organisation that had challenged the alleged use of halal-certified jaggery at the Sabarimala temple if it fully understood the concept of halal.
A Division Bench comprising Justices Anil K. Narendran and PG Ajithkumar was hearing a petition filed by a Hindu body alleging that spoiled halal-certified jaggery was being used to prepare Nivedyam and Prasadam at Sabarimala.
9. Kodakara Money Heist: Kerala High Court Closes Petition Alleging Inaction In Case After ED Submits Progress In Investigation[Saleem Madavur v. Deputy Director]
The Court closed a plea seeking directions to the Enforcement Directorate to investigate the Kodakara black money case in which certain BJP leaders are allegedly involved.
Justice K. Haripal closed the writ petition upon being informed that the central agency had opened a file in the matter and that investigation was progressing based on the information gathered and complaints received so far.
10. Walayar Rape-Death Case: Kerala High Court Directs CBI To Submit A Report On Ongoing Investigation[Madhu Alias Valiya Madhu v. Central Bureau of Investigation]
The Court directed the Central Bureau of Investigation to present a report on the progress in the investigation conducted so far in the infamous Walayar case that had built up public outrage in the State.
Justice P. Gopinath ordered so while hearing the regular bail applications moved by the prime accused in the case. The CBI has been directed to submit the report within 10 days.
11. NEET-PG: MBBS Graduates Approach Kerala High Court To Quash State Circular Granting 27% Reservation To SEBC[Dr. Sreeparvathy v. Commissioner of Entrance Examinations]
A group of MBBS graduates has moved the Court challenging a circular issued by the State government increasing reservation for the socially and economically backward classes (SEBC) from 9% to 27% in medical postgraduate courses.
Justice N. Nagaresh has admitted the matter and posted the matter for hearing on 29th November.
12. [Gawking Charges] State To Amend Headload Workers Act, Issue Circulars To All Police Stations: Kerala High Court[T.K.Sundaresan v. District Police Chief]
The Court came down heavily on the State over the continued prevalence of the appalling practice of demanding gawking charges, often referred to as 'nokkukooli' in Malayalam.
This is not the first time Justice Devan Ramachandran has accentuated upon the need to eradicate the practice from the State. However, today, the Court was adamant about finding a solution to this problem.
13. Kerala Assembly Ruckus Case: Accused Move High Court To Set Aside Magistrate's Order Rejecting Their Plea For Discharge [K. Ajith &Ors v. State of Kerala]
The accused in the infamous Assembly Ruckus case have approached the Court with a revision petition seeking to set aside the recent order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate rejecting their plea of discharge.
The revision petitioners have also sought the Court to call for the records from the lower court leading to the said order.
14. Registered Headload Workers Not Entitled To Insist On Being Engaged In Loading-Unloading Activities At Sabarimala: Kerala High Court[Suo Motu v. Travancore Devaswom Board]
The Court has ruled that registered headload workers have no legal right to insist that they should be engaged in the loading and unloading activities in Sabarimala, Pampa and Nilackal.
A Division Bench of Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice P.G. Ajithkumar after being informed that Nilackal, Pampa and Sabarimala are not Scheme covered areas, observed:
"…we deem it appropriate to direct additional respondents 6 to 8 to take necessary steps to ensure that the loading and unloading or the transportation of Pooja articles, raw materials for making prasadam and Annadanam, etc. and other articles … are not obstructed in any manner by any loading and unloading workers, their Unions or supporters."
Other Developments:
- "If The Engineers Do Not Know How to Maintain the Roads, They Should Just Resign": Kerala HC Reprimands Authorities For Improper Maintenance Of Roads
- Innocent Attempt Of A Girl To Get Admitted To Her Dream Course: Kerala HC Refrains From Imposing Cost For Filing Multiple Pleas With Similar Prayers
- State Multiplying Liquor Outlets Under Guise Of Complying With Court Order: Congress Leader VM Sudheeran Before Kerala High Court
- Cannot Ask TRAI To Direct A Telecom Service Provider To Produce Subscribers' Call Records: Kerala High Court
- Audi Driver Who Allegedly Chased The Vehicle Not Yet Arraigned As Accused: State Submits Before Kerala HC In Car Crash Case That Killed Two Models
Madras High Court
1. Circumstantial Evidence Must Unerringly Infer Guilt For Conviction: Madras High Court Sets Aside Capital Punishment Of Rape & Murder Accused[State v. Vasanthat Kumar]
In a rape and murder case that dates back to 2008, the Madurai Bench has reiterated the settled law on circumstantial evidence and the nature of inferences drawn therefrom for convicting an accused.
"In a case of circumstantial evidence, the Court may infer from available evidence, which may lead to prove the guilt of the accused and the Courts have to identify the facts in the first place so as to fit the case within the parameters of a "Chain of Circumstances" and then find out the fact of the case and to see that there is a chain of events, which unerringly proving the guilty of the accused beyond reasonable doubt," a Division Bench of Justices V. Bharathidasan and J. Nisha Banu observed.
2. Madras High Court Expresses Satisfaction Over Medical Treatment Of Siva Shankar Baba Accused In Multiple Child Sexual Abuse Cases[C.N.Siva Shankaran Vs The State]
The Court expressed its satisfaction over the medical treatment given at a government hospital to self-styled godman CN Siva Shankaran (popularly known as Siva Shankar Baba) accused under the POCSO Act in connection with multiple child sexual abuse cases.
Justice M Nirmal Kumar further observed that the accused may be taken to a private hospital for specialised treatment upon a recommendation made by the Government Doctors to that effect.
Also Read: Feasibility Study Of Establishing Ropeways At Hill Temples Underway: TN Govt Tells Madras High Court
3. Religious Conversion Won't Change Person's Caste; Inter-Caste Marriage Certificate Can't Be Issued Merely On Account On Conversion : Madras High Court[S. Paul Raj v. The Tahsildar, Mettur Thaluk &Anr.]
The Court has recently held that a person is not entitled to claim an 'inter-caste marriage' certificate on the pretext of his community certificate when he originally belonged to a certain caste but received a different community certificate on account of conversion to another religion. Justice S.M. Subramaniam observed that conversion does not alter the caste of a person and the said aspect cannot be suppressed to grant an inter-caste marriage certificate on the basis of his current community certificate.
4. Guidelines To Repatriate Dead Bodies: Madras High Court Suo Moto Impleads MEA In Pudukkottai Fisherman Case[R. Brundha v. The Principal Secretary, Home Department &Ors.]
Following allegations of unstitched body being handed over to the family of a Kottaipattinam fisherman who died at the sea in a collision with the Sri Lankan Navy Vessel, the Madurai Bench has suo moto impleaded the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) and the Consulate General of India (Jaffna) to get response on the guidelines followed for repatriation of dead bodies to India.
The order was passed by Justice GR Swaminathan days after he ordered the respondent authorities to exhume the fisherman's body and conduct a fresh postmortem, as the fisherman's wife alleged that the Sri Lankan navy fired upon her husband and that he died due to gunshot injury, not drowning.
5. 'High Court Custodian Of Minor Deity, Can't Be Mute Spectator': Madras HC Raps HR&CE Department For Inaction Against Illegal Temple Occupant[K.A. Sreedharan v. The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments]
The Court recently censured the trustees of a temple and the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department of state for purported corrupt practices while dealing with temple properties.
"This Court is witnessing day in and day out that the said illegal occupants are many and numerous. In respect of Temple properties and in many such cases, the Lessees are in possession without any authority and actions taken by the Authorities are absolutely not satisfactory. Thus, the Courts are bound to draw factual inference that some Authorities are colluding with such Private Parties on various reasons and on extraneous considerations,", Justice S.M Subramaniam observed.
6. Madras High Court Sets Aside Acquisition Proceedings Of Former CM Jayalalithaa's 'Veda Nilayam' Residence; Property To Be Handed Over To Legal Heirs[J.Deepak Vs The Secretary To Government And 3 Others & Connected Matters]
The Court set aside the land acquisition proceedings of former CM J Jayalalithaa's residence, 'Veda Nilayam', at Poe's Garden, Chennai. The single bench of Justice N Seshasayee has allowed the petitions filed by J. Deepak and J. Deepa, both the children of Late Jayalalithaa's brother, challenging the Tamil Nadu Government order for acquiring 'Veda Nilayam' and converting it to a memorial.
While reading out the operative part of the order, Justice Seshasayee instructed the District Collector, Chennai to hand over the property to the legal heirs, i.e, J. Deepa and J. Deepak within three weeks. In the order, the court has also clarified that the Income Tax Department can proceed as per the law to recover the arrears chargeable on the estate due from Late J Jayalalithaa.
7. 'Service-Related Disputes Not Maintainable In PILs': Madras High Court Dismisses Former National Women's Kabaddi Captain's Plea For Govt Job[Tamil Nadu Sportsmen Association v. The Government of Tamil Nadu]
The Court has dismissed a PIL seeking employment for S. Kavitha, former captain of State and national Kabbadi teams and Asian Games Gold Medalist.
The bench of Acting Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice P.D Audikesavalu observed that public interest litigation cannot be deployed for service matters for the assertion of individual rights.
"…a petition of the nature of public interest is not maintainable to espouse the cause of an individual and in service matters, i.e., even to seek appointment or any dispute relating to service, as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Duryodhan Sahu (Dr) v. Jitendra Kumar Mishra, (1998) 7 SCC 273 and Ashok Kumar Pandey v. State of West Bengal, (2004) 3 SCC 349."
8. Trademark/ Copyright Infringement: No Jurisdiction Based On Location Of Branch Office Where No Part Of Cause Of Action Has Arisen- Madras High Court[P. Sundaram v. Asia Match Company Private Limited Represented By Its Director]
In a significant order, the Court has given clarity about the interpretation of the phrase "actually and voluntarily resides or carries on business or personally works for gain" in Section 134(2) of Trade Marks Act and Section 62(2) of the Copyright Act, which determines the territorial jurisdiction of the courts concerned.
In an application filed by the defendant challenging the territorial jurisdiction of the Commercial Division of the Court to adjudicate on an alleged trademark and copyright infringement, Justice Anand Venkatesh has observed that the discretion of plaintiff to file a suit where the plaintiff carries on business is not unconditional.
Madhya Pradesh High Court
1. MP High Court Dismisses Law Student's PIL Seeking Framing Of Rules Regarding Working Conditions, Stipend For Law Interns[Siddharth Shrivastava Vs. Bar Council of India and another]
The High Court recently dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition filed by a Law Student seeking a direction to the Bar Council of India to frame rules regarding working hours, other conditions, and payment of stipends to the Law Interns.
Observing that the Writ Petition is miserably misdirected in the context of reliefs sought for, the Bench of Justice Rohit Arya and Justice Deepak Kumar Agarwal noted that If a law student is expected to do an internship, he can not be a liability either that of a Bar Council of India.
Meghalaya High Court
1. Romantic relationship Cannot Be Lost Sight Of: Meghalaya High Court Grants Bail To Teenager In POCSO Case[EphinaKhonglah v. State of Meghalaya]
The Court granted bail to a teenager in a sexual assault case lodged against him under the provisions of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act) after taking into consideration that the minor victim and the accused were in a romantic relationship and that there was consensual sexual intercourse.
Justice W Diengdoh observed,
"On perusal of the records, particularly the statement of the victim and the accused, prima facie it is apparent that there is a romantic relationship between the two and that the sexual act involved between them was one of consensual, notwithstanding the fact that in the case of an alleged victim being a minor, consent has no legal validity, however, this aspect of the matter cannot be lost sight of while a plea for grant of bail is being considered by the court."
Punjab & Haryana High Court
1. "Allegations Serious": Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Bail To Man Who Allegedly Chopped Off A Person's Private Parts[Kuldip Kumar @ Sonu v. State of Punjab]
The Court denied bail to a man accused of kidnapping and chopping of the private parts of another man as it noted that the allegations against him are serious in nature.
The Bench of Justice Arvind Singh Sangwan was hearing the 2nd bail plea filed by one Kuldip Kumar who has been booked under Sections 344, 364, 307 IPC and Sections 325, 326, 201 IPC.
2. Rabia Saifi Murder: Punjab & Haryana High Court Issues Notice To Haryana State, CBI On Parents Plea[Sameed Ahmad and Anr v. State Of Haryana]
The Court issued notice to Haryana State and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on a plea moved before it seeking a court-monitored CBI probe into the murder of Rabia Saifi, a 21-year-old Civil Defense volunteer with the Delhi government.
The Bench of Justice Arvind Singh Sangwan issued notice on the plea filed by Sameed Ahmad and Praveen Jahan, parents of Rabia Saifi, through Advocates Mehmood Pracha and Ajay Kalra.
Also Read:Rabia Saifi Murder- Parents Move Punjab & Haryana High Court Seeking Court-Monitored CBI Probe
Rajasthan High Court
1. 'Aggrieved Person' Under The Domestic Violence Act Includes A Foreign Citizen: Rajasthan High Court[Robarto Nieddu v. State Of Rajasthan and Another]
In a significant observation, the Jodhpur Bench has held that as per Section 2(a) of the Domestic Violence Act of 2005, the definition of 'aggrieved person', would include any woman including a foreign citizen, who is subjected to domestic violence.
Such a woman is very much entitled to get the protection of Section 12 of the Act of 2005 [Application to Magistrate], the Court further ruled.
Telangana High Court
1. [O XXXII R 15 CPC] Mental Infirmity Can Also Be Caused By Physical Defects Rendering Person Incapable Of Communicating His Wishes: Telangana HC[M.Sudhakar @ M.Sudhakar Rao v. Peerajee @ Reddy]
The Court has held that 'Mental Infirmity' for the purpose of Order XXXII Rule 15 of CPC, could also be caused by physical defects like deafness or dumbness, whereby a person is made incapable of communicating his wishes, views, or thoughts to others who are not acquainted with him.
Holding thus, the Bench of Justice Justice K. Lakshman allowed a 75-year-old petitioner to appoint his son as his next friend as the Court noted that he is suffering with various old-age ailments including paralysis and hearing problem, which was supported by medical evidence.
