Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The Court said directions regarding ensuring reservation of women advocates had been issued by the Supreme Court under Art. 142 and same cannot be done by the High Court.
Court noted that innumerable matters are coming up where stolen gold had been pledged with a gold finance company and this aspect must be examined by the concerned authorities and proper guidelines must be formulated in relation to issues such as implication of pledging stolen gold, manner of dealing with such gold when criminal proceedings are taken up etc.
“It is the application of mind that is necessary in law and not application of ink; it is not the flow of ink on the paper that is necessary in law, but flow of content depicting such application of mind.”
The sitting Member of Parliament had shared article in November claiming that a farmer had died by suicide after discovering his land had been taken over by the Waqf Board.
The bail application of the Founder-Chairman has been denied for the fourth time. Earlier, his bail was denied twice by the Court and once by the Supreme Court.
The Court pointed out that the guidelines 2024-25 expressly did not provide preference to the grandchildren of serving/retired employees. When such a preference was specifically not provided in the current guidelines governing the admission process, then such admission cannot be considered as per previous guidelines.
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.
Court explained that POSH Act does not expressly prohibit the Appellate Authority to pass an interim order and once the appellate authority has the power to set aside impugned proceedings, it can be construed that the appellate authority also has implied power to consider passing of interim order of stay as well.
Justice B. V Nagarathna who is currently serving as a Judge of Supreme Court of India, formerly served as a Judge of Karnataka High Court until her elevation to the Supreme Court. Justice Nagarathna is also the potential contender for the first ever woman Chief Justice of India.
Late Justice K.S. Puttaswamy played a crucial role in the recognition of the Right to Privacy as a fundamental right.
On 15-10-2024, the SC Collegium recommended Justice Siddaiah Rachaiah’s name for appointment as a Permanent Judge of the High Court of Karnataka against the existing vacancy.
The Court said that it is not understandable that how if someone shouts ‘Jai Sriram’ it would outrage the religious feeling of any class especially when the complainant himself states that Hindu — Muslims are living in harmony in the area the incident by no stretch of imagination can result in antimony.
The Court further stated that power of the Courts either competent Civil Court or Constitutional Court cannot be permitted to be usurped by the Chairman of the Bar Council of India, as was done in the instant case.
The Court directed the company’s Internal Complaints Committee to hold an enquiry into the complaint of the petitioner in accordance with the provisions of PoSH Act, 2013 and complete the process as expeditiously as possible within an outer limit of 90 days.
“Casual observation may indicate personal biases especially when perceived to be directed at a certain gender or community. One must be wary of making patriarchal or misogynistic comments”
Upholding the order, the Court stated that the Governor in the normal circumstance has to act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers as obtaining under Article 163 of the Constitution, but can take independent decision in exceptional circumstances and opined that the instant case was one such exception.
These guidelines have come in the wake of a suo motu case concerning the controversial ‘Pakistan’ and ‘undergarment’ comments made by Karnataka High Court judge, Justice Vedavyasachar Srishananda.
Justice Vedavyasachar Srishananda was appointed as Additional Judge of the Karnataka High Court and taken oath on 04-05-2020 and was made permanent judge on 25-09-2021.
On 5-9-2017, Gauri Lankesh, a journalist and a progressive thinker, was found dead in her house. Suspecting foul play, her sister filed an FIR against unknown persons.
Considering the contention to read down R. 2(b)(ii) of Karnataka Civil Services (Appointment on Compassionate Grounds) (Amendment) Rules, 2021, the Court pointed out that who all can lay a claim for compassionate appointment, is a matter of public policy that falls within the domain of the lawmaker, and Courts being the legislature’s coordinate branch, cannot run a race of opinions.