- Home
- /
- News Updates
- /
- High Courts Weekly Roundup...
High Courts Weekly Roundup [November 29, 2021 To December 3, 2021]
LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK
5 Dec 2021 4:21 PM GMT
![High Courts Weekly Roundup [November 29, 2021 To December 3, 2021]](https://www.livelaw.in/h-upload/2021/05/09/750x450_393154-high-courts-weekly-roundup-1.jpg "High Courts Weekly Roundup [November 29, 2021 To December 3, 2021]")
Allahabad High Court 1. Allahabad HC Directs Name, Gender Change Of A Transgender In Educational Records Following UP Education Board's DenialThe High Court (Lucknow Bench) today 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...
Allahabad High Court
The High Court (Lucknow Bench) today 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 Allahabad 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 favorable order in a matter regarding Prasad Institute of Medical Science, Lucknow. With this sanction, CBI can now move ahead and prosecute Justice SN Shukla.
Also Read: UP Govt Assures Best Possible Medical Treatment To Atiq Ur Rehman; Tenders 'Unconditional Apology' In Allahabad High Court, Following Allahabad High Court's Nudge, UP Govt. Takes UAPA Accused Atiq Ur Rehman To AIIMS For Medical Treatment
3. 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 recently 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.
4. Law Minister's Statement On Allahabad HC's 'Proposed' Bench At Agra 'Childish' & 'Politically Motivated': HCBA's Elders' Committee
The High Court Bar Association Elders' Committee today issued a resolution/public statement calling the Statement of Union Law Minister, Kiren Rijiju regarding the creation of Bench of Allahabad High Court at Agra as 'Childish' and 'Politically motivated'. Issuing a public statement, Allahabad High Court Bar Association Elders' Committee has stated that it has taken note of the statement of the Union Law Minister regarding the creation of Bench of Hon'ble High Court in Agra with concern.
5. 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 recently 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.
Andhra Pradesh High Court
1. Andhra Pradesh State Assembly Passes Bill To Repeal 'Three Capital' Laws
The Andhra Pradesh State Assembly on Monday passed the Andhra Pradesh Decentralisation and Inclusive Development of All Regions Repeal Bill, 2021, which aims to repeal the earlier laws made by the state legislature paving way for the 'three capitals' plan for the state. Essentially, this bill intends to repeal the A. P. Decentralisation and Inclusive Development of All Regions Act 2020 and the Andhra Pradesh Capital Region Development (Repeal) Act 2020.
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 have approached the division bench and sought to quash the single judge's ad-interim order with the 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 is 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.
The High Court rejected the anticipatory bail applications of six people including Raj Kundra, Sherlyn Chopra, and Poonam Pandey in a 2020 porn videos case. Justice Nitin Sambre however granted the accused four weeks to approach the Supreme Court. The other three accused whose anticipatory bail applications were rejected include Suvojit Chaudhari, Umesh Kamat, and Sam Ahmad.
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 the 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.
5. Bombay High Court Rejects Tarun Tejpal's Plea For In-Camera Hearing Of Rape Case Appeal
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.
6. 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 [Dhyandev Kachruji 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. On Monday, 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 on 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 the 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.
4. Calcutta High Court Stays Single Bench's Order On CBI Probe Into Irregularities In Non-Teaching Staff Appointments For 3 Weeks [West Bengal Board Of Secondary Education and Anr v. Sandeep Prasad and Ors]
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).
8. '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 High Court challenging the 'senior designation' conferred on 12 advocates alleging that the decision was made by applying the pick and choose a method which suffers from biases, favoritism, nepotism, and is against the settled principles of law. 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. 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 Delhi 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.
2. 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 the 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.
3. Inter-Country Adoptions: Delhi HC Issues Directions For Enabling Parties To Obtain Certification From DMs, Foreign Authorities And CARA [RAJWINDER KAUR & ANR v. CENTRAL ADOPTION RESOURCE AUTHORITY]
The High Court has issued various steps for enabling adoptive and biological parents to obtain the required certification and no- objection from District Magistrates, foreign authorities and Central Adoption Resource Authority(CARA) in relation with inter country adoptions. Justice Pratibha M Singh issued six steps to be considered by the concerned authorities for implementation.
The High Court today issued notice on a PIL seeking immediate appointment of adequate number of doctors including paramedical staffs in government run hospitals like AIIMS, Safdarjung Hospital, Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital etc. The plea also seeks to fill up vacancies in hospitals of local bodies like all MCDs and other bodies including Mohalla clinics being run by the Govt of NCT of Delhi on urgent basis.
Also Read: Delhi High Court Stays Summons Issued To BJP MLA Vijender Gupta In Criminal Defamation Case By AAP's Kailash Gahlot
5. "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
6. 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.
"Let notice issue to the learned Amicus returnable for the next date," the Court ordered while posting the matter for hearing on January 11, 2022
7. "Will Lead To Anarchy If Permitted": Delhi HC Sentences Man For Three Months For Wilful Disobedience Of Repeated Court Directions In Matrimonial Dispute [Sonali Bhatia v. Abhivansh Narang]
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.
8. 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.
9. What Is It Supposed To Look Like?': Delhi High Court Asks Centre, SDMC To Indicate Technical Specifications Of 'Tower On Wheels' [Jan Kalyan Samiti v. SDMC & Ors.]
The High Court directed the Union of India and South Delhi Municipal Corporation to elucidate the technical specifications of a "tower on wheels" which it had proposed to install at a public park in the city's Sarita Vihar area.
"You have permitted installation of tower on wheels, no difficulty there. But what is it supposed to look like? Who will draw the infra drawing?" asked Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva.
10. 'Intellectual Freedom Can't Be Stifled Merely Because View Expressed Is Disagreeable To Some" : Delhi HC While Refusing To Ban Salman Khurshid's Book [Vineet Jindal v. Union of India & Ors.]
The freedom to freely express ideas and opinions cannot be permitted to be overshadowed by the ominous cloud of being non-conformist," said the Delhi High Court while dismissing 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. Justice Yashwant Varma further observed that the right to dissent or to have and express a contrarian view with respect to current affairs or historical events are the essence of a vibrant democracy.
11. "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 High 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.
12. 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 High 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's home at Bakhtawarpur and other similar incidents reported in the past.
The Court, therefore, directed the Joint Director, Child Protection Unit, Department of Women and Child Development to be present in the Court on the next date of hearing for assisting the Court in giving appropriate directions to ensure better functioning of various child care institutions.
Gujarat High Court
The Court ordered for the confiscation of a ringing mobile of a man during the court hearing and asked the Registrar General of the Court to not return the mobile till 5 pm today.
While Chief Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice Ashutosh J. Shastri was hearing a matter, the mobile phone of a man started ringing. He immediately stood up and started proceeding towards the exit gate of the Courtroom.
2. Gujarat High Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings Against Hardik Patel For Taking Out A Public Rally Sans Permission [Hardik Bharatbhai Patel v. State Of Gujarat]
The Court quashed the complaint and the charge sheet against Congress leader Hardik Patel in connection with a rally which he took out in the year 2017 sans police permission.
Justice Gita Gopi was hearing a 482 CrPC application filed by Patel who sought quashing of the complaint registered with the police station for the offences punishable under section 188 of IPC [Disobedience to order duly promulgated by public servant], charge-sheet, and the proceedings initiated pursuant thereto.
Himachal Pradesh High Court
The High Court asked the Central Government as to whether the provisions of the Family Courts Act 1984 have been made applicable by way of issuance of a statutory notification vis-Ã -vis the State of Himachal Pradesh or not.
Essentially, the Bench of Justice Ajay Mohan Goel was hearing a criminal revision plea when the counsel for the petitioner drew court's attention to Section 1 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, and on the strength of subÂsection (3), he submitted that the Central Government had not issued any Notification so as to bring into force this Act in the State of Himachal Pradesh.
Karnataka High Court
1. Karnataka High Court Refuses To Interfere With Stay On Bar Council Of India Elections
The Court refused to interfere with the interim order passed by the single judge bench, by which it has stayed the holding of elections on December 4 or to any other adjourned date to the office of the Chairman, Vice-Chairman and Executive Members of the Bar Council of India.
A division bench of Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi and Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum disposed of the intra-court appeal.
2. Karnataka High Court Refuses To Interfere With State Government Order Allowing Only Students, Teachers, Staff With One Dose Of Vaccine To Attend Colleges [Mohammed Arif Jammel v. Union of India]
The Court refused to interfere with the government order, permitting only those students, teachers and staff members who have been vaccinated to attend colleges.
Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi and Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum while disposing off a petition filed challenging the government order dated July 16, said, "We are of the considered view that no students, teacher or staff who has not received vaccination be permitted to attend the colleges where the students gather in large number and risk them. As such no direction can be issued to permit such students, teachers or other staff who have not received at least one dose of covid-19 vaccine to attend the colleges."
3. Can't Pass Blanket Orders To Protect Doctors From Acts Of Violence By Relatives Of Patients: Karnataka High Court [Dr Vinod G Kulkarni And State of Karnataka]
The High Court dismissed a petition filed by one Dr Vinod G Kulkarni, seeking directions to authorities to protect doctors/medical practitioners from acts of violence by dissatisfied relatives of patients.
Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi and Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum said,
"We cannot issue a blanket direction to authorities to protect government and private doctors. In case of any individual incident, the matter shall be brought to the notice of the concerning authority, who may deal in accordance with law. In case a criminal act is committed, it is expected that due action will be taken against the culprits."
4. Church Survey Intended For Welfare Of Minorities : Karnataka Govt Tells High Court [People Union For Civil Liberties And State Of Karnataka]
The State government in its statement of objections filed before the High Court has said that the policy decision taken by it seeking to collect information about churches in the state is only for the purpose of welfare and well being of minorities.
The reply is filed in response to a petition filed by the People's Union For Civil Liberties challenging the communication issued by the State government dated July 7 and July 9.
The Court refused to modify its order dated November 24, by which it had 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.
Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi and Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum while refusing relief to the students orally said, "No right with a student to say, do not hold exams."
6. Ramesh Jarkiholi Sex CD Case : Karnataka HC Asks SIT To File Application If It Seeks Permission To Submit Final Report [Geetha Misra v. State Of Karnataka]
The High Court directed the Special Investigation Team (SIT) to file an application to permit it to file its final report in the alleged sex cd scandal case involving former Minister Ramesh Jarkiholi.
A division bench of Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi and Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum said, "It is to be noted that court vide order dated July 27, had restrained any investigation report to be submitted before the competent court without leave of this court. In case the respondent investigating agency wants the report to be placed before a competent court, let an application be filed in this regard."
7. Karnataka High Court Directs State To Prevent Illegal Slaughtering Of Animals, Says Officers Concerned Shall Be Held Responsible [Gau Gyan Foundation v. Union Of India]
The High Court directed the state government to ensure that no illegal slaughtering of animals is carried out in any district of the state and immediate remedial measures are taken to ensure that no such illegal activities take place.
Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi and Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum while disposing of the petition filed by Gau Gyan Foundation said, "The answering respondents are directed to ensure no such illegal slaughtering animals is carried out in any district of the state and immediate remedial measures shall be taken to ensure that no such illegal activities take place."
8. 'Online Gambling Bigger Menace Than Alcohol' : Advocate General Defends Karnataka Police(Amendment) Act 2021 [All India Gaming Federation v. State Of Karnataka]
The State Government informed the Court that Karnataka Police (Amendment) Act 2021, by which it has banned all kinds of online gaming, is a social legislation.
A division bench of Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi and Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum were told, "This online gaming is a bigger menace than Alcohol. It is the biggest menace which we are facing today."
9. Section 171H IPC Can't Be Invoked For Merely Displaying Flags & Symbols Of Political Party On Vehicles: Karnataka High Court [Hanmagouda v. State Of Karnataka]
The High Court recently quashed criminal proceedings initiated against three persons associated with the Indian National Congress party, stating that section 171H of Indian Penal Code which pertains to illegal payments in connection with an election, cannot be invoked when the persons were found to have only displayed flags and symbols of the party on their vehicles.
Kerala High Court
1. NEET PG Reservation: Several Similar Cases Pending Before SC, Kerala High Court Directs Petitioner To Confirm If They Are Identical Issues [Dr. Sreeparvathy & Ors. v Commissioner of Entrance Examinations & Anr.]
The Court elaborately heard the petitioners in a matter that challenged the State circular increasing reservation for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) from 9% to 27% for NEET-PG 2021.
After recording the submissions made by the petitioners, Justice N. Nagaresh posted the matter for further hearing tomorrow. The matter is being taken up on a priority basis considering that the admissions to PG medical courses are to begin soon.
2. Renjith Maheshwary Moves Kerala High Court Assailing Centre's Decision To Withhold His Arjuna Award Based On 2008 Doping Charges [Renjith Maheshwary v. Union of India & Ors.]
Olympian national record holder in triple jump Renjith Maheshwary has moved the Court challenging a press release issued by the Secretary, Department of Sports withholding the Arjuna Award previously conferred to him.
Justice N. Nagaresh admitted the plea and issued notice to the respondents.
3. Kerala High Court Allows Centre's Appeal Against Single Judge Decision To Reduce Covishield Dose Interval [Secretary to Government of India v. Kitex Garments Ltd & Ors]
In a significant judgment, the Court has allowed the appeal preferred by the Central Government against the Single Judge decision allowing the second dose of COVISHIELD to be administered prior to the prescribed interval of 84 days.
A Division Bench of Chief Justice S Manikumar and Justice Shaji P Chaly was hearing an appeal preferred by the Central government alleging that by allowing early administration of the vaccine, the Single Judge had interfered with the Vaccine policy of the Government.
4. Fake Antique Dealer Case: Police Objects To CBI's Involvement In Investigation Before Kerala High Court [Ajith EV v. Commissioner of Police and Ors.]
In its affidavit filed before the Court, the Additional Director General of Police (Crimes) has submitted that the involvement of CBI to probe into the allegations made against fake antique dealer Monson Mavunkal was unnecessary.
The affidavit was filed in a petition filed by the dealer's former driver, who had alleged harassment from his ex-employer and certain police officers close to him.
5. Kottiyoor Rape Case: Kerala High Court Reduces Sentence Awarded To Former Priest To 10 Yrs Imprisonment [Robin Mathew v. State of Kerala]
The Court reduced the sentence imposed on former priest Robin Mathew Vadakkumchery in the infamous Kottiyoor rape case that had shaken the public conscience, where he was accused of raping and impregnating a minor girl in 2016.
The POCSO court at Thalassery had sentenced him to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment under Section 376 (2)(f) of IPC and provisions of the POCSO Act.
6. SilverLine Project: Kerala High Court Seeks State Response On Contempt Plea Challenging Land Acquisition Without Centre's Sanction [M.T Thomas v. V.P Joy]
The Court sought the response of the State and the Kerala Rail Development Corporation Ltd (K-Rail) in a petition seeking to initiate contempt proceedings against K-Rail for allegedly breaching its assurance not to proceed with the Silver Line project before obtaining sanction from the Centre.
Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V was hearing a contempt petition filed by a group of petitioners challenging the land acquisition proceedings initiated by the K-Rail authorities despite Union's sanction for the project still pending.
7. Govt Employee Entitled To Special Disability Leave If Met With An Accident While Travelling From Residence To Workplace: Kerala High Court [State of Kerala & Ors v. Shylaja K Unnithan]
The Court has ruled that under Rules 97 and 98 of Part I of the Kerala Service Rules, a government employee who meets with an accident while travelling from their residence to workplace is entitled to special disability leave.
Justices A.K Jayasankaran Nambiar and Mohammed Nias C.P observed:
"...the phrase 'caused in, or in consequence of due performance of his official duties or in consequence of his official position', which appear in both the Rules aforementioned, cannot be construed in a narrow and pedantic fashion so as to exclude a person who was admittedly an employee, who was travelling from her residence to the place of work at the time when the accident took place."
8. This Is Khaki Ego & Arrogance: Kerala High Court On Pink Police Officer Harassing Minor
The Court expressed its astonishment with the inaction of the respondents in the matter where a pink police officer had allegedly mortified an 8-year-old child and her father in public, accusing them of theft.
After a CD containing the video of the incident was played in the courtroom, Justice Devan Ramachandran was visibly distressed and moved.
The Court directed that all efforts shall be taken in an expeditious manner to ensure that the child is provided with a seat in the government school after her mother alleged that she was being denied admission.
Justice Raja Vijayaraghava was adjudicating upon a plea filed by the mother of a 17-year-old girl who had fallen prey to sexual abuse. In her plea, she had alleged that a government school was denying admission to her daughter.
In a suo motu writ petition initiated to investigate the matter of appointment of Public Prosecutors in the State, the Court has directed all Principal District Judges to file a report regarding the same.
This comes after a Division Bench comprising Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice C. Jayachandran noted the abject incompetence displayed by the prosecution while dealing with appeals from orders of conviction under Section 302 of IPC and the POCSO Act.
11. Non-Implementation Of EWS Reservation For Veterinary & Dental Courses Under KEAM: Kerala High Court Issues Notice [Vinay Shankar v. Union of India & Ors.]
A plea has reached the Court challenging the non-implementation of reservation earmarked for Economically Weaker Section (EWS) for Veterinary and Dental Courses under Kerala Engineering Architecture ad Medical (KEAM).
The matter was first mentioned before Justice N. Nagaresh who issued notice to the respondents. Later, it was taken up by Justice Murali Purushothaman and has been listed on 6th December for hearing.
Also Read: Plea Before Kerala High Court Challenges Vice Chancellor's Reappointment At Kannur University
12. Fake Antique Dealer Case: Kerala High Court Slams Police Chief For Levelling Baseless Accusations Against Court [Ajith EV v. Commissioner of Police and Ors.]
Interesting developments took place in the infamous fake antique dealer Monson Mavunkal's case, wherein the Court came down heavily on the State Police Chief for filing an application containing veiled accusations and threats against the Court.
Justice Devan Ramachandran was evidently chagrined at the application submitted by the Director-General of Prosecution T.A Shaji on behalf of the State Police Chief seeking that the writ petition be closed.
13. 'Pandemic Not An Excuse, Give Genuine Reasons' : Kerala High Court To Centre Over Non-Inclusion Of Petroleum Products Under GST [Kerala Pradesh Gandhi Darshanvedhi v. Union of India]
The Court was discontent with the reasons given by the Goods and Services Tax Council for its decision to not include petrol and diesel within the ambit of GST.
A Division Bench of Chief Justice S Manikumar and Justice Shaji P Chaly denied the council's justification that the pandemic prevented them from deliberating on the subject since it has heavy implications on revenue.
14. What Measures Are Taken To Ensure Data Privacy? Kerala High Court Asks TCS In Sabarimala Virtual Queue Row [Suo Motu v. Travancore Devaswom Board]
The Court issued various directions to the Project Manager of the Tata Consultancy Services regarding the data of pilgrims entered into the Sabarimala virtual queue portal.
Justices Anil K Narendran and P.G Ajithkumar was hearing a PIL questioning the legality of the 'Sabarimala Pilgrim Management System' implemented by the Kerala Police, alleging that it restricts Darshan in Sabarimala to only those who avail the Virtual Queue Services.
Other Developments
- Release Of Goods During Pendency Of Confiscation Proceedings Under CGST Act Permissible On Payment Of Fine : Kerala High Court
- 'Why Are District Collectors Maintaining Stoic Silence?': Kerala High Court Seeks ATR On Illegal Flag Posts
- Unconscionable Agreements Between Parties With Unequal Bargaining Power Void: Kerala High Court Reiterates
- Faceless Assessment Scheme: Kerala High Court Issues Notice To Centre On Plea Challenging Constitutionality Of S.144B Of IT Act
Madhya Pradesh High Court
The High Court has launched the NISARG Smart Monitoring app to track the compliance of orders concerning social responsibility like tree plantation, volunteering responsibilities in hospitals, water conservation, etc.
The App was e-inaugurated by Chief Justice of Madhya Pradesh High Court, Justice Ravi Malimath, and Justice Rohit Arya (Administrative Judge), in the presence of other judges of all three benches.
Madras High Court
1. Madras High Court Quashes Order Impounding Leena Manimekalai's Passport Over Pendency Of Criminal Defamation Case; Orders Release Within One Week [Leena Manimekalai v. Regional Passport Officer]
In a writ petition challenging the impounding of Leena Manimekalai's passport, the High Court has allowed the petitioner's plea while setting aside the impounding order of Regional Passport Officer, Chennai on the grounds of pendency of criminal defamation proceedings against her.
Justice M. Dhandapani has directed the Regional Passport Office to release the impounded passport within a period of one week from the receipt of the court's order.
2. Dearth of Members, NCLT Benches At Chennai Not Fully Functional: Madras High Court Asks Centre To Clarify [CA V. Venkata Siva Kumar v. Union of India & Ors.]
In public interest litigation filed before Court for directions to make the NCLT Benches in Chennai fully functional, the respondents including Union of India, NCLT and the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India has been asked to clarify if a single technical member of the Bench at Chennai has been discharging the duties of the NCLT Bench in Kochi as well.
In a batch of petitions challenging the withdrawal of reservation for Backward Classes (BC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) in the upcoming Puducherry local body elections, the Court is set to examine if providing reservation for BC is mandatory as per the Constitutional provisions or not.
4. Appointment Of 5-Year Old As Temple Priest Part Of Centuries-Old Custom; Right To Education Not Violated : AG Tells Madras HC [D. Sivan v. The District Collector & Ors.]
In a PIL challenging the appointment of a five-year-old boy as the pujari at a temple in the Nilgiris, allegedly deprived of education at a tender age, the High Court has allowed the Advocate General two weeks' time to file a counter.
The first bench of Acting Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice P.D Audikesavalu took note of the status report filed by Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments (HR & CE) Department and the counter filed by Education Department.
5. 'Tarnished Her Self Esteem': Madras High Court Invokes Suo Motu Revisional Powers, Holds Sexual Assaulter Guilty Of Abetment To Suicide [Nagarajan v. The State Represented By The Inspector Of Police]
In a recent judgment, Madurai Bench has invoked its suo moto revisional powers to set aside the Sessions Court Order acquitting the accused of abetment to suicide.
Justice B. Pugalendhi addressed the four corners of suo moto revisional jurisdiction of the High Court and held the accused guilty of abetment to suicide under Section 306 IPC along with other charges. In 2015, Fast Track Mahila Court, Dindigul, had already held the accused guilty under Sections 354(Assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty) and 448 IPC (Punishment for house-trespass).
6. 'Interim Measure To Bring Down Soaring Tomato Prices Necessary': Madras High Court Permits Temporary Parking For Koyambedu Market Traders [Thanthai Periyar Tomato Traders Association v. Member Secretary & Ors.]
The Court has instructed the Koyambedu Market Management Committee and Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority (CMDA) to earmark a specific area for licensed tomato traders, so that they can load/ unload the perishables that are transported via trucks within the market itself.
Justice R Suresh Kumar also allowed the respondent authorities to monitor the traders who bring trucks to the allotted vacant ground for unloading and ensure that they don't indulge in any wholesale/ retail trade there.
7. Govt Job Offer Scam: Madras High Court Reserves Order In Former Minister Rajenthra Bhalaji's Plea For Anticipatory Bail [K.T Rajendra Bhalaji v. The State of Tamil Nadu & Ors]
The High Court has reserved orders on the two anticipatory bail applications in cases registered against former AIADMK Minister Rajenthra Balaji for swindling money from the public by promising government jobs.
Justice M. Nirmal Kumar heard all the parties at length before reserving the orders.
8. Madras High Court Refuses To Entertain Writ Against Indirect Polls To Marakkanam Panchayat Union; Grants Liberty To File Election Petition [S.Arjunan v. The Tamil Nadu State Election Commission & Others.]
The Court has refused to entertain a writ petition challenging the Marakkanam Panchayat Union indirect elections to the posts of Chairman and Vice Chairman.
It has however granted liberty to the petitioner, S. Arjunan, who had contested for the post of Chairman in the Union, to prefer an election petition in this regard.
9. 'Voice Of The Oppressed Not Meant To Be Criminalised': Madras HC Quashes FIR Against Director Pa. Ranjith Over Comments On Chola Empire [P.A. Ranjith v. The Inspector of Police, Thirupananthal Police Station]
The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court has quashed criminal proceedings initiated against Film Director Pa. Ranjith for his remarks on the Chola era during a public gathering in 2019.
The court was of the view that the criticism meted upon the Chola Kingdom by the Director was based on Historical Books. The petitioner has not exceeded the limit to freedom of speech under Article 19 (1)(a) of the Constitution. The court also concluded that his speech lacked the intent to create enmity between two groups/ communities.
10. 'Raised Legitimate Public Issue; No Adverse Consequence Ensued': Madras HC Quashes FIR Over Protest Gathering During Pandemic [A Muniadhas v. The State represented by The Inspector of Police & Anr.]
The Madurai Bench has quashed an FIR registered against a member of the political party for organizing a protest in November 2020, the peak days of the Covid-19 pandemic.
"The petitioner is a member of the political party. They have only raised a legitimate public issue. As a result of the petitioner's conduct, no adverse consequence ensued. The accused has not indulged in any act of violence. I am therefore of the view that continuation of the impugned prosecution is not warranted. FIR stands quashed," Justice G.R Swaminathan observed while pronouncing the order.
Manipur High Court
1. "Natural Justice Principles Violated": Manipur HC Sets Aside Legislative Assembly Speaker's Disqualification Order Against An MLA [Tongbram Robindro Singh v. Speaker, Manipur Legislative Assembly & others]
The Court set aside a disqualification order passed by the Speaker, 11th Manipur Legislative Assembly against an MLA, Tongbram Robindro Singh in June 2020.
The Bench of Chief Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice M. V. Muralidaran held that there was is a clear and flagrant violation of the principles of natural justice while passing the disqualification order as no opportunity was given to the MLA of hearing before passing of the order.
Meghalaya High Court
1. Don't Regulate Entry Or Movement Of Indian Citizens Into & Within State: Meghalaya High Court To State Govt [Ibahunlang Nongkynrih & ors v. State of Meghalaya & ors]
The Court has asked the State Government not to restrict or regulate the entry or movement of Indian citizens into and within the State, without indicating any parameters regarding the same.
This direction came from the Bench of Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice W. Diengdoh while dealing with a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea challenging the validity of the Meghalaya Residents Safety and Security Act, 2016.
Patna High Court
The High Court has allowed the transfer of investigation on the case of Policemen assaulting Additional District & Sessions Judge to Criminal Investigation Department (CID).
Justice Rajan Gupta and Justice Mohit Kumar Shah have also directed that the investigation must be carried out by an officer not below the rank of Superintendent of Police. The said officer shall be under the direct supervision of the Additional Director General of Police, who heads the CID.
Also Read: Policemen Assaulting Judge : Bihar DGP Submits Report To Patna High Court In Sealed Cover
2. 'Educational Institutions Should Be Sensitive About Aftermath Of The Pandemic': Patna HC Sets Aside CNLU's Demand For Payment of 'Library Fees' & 'Examination Fees' [Kartikay Trivedi and Ors v. Chanakya National Law University]
The Court has recently ruled that the demand of Chanakya National Law University (CNLU) with respect to payment of facilities fees and examination fees from the students with respect to academic year 2020-2021 is 'arbitrary and illegal' in view of the fact that students had not attended classes and had not availed these facilities due to the Covid-19 pandemic.
3. Giving Third Degree Treatment For Extracting Confession 'Worst Crime': Patna High Court Directs Bihar DGP To 'Set House Right' [Sanjay Singh v. State of Bihar]
"Giving third-degree treatment to the apprehended accused and that too for extracting confession is the worst crime in a civilized society which can be committed by a Police officer," said Court recently as it observed that the Judiciary is witnessing a large number of custodial deaths caused by men in uniform.
Justice A. M. Bidar further expressed hope that the Director-General of Police, Bihar State shall take necessary cognizance of the order of the court to set his house right.
Punjab & Haryana High Court
1. "Bail Granted For Extraneous Considerations, Deserves Disciplinary Action": P&H HC Raps Judicial Officer For 'Grave Misconduct' [Ajay Kumar alias Kala v. State of Haryana]
The High Court admonished a judicial officer for his "grave misconduct" as it noted that he had granted bail to an NDPS Accused on account of extraneous considerations and that the bail order was passed by deliberately ignoring the material on record
Opining that the disciplinary action against the Presiding Officer deserved to be initiated, the Bench of Justice Manoj Bajaj, cancelling the bail of the accused, forwarded the copy of the order to the Chief Justice for further orders on the administrative side.
2. Punjab & Haryana High Court Seeks State's Response In Plea For Registration Of Sale Deeds Through Video Conferencing For NRIs [Vivek Devgun v. State of Haryana]
The High Court issued notice to the State government on a plea seeking directions to allow NRIs to represent before the office of sub-registrar through video conferencing or through any other electronic medium for the purpose of registration of sale deed of properties.
Justice Raj Mohan Singh issued notice on the plea and adjourned the matter for further hearing to January 21, 2022.
3. Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders Correction In Woman's Date Of Birth By Relying Upon Her Educational Certificate [Jyoti Bajaj v. State of Haryana and others]
In a first, the High Court recently ordered the Haryana government to carry out a correction in the birth certificate of a woman (petitioner before the court) on the basis of her educational certificates issued by CBSE.
This direction by the Bench of Justice Raj Mohan Singh came on the plea of one Jyoti Bajaj who had sought directions for the respondents to correct her date of birth in her birth certificate from December 19, 1982, to December 17, 1982, being a clerical mistake.
Rajasthan High Court
1. Maintenance- Magistrate Empowered U/S 125 CrPC To Sentence Defaulter To Separate Terms Of Imprisonment Of Upto 1 Month For Every Month's Default: Rajasthan HC [In Re A Ref. U/s 395 Cr.P.C. By District And Sessions Judge, Pali v. Unknown]
In a significant judgment, the High Court has held that a Magistrate is empowered under Section 125 of CrPC to pass separate sentences over non-compliance of its order granting maintenance and that such sentence may be of up to one-month imprisonment each for every month's default.
2. 'No Objection Can Be Raised Against Implementation Of Act': Rajasthan High Court Dismisses Plea Challenging Circular Prohibiting Construction Of Shrines In Police Stations [Pooja Gurnani v. State of Rajasthan]
The Court has recently dismissed a plea challenging a circular issued by the Additional Director General of Police (Police Housing) to all district police stations to ensure strict compliance with the Rajasthan Religious Building and Places Act, 1954 (1954 Act).
The circular prohibits the construction of shrines inside police stations and police offices and stipulates that the 1954 Act prohibits use of public places for religious purposes.
The Court held that NCTE's notification relaxing eligibility for teaching primary level students and thereby allowing B.Ed degree holders to appear for REET Level I [Rajasthan Eligibility Examination for Teacher] is unlawful.
With this, the Bench of Chief Justice Akil Kureshi and Justice Sudesh Bansal also vacated its interim orders granted earlier allowing the petitioners to hold B.Ed. the degree to appear in the REET.
Uttarakhand High Court
1. Dadri MLA Murder- 'Absconding' Can't Be Treated As Incriminating Evidence: Ut'khand HC Acquits Man Serving Life Sentence [Karan Yadav v. CBI]
Holding that conviction cannot be based only on the ground that the alleged accused has absconded, the High Court acquitted a man convicted of murdering then Dadri (Uttar Pradesh) MLA, Mahendra Singh Bhati around 29 years back.
The Bench of Chief Justice R. S. Chauhan and Justice Alok Kumar Verma set aside a 2015 judgment of the Special CBI court which had convicted Karan Yadav under Sections 302 (murder) r/w 120-B IPC.
