Negotiable Instruments Act: All India High Courts Digest 2022

LiveLaw reported almost 7,000 orders and judgments in 2022 from various High Courts across the country. Here are some important decisions relating to the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881:1. Director Can't Be Prosecuted U/S 138 NI Act When He Is Not Involved In Day To Day Affairs Of The Company: Allahabad High Court Case Title : Jatinder Pal Singh vs M/S Statcon Power...

Haldwani Evictions : Reasons Given By Uttarakhand High Court To Order Evictions In Gafoor Basti Near Railway Land [Read Judgment]

The Uttarakhand High Court last month ordered the Railway and local authorities to demolish the encroachment on railway land in Ghafoor Basti located in the Banbhoolpura area of Haldwani by giving a week's notice to the encroachers. The Court ordered thus while holding that the area in question is the property of the railway, and not Nazul land, as claimed by the dwellers. It may be...

Article 19 & 21 Rights Can Be Enforced Against Private Individuals & Entities : Supreme Court Holds By 4:1 Majority

In an important development, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court on Tuesday said that the fundamental rights enshrined in Articles 19 and 21 are enforceable even against persons other than the state or its instrumentalities.“A fundamental right under Article 19/21 can be enforced even against persons other than the State or its instrumentalities”, the majority judgment...

Cinema Theatres Can Prohibit Viewers From Bringing Food Articles From Outside : Supreme Court

Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha stated that a cinema hall owner could prohibit movie-goers from carrying their own food and beverages inside cinema halls. The Court observed that such a prohibition is "not unfair, unreasonable or unconscionable"."The condition of entry is imposed as a direct result of the exercise of the right of cinema...

Lawyer Cannot Be Compelled To Disclose Communication With Client As It Is Privileged: Bombay HC Quashes Witness Summons To Senior Advocate

Communications between lawyer and client are privileged and a lawyer cannot be compelled to confirm such a communication in a trial even if it is already disclosed to the trial court by another party, the Bombay High Court held while setting aside a witness summons to a lawyer.“Therefore, even though the communication dated 11th January, 2004 between Petitioner and his client Shri...

Ministers' Statements In Official Capacity Cannot Be Vicariously Attributed To Govt : Supreme Court; Justice Nagarathna Dissents

A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court has ruled by 4:1 majority that the statements made by a minister in official capacity are not vicariously attributable to the government.One among the questions considered by the bench was this : Can a statement made by minister traceable to any affairs of the state or for the protection of the government be attributed vicariously to the...

Facial Recognition System Does Not Trace Public Movement Through CCTVs, No Mass Surveillance: Hyderabad Police Tells High Court

Hyderabad City Police Commissioner CV Anand has informed the Telangana High Court that ‘Facial Recognition System’ is a standalone tool used to prevent and detect crimes for public safety. The tool is primarily used for identifying suspected terrorist, habitual offenders, dreaded criminals, missing persons, unidentified dead bodies, etc. It is not linked to CCTV cameras installed...

"All Conversions Can't Be Said To Be Illegal' : Supreme Court Refuses To Stay MP HC Order Against Declaration Before DM To Change Religion

The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued notice on the special leave petition filed by the State of Madhya Pradesh against the High Court restraining the government from taking coercive action against any person who contravenes Section 10 of the Madhya Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 2021 which requires a person desiring to convert religion to give a declaration in this regard to the...

Assisted Reproductive Technology Act | Enforcing Upper Age Limit On Couples Who Were In The Middle Of Treatment Is Arbitrary : Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court recently observed that the imposition of age restriction under the Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulations) Act, 2021 without a transitional provision, is irrational and arbitrary. Thereby, the Court issued the direction that the petitioners who were undergoing ART services as of the date on which the ART Act came into effect (25.01.2022) shall be permitted to...

Additional Restrictions Not Found In Article 19(2) Cannot Be Imposed On Right To Free Speech : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court Constitution Bench comprising Justices S. Abdul Nazeer, B.R. Gavai, A.S. Bopanna, V. Ramasubramanian and B.V. Nagarathna has held that additional restrictions, not found in Article 19(2), cannot be imposed on the exercise of right to free speech under Article 19(1)(a) of Ministers, MPs and MLAs. It held that the grounds mentioned in Article 19(2) for restricting free speech...

RBI Didn't Independently Apply Its Mind In Recommending Demonetisation, Entire Exercise Carried Out In 24 Hours : Justice BV Nagarathna

In her dissenting judgment in the pleas challenging demonetisation, Supreme Court judge Justice BV Nagarathna observed that there was no independent application of mind by the Reserve Bank of India in recommending the cancellation of entire Rs.500 and Rs.1000 notes as proposed by the Central Government.Justice Nagarathna formed this opinion after referring to the records relating to the...

Demonetisation Decision Making Process Lawful, Supreme Court Holds By 4:1 Majority; Justice Nagarathna Dissents

The Supreme Court Constitution Bench has upheld by 4:1 majority the decision taken by the Union Government six years ago to demonetise the currency notes of Rs. 500 and Rs.1000 denominations. The majority held that Centre’s notification dated November 8, 2016 is valid and satisfies the test of proportionality. Justice BV Nagarathna in her dissenting view held that though demonetization...