ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Allahabad High Court | Removing the corpse from place of murder does not cause disappearance of evidence of murder
In a Jail appeal under Section 383 Code of Criminal Procedure (‘CrPC’) against judgment passed by Additional Sessions Judge, wherein, convict/appellant has been convicted under Sections 302 and 201 of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’), the division bench of Suneet Kumar and Syed Waiz Mian, JJ. has held that there is no evidence pertaining to offence under Section 201 IPC, however, the conviction under Section 302 IPC is proper and justified in the law, and the impugned judgment and order is not excessive or exorbitant and no question arises to interfere in the matter on the point of punishment imposed upon him. READ MORE
Gulam Rashul v. State of UP, 2022 SCC OnLine All 901
‘No authority or person should intervene in the enjoyment of live-in-relationship of two consenting adults’; Allahabad High Court directs State to ensure protection of their life & liberty
In a criminal writ petition filed for quashing the First Information Report (‘FIR’) for offence under Section 366 of Penal Code, 1860, the division bench of Suneet Kumar and Syed Waiz Mian, JJ. while quashing the impugned FIR, held that since both the petitioners are major, no authority or person should intervene or intercept their enjoyment of live-in-relationship and has directed the State respondents to ensure protection of their life and liberty. READ MORE
Dolly Gupta v. State of UP, 2022 SCC OnLine All 920
Allahabad High Court issues bailable warrant against Sanjay Prasad, UP Principal Secretary for Contempt of Court
In a second contempt application filed against Sanjay Prasad, Principal Secretary (Home), Government of U.P. due to wilful and deliberate disobedience of the writ Court’s order that directed him to decide the claim of the petitioner for grant of additional increment within a period of three months after treating training period for the purposes of grant of such benefit, Piyush Agrawal, J. issued bailable warrants against Sanjay Prasad, and said that the way the officers of the State are behaving is a very sorry state of affairs and directed this order to be placed before the Law Minister of the State for intimation and necessary action at his end. READ MORE
Suresh Chand Rajvanshi v. Sanjay Prasad, Contempt Application (Civil) No. – 6613 of 2022
Guilt not established beyond reasonable doubt and to the satisfaction of the judicial conscience; Allahabad High Court acquits acid attack convict
In an appeal against the order of Additional Sessions Judge convicting the appellant under Section 326-A of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) and sentencing him for life imprisonment and fine, the division bench of Pritinker Diwaker and Nalin Kumar Srivastava, JJ. set aside the impugned judgment and held that the convict is not guilty for the offence punishable under Section 326-A IPC. READ MORE
Vimal Kumar Maurya v. State of U.P., 2023 SCC OnLine All 6
Allahabad High Court prohibits Advocate from practicing law in UP due to alleged misbehaviour with the lady Judge; Directs police to ensure safety and security of the Judicial Officer
In a suo motu contempt application against an Advocate, the division bench of Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Shiv Shanker Prasad, JJ. while invoking its jurisdiction under Chapter XXIV Rule 11 (2) of the Allahabad High Court Rules, prohibited the contemnor from practicing law in any court within Uttar Pradesh till the next date of listing. Further, directed the Police to take necessary steps to ensure the safety and security of the lady Judicial Officer. READ MORE
In Re, High Court v Bharat Singh, Contempt Application (Criminal) No 11 of 2022
Whether a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal constituted under MV Act, 1988 is a Court subordinate to the High Court within the meaning of S. 115 of CPC? Allahabad High Court answers
In a case relating to the issue that whether a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal constituted under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 or functioning under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (‘Act of 1939’) is a Court subordinate to the High Court within the meaning of Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (‘Code’) to make an order passed by the Tribunal amenable to the High Court’s jurisdiction in a civil revision, J.J. Munir, J. held that the Full Bench decision in Kamla Yadav v. Sushma Devi, 2004 (22) LCD 40 is binding precedent and does not need reconsideration. Thus, a Tribunal being a Civil Court is amenable to the revisional jurisdiction under Section 115 of the Code. READ MORE
Radhey Shyam Singh v. Nagina Dev, 2023 SCC OnLine All 5
Approval of a Resolution Plan does not ipso facto discharge a Personal Guarantor of a Corporate Debtor of his liabilities under Contract of Guarantee; Allahabad High Court reiterates
In a writ petition filed against the demand notice under Section 3 read with Section 5 of the U.P. Government Electrical Undertakings (Dues Recovery) Act, 1958, for recovery of electricity dues of a company, the division bench of Sunita Agarwal and Vipin Chandra Dixit, JJ. held that the challenge to the demand notice for dues of electricity, issued jointly in the name of the Directors of the corporate debtor, the defaulter company which went into insolvency cannot be sustained on the ground that in view of the acceptance of the resolution plan under Section 31 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (‘IBC’) all liabilities of the Directors, who may be the guarantor, stood automatically discharged/extinguished. READ MORE
Narendra Singh Panwar v Pashchimanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Writ – C No. – 26355 of 2022
Allahabad High Court | Even after ‘Levana Suites fire’ case, unauthorised hotels still functioning in the city as Lucknow Development Authority has failed to take any action
In three public interest litigation petitions against the unauthorised hotels functioning in the city, the division bench of Rajesh Bindal, C.J. and Brij Raj Singh, J. said that the Lucknow Development Authority has failed to take any action against the unauthorised hotels even after the Levana Suites fire case. READ MORE
Dr. Surendra Kumar v. State of UP, 2023 SCC OnLine All 18
Allahabad High Court| Application of law should be the same for all, and no special treatment shall be given to any person depending upon his position, power and place in society
In an application under Section 482 Code of Criminal procedure, 1973 Rahul Chaturvedi, J directed the Additional District Judge to give written explanation as to why order dated 20-7-2016 issuing non bailable warrants has not been complied with till date. READ MORE
Chandrapal v. State of U.P, 2023 SCC OnLine All 13
Section 16 G (3) of U.P. Intermediate Education Act not applicable to the teachers employed in private minority institutions; Allahabad High Court reiterates
In an intra court appeal against the judgment passed by a Single Judge dismissing writ petition filed by the appellant challenging his removal from a post of lecturer in Christ Church College, Lucknow (‘college’), on the ground that the removal was done in violation of Section 16 G (3) of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921, the division bench of Ramesh Sinha and Subhash Vidyarthi, JJ. upheld the order of the Single Judge and said that the provisions of Section 16 G (3) of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act are not applicable to the teachers employed in private minority institutions. Thus, the writ petition filed by a former teacher against the private unaided minority institution challenging the order of his termination and seeking restitution of his service, is not maintainable. READ MORE
Devesh Verma v. Christ Church College, 2023 SCC OnLine All 7
Order rejecting Siddique Kappan’s discharge application is against law propounded by SC; Allahabad High Court remits the matter back to the Trial Court to decide afresh
In an application filed by Journalist Siddique Kappan under Section 482 of Code of Criminal procedure, 1973 (‘CrPC’) to quash the order passed by the Special Judge, (NIA) for the offences under sections 153-A, 295-A ,120-B of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) and Sections 17 and 18 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (‘UAPA’) and Sections 65 and 72 of the Information Technology Act, 2008, Shree Prakash Singh, J. said that the Trial Court must make every endeavour to keep the trial fair, but in the order of framing of charges, certain illegalities and ambiguities are apparent and therefore, the order dated 19-12-2022 prima-facie, seems to be unsustainable and thus it is set aside. Further, the matter was remitted back to the Trial Court for deciding the discharge application of Siddique Kappan, dated 19-12-2022 afresh. READ MORE
Siddique Kappan v. State of UP, Application under Section 482 No. 161 of 2023
Allahabad High Court sets aside Ghazipur Sessions Judge order granting superior class to UP-ex MLA Mukhtar Ansari, in prison
In an application filed by the State under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, (‘CrPC’) against the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (MP/MLA) for the offences under Sections 307, 506 and 120-B of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’), wherein the Court as directed the Senior Superintendent of District Jail, Banda to grant superior class to accused/Mukhtar Ansari., Dinesh Kumar Singh,J. held that the impugned order is not only without jurisdiction, but also unsustainable on merits, therefore, it set aside the same. READ MORE
State of U.P v. Mukhtar Ansari S, Application under Section 482 No. 903 of 2023
Allahabad High Court orders interim stay on the GST demand of Rs. 1,081 crores against Paytm’s parent company, One 97 communications
In a tax writ filed by the parent entity (One 97 communications) of the leading Indian mobile payments and financial services company -Paytm, the division bench of Rajesh Bindal and J.J. Munir said that, since the amount of tax due on the transaction has already been paid and only dispute is whether it is to be treated as intra-state sale or inter-state sale, recovery of the demand raised vide order dated 03-12-2022 shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing. READ MORE
One 97 Comunications Limited v. Union of India, Writ Tax No. – 1606 of 2022
“Fundamental Right to Speedy Trial has been violated”: Allahabad High Court quashes criminal proceedings in electricity theft case, pending for more than 18 years
In an application filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘CrPC’) to quash the charge-sheet for the offences under Section 39 read with 49-B of Electricity Act, 2003, Sameer Jain, J. said that an unexplained inordinate delay of 18 years should be termed as oppressive and unwarranted, thus, held that the fundamental right to speedy trial of applicant has been violated. Further, said that the continuance of the criminal proceedings pending against the applicant is unwarranted, therefore, to secure the ends of justice, quashed the pending proceeding READ MORE
Madan Mohan Saxena v. State of UP, Application under section 482 No. – 23675 of 2022
Allahabad High Court| Right to cross-examine witnesses is a right of the other side and can only be done away with, in exceptional cases
In an application filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (‘CrPC’) to set aside the impugned order passed by the Trial Court, wherein the Court had closed the opportunity of cross examination for the accused. The Single Judge Bench of Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J. said that under Section 273 CrPC, all evidence taken should be taken in front of the accused or in the presence of his pleader, and that the right of Statutory prescription under Section 273 CrPC should only be denied in exceptional cases where the order sheet reflects that the party is habitual in seeking adjournments for one reason or another. Since it was the first adjournment sought by the accused/applicant, the impugned order in the present case was not proper. READ MORE
Brijesh Saurabh Mishra v. State of U.P in application u/s 482 No. 216 of 2023
An order of discharge would be warranted only in cases where Court is satisfied that there are no chances of conviction, and trial would be a futile exercise; Allahabad High Court reiterates.
In a criminal revision against the order passed by Sessions Judge, for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 308, 323, 504, 506 of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’), wherein the Court has rejected the application filed by the accused/ revisionist under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal procedure Code, 1973 (‘CrPC’) Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi, J. held that the Trial Court has considered the entire facts, evidence and other material available on record and after analysing it has concluded that there is sufficient ground to frame charges under the said Sections, and thus has rejected the discharge application. So, there is no illegality in the impugned summoning order. READ MORE
Ramji Prasad v. State of UP, Criminal Revision No. 137 of 2023
ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Offence of Rape can be permitted to be compounded to promote family life of complainant and accused; Andhra Pradesh High Court quashes complaint for being made in fit of anger.
The Single Judge bench of R. Raghunandan Rao, J., held that the offence under Section 376 can be permitted to be compounded under special circumstances, including a situation where closure of such a case would promote family life of the complainant and the accused. READ MORE
Gokada Suresh v. State of Andhra Pradesh, 2023 SCC OnLine AP 57
Supreme Court’s Triple Talaq judgment applies retrospectively; Andhra Pradesh High Court rejects husband’s suit for decree of divorce.
The Single Judge bench of the Dr. V.R.K. Krupa Sagar set aside the order of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Chilakaluripet while rejecting the husband’s plaint for declaration of a divorce decree upon pronouncement of triple talaq. READ MORE
[Shaik Jareena v. Shaik Dariyavali, Civil Writ Petition 2477 of 2019
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
[JJ Act] Bombay High Court issues notice to the Publisher and Editor of Mid-Day for alleged publication of name and photographs of the child in conflict with law.
In a case relating to an article published by Mid-Day, pursuant to the order of the instant Court dated 20-10-2022 wherein the names of the parties as well as the photos of the child in conflict with law, was published, a Division Bench of Revati Mohite Dere and Prithviraj K. Chavan, J., issued show cause notice to the scribe of the said article i.e., Shirish Vaktania, the Publisher and Editor of Mid-Day, as to why suo-motu action should not be initiated against them. READ MORE
Akanksha Anmol Kelkar v. State of Maharashtra, 2022 SCC OnLine Bom 8036
Bombay High Court analyses whether ‘referring disputes to a sole arbitrator’ printed at the back of the tax invoice amount to an arbitration clause
In a petition filed for dealing with a primary issue for consideration that whether a clause contemplating reference of disputes and differences arising out of, or in relation to a contract or order of advertisement, bill or otherwise breach thereof, to be referred to Sole Arbitrator, printed at the back of the tax invoice would amount to an arbitration clause, Bharati Dangre, J., held that the parties have acted upon the invoices and there was no denial of the invoices raised by the applicant, the clause contained in the invoices which clearly stipulate a reference to arbitration, deserve to be construed as an arbitration clause. READ MORE
Bennett Coleman & Co. Limited v. MAD (India) Pvt. Ltd., 2022 SCC OnLine Bom 7807
[JJ Amendment Act, 2021] Bombay High Court stays the change of exclusive jurisdiction over all adoptions including foreign adoptions from Courts to DM
In a petition filed challenging the vires of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Amendment Act, 2021 to the extent that the word ‘Court’ is replaced with ‘District Magistrate’, a Division Bench of G S Patel and S G Dige, JJ., granted interim relief by staying the change of exclusive jurisdiction over all adoptions including foreign adoptions from Courts to District Magistrate. READ MORE
Nisha Pradeep Pandya v. Union of India, Writ Petition No. 32065 of 2022
Bombay High Court | Denial by wife to go through DNA test in order to prove legitimacy of child not a sufficient ground to draw adverse inference against the wife
In a petition filed by the husband challenging on the ground of legitimacy of the child born out of wedlock, the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Beed dated 30-11-2016 thereby dismissing the revision application challenging the judgment and order passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Ashti wherein the Judicial Magistrate had granted maintenance under section 125 of Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) to respondent 1 and 2 i.e., wife and daughter at the rate of Rs.2000/- and Rs.1000/- per month respectively, Kishore C Sant, J., upheld the maintenance granted and further held that both the courts have rightly observed that no case is made out by the husband to show that for the period of 280 days before the delivery of the child, there was no access to him with his wife (respondent 1). READ MORE
Namdeo v. Seema, Divorced wife of Namdeo Giri, 2023 SCC OnLine Bom 73
‘Reason to arrest after four years, not spelt out in the arrest memos’; Bombay High Court grants interim bail to Chanda Kochhar and husband Deepak Kochhar
In a petition filed by Chanda Kochhar (wife) and Deepak Kochhar (husband) seeking quashing of the FIR registered under Sections 120-B and 420 of Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) and Sections 7, 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (‘PC Act’), further seeking quashing of their illegal arrest being violative of Sections 41 and 41-A of Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) as well as quashing of the remand orders dated 24-12-2022 and 26-12-2022 passed by the Special Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI ) Judge, Mumbai, and ultimately seeking their release from custody, a Division Bench of Revati Mohite Dere and Prithviraj K. Chavan, JJ., granted interim bail to the petitioners-Chanda Kochhar and Deepak Kochhar on cash bail in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- each, for a period of two weeks on finding non-compliance of the mandate of Section 41(1)(b)(ii), Section 41-A and Section 60-A of Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) by the authorities. READ MORE
Chanda Deepak Kochhar v. Central Bureau of Investigation, 2023 SCC OnLine Bom 72
Loss of character or bruised reputation cannot be restored even by judicial reprieve; Bombay High Court quashes FIR filed under S. 498-A IPC
In an application filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code I.e., CrPC, to quash the First Information Report filed for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 406, 506 read with Section 34 of Penal Code, 1860 i.e., IPC and Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, a Division Bench of Anuja Prabhudessai and R M Joshi, JJ., quashed the FIR to prevent the abuse of the process of the Court, to protect the right of the applicant and thus to secure the ends of justice. READ MORE
Vrushali Jayesh Kore v. State of Maharashtra, 2023 SCC OnLine Bom 85
Bombay High Court grants interim bail to former Chairman Videocon Group, Venugopal Dhoot for his arrest being in violation of Section 41, 41-A CrPC
In a petition filed by Venugopal Dhoot, former Chairman and Managing Director of the Videocon Group of Companies, seeking quashing and setting aside the FIR filed under Sections 7, 13 (2) read with 13(1) & (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, (PC Act), 420 & 120-B of Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) as well as declaring the arrest and remand to the custody of the Petitioner as arbitrary, illegal, without following due procedure of law and in gross violation of Sections 41 and 41A of CrPC and Article 14, 19 (1) (d) and 21 of the Constitution of India, a Division Bench of Revati Mohite Dere and Prithviraj K Chavan, J., granted interim bail as merely stating in the order that there is due compliance of Section 41 to 41A of Criminal Procedure Code is not sufficient because the non-compliance of the said provisions is apparent. READ MORE
Venugopal Nandlal Dhoot v. Central Bureau of Investigation, Criminal Writ Petition 300 of 2023
Clauses in Information Brochure based on statutory Master Circular is enforceable; Bombay High Court sets aside Administrator decision to write down AT-1 bonds once Yes Bank stood reconstituted.
In a petition filed challenging the communication dated 14-03-2020 under which the Administrator of the Yes Bank Ltd., informed the (Bombay Stock Exchange) BSE Limited and National Stock Exchange, of the decision to write off the Additional Tier 1 Debenture bonds, a division bench of S V Gangapurwala CJ. and S M Modak, JJ., sets aside the decision taken by the administrator appointed by the Reserve Bank of India, to write off Additional Tier 1 (AT-1) bonds because as per Clause 57 of the Information Memorandum along with the Final Reconstruction Scheme, the administrator could not have exercised his powers to write down bonds after reconstitution of the bank. READ MORE
Axis Trustees Services Limited v. Union of India, 2023 SCC OnLine Bom 180
Several questions are unanswered by the NIA in Antilia Bomb Scare case; Bombay High Court rejects bail to Pradeep Sharma for alleged involvement in Mansukh Hiren murder case
In an appeal filed by the appellant under Section 21 of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 challenging an order passed by the Special Court (NIA), Greater Mumbai, rejecting his application for bail in connection with Antilia Bomb Scare case and Mansukh Hiren Murder case for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 201, 302, 364 and 403 of Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’), Section 25 of the Arms Act and Sections 16, 18 and 20 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 2004, a division bench of Revati Mohite Dere and R N Laddha JJ., rejected the prayer for bail for having perused records that points to the complicity of the appellant in the murder of Mansukh Hiren, the real owner of the Scorpio vehicle that was used in the Antilia Bomb Scare case. READ MORE
Pradeep Rameshwar Sharma v. National Investigation Agency, Criminal Appeal No. 258 of 2022
“The right to choose lies with the petitioner and not the Medical Board”, Bombay High Court allows termination of pregnancy of 32 weeks
In a civil writ petition seeking permission for medical termination of pregnancy of around 32 weeks, the division bench of G.S. Patel and S.G. Dige, JJ. permitted the same, against the Medical Board’s report as the foetus suffers from multiple anomalies which could be mild to severe, often lifelong and life-threatening and may cause death before the age of 10. READ MORE
ABC v. State of Maharashtra, 2023 SCC OnLine Bom 175
Delay in Divisional Commissioner’s approval cannot disentitle teachers from additional increment: Bombay High Court
In a writ petition challenging denial of additional increment to District Awardee Teachers, the division bench of A.S. Chandurkar and Vrushali V. Joshi, JJ. held that the government circular would not apply retrospectively. Circular for discontinuation of grant of additional increment to honour teachers will not affect petitioner’s prior claim of selection/ recommendation. The Court directed the Zilla Parishads of Amravati and Bhandara districts to continue to honour the teachers with the District Award. READ MORE
Waseem Farhat Khalil Farhat v. State of Maharashtra, Writ Petition No. 94 of 2021
Yardstick for parliamentary elections cannot be applied ipse dixit to every local election; Bombay High Court holds imposition of prohibitory ban on sale of liquor as violative of Article 21
In a petition filed by All India Wine Producers Association challenging the ban imposed by the respondent(‘State’) imposing a ban on the sale of liquor in the jurisdiction of Nashik District in view of the proposed election to be held on 30-01-2023 for Nashik Graduate Constituency, Milind N Jadhav, J., held that imposing a prohibitory ban for long period on merchant establishments and establishments which provide livelihood is contrary to the enshrined principles under Article 21. READ MORE
All India Wine Producers Association v. The Deputy Speaker and Assistant Chief Election Commissioner, Writ Petition No. 2547 of 2023
[Section 438 CrPC] Bombay High Court | Abuses given on phone cannot be said to be within public view to attract the ingredients of offence punishable under Atrocities Act
In an appeal filed under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (‘the Atrocities Act’) by the original accused persons challenging order passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Newasa/Special Judge in a Criminal Bail Application thereby rejecting the application filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by the appellants, a division Bench of Vibha Kankanwadi and Abhay S Waghwase, JJ., sets aside the impugned order and granted anticipatory bail, in case the appellant gets arrested in connection with offences punishable under Section 143, 147, 149, 354, 354-D, 436, 504, 506 of Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) under Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w)(i), 3(1)(w)(ii), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and under Section 66(e) of the Information Technology Act, 2008. READ MORE
Yogesh Laxman Pandav v. State of Maharashtra, Criminal Appeal No. 858 of 2022
[Trademark v. Domain Name] Bombay HC holds trademark infringement suit is an action in personam; Court cannot impose a blanket ban on “Swiggy” mark in future
In an interesting case regarding domain name dispute, Manish Pitale, J., held that the Court cannot restrict a domain name registrar from registering certain marks which may lead to trademark infringement in futuro.
The Court held that a suit for trademark infringement is a suit in personam, therefore, in such a suit, directions cannot be issued to restrict third parties, and in each instance of infringement, the proprietor of the mark has to rush to the Court for seeking relief. READ MORE
GoDaddy.com LLC v. Bundl Technologies (P) Ltd., Interim Application No. 38837 of 2022 in Commercial IP Suit No. 26549 of 2022
Bombay High Court directs SEIAA to decide environmental clearance proposals by applying provisions of DCPR 2034 or UDCPR, on merits within 8 weeks
In a petition filed by the Maharashtra chapter of the National Real Estate Development Council (NAREDCO) being aggrieved by the inaction of Respondent 2-State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA) in repeatedly deferring the proposals of members of Petitioner 1-Association for environmental clearance on the ground of receipt of the email dated 23-09-2022 from Registrar of National Green Tribunal (‘the NGT’) inviting the attention of SEIAA to the judgment and order dated 13-09-2022 passed by the NGT in Anil Tharthare v. State of Maharashtra, Appeal No. 22 of 2016 (‘NGT Order’), a division bench of S V Gangapurwala CJ. and Sandeep V Marne, J., directed that the judgment and order dated 13-09-2022 by National Green Tribunal shall not be an impediment for SIEAA to decide various proposals submitted by members of Association (Petitioner 1) for grant of environmental clearances on its own merits. READ MORE
NAREDCO West Foundation v Union of India, Writ Petition No. 35671 of 2022
[S.156(3) CrPC] Bombay High Court| Affidavit not in compliance with Chapter VII of the Criminal Manual is deemed non-compliance with the mandatory requirement of filing an affidavit
The criminal writ petitions are filed by the petitioners who are the ex-managing director and ex-directors of ‘Global Energy Private Limited’ (‘company’) registered under the Companies Act, 1956, challenging the order passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nagpur directing to carry out the investigation under section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), a division bench of Sunil B Shukre and M W Chandwani, JJ., quashed the impugned order and held that the case is only of breach of contract and the civil dispute has been given the color of a criminal offence, thus, the continuation of the proceedings against the petitioners will be an abuse of process of criminal law. READ MORE
Harry Inder Dhaul v. State of Maharashtra, Criminal Writ Petition No. 881 of 2021
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
No interference in case of well-founded, unshaken ocular and documentary evidence: Calcutta High Court upholds conviction in Acid Attack case
In an appeal dealing with acid attack, the Division bench consisting of Debangsu Basak and Md. Shabbar Rashidi*, JJ., held that deliberate implication of the appellant and impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence are well founded based on unshaken testimony of ocular as well as documentary evidence. READ MORE
Jamat Sk v. State of W.B., 2022 SCC OnLine Cal 4093
Calcutta High Court dismisses plea by Kamal Nath, Former Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister challenging transfer of IT proceedings from Kolkata to New Delhi
In a landmark judgement discussing the grounds on which transfer of assessment records/jurisdiction can be challenged under S. 127 of the Income Tax Act, 1961(the Act), Shekhar B. Saraf*, J., upheld that order of transfer of proceedings by Income Tax Department against the petitioner, Mr. Kamal Nath from Kolkata to New Delhi READ MORE
Kamal Nath v. CIT, 2023 SCC OnLine Cal 51
Calcutta High Court | Infertility cannot be a ground for divorce
While deciding a revision petition filed for quashing of FIR and criminal proceeding, Shampa Dutt (Paul)*, J. held that asking for mutual divorce when the wife is battling mental and physical health issues due to infertility amounts to cruelty and infertility cannot be a ground for divorce. READ MORE
Uttam Kumar Bose v. State of W.B., CRR 144 of 2019
Calcutta High Court set aside ban on use of hookahs in licensed bar and restaurants
While dealing with a case regarding violation of S. 20(2) of the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003 (COTP Act), Rajasekhar Mantha*, J. held that in absence of any rules made by the State Government, the municipal authorities cannot ban the use of hookahs in the licensed bars and restaurants. READ MORE
National Restaurant Assn. of India v. State of W.B., WPA 59 of 2023
DELHI HIGH COURT
Last date for admission in EWS category is 31st December of any given academic year; belated admission impermissible: Delhi High Court
In a case wherein a petition was filed by an EWS category student who was denied admission in a school under the EWS category, a Single Judge Bench of Mini Pushkarna, J. disposed of the petition and held that belated admission in a particular academic year would be totally dehors the scheme of the Delhi School Education Act and Rules, 1973 and would be counterproductive to the very purpose of reserving seats for children belonging to the EWS category. READ MORE
Bushra Riyaz v. Govt. (NCT of Delhi) 2022 SCC OnLine Del 4648
Delhi High Court confirms ex-parte ad interim injunction in favour of AIWA Co. Ltd., a Japan company for its mark “AIWA” in a trademark infringement suit
A Single Judge Bench of Amit Bansal, J. held that the marks “AIVVA” and “AIWA” were phonetically similar to each other and the use of the mark “AIVVA” by the defendants was dishonest and caused confusion in the market, therefore, the Court confirmed ex-parte ad interim injunction in favour of Aiwa Co. Ltd. for its mark “AIWA”. READ MORE
Aiwa Co. Ltd. v. Aivva Enterprises (P) Ltd., 2023 SCC OnLine Del 6
An artist cannot be compelled to deal with another party against his own wish in perpetuity; Delhi High Court holds termination of agreement by Khesari Lal Yadav, valid
In a suit filed by the plaintiff seeking an order declaring that the Plaintiff has all rights, title and interest in the content created/ produced by Khesari Lal Yadav who is a famous actor/singer/dancer of the Bhojpuri Film Industry (Defendant 6) and that all copyright in such content vests solely with the Plaintiff during the term of the Original Agreement as well as pass a decree permanently restraining and enjoining the defendants, their servants, employees, representatives and agents, jointly and severally, from violating and infringing, in any manner, the copyrights and intellectual property rights of the Plaintiff, Amit Bansal, J., held that the plaintiff cannot claim any copyright in the songs/content that are yet to come into being and therefore the present suit is nothing but a suit for specific performance of the contract, though guised as a suit seeking an injunction for infringement of copyright. READ MORE
Global Music Junction Private Limited v. Annapurna Films Pvt. Ltd., 2023 SCC OnLine Del 17
Right to avail legal remedy in Supreme Court cannot be denied; Delhi High Court grants parole to rape convict
In a case wherein a Writ Petition was filed under Section 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the CrPC for issuance of Writ of Certiorari for quashing the order passed by the State rejecting the application of parole, a Single Judge Bench of Swarna Kanta Sharma, J. allowed the petition and granted four weeks parole to the rape convict and held that the right of a citizen to avail a legal remedy in Supreme Court could not be denied. READ MORE
Neeraj Bhatt v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi), 2023 SCC OnLine Del 32
Delhi High Court | Marks under ‘Swiss Military’ ineligible for trade mark registration Delhi High Court
In a case wherein an appeal was filed by Armasuisse, the Federal Agency of Swiss Federation against the order of Registrar of Trade Mark (Registrar) permitting registration of the word mark ‘SWISS MILITARY’, a Single Judge Bench of C. Hari Shankar, J. set aside the Registrar’s decision and held that the marks ‘white cross on a red background’, ‘white cross on a black background’ and ‘SWISS MILITARY’ were all ineligible for trade mark registration. READ MORE
Armasuisse v. Trade Mark Registry, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 4
Purchase orders do not in any manner supersede the contract between the parties; Delhi High Court holds arbitration clause in contract valid
In a petition filed by the petitioner engaged in the business of providing cranes of various types and capacity on hire basis under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of the sole arbitrator in terms of Clause 10 of the contract between the parties, Mini Pushkarna, J., appointed Justice Jayant Nath (Retired), Former Judge of the present Court as Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. READ MORE
Sanghvi Movers Limited v. Vivid Solaire Energy Private Limited, 2022 SCC OnLine Del 4423
Law does not allow husband to take wife’s articles without her consent and knowledge: Delhi High Court dismisses pre-arrest bail application
In a case wherein an application was filed by the husband under Section 438 of CrPC for pre-arrest bail, a Single Judge Bench of Amit Mahajan, J. dismissed the bail application and held that the law did not permit even the husband to take the household articles including the jewellery without the consent and knowledge of his wife. READ MORE
Akshay Dhingra v. State (Govt. Of NCT of Delhi), 2022 SCC OnLine Del 4646
Delhi High Court directs Government to ensure free food and medical treatment to HIV positive persons below the poverty line
In a case, wherein a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed by various homeless and displaced persons suffering from HIV/AIDS, the Division Bench of Satish Chandra Sharma, CJ. and Subramonium Prasad, J. held that the Government should ensure strict compliance of the statutory provisions under the Human Immunodeficiency Virus and Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (Prevention and Control) Act, 2017 and directed the Government to ensure free food and medical treatment to HIV/AIDS patients who were below the poverty line and were unable to afford the same. READ MORE
Girish v. Union of India, 2022 SCC OnLine Del 4653
Delhi High Court dismisses PIL challenging notification allowing Sikhs to carry Kirpans on flights; says it is a policy decision
A Division Bench of Satish Chandra Sharma*, CJ. and Subramonium Prasad, J. dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the Government notification by which the Sikh travellers were allowed to carry Kirpans on the flights. The Court held that the notification was issued after due deliberations and the issue involved in the present PIL was entirely a matter of policy decision. READ MORE
Harsh Vibhore Singhal v. Cabinet Secretary, Govt. of India, 2022 SCC OnLine Del 4556
Delhi High Court dismisses petition filed by Association for Democratic Reforms for constituting an independent tribunal to oversee enforcement of Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010
In a case wherein a petition was filed by Association for Democratic Reforms to seek directions to constitute an independent tribunal or committee to oversee the enforcement of the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010 (FCRA), the Division Bench of Satish Chandra Sharma, CJ. and Subramonium Prasad, J. dismissed the petition and held that the direction sought by the petitioners to set up a committee or Tribunal to oversee the functioning of the FCRA was unsustainable as setting up a committee or a tribunal was purely a policy decision. READ MORE
Association for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 102
[YashRaj Copyrights case] Delhi High Court issues summons and notice to the American video sharing application ‘Triller’
The Single Judge bench of Amit Bansal, J., issued summons in the suit and notice in the application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (‘C.P.C.’) to the American video sharing app ‘Triller’(‘defendant’) in a copyright infringement case filed by well-known Yash Raj Films production house (‘plaintiff’). READ MORE
[YashRaj Films Private Limited v. Triller Inc, Civil Suit (Commercial) no 9 of 2023
Delhi High Court | Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954 not applicable to the land which has been declared urbanised and had lost its agricultural character
A Single Judge Bench of Mini Pushkarna, J. quashed the order passed by the Delhi Development Authority and Ministry of Urban Development and held that the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954 would not be applicable to the land which was declared urbanized and had lost its agricultural character. The Court further held that the owner of the urbanized land could not be forced to use the land for agricultural purposes when the land in question had ceased to be agricultural in nature. READ MORE
Mahajan Industries (P) Ltd. v. Gaon Sabha Chattarpur, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 23
Delhi High Court grants bail to an accused allegedly engaged in cheating citizens of the United States of America from a fake call center
In a bail application filed by the accused, Kapil Taneja, seeking bail for alleged offences under Sections 419, 420, 120-B, 34 and 389 of the Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) read with Sections 66-C and 66-D of the Information Technology Act, 2000, (IT Act), Amit Sharma, J., granted bail considering that the chargesheet has been filed, the possibility of tampering with the evidence, as also of influencing the witnesses cannot be presumed at this stage, owing to the fact that the evidence is already in the possession of the investigating agency. READ MORE
Kapil Taneja v State, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 81
Delhi High Court dismisses petition of the student seeking admission under the ‘Disadvantaged Group Category’ for the academic year 2021-2022 and 2022-2023
The Single Bench of Mini Pushkarna, J., dismissed the writ petition praying for granting admission in primary school to the student under the ‘Disadvantaged Group Category’ for the academic year 2021-2022 and 2022-2023, on the grounds that for any Academic Session, admission has to be taken by the student latest by 31st December of the said Academic Session. READ MORE
Bhagwan Singh as Guardian of Vivek v. GNCTD, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 27
Delhi High Court dismisses Dabur’s plea of restraining Advertising Standards Council of India from taking down advertisement of ‘Dabur Vita’
In a case, wherein Dabur had sought an interim direction to restrain the Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) from creating impediments in the broadcast of an advertisement for its health drink ‘Vita’, a Single Judge Bench of Manoj Kumar Ohri, J. dismissed Dabur’s plea and held that it would be unfair on Dabur’s part, which was a member of the ASCI, a self-regulatory body, “to enjoy the privileges of self-regulation and in the same breadth question the authority of the respondent to enforce its code”. READ MORE
Dabur India Ltd. v. Advertising Standards Council of India, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 64
Whether excess amount liable to be recovered from the beneficiary Government employee where the actual medical expenditure is more than the approved rates? Delhi High Court rules
In a petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking reimbursement of the medical expenses incurred by the Petitioner for the treatment of his son for brain tumor in accordance with the relevant rules applicable to the Petitioner being employed in the Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi as a Reader in the Court of the Metropolitan Magistrate and covered by the Central Government (Medical Attendance) Rules, 1944 and the orders passed there under from time to time, Chandra Dhari Singh, J., directed the respondent- State to fully reimburse the Petitioner to the extent of bills raised by both the Hospitals, and to release the amount retained in the FDR, along with interest accrued from time to time, deducted from the salary or allowances of the petitioner as soon as possible, but positively within a period of four weeks from the date of the judgment. READ MORE
Mahendra Kumar Verma v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 75
Delhi High Court acquits a man who faced trial for 15 long years without proper legal representation
By way of an appeal under Section 374 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘CrPC’), the appellant who was aggrieved by the judgment and order on sentence passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-01, Patiala House Court, New Delhi wherein he was convicted of offences punishable under Section 399 and 402 of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) and Section 25 of Arms Act, 1959 (‘Arms Act’), was granted relief by the Single Judge bench of Swarana Kanta Sharma, J., and acquitted the accused of all charges since the trial was vitiated due to non-assistance by legal aid counsel. READ MORE
Sunil v. State, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 104
Power to recall orders not to be exercised when ground for vacating the judgment was available but not availed; Delhi High Court dismisses application for recall of order
In a case wherein an application was filed under Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code to seek relief of “recalling the old order and then deciding the petition on merits”, a Single Judge Bench of Chandra Dhari Singh, J. dismissed the application as no ground was made for recall of earlier Order and held that the settled things could not be permitted to be unsettled at the behest of a person who had not been careful enough with regard to his rights and claims. READ MORE
[Daya Engg. Works (Sleeper) Ltd. v. Union of India, O.M.P. (T) (COMM) 1 of 2020
Delhi High Court rules in the context of the procedure and principles of natural justice to be observed by the Indian Patent Office in a pre-grant opposition to a patent application
In a petition filed under Article 226, whereby the petitioner, Natco Pharma Ltd. (NATCO) assailed an order passed by the Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs, allowing the Indian Patent Application filed by Respondent 2, Novartis AG (Novartis) on the aspect of procedural irregularity and violation of the principles of natural justice in the passing of impugned order, C. Hari Shankar, J., directed the Assistant Controller is directed to take a fresh decision on both on the application for registration as filed by Novartis as well as on the objection of NATCO and such a decision would be taken in accordance with the principles of natural justice and fair play and keeping in mind the dictates of the law in that regard. READ MORE
NATCO Pharma Limited v. Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 175
“Schezwan Chutney” is a mere descriptive term; Delhi High Court rejects plea of Capital Food (P) Ltd. of restraining Radiant Indus Chem (P) Ltd. from using the word “Schezwan Chutney”
In a case, wherein an application was filed for the grant of an ad interim injunction restraining Radiant Indus Chem (P) Ltd. from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, marketing, retailing, supplying, distributing, exhibiting, advertising, promoting, displaying, dealing in and / or using, in any manner whatsoever, the products bearing the marks “SCHEZWAN CHUTNEY” and “SZECHUAN CHUTNEY”, a Single Judge Bench of Navin Chawla, J. rejected Capital Foods (P) Ltd.’s plea and held that “SCHEZWAN CHUTNEY” was a mere descriptive term and not something unique and coined by Capital Food (P) Ltd. Itself. READ MORE
Capital Foods (P) Ltd. v. Radiant Indus Chem (P) Ltd., 2023 SCC OnLine Del 118
Confessional statements should lead to discovery of ‘fact’; Delhi High Court grants bail to the accused under the NDPS Act
The Single Judge bench of Jasmeet Singh, J., granted bail to the applicant/ accused 4, alleged to have committed offence under Section 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(A), 20(b)(ii)(B), 21(b), 22(c), 23 and 29 of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (‘NDPS Act’) on the ground that:
Statements recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act are inadmissible in evidence according to Section 25 of the Evidence Act, 1872 (‘IEA’). The recoveries made from the accused 4 were in ‘small quantity’ as notified under the NDPS Act. READ MORE
Jasbir Singh v. Narcotics Control Bureau, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 134
“SUBWAY” and “SUBERB” not phonetically and deceptively similar; Delhi High Court dismisses Subway’s plea for injunction for its mark “SUBWAY” against Infinity Food’s mark “SUBERB”
In a case wherein, Subway filed for an injunction for its mark “SUBWAY” against the mark “SUBERB”, C. Hari Shankar, J. dismissed the application for injunction and held that after the modifications undertaken by Infinity Food in respect of décor, layout, wall hanging, menu cards and uniforms of the staff and its outlets, the appearance of Infinity Food’s red and white “SUBERB” mark could not be said to be deceptively similar to Subway’s device mark, “SUBWAY”. READ MORE
Subway IP LLC v. Infinity Food, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 150
Classification of retirees of BSNL VRS-2019 as distinct from those superannuating in normal course is a clear violation of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution: Delhi High Court
A Division Bench of V. Kameswar Rao and Anoop Kumar Mendiratta, JJ. held that the engagement of BSNL VRS-2019 retirees in any Central Public Sector Enterprises/Government department on contractual/consultancy basis, for which the retired employees on superannuation in due course were eligible for consideration, was not in violation of Clause 8 (iii) of BSNL Voluntary Retirement Scheme-2019 and therefore, the petitioners were eligible to be considered for appointment on consultancy/contractual basis. READ MORE
[Ashwani Kumar Sharma v. Union of India, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 132
[Uphar Cinema Fire Case] A fictional rendition of trials and tribulations cannot be presumed to be defamatory; Delhi High Court denies restrain order against web series ‘Trial by Fire’
In a suit filed seeking a decree of mandatory and permanent injunction in order to restrain the exhibition, broadcast, telecast and release of the series titled ‘Trial by Fire‘, to be aired on 13-01-2023 on its digital/OTT platforms, Yashwant Verma, J., refused to grant ad interim injunction stating that the narrative of the authors was available in the public sphere right from 2016, thus disentitling the plaintiff from the grant of ad interim reliefs. READ MORE
Sushil Ansal v. Endemol India Private Limited, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 121
Delhi High Court | Central Armed Police Forces is part of Indian Armed Forces; Delhi High Court holds CAPF to be governed by old pension scheme
In a batch of 82 petitions filed by the petitioners who are employees of different forces i.e., Central Reserve Police Force (‘CRPF’), Sashastra Seema Bal (‘SSB’), Border Security Force (‘BSF’) and Central Industrial Security Force (‘CISF’) Indo Tibetan Border Police (‘ITBP’) etc., are seeking issuance of a writ of certiorari to Union of India (‘Respondent’) for quashing of orders denying them the benefit of Old Pension Scheme (‘OPS’) in accordance with CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 vide different Office Memorandums and Signals issued by the respondents. The petition further seeks quashing of Office Memorandum dated 17-02-2020 issued by the respondents to the extent that it does not grant the benefit of Old Pension Scheme to the personnel who have been appointed pursuant to notifications/ advertisements dated 01-01-2004. A Division Bench of Suresh Kumar Kait and Neena Bansal Krishna, JJ., directed the Union to issue an Order to CAPFs mentioned above to implement the Notification dated 22-12-2003 as well as OM dated 17-02-2020 granting the benefit of Old Pension Scheme to apply in rem, thus, making the Old Pension Scheme to be applicable to all the personnel of CAPFs at large. READ MORE
Pawan Kumar v. Union of India, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 112
“The problem of toxic work culture is problem plaguing all booming economies”; Delhi High Court grants anticipatory bail to the Secretary of Central Board of Irrigation and Power accused of abetting suicide
The Single Judge Bench of Jasmeet Singh, J., allowed the anticipatory bail application in a case where the Chief Manager, the Director, and the Secretary (‘applicant’) of the Central Board of Irrigation and Power were accused of abetting suicide of the finance and administration manager by hanging herself from the ceiling fan. READ MORE
V.K. Kanjlia v. State of NCT of Delhi, Bail Application No. 1332 of 2022
Delhi High Court | Divorced/Widowed daughter to be regarded as an unmarried daughter under the Swantantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme
In an appeal filed against the judgment dated 10-08-2021 rendered by the Single Judge while dealing with a challenge against the communication dated 12-02-2020 issued by Union of India rejected the request for grant of pension under the Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980 based on the reason that a “widowed/divorced daughter” was not eligible for pension under the 1980 Scheme, a Division Bench of Rajiv Shakdher and Talwant Singh, JJ., upheld the impugned order wherein the Single Judge found the issue to be no longer res integra in view of the judgement delivered by a Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Khajani Devi v. Union of India,2016 SCC OnLine P&H 15867 wherein the Court saw no good reason to differentiate between an “unmarried” daughter, who, admittedly, is an eligible beneficiary under the 1980 Scheme and a “divorced daughter”. READ MORE
Union of India v. Kolli Uday Kumari, Review Petition No. 21 of 2022
Delhi High Court| CERC does not have jurisdiction to adjudicate upon a dispute without Power Purchase Agreement
The Single Judge Bench of V. Kameswar Rao, J., in a civil suit commercial application filed under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (‘CPC’), held that the agreement for procurement of electricity between the plaintiff and the applicant stood terminated, therefore, no agreement existed between the plaintiff and defendant 2, thus, no dispute with respect to tariff existed to be adjudicated by CERC. The disputes between the parties arose out of the PPA, therefore, the contention to adjudicate the matter under Section 79 (1)(b) of the Act by the CERC was rejected. READ MORE
MB Power (Madhya Pradesh) Limited v. State Bank of India, CS(COMM) 282 of 2022
Delhi High Court | Errors that are apparent on record can be subjected to review and not the ones required to be discovered through a process of legal reasoning/ arguments
In a review petition filed under Section 114 read with Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code on behalf of the partners of the respondent(‘firm’) seeking a review of the order and consequently praying for an order cancelling the appointment of Sole Arbitrator, Chandra Dhari Singh, J. held that the respondent-applicant in the present case failed to establish adequate reasons for reviewing the order as when this Court delivered its order appointing an arbitrator, all parties were present whereby, the respondent-applicant herein failed to express any objections. READ MORE
Shyamjee Prepaid Services v. Top Steels, Arbitration Petition No. 137 of 2019
Make “Pathaan” accessible to visually and hearing impaired persons; Delhi High Court directs Yash Raj Films to prepare audio description, subtitles, and closed captions for the movie
A Single Judge Bench of Prathiba M. Singh, J. directs Yash Raj Films to prepare audio description, subtitles, and closed captions for the movie “Pathaan” and submit the same to Central Board of Film Certification for re-certification of the film, so that the film could be made accessible to visually and hearing impaired persons. READ MORE
Akshat Baldwa v. Yash Raj Films, W.P. (C) 445 of 2023
Delhi High Court permits student to take exams who was debarred from school for non-payment of fees; Necessitates the balance between Rights of child and Rights of School
In a petition filed with a grievance that the name of the petitioner(‘child’) has been struck off from the school due to non-payment of fees and even though the petitioner is a student of Class 10th, Mini Pushkarna, J., directed the respondent school to allow the petitioner child to take up the Practical Board Examinations of Class 10th commencing from 18-01-2023 and to further allow to attend any classes/ special classes that may be held by the school for imparting education to the children for appearing in Class 10th Board Examinations. READ MORE
Master Prabhnoor Singh Virdi v. The Indian School, W.P.(C) 584 of 2023
Delhi High Court quashes arbitral award for ineffective delivery of notice and wrong application of Indian laws in a case governing UAE Federal Labour Law
In a petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking to set aside the arbitral award passed by the sole arbitrator, Chandra Dhari Singh, J., quashed and set aside the impugned arbitral award as there was no effective delivery of the arbitral award to the petitioner, no mandatory notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration Act was given to the Petitioner and the Arbitrator has applied wrong governing law while adjudicating the disputes between the parties. READ MORE
Monika Oli v. CL Educate Limited, O.M.P. (COMM) 370/2022
[Arbitration Agreement] Delhi High Court reiterates the law of interpretation with respect to two inconsistent clauses of a same instrument/document/deed
In a petition filed by the petitioner seeking the constitution of an Arbitral Tribunal under the provision of Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 qua the dispute arising out of the agreement dated 26-08-2013 that was executed between the parties and vide which the petitioner was allocated a lockable unit Chandra Dhari Singh, J., directed Mrs. Madhurima Mridul, Advocate to be appointed as the sole arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. READ MORE
Sunil Kumar Chandra v. Spire Techpark Private Limited, Arbitration Petition No. 1102 of 2022
Delhi High Court quashes FIR registered against the law intern who projected himself as a proxy counsel on the instructions of his Advocate
In a case wherein, a petition was filed to seek quashing of FIR registered against the law intern who projected himself as a proxy counsel on the instructions of his Advocate, a Single Judge Bench of Anish Dayal, J. quashed the FIR registered against the law intern and further observed that the law interns who were merely students should be counselled, properly informed, and instructed instead of registering FIRs against them. READ MORE
Rajesh Sharma v. State (NCT of Delhi), W.P. (Crl) 2583 of 2022
Provisional Attachment Order rests merely on an assumption of ED; Delhi High Court quashes Order passed by ED being arbitrary and illegal
In a petition filed assailing the action taken by the ED to pass a Provisional Attachment Order (‘Order’) emanating from an FIR registered by the CBI due to an allocation of the Fatehpur Coal Block located in the State of Chhattisgarh, on allegations of offences under Section 120-B read with Section 420 of Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) along with Sections 13(2) and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Yashwant Varma, J., quashed the Order being violative of the statutory provisions and was held to be ‘arbitrary and illegal’. READ MORE
Prakash Industries Limited v. Union of India, W.P.(C) 13361/2018
Delhi High Court issues guidelines for medical examination of pregnant rape victims exceeding 24 weeks; allows termination of pregnancy of around 25 weeks of a minor child
In a case wherein a minor approached the Court through her mother under Article 226 of the Constitution praying for issuance of directions to the respondents to conduct medical termination of her pregnancy under Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 (MTP Act), a Single Judge Bench of Swarana Kanta Sharma, J. allowed termination of pregnancy of around 25 weeks and observed that in the cases of sexual assault, denying a woman the right to say no to medical termination of pregnancy and fastening her with responsibility of motherhood would amount to denying her human right to live with dignity as she had a right in relation to her body which included saying ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ to being a mother. READ MORE
Minor R THR Mother H v. State (NCT of Delhi), W.P. (Crl) 221 of 2023
Adjudication of an avoidance application is independent of the resolution of the corporate debtor and can survive CIRP: Delhi High Court
A Division Bench of Satish Chandra Sharma, CJ. and Subramonium Prasad, J. held that the phrase “arising out of” or “in relation to” as situated under Section 60(5)(c) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) was of a wide import and it was only appropriate that such applications were heard and adjudicated by the Adjudicating Authority, i.e., the NCLT or the NCLAT. READ MORE
Tata Steel BSL Ltd. v. Venus Recruiter (P) Ltd., 2023 SCC OnLine Del 155
Whether the eligibility criteria mentioned in the Bulletin of Information will prevail over the one given in the Admission Form? Delhi High Court rules
In a petition filed by the candidate (‘petitioner’) having graduated in a B.Sc. (H) Biological Science from the University of Delhi applied for admission in M.Sc. Botany course under the Merit Admission Category as OBC (Non-Creamy Layer) candidate for the academic year 2022-2023 in the University of Delhi. She is hereby challenging the rejection of her candidature for admission on grounds of non-eligibility, despite having scored 88.96% (9.365 CGPA) in B.Sc. (H) Biological Science, whereas the candidates selected for admission are having much lesser percentage, Vikas Mahajan, J., held that the petitioner cannot take advantage of, or refuge under, the error that has crept in the Admission Form available on the website, as the petitioner does not fulfil the criteria mentioned in the Bulletin of Information and it is this which will prevail over the former. READ MORE
Sonam Rawal v University of Delhi, W.P.(C) 16897 of 2022
Reasonable opportunity of being heard must be granted; Delhi High Court sets aside non-speaking order of the Delhi GST Commissioner
The division bench of Vibhu Bakhru and Amit Mahajan, J.J., while dealing with the civil writ petition, set aside the order passed by the Commissioner of Delhi (Goods and Service Tax) (‘Commissioner’) as well as the Appellate Authority, whereby his goods were detained under Section 129(1) of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (‘GST Act’) during transportation. An order raising demand of tax and penalty was also imposed on the petitioner. READ MORE
Ram Prakash Chauhan v Commissioner of Delhi (Goods and Service Tax), Writ Petition (Civil) 6924 of 2022
Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 does not permit passing of an order in the nature of a permanent measure; Delhi High Court denies permanent injunction under Section 9
In a case wherein an instant petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 r/w Section 2(1) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 had been filed by the petitioner seeking mandatory injunction to direct the respondent to reimburse/release the amount which had been deducted illegally and arbitrarily by the respondent in breach of the Arbitral Award, a Single Judge Bench of Chandra Dhari Singh, J. dismissed the petition and held that considering the limitations delineated under Section 9 of the Act, this Court could not grant a permanent relief to the petitioner, especially when an Award had already been made highlighting the extent of claims and reliefs that the parties were legally entitled for. READ MORE
GMR Pochanpalli Expressways Ltd. v. National Highways Authority of India, O.M.P.(I) (COMM) 396 of 2020
GAUHATI HIGH COURT
[Illegal Bulldozing of Houses] | “State of Assam must now take appropriate action to compensate the persons affected by illegal demolition of their houses”: Gauhati High Court
In a significant decision, the Division Bench of R.M. Chhaya, C.J., and Soumitra Saikia, J., expressed their expectation that State of Assam shall take appropriate decision for compensating the persons affected by the bulldozing of their houses, undertaken illegally by the police personnel of Batadraba Police Station. READ MORE
X v. State, 2023 SCC OnLine Gau 43
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
‘Amicable settlement between parties is unwarranted when the serious offence of murder is committed’; Gujarat High Court denies bail
While deciding the bail application, the bench of Samir J. Dave, J., held that when such a serious offence of murder is committed, amicable settlement is unwarranted as it amounts to hampering/ tempering with the evidence or witnesses. READ MORE
Naransinh Amarsinh Bihola v. State of Gujarat, 2022 SCC OnLine Guj 2412
Life and liberty of a person not on the shore of India, cannot be invoked when the individual himself is not in India; Gujarat High Court dismisses petition of foreigner to enter India
While deciding the petition, the bench of Biren Vaishnav, J., held that life and liberty of a person not on the shore of India, cannot be invoked on his behalf when the individual himself is not in India and as per the guidelines, foreigners who are morally depraved are not permitted to enter the territorial limits of India. READ MORE
Dhanraj Rajendra Patel v. UOI, R/Special Civil Application No. 26810 of 2022
Mandate of the Right to Information Act, 2005 is to promote free flow of information; Gujarat High Court directs Commissioner of Police to publish rules framed under Section 33 of Gujarat Police Act, 1951
While deciding the petition, the bench of Biren Vaishnav, J., held that Commissioner of Police is under a legal duty to publish information specified in Section 4 of the RTI Act and the petitioner is entitled to know the rules framed under Section 33 of the Gujarat Police Act, 1951 to know the reasons by which the petitioner was denied permission to protest. READ MORE
Swati Rajiv Goswami v. Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad, R/Special Civil Application No. 11826 Of 2020,
Inability to produce required documents due to COVID-19 lockdown; Gujarat High Court quashes reassessment order
While deciding the petition, the division bench of Sonia Gokani, J., and Sandeep N. Bhatt, J., quashed the reassessment order and notice of assessment issued by the Authority under Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, after taking note of the fact that petitioner was unable to get Form-F due to COVID-19 lockdown. READ MORE
Kavita Krushna Kumar v. UOI, R/Special Civil Application No. 10137 of 2020
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Karnataka HC refuses to entertain writ petition against Bharat Biotech vis-à-vis a private contract with United Brothers Healthcare Services for supply of Covaxin doses
While deciding over a writ petition under Art. 226 revolving around a private contract between Bharat Biotech and United Brothers Healthcare Services Pvt. Ltd., the Bench of M. Nagaprasanna, J., deliberated over its maintainability and has held that the writ petition is neither maintainable nor entertainable as the High Court would not issue a writ to interfere with a private contract between the two private entities. “Writ petition for recovery of money by a private entity from a private entity, arising out from a private contract, cannot be entertained” READ MORE
United Brothers Healthcare Services Pvt. Ltd., v. Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, 2022 SCC OnLine Kar 1600
Guideline excluding married daughter for issuance of I-cards to dependants of ex-servicemen, held violative of Art. 14; Karnataka High Court struck down the words “till married” from the impugned policy
While considering the reasonableness of Guideline issued by the Directorate of Department of Sainik Welfare and Resettlement, vis-à-vis issuance of dependant identity cards for the wards of ex-servicemen, which were alleged to have discriminated on grounds of gender, the Bench of M. Nagaprasanna, J., held that exclusion of married daughter for grant of an I-card in terms of Guideline 5(c) of the Guidelines for Issuance of I-cards to dependants of ex-servicemen to be violative of Arts. 14 and 15 of the Constitution and accordingly, struck down the words “till married” in the impugned Guideline. “If any Rule/Policy/Guideline, which would be in violation of the Rule of equality, such Rule/Policy/Guideline cannot but be obliterated, as being unconstitutional”. READ MORE
Priyanka R. Patil v. Kendriya Sainik Board, 2023 SCC OnLine Kar 1
Karnataka HC | Memorandum of settlement arrived during divorce proceedings cannot be questioned on the ground of husband’s re-marriage, unless an element of fraud is involved
While deciding the instant writ petition seeking to set aside the memorandum of settlement arrived between the parties involved in divorce proceedings under the provisions of CPC r/w the provisions of Karnataka Civil Procedure (Mediation) Rules, 2005, the Bench of M. Nagaprasanna, J., held that once the issue is settled before the Court and a settlement has been recorded, a party cannot call to question the settlement just because her former husband has re-married. The only ground when such settlement can be questioned, is the ground of fraud. READ MORE
Latha Choodiah v. Sree Balaji H., 2023 SCC OnLine Kar 2
KERELA HIGH COURT
‘Time period of 6 months for filing Motor Accident Claim must be calculated from the date of accident’; Kerala High Court interprets “month”
While deciding the petition, the bench of Amit Rawal, J., held that calculation of six months for filing the claim petition must be calculated from the date of accident and a month is reckoned according to the British calendar. READ MORE
Vimala Jose v. Aboobacker, 2022 SCC OnLine Ker 8268
Kerala High Court orders action against Devaswom Guard for misbehaving with the devotees at Sabarimala Temple on Makara Sankranti
In the matter of Travancore Devaswom Board(‘TDB’) of Sabarimala Temple regarding the misbehaviour of a TDB guard to devotees having darshan on Makara Sankranti, the division bench of Anil K. Narendran and P.G. Ajithkumar , JJ. said that the body language and the facial expression of the guard, while shoving the pilgrims has to be deprecated in the strongest words and for such misbehaviour towards pilgrims, the guard must proceed against, in accordance with law. READ MORE
Suo Motu v. State of Kerala, SSCR No. 4 of 2023
Kerala High Court |Violation of SARFAESI Rules for Sale of property is under DRT’s Scope, beyond Article 226
In a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Gopinath P., J. held that the Debt Recovery Tribunal(‘DRT’) has the power to set aside the sale of property, if the same is conducted in violation of the provisions of Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (‘SARFAESI Act’). The court held that the matter is beyond the scope of Article 226. READ MORE
Joji Mathew v. South Indian Bank, OP (DRT) No. 512 of 2022
Kerala High Court | Court fee cannot be refunded after the suit decided on merits
While deciding the petition, the bench of C.S. Dias, J., held that the judgment and decree, rendered after a full-fledged trial is appealable under Section 96 of Civil Procedure Code and without challenging the decree, application for refund of court fee is impermissible in law. READ MORE
S. Surendran v. State of Kerala, OP(C) No. 2463 of 2019
Individuals should not be permitted to snoop in neighbour’s affairs through CCTV; Kerala High Court directs Police to come up with guidelines related to CCTV installation
In a civil writ petition to protect the petitioner’s right to privacy, V.G. Arun, J. calls State Police Chief of Kerala to consult with the Government and to come up with appropriate guidelines related to CCTV camera installation. The Court suo motu included the State Police Chief as a respondent in the present matter. READ MORE
Agnes Michale v. Cheranelloor Grama Panchayath, WP(C) NO. 1485 OF 2023(I)
[BCI circular] Kerala High Court directs college to consider 5-year LL.B. admission to Polytechnic/Diploma holder
In a writ petition filed for admission to 5-year LL.B. course, Devan Ramachandran, J. directed the college and other authorities to consider the petitioner’s claim resolved after Bar Council of India (‘BCI’) issued a circular amending qualification for admission to 5-year LL.B. course. READ MORE
Meharban M.H. v. State of Kerala, (WP(C) NO. 42926 OF 2022)
Kerala High Court | If a party has taken steps considering the factor of subsidy, the Government cannot withdraw it retrospectively
While deciding the petition, the bench of Amit Rawal, J., held that principle of promissory estoppel arises while extending the promise of subsidy and the benefit cannot be taken away after expiry of number of years, if steps have been taken by other party considering the factor of subsidy. READ MORE
Vasu Coco Resorts Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Kerala, WP(C) No. 16882 OF 2019
Kerala High Court directs Central and State Government to consider penalty against obstruction of free flow of traffic at toll plaza
In a writ petition seeking permission for vehicles at toll plaza to pass through without paying toll in case of disruption, V.G. Arun, J. directed the Central and State Governments to consider imposition of penalty against persons obstructing free flow of traffic. READ MORE
Nithin Ramakrishnan v. Union of India, WP(C) No. 31341 OF 2022
Vehicle piloting or accompanying another vehicle transporting Narcotic Drug and Psychotropic Substances cannot be held as vehicle used as conveyance in carrying the contraband; Kerala High Court orders release of piloting vehicle
While deciding a petition, the bench of A. Badharudeen, J., held that conveyance used in carrying any narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances alone is subject matter of confiscation under Section 52-A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and vehicle piloting or accompanying another vehicle transporting Narcotic Drug and Psychotropic Substances cannot be held as vehicle used as conveyance in carrying the contraband. READ MORE
Firozalavi T.V. v. State of Kerala, 2023 SCC OnLine Ker 436
[Sexual Harassment]: Sexism not acceptable or cool; Boys should understand ‘No’ means ‘No’: Kerala High Court suggests including lessons in good behaviour and etiquette in curriculum
In a writ petition against Internal Complaints Committee’s (‘ICC’) enquiry report on sexual harassment, Devan Ramachandran, J. directed college authorities to constitute “Collegiate Students Redressal Committee”. The Court also suggested including lessons in good behaviour and etiquette in the curriculum and entrusted various authorities including Government of Kerala, General Education Department and Higher Education Department, Education Boards like the CBSE, ICSE and such others to look into it. READ MORE
Aaron S. John v. TKM College of Engineering, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 42412 of 2022
Mentally retarded persons are also entitled for tax exemption while purchasing motor cars; Kerala High Court set aside notification for being discriminatory
While deciding the petition, the bench of P.V. Kunhikrishnan, J., held that exclusion of mentally retarded persons from tax exemption by restricting the physically handicapped persons to blind, deaf and orthopedically handicapped, is discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. READ MORE
Clint Johnson v. State of Kerala, WP(C) No. 31061 of 2013
Only unmarried major daughter, unable to maintain herself, can claim maintenance under HAMA; Benefit not extended to all unmarried daughters: Kerala High Court
While deciding the petition, the bench of A. Badharudeen, J., held that the respondent is not eligible for grant of maintenance from the date of attaining majority, as she was unable to prove any physical or mental abnormality, or any injury due to which she could not maintain herself. READ MORE
Gireesh Kumar. N v. Rajani K.V., RPFC No. 503 of 2017
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Madhya Pradesh High Court | Every Panch, Sarpanch, other village officer of any description and landholder are duty bound to immediately furnish information of illegal cultivation
In a case dealing with illegal cultivation of opium poppy, Anand Pathak, J., held that Ss. 46 and 47 of NDPS Act casts legally bound duty on every Panch, Sarpanch, other village officer of any description and landholder to immediately furnish information of illegal cultivation as soon as it comes within their knowledge and not to neglect the same, whether knowingly or unknowingly or intentional or accidental, to forward to the Authority concerned. READ MORE
Gopal Krishna Gautam v. Union of India, Criminal Revision No. 2068 of 2021
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Madras High Court directs Tamil Nadu Judicial Academy to conduct a refresher course for the judicial officers, focusing on the special enactments, making them aware of the procedure
In a criminal appeal filed under Section 21(1) of the National Investigation Agency, Act, 2008, to set aside the order passed by the Magistrate, wherein the Magistrate allowed the petition filed under Section 43-D(1)(2)(b) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (‘UAPA’).and dismissed the petition filed by the accused for default bail on the same day on the ground that he has allowed the petition of the prosecution and has granted extension of period of remand to 180 days, the division bench of P.N. Prakash and N. Anand Venkatesh, JJ. while granting default bail to the accused, said that once the indefeasible right under the first proviso to Section 167(2) CrPC kicks in, the accused will be entitled to default bail, as a matter of right because Section 167(2) CrPC is directly relatable to Article 21 of the Constitution of India. READ MORE
Mir Anas Ali v. State, 2022 SCC OnLine Mad 5997
State must follow the specific method stipulated in the enactments for determining the value of the property, Madras High Court reiterates
In a writ petition to call for the entire records starting from the Council resolution dated 30-05-2022 passed by the Council of the Greater Chennai Corporation and the consequential proceedings and quash the entire proceedings, being illegal and ultravires to the provisions of Section 100 of the Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919, Anita Sumanth, J. held that the amendments by way of impugned Government Order, Gazette Notification dated 11-04-2022 and Council Resolution dated 30-05-2022 stand confirmed and challenges to the same are dismissed, and set aside the Property tax General Revision Notices for the period 2022-23 second half . Further, it directed that qua the writ petitioners, the amendments will be operative from the first half of 2023-24, i.e., 01.04.2023 onwards. It accepted the challenge to the property tax demands. Moreover, it directed the Corporations to ensure that the websites are kept robust and grievance mechanisms are put in place to enable all property tax assesses to seek clarifications regarding any aspect of property tax assessments. READ MORE
K. Balasubramaniam v. Commissioner, 2022 SCC OnLine Mad 6120
Madras High Court| Prison administration needs to be reformed to create a better environment and prison culture to ensure that prisoners enjoy their right to dignified life
In a petition filed praying to direct the respondents to appoint trained and skilled non-official board of visitors to jails as per Rule 507 of the Tamil Nadu Prison Rules, 1983 for visiting each of the Central Jails and Sub Jails to address the grievance of prisoners and helping the prisoner administration on the development of correctional administration, the division bench of R. Mahadevan and J. Sathya Narayana Prasad, JJ. gave the following directions to the respondent authorities: READ MORE
People’s Watch v. Home Secretary, Writ Petition (MD) No. 15321 of 2017
Madras High Court directs authorities to impose strict laws on consumption and distribution of alcohol and to curtail accessibility of alcohol, especially to younger generation
In public interest litigation filed for directing the respondents to open all retail outlets, pubs and bars situated in Tamil Nadu only between 2.00 pm and 8.00 pm to sell all alcoholic breweries and to take appropriate action in case of violation of the norms, the division bench of R. Mahadevan and J. Sathya Narayana, JJ. gave the following directions/suggestions: READ MORE
B. Ramkumar Adityan v. Additional Chief Secretary, 2023 SCC OnLine Mad 127
“Woman is not a pendulum and cannot be forced to swing between motherhood and employment”, Madras High Court upholds maternity benefits, as welfare legislation and benefits cannot be deprived on mere interpretation and technicalities
In a writ appeal filed against the order of the Single Judge directing the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (‘TNSTC’)(‘appellants’) to treat the petitioner/respondent maternity leave period as duty period for all purposes, the division bench of S. Vaidyanathan and Mohammad Shaffiq, JJ. upheld the Single Judge order granting paid maternity leave to the respondent. READ MORE
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Coimbatore) Ltd v. B. Rajeswari, 2023 SCC OnLine Mad 143
Madras High Court issues directions for conducting the traditional game of cock fight during the Pongal festival
In a writ petition filed praying for directing the police/respondents to grant permission and police protection for conducting “Cock fight” at Valakkanampoodi Pudur Village, the division bench of V.M. Velumani and R. Hemalatha JJ. directed the police to consider the representations of the petitioner and to give protection for conducting cock fight event during 17-01-2023 to 19-01-2013, subject to certain conditions. Further, it allowed the police to act immediately in accordance with law, if the conditions were not strictly followed during the event and if there is any violation. READ MORE
M. Munusamy v. Superintendent of Police, 2023 SCC OnLine Mad 82
Madras High Court grants 3.5 lakh Compensation to Prisoner who spent 9 months in Jail after Acquittal Orders
In a writ petition filed seeking interim compensation since the petitioner’s son(‘aggrieved’) was kept under illegal custody from 31-10-2019 to 14-07-2020, the Single Judge bench of Sunder Mohan, J. held that the aggrieved party should be paid compensation of Rs. 3,50,000/- for illegal detention, since he was imprisoned even after acquittal orders. READ MORE
Rathinam v. The State in 2023 SCC OnLine Mad 191
Madras High Court sets aside unsuitable conditions imposed by police for birthday celebration of LTTE leader Prabhakaran
In a writ petition filed by the petitioner contesting the conditions imposed by the police/respondents. The Single Judge Bench of G. Chandrasekharan, J. held that the police has to permit the petitioner to conduct an oratory competition on the 68th Birth Anniversary of Prabakaran the leader of the banned outfit Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (‘LTTE’) and set aside unsuitable conditions imposed on the petitioner. The conditions that the speeches should not eulogise Prabakaran was held to be not just and appropriate.Also, the condition to conduct the programme between 10 a.m to 1.00 p.m. was held to be improper. They also held that the respondent cannot require the petitioner to video graph the entire programme and can do the same independently. READ MORE
[Pugazendhi Thangraj v. Inspector of Police in W.P No. 339 of 2023
Madras High Court sets aside conviction of a woman who set her minor daughter on fire for offence under Section 302 IPC; Commutes Life sentence to 10 years RI
In a Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, against the judgment passed by the Mahila Court, wherein the Court has convicted the appellant under Section 302 of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’), the division bench of P.N.Prakash and Dr. G.Jayachandran, JJ. set aside the conviction and sentence of the convict for the offence under Section 302 IPC and convicted her for offence under Section 304(1) IPC and sentenced to undergo 10 years rigorous imprisonment and pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- in default to undergo 6 months rigorous imprisonment. READ MORE
Rajeshwari v. State, The Inspector of Police, Criminal Appeal (MD)No. 283 of 2020
Madras High Court grants Rs.10 lakhs compensation to victims suffered burn injuries due to illegal waste management
In a writ petition filed for directing the District Collector (‘DC’) to grant the relief to the petitioner as compensation for fire accident due to illegal waste management of fire waste and match factory waste dumped by the Maharaja Fire Works and Rajasekar Match Factory at Karuthoorani Kanmoi situated at Meenampatti to Naranapuram Road, G.R. Swaminathan, J. held that the State is liable as there is a breach of the provisions relating to environmental laws and human safety and directed the DC to pay Rs. 10 lakhs each to the victims. Further, it said that, if any specialised treatment is required by the victims at any point of time in future, it will be provided in any of the hospitals run by the State on a preferential basis. READ MORE
Sankareswari v. District Collector, Writ Petition (MD)No. 16862 of 2010
Madras High Court| Notification permanently banning sale of tobacco and its products is beyond the scope of powers of Food safety Commissioner
In a case relating to the imposing a ban on sale of Gutka, Pan Masala, flavoured or scented food products or chewable food products by whatever name called containing Tobacco and/or Nicotine as ingredients, the division bench of R. Subramanian and K. Kumaresh Babu, JJ. held that the successive notifications issued by the Commissioner of Food Safety relying upon Regulation 2.3.4 are not within the powers of the Commissioner and he had exceeded his powers in issuing such successive notifications. Thus, it quashed the notifications on the ground that they are in excess of the powers of the Commissioner, Food Safety. READ MORE
Designated Officer v. Jayavilas Tobacco Traders LLP, Writ Appeal No. 2093 of 2018
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Punjab and Haryana High Court directs restoration of pension to remarried widow
In a writ petition challenging rejection of family pension to petitioner by the Central Administrative Tribunal (‘CAT’) on the ground of remarriage, the bench of M.S. Ramachandra Rao and Sukhvinder Kaur, JJ. directed restoration of pension. READ MORE
Sukhjeet Kaur v. Union of India, 2023 SCC OnLine P&H 33
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Explained | Why Rajasthan High Court denied relief to Robert Vadra in Money Laundering Case
In a writ petition filed for quashing the Enforcement Case Information Report (‘ECIR’) and deter any coercive action against the petitioners, the single Judge bench Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J., found no ground to grant relief to the petitioners. READ MORE
Sky Light Hospitality LLP v. Union of India, 2022 SCC OnLine Raj 2530
[Congress MPs Mass Resignation] Rajasthan High Court seeks decision of Speaker of the House in 10 days
By way of Public Interest Litigation, opposition leader of the Legislative Assembly of Rajasthan (‘petitioner’) sought for directions to be issued to the Speaker of the House to take decision on the resignation tendered by 91 Members of the Legislative Assembly in September 2022, within a stipulated time. The division bench of Pankaj Mithal, Chief Justice and Shubha Mehta, J., expressed their expectation in reference to the decision being taken in this regard by the Speaker of the House before the commencement of next Assembly session. READ MORE
Rajendra Rathore v. The Honble Speaker, Rajasthan Assemble, 2023 SCC OnLine Raj 16
Rajasthan High Court quashes notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act for non-supply of ‘reasons to believe’
The division bench of Pankaj Mithal, CJ and Rekha Borana, J., quashed the notice issued to the petitioner under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) as well as the order dismissing the objections of the petitioner by the Income Tax Officer (‘respondents’) in relation to the belief of the revenue officer that the petitioner had escaped assessment for the year 2017-2018, stating that material referred to by the respondents were on the basis of ‘reason to believe’ which was not even supplied to the petitioner resulting into the entire proceedings for reopening of the assessment being vitiated in law. READ MORE
Micro Marbles Private Limited v. Office of Income Tax Officer, 2023 SCC OnLine Raj 58
Rajasthan High Court upholds the validity of equivalence certificate issued by Association of Indian Universities
The Single Judge bench of Arun Bhansali J., allowed the petition challenging the cancellation of the petitioner’s candidature for the post of Teacher Grade III (Level I) and quashed the determination made by respondents and held that since Association of Indian Universities (‘AIU’) had issued equivalence certificate with regard to the qualification of the petitioner, the same made her eligible for the post. READ MORE
Sharmila Barma v State of Rajasthan, Civil Writ Petition 6411 of 2022
[Congress MPs Mass Resignation] Advocate General alleges all 91 MLAs have withdrawn their resignation applications; Rajasthan High Court directs them to be placed on record
The division bench of Pankaj Mithal, Chief Justice and Shubha Mehta, J., granted time to Advocate general (‘AG’) to obtain fresh instructions given the changed circumstances that all the MLAs had withdrawn their resignation applications. READ MORE
Rajendra Rathore v. The Hon’ble Speaker, Rajasthan Assemble, 2023 SCC OnLine Raj16
SIKKIM HIGH COURT
Can Courts re-appreciate evidence under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act and treat High Courts as regular first Court of Appeal? Sikkim High Court answers in Negative
While dealing with the dispute in relation to ‘Loss of Profits’ awarded by the Arbitral Tribunal but disallowed by the Commercial Court, the division bench of Biswanath Somadder, Chief Justice and Meenakshi Madan Rai, J., while considering the matter under Section 37 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘Arbitration Act’), set aside the order passed by the Commercial Courts and restored the award passed by the Tribunal. READ MORE
KMC Brahmaputra Infrastructure Ltd. v. The Chief Engineer, Roads & Bridges Department, Government of Sikkim, 2022 SCC OnLine Sikk 130
*Simran Singh, Editorial Assistant has summated January 2023 High Court Roundup
