BAIL
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT| “Say ‘Bharat Mata ki Jai’, Salute tricolour 21 times”; Bail granted to accused for shouting “Pakistan Zindabad, Hindustan Murdabad”
In an application filed under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC), seeking regular bail where the applicant was arrested for allegedly shouting slogans “Pakistan Zindabad, Hindustan Murdabad” at a public place, a single-judge bench of Dinesh Kumar Paliwal, J., granted bail to the applicant but imposed stringent conditions, such as, mandating the applicant to salute the national flag 21 times and shout “Bharat Mata Ki Jai” each time at the police station. Read more HERE
BOMBAY HIGH COURT| Man grooving his neck towards a woman while riding two-wheeler and listening to music not ‘stalking’ under S.354-D of IPC
In the present case, applicant was convicted under Section 248(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 for offences punishable under Sections 279, 354-D, and 337 of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of three months and to pay fine of Rs 500 for offence punishable under Section 354-D; rigorous imprisonment of three months and to pay fine of Rs 5,000 for offence under Section 279 and rigorous imprisonment of three years and to pay fine of Rs 500 for offence punishable under Section 337 of IPC. A Single Judge Bench of Milind N. Jadhav, J., opined that applicant’s act of shaking his neck i.e., grooving his neck while riding and simultaneously listening to the music did not fall into any one of the ingredients of the offence of stalking under Section 354-D of IPC. The Court agreed with the complainant’s submission that the act of overtaking and coming close while driving a vehicle in motion endangered the life and limb of both the riders, therefore, the Court stated that applicant had been correctly convicted for rash and negligent driving even though there was no collision between the vehicles of the parties. Read more HERE
COMPENSATION
DELHI HIGH COURT| BSES Yamuna Power Ltd to pay ex-gratia amount of Rs. 10 lakhs to parents of 18-year-old boy who died due to electrocution from non-insulated live electric line
In a petition filed for claiming compensation, on account of the unfortunate death of the petitioners’ 18-year-old son (‘the deceased’), who allegedly got electrocuted from falling over a non-insulated live electric line, Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, J., stated that the maxim res ipsa loquitur was applied in cases where the facts clearly and unequivocally attribute the responsibility for the incident to statutory authorities, rather than to any act which was beyond human control and knowledge or natural occurrences. Since, in the present case, there was no conclusive evidence, the present case did not satisfy the requirement of application of the maxim res ipsa loquitur. Thus, the Court granted an ex-gratia amount of Rs. 10,00,000, which was to be paid by BSES Yamuna Power Ltd. to the parents of the deceased. Read more HERE
COSTS
BOMBAY HIGH COURT| ‘Allegations about show cause notice being vague are wholly misconceived’; Rs 5 lakhs costs imposed on litigants who tried to “take a chance” by filing a petition
In the present case, petitioners prayed that this Court be pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari or a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other writ, order, or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution calling for the records pertaining to petitioner’s case and after going into the validity and legality, quash and set aside the impugned order dated 22-07-2024 and the show cause notice dated 07-12-2023. Read more HERE
ENVIRONMENTAL LAW
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT| Authorities to decide on Rehabilitation of migrated Wild Elephant as per Section 11(1)(a) of Wild Life Protection Act
In a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed seeking a direction to the respondent/authorities to release the captured elephants and to rehabilitate them in the wild with the aid and assistance of experts, a division bench of Suresh Kumar Kait, CJ., and Vivek Jain, J., directed the respondent authorities to make a conclusive decision on the rehabilitation of the elephants and provide a detailed status report on their conditions and captivity by the next hearing. Read more HERE
FAMILY LAW
DELHI HIGH COURT| Daughter-in-law’s right to shared household under DV Act does not supersede right of senior citizen to seek relief under Senior Citizens Act in case of gross ill-treatment
In a petition challenging the order dated 31-03-2021, passed by the Divisional Commissioner, whereby the eviction of Petitioners 1 and 2 was upheld, Sanjeev Narula, J., noted that the daughter-in-law sought to reside in the subject property by invoking her right to a shared household, as provided under Section 17 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (‘DV Act’). However, this right was not absolute, particularly in cases where it conflicted with the rights of senior citizens. While the daughter-in-law’s right under the DV Act was acknowledged, it did not supersede the right of the senior citizen to seek relief under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (‘Senior Citizens Act’) when there was evidence of gross ill-treatment. Thus, the Court stated that there was no jurisdictional bar on the authorities under the Senior Citizens Act to entertain the request for eviction. Read more HERE
INTERPRETATION OF LAWS
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT| Revenue Code fully applicable to areas added to municipal limits after July 7, 1949, previously governed by Z.A. Act before its repeal
In a petition filed against the order passed by Tahsildar in proceedings under Section 25 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, and praying for certain ancillary reliefs Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava, J. held that the Revenue Code is fully applicable to areas added to municipal limits after July 7, 1949, previously governed by Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (‘ZA Act, 1950’), before its repeal. Further, it said that the objection raised by the petitioner about the jurisdiction of the Tahsildar in passing of the order exercising powers under Section 25, is legally untenable, and the said order is unassailable on the ground of lack of jurisdiction. Read more HERE
MAINTENANCE
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT| Wife’s education alone does not bar her ‘Right to Maintenance’; Husband’s support still required
In a petition filed by husband challenging the Family Court’s order awarding Rs. 40,000/- per month as maintenance to wife (Rs. 25,000/-) and daughter (Rs. 15,000/-), a single-judge bench of Prem Narayan Singh, J., partly allowed the petition and reduced the maintenance for the wife from Rs. 25,000/- to Rs. 20,000/- per month considering her qualifications and potential earning capacity, while the maintenance for the daughter remained unchanged. Read more HERE
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT| A spouse unable to maintain himself/herself is entitled to maintenance on the principle of equistatus; Maintenance to wife, upheld
A revision application was filed challenging the judgment and order dated 31-05-2014, passed by the Judicial Magistrate wherein it was directed that the husband (petitioner) will pay Rs. 4,000 per month as maintenance to the wife (opposite party) under Section 125 of Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) arising from a case filed by the wife seeking maintenance, claiming that she was unable to support herself after being driven out of her matrimonial home following marital discord and alleged mistreatment by her husband and his family. Bibhas Ranjan De., upheld the maintenance order because the object behind providing maintenance, to a spouse is to the effect that the spouse can maintain herself or himself and not unduly suffer for want of funds. Read more HERE
CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT| ’Relationship was in nature of marriage’; Maintenance for a woman in live-in relationship who was unaware of her partner’s already existing marriage, upheld
In a revision petition filed under Section 438 read with Section 442 of Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNSS’) against the judgment dated 02-08-2024, whereby the criminal appeal filed by the applicant was dismissed, Narendra Kumar Vyas, J., stated that in the present case, the woman had clearly stated that she was not aware of her partner’s family and her partner had also not placed any evidence on record to suggest that the woman was aware about the marriage and children. Therefore, the relationship between the parties was in nature of marriage. Read more HERE
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT
DELHI HIGH COURT| ‘Mere violation of Motor Vehicles Act provisions does not amount to negligence’; MACT’s order, modified
In an appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (‘MV Act’) to challenge the order dated 20-02-2016 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (‘Tribunal’), South East District, Saket Court, New Delhi, a Single Judge Bench of Chandra Dhari Singh, J. said that the Tribunal had rightly assessed that the driver (appellant) was driving in a rash and negligent manner which is why there was no scope for contributory negligence, and held that respondent 2 along with the driver were jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation amount to respondent 1. Read more HERE
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT| ‘Failed to establish negligence in handling of vehicle by driver’; Insurance Company to pay Rs. 54, 650 to oil carrier company for damage caused to its oil tanker
In a petition challenging the order dated 28-01-2020, passed by Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services), Jind (‘Respondent 3’), whereby the application filed by the applicant (‘Respondent 2’) was allowed, Vinod S. Bharadwaj, J., stated that the petitioner’s counsel had failed to refer any evidence that establishes that there was any negligence in handling of the vehicle by the driver or that the said training obtained by him was invalid or not worthy acceptance. The requirement of having undergone a certified training course was a prerequisite for seeking an endorsement on the driving license. Thus, the Court partly set aside the award passed by Respondent 3 and modified it to the extent that the petitioner was directed to pay Rs.54,650, as approved by the Surveyor and assessor of the petitioner with respect to the damage caused to the oil tanker along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing an application till its actual realization. Read more HERE
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT| Blind rejection of License transfer request without provision violates principles of Equity, Justice & Good Conscience
In a writ Petition challenging the rejection of the application for transfer of Motor Driving School license, a single-judge bench of Rekha Borana, J., while balancing legal and equitable principles, set aside the blind rejection of the License transfer application. The Court affirmed that “when no positive law is discernible, Courts turn to equity as a source of applicable law” and directed the respondent authorities to reconsider the petitioner’s application for license transfer. Read more HERE
PMLA
MADRAS HIGH COURT| Is mere possession of proceeds of crime enough to invoke PMLA?
In a criminal revision filed to set aside the orders passed by the Principal Sessions Court, wherein the Court rejected the discharge petition as the accused has failed to made out prima facie case for discharge, the division bench of S.M. Subramaniam and Dr. A.D. Maria Clete, JJ. while upholding the impugned order, said that the burden of proof lies on the affected person, who in turn has to prove his innocence during trial. Adjudication of those materials placed by the accused would be unnecessary for this Court, while dealing with the discharge petitions. Read more HERE
POCSO
KERALA HIGH COURT| Having sexual intercourse, being naked in front of minor amounts to sexual harassment, punishable under POCSO Act
In a criminal miscellaneous case filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to quash all further proceedings for the trial of cases under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (‘POCSO Act’), A. Badharudeen, J. held that having sexual intercourse in an unlocked room and exposing one’s naked body to a minor child is an intentional act of sexual harassment punishable under POCSO Act. Thus, the Court quashed the criminal proceedings pertaining to offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 341 read with 34 of IPC as well as under Section 75 of the JJ Act, against the accused 2 , while dismissing the quashment sought for, for the offences punishable under Sections 323 read with 34 of IPC as well as under Section 11(i) read with 12 of the POCSO Act. Read more HERE
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT| Central Administrative Tribunal affirmed as substitute for Civil Court in service disputes
In the writ petition challenging the judgment and order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), the division bench of Justices Rajan Roy and Om Prakash Shukla set aside the impugned order. The bench observed that the Tribunal had mistakenly approached the matter as if it were exercising the powers of judicial review akin to that of the High Courts under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. They highlighted that the Tribunal’s decision was made through summary proceedings, wholly oblivious of the actual legal position. There is similarity of the jurisdiction of the Tribunal vis-à-vis the High Court, but this does not take away the initial role of the Tribunal to act as a Court / Tribunal of first instance. There are various issues which should have been seen by the Tribunal. Read more HERE
PREMATURE RELEASE/ PAROLE/ FURLOUGH
BOMBAY HIGH COURT| ‘Uniform policy required for granting furlough/parole as authorities adopt pick and choose policy’; Furlough leave to two prisoners who surrendered late
In the present case, petitioners were inmates who challenged the order dated 15-04-2024 passed by Respondent 2-Deputy Inspector of Police (Prison) and prayed for directions to be given to release them on furlough leave. The Division Bench of Vibha Kankanwadi* and S.G. Chapalgaonkar, JJ., noted that earlier in case of a prisoner who had surrendered belatedly by 49 days, was granted furlough leave and observed that the authority was adopting pick and choose policy and thus, opined that the same criteria ought to have been adopted and certainly petitioners in the present case should not to have been discriminated against on the said ground. The Court quashed and set aside the impugned order dated 15-04-2024 and directed that petitioners be released on furlough leave. Read more HERE
QUASHMENT OF PROCEEDINGS/ FIR
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT| Long-standing consensual relationship without cheating not considered rape on pretext of marriage
In an application filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking quashing of chargesheet and the entire criminal proceedings in case under Sections 376 and 386 of the Penal Code, 1860, Anish Kumar Gupta, J. while quashing the criminal proceedings against the accused, said that the informant, a mature woman with adult sons, initiated a physical relationship with the accused while her husband was still alive, raising significant questions about her legal capacity to engage in a new commitment. Given her marital status, any promise of marriage made by the accused may lack legal validity, as she was not in a position to marry at that time. Furthermore, her involvement in the relationship appears to have been driven by her own desire, suggesting she cannot claim victimhood in the context of a breach of promise, as the promise itself was not non-est at that time of beginning of the relationship between them. Read more HERE
DELHI HIGH COURT| FIR in 7-Year-Old Case of fraud, rape, and forgery, quashed after amicable settlement
A petition was filed by the petitioner (accused) under section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of FIR registered under Sections 376, 420, 385, 387, 506, 419, 467, 468, 471, 120-B and 34 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) read with Section 14 of Foreigners Act and 66D & 66E of IT Act 2000 along with all consequential judicial proceedings on the ground that the parties have arrived at a settlement. Vikas Mahajan, J., quashed the FIR to serve the ends of justice and to provide relief to the complainant and to save her from the agony of criminal cases. Read more HERE
KARANATAKA HIGH COURT| Criminal proceedings against persons accused of shouting ‘Jai Shri Ram’ inside a mosque, quashed
While considering the instant petition challenging the registration of crime against persons accused of creating communal disturbances by shouting ‘Jai Shri Ram’ inside a mosque, the Bench of M. Nagaprasanna, J*., found no ingredients of any of the offences so alleged under Sections 295-A, 505 and 506 and 447 of Penal Code, 1860, in the complaint and held that permitting further proceedings against the accused persons would become an abuse of the process of law and result in miscarriage of justice. Read more HERE
KERALA HIGH COURT| Referring woman as ‘prostitute’ in public in her absence may not constitute an offence under S. 509 IPC, but could attract other charges
In a criminal miscellaneous case filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘CrPC’) to quash the proceedings, A. Badharudeen,J. while quashing the proceedings against the accused persons, said that under Section 509 of the Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), insulting a woman’s modesty requires that the act or words must be directed at her in a manner that is intended to insult or offend. If a remark, such as referring to a woman as a “prostitute,” is made in a context where the woman is not present, it may not meet the criteria for constituting an offense under this section. Read more HERE
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT| ‘Every citizen has right to access temple and offer prayers’; FIR for alleged Trespass at Mahakaleshwar Mahadev Temple, quashed
In a criminal petition seeking quashment of FIR filed by Sub-Inspector based on a report that the petitioner attempted to forcibly enter the Mahakaleshwar Mahadev Ji Siddh Dham Temple by cutting a lock on the door, a single-judge bench of Arun Monga, J., held that “every citizen has the right to access the temple and offer prayers” and quashed the FIR and all consequential proceedings as the petitioner’s actions prima facie did not constitute any criminal offense. “A temple is a public place of worship, accessible to all citizens regardless of caste, creed, or social standing. Restricting access to such a place by erecting barricades or locks by private Trustees violates the fundamental right of every individual to practice and propagate their religion, as guaranteed under Article 25 of the Constitution of India.” Read more HERE
SERVICE LAW
DELHI HIGH COURT| Compassionate allowance to wife of deceased despite dismissal for absenteeism under CCS Pension Rules, granted
The petition was filed by the petitioner seeking compassionate allowance under Rule 41 of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972, following the dismissal of her deceased husband from service, contending that despite his dismissal for unauthorized absenteeism, the dire financial situation of her family warranted special consideration for compassionate relief. A division bench of C. Hari Shankar and Sudhir Kumar Jain, JJ., held that the petitioner’s family, facing dire financial circumstances, was entitled to compassionate allowance under Rule 41 of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972, despite the dismissal of the petitioner’s husband for unauthorized absenteeism, as the provision allows for such relief in cases of severe financial hardship. Read more HERE
