Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The wife was appointed as Assistant Manager in LIC Housing Finance Ltd., and at time the respondent was doing nothing, this was the reason why husband compelled the appellant to leave the job and stay with him.
“The enquiry is nothing but an eye wash because the same was conducted without following any procedure which had to be mandatorily followed.”
“Private Respondents are free to reuse generic beer bottles manufactured by third parties which do not violate the label, trademark/brand/logo of another entity.”
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.
The applicant bore sole responsibility for any adverse effects arising from the inability to cross-examine the prosecutrix due to repeated delay tactics.
The Court deemed the Coordinate Bench decision in Narmadi Prasad v. State of M.P., as per incuriam, as it did not consider the Aadhaar Card’s intended use solely as identity-only proof.
As per the provisions of Muslim law and the DV Act, the Court opined that the present petitioner being father-in-law of respondent, cannot be compelled to give maintenance to the respondent.
“If any social media platform intends to publish the Court proceedings, that will be permissible only in the manner provided by and subject to restrictions and limitations as per Rule 11(b) of Rules of 2021 and not in any other manner.”
“Indisputably, the public good is a question of fact. Good faith has also to be established as a fact. Ergo, to prove good faith so as to constitute offence of Section 499 of IPC, trial is necessary.”
The Justice Jain Commission Report pertains to the 2017 Mandsaur farmers’ protest, during which police action resulted in five deaths and several injuries.
The Court, however, opined that “Section 125 of CrPC has not been constituted to create an army of idle or inactive people waiting for maintenance to be awarded from the income of the other spouse.”
The Court observed that the effect of the order was limited to 17-09-2024, indicating that the immediate urgency of the issue may be moot, however, recognised the need to address the concern of setting a future precedent.
The petitioner pointed out that respondents are keeping the elephants in captivity and in process giving inhuman treatment and out of 10 elephants, 2 elephants died and the respondents have concealed this fact from the Court.
The Court opined that applicant may be released on bail by imposing some conditions which may enthuse in him the sense of responsibility and a pride for the country in which he is born and living.
The primary objective of the JJ Act is the rehabilitation of juveniles rather than punishment. The grant or denial of bail/suspension should be based on the individual’s conduct and circumstances, not solely on the severity of the offense.
The petitioner contended that the manner in which drinking water is stored for the Jail inmates, the water will get contaminated, and the inmates are probably not being supplied potable drinking water.
Despite the Court granting bail on 11-09-2024, the case was not immediately disposed of, as there were concerns regarding lapses in maintaining CCTV footage at the police station in Manasa, District-Neemuch.
The Court held that “the prosecution of the petitioner is sugarcoated with ill-intention and made to belittle his image in the society.”
“A women survives as a mother, wife, sister and daughter etc. of every person. Her body is known as her own temple as she is specifically known for her sacrifices. Her sacrosanct entity is required to be protected in every circumstances.”
The petitioner argued that the State committee lacks expertise in handling elephants and suggested involving experts from states like Kerala, which have significant experience in managing wild elephants.