Supreme Court Weekly Round Up: August 15 To August 21, 2022

Talaq-E-Hasan Not So Improper Prima Facie, Women Have Option Of Khula Divorce : Supreme CourtCase Status: Benazeer Heena v. Union of India And Ors. WP(C) No. 348/2022 (PIL) The Supreme Court made a prima facie observation that the practice of divorce through the Muslim personal law practice of Talaq-E-Hasan, as per which a man can divorce his wife by pronouncing "talaq" once a month for three months, is "not so improper". "Prima Facie this (talaq e Hasan) is not so improper. Women also have an option. Khula is there. Prima facie I don't agree with petitioners. I don't want this to become an agenda for any other reason", Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, the presiding judge of the bench, orally remarked. Supreme Court Agrees To List Next Week Plea Of Unnao Rape Survivor Seeking Transfer Of Case Against Her To Delhi The Supreme Court agreed to list plea seeking transfer of a counter case filed against her by the father of Shubham Singh, one of the accused men, facing trial in New Delhi for the gang rape of the minor petitioner. The plea wherein the victim had sought interim relief for the stay of the non-bailable warrant issued by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Unnao against her was mentioned by Advocate Vrinda Grover before the bench of Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justices JK Maheshwari and Hima Kohli. Reports Of "Christian Persecution" In India False : Centre Tells Supreme Court Opposing Plea By Catholic Bishop & Evangelical Group Case Status: Most Rev Dr. Peter Machado v. UOI & Ors. WP (Crl) NO. 137 of 2022 The Central Government has opposed a PIL filed seeking directions to stop alleged attacks against Christians in the country by saying that the petitioners have resorted to 'falsehood and some selective self-serving document' and mere conjectures. The preliminary objection has been filed by the Central Government through the Deputy Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs in response to the PIL filed by Archbishop Of Bangalore Diocese Dr. Peter Machado along with the National Solidarity Forum, the Evangelical Fellowship of India. The Centre's response states that the petitioners had relied on information gathered from press reports, "independent" online databases and from findings of various non-profit organisations. The Centre said that "enquiries reveal that the majority of the incidents alleged as Christian persecution in these reports were either false or wrongfully projected". Supreme Court Dismisses Plea Challenging Construction Of Lulu Mall At Thiruvananthapuram Case Status: MK Salim v. State of Kerala SLP(C) 8363 of 2022 The Supreme Court dismissed a plea challenging the construction of LuLu Mall, a popular shopping mall in Thiruvananthapuram, the Capital city of Kerala. The bench of Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justices JK Maheshwari and Hima Kohli upheld Kerala High Court's order dated August 13, 2021 passed by the bench of Justice S.V. Bhatti and Justice Bechu Kurian. The bench observed that the mall has been granted requisite permission by the statutory authorities. Can A State Running Lottery Ban Lotteries From Other States? Supreme Court To Consider Case Status: State of Nagaland And Ors. v. State of Kerala And Ors. Diary No. 21222/2022 The Supreme Court issued notice to the State of Kerala on a Special Leave Petition filed by the State of Nagaland challenging the Kerala High Court's order which upheld the power of the State Government to regulate lotteries from other states. A bench comprising Justices KM Joseph and Hrishikesh Roy was hearing the challenge against the judgment delivered by the High Court on May 17, 2021, which upheld the amendments brought to Kerala Paper Lotteries (Regulation) Rules in 2018 (Rules) to regulate marketing and sale of lotteries organised by other states in their own State. Welfare Schemes Not "Freebies"; Union Govt's Tax Holidays, Waiver Of Bad Loans Also Should Be Considered : DMK Tells Supreme Court Case Status: Ashwini Upadhyay v. Union of India WP(C) 43 of 2022 The Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) is the latest party to approach the Supreme Court in the "freebies" issue, after the Aam Aadmi Party and the Indian National Congress, saying that welfare schemes intended to ensure social and economic justice can't be termed "freebies". The application moved by the DMK seeking to implead itself in the PIL filed by former BJP Spokesperson Ashwini Upadhyay stated : "It is humbly submitted that a welfare scheme providing a free service are introduced with an intent to secure a social order and economic justice under Article 38 to minimise the inequalities in income, status, facilities and opportunities. In no imaginable reality, it could be construed as a "freebie". Such schemes have been introduced in order to provide basic necessities which the poor households cannot afford. They cannot be imputed to be luxuries". It also ...

Supreme Court Weekly Round Up: August 15 To August 21, 2022

Sohini Chowdhury

Tags