Criminal Law Roundup July 2024 | Updates on cases related to quashing of proceedings, wrongful detention, bail, and more
Read July’s share of criminal law discussions at the Supreme Court and various High Courts
Supreme Court
Identify and exclude ‘creamy layer’ among SC/ STs from reservation: Supreme Court in Sub-classification of SC/STs Verdict
“The criteria for exclusion of the creamy layer from the SCs and STs for the purpose of affirmative action could be different from the criteria as applicable to the Other Backward Classes.”
‘Indra Sawhney did not limit sub-classification to OBCs; Sub-classification of SC/STs permissible’: A point wise breakdown of Majority Ruling in SC’s 6:1 Verdict
“Article 341 does not create an integrated homogenous class. Sub-classification within the Scheduled Castes does not violate Article 341(2) because the castes are not per se included in or excluded from the List.”
SC calls for performance audit of Maharashtra Slum Areas Act; Emphasises on review of implementation of Statute to ensure Rule of Law
“Legal reform through legislative correction improves the legal system and it would require assessment of the working of the law, its accessibility, utility and abuse as well. Executive branch has a constitutional duty to ensure that the purpose and object of a statute is accomplished while implementing it, along with duty to closely monitor the working of a statute and must have a continuous and a real time assessment of the impact that the statute is having.”
‘Sub-classification of SC/STs permissible’: SC overrules EV Chinnaiah ruling in 6:1 verdict; Justice Bela M. Trivedi dissents
In E.V. Chinnaiah v. State of A.P., (2005) 1 SCC 394, the Supreme Court five Judge Bench held that Scheduled Castes form homogenous classes and there cannot be any sub-division, and that such sub-classification of SC/STs is contrary to Article 341 of the Constitution.
Supreme Court stays Delhi HC order granting divorce to Chef Kunal Kapur; Refers case for Mediation
Supreme Court has referred the case to the Supreme Court Mediation Centre to explore the possibility of any out-of-court settlement.
Bar Councils cannot charge more than amount specified under S. 24 of Advocates Act as enrolment fees: Supreme Court
Supreme Court declared that the judgment would have a prospective effect, thus the Bar Councils are not required to refund the enrolment fees collected more than the statutory amount so far.
Supreme Court on Parliament’s power to impose limitations on State to levy tax on mineral rights
Supreme Court said that authorizing the Central Government to lay down the terms of mining leases and grant approval to concessions, the MMDR Act seeks to ensure that there is uniformity in the terms for working of mines and extraction of minerals.
Explained | Supreme Court’s verdict on ‘royalty’ as tax and States power to levy cess on mining and mineral-use activities
“The payments made to the Government cannot be deemed to be a tax merely because the statute provides for their recovery as arrears”.
Requirement of proficiency in State’s local language for appointment in District Judicial Service is valid: Supreme Court
The imposition of such a requirement was manifestly proper, as judicial officers are required to appreciate the evidence in the State’s language.
Supreme Court| No interim relief to Bihar Govt in plea against Patna HC ruling quashing 65% reservation for SC, ST & OBC in jobs and education
The Supreme Court refused to grant interim relief at this stage.
Never Reported Judgment| Seller must prove readiness and willingness to perform his part of contract to sustain his claim for damages for breach of contract [(1953) 2 SCC 52]
This report covers the Supreme Court’s Never Reported Judgment dating back to the year 1953 on damages for breach of contract.
’National Policy on Genetically Modified crops’: A breakdown of Justice Karol’s opinion upholding conditional approval to GM Mustard cultivation by Centre
“When a legislative body enacts a legislation there is a presumption of constitutionality unless proven otherwise, similarly, a policy decision when taken by the competent authority enters the fray of enforcement with a presumption in its favour of being in public interest, unless otherwise shown, demonstrated and proven to be among other grounds, manifestly arbitrary.”
Supreme Court holds that States can levy cesses on mining and mineral-use activities; Justice BV Nagarathna dissents
This matter was the oldest pending nine-judge Bench case before the Supreme court. The Bench had reserved its judgment in the matter on 14-03-2024
Power to grant interim stay of operation of bail order can only be exercised in exceptional cases: Supreme Court
“An order granting a stay to the operation of the order granting bail during the pendency of the application for cancellation of bail should be passed in very rare cases”
Supreme Court sets aside Delhi HC order quashing summons issued to “The Wire” in criminal defamation case filed by former JNU Professor
In March 2023, the Delhi High Court quashed the summoning order, stating that there is nothing therein that could be defamatory against former Professor
‘Non-consideration of adverse effect on health of humans, animals, plants’: Justice Nagarathna on Centre’s approval for Genetically Modified mustard cultivation
“The failure to adequately assess health and environmental impact of Genetically Modified crops seriously infringes upon intergenerational equity as it potentially endangers the ability of future citizens to enjoy the highest attainable standard of health.”
Read why Supreme Court granted bail to Ashish Mishra in Lakhimpur Kheri violence case
In Lakhimpur Kheri violence, four farmers, one journalist, the driver of one of the vehicles, and two others, were killed. Nearly ten farmers suffered major and minor injuries
Candidate scoring minimum qualifying marks with no work experience will still be eligible to be appointed as City Manager under UDHD: Supreme Court
“The only criteria for minimum qualifying marks have been mentioned in the Bihar City Manager Cadre (Appointment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2014 and the advertisement, which states that 32 % for women is the minimum qualifying marks for the written test (70 marks) and not out of 100 marks as interpreted by BSSC.”
No re-test for NEET UG 2024 as Supreme Court finds no material indicating vitiated results or systemic breaches
On 22-07-2024 the Supreme Court has asked the Director of IIT, Delhi to constitute a three-member expert committee to give their opinion regarding the correct answer to a multiple-choice question of NEET-UG 2024, for which the NTA awarded marks for two options.