Legal

While dealing with the case of a 15-year-old rape survivor who was 32 weeks pregnant, the Allahabad High Court observed that it was a woman’s decision whether to continue with her pregnancy or go ahead with its medical termination.

This court added that a woman’s decision in whether or not to go ahead with the termination of her pregnancy is a decision that is to be taken by no one but herself. “This is primarily based on the widely acknowledged idea of bodily autonomy. Here, her consent reigns supreme,” the Court held.  “If she decides to go ahead with the pregnancy and put the child up for adoption, then the duty lies on the state to ensure that it is carried out as privately as possible and also to ensure that the child, being a citizen of this land, is not stripped of the fundamental rights that are enshrined in the Constitution,” the court added.

The Supreme Court has decided to examine and lay down law to check unlicensed money lending business in India for rescuing hapless borrowers who are driven into a debt trap by moneylenders having "Shylockian attitude".

Shylock was a fictional moneylender in William Shakesphere's play "The Merchant of Venice".

A bench of Justices CT Ravikumar and Sanjay Kumar, while adjudicating a cheque bounce dispute involving Bollywood film producer and director Raj Kumar Santoshi, who allegedly borrowed money from a man named Prashant Malik to produce film "Saragarhi", said it has taken note of a "growing menace to the society". The bench said, "We are coming across cases where such so-called friendly advances are in crores (of rupees). We are mainly peeved and pained by instances where ordinary laymen take such loans and are at last driven to streets or driven to commit suicide, on account of lenders entertaining Shylockian attitudes."

Santoshi, in his plea filed by advocate Durga Dutt, has claimed when he was preparing for making "Saragarhi", Malik, who knew him, had approached him with an offer to invest Rs 2 crore in the film.

The Kerala High Court has annulled the proceedings of a Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act case, citing "humanitarian consideration" despite such cases typically being non-settled under the law.

The court noted that the accused, who has married the victim, is now living with her and their two children. The case, filed in February 2021 with the Ernakulam Rural Police, involved allegations that the accused kidnapped and raped the 17-year-old victim. The victim’s mother was also charged for failing to report her daughter's pregnancy following the assault. The court acknowledged that the accused and the victim are now married and have two children.

 “In such cases, the tough nut standing in the way of settlement shall be crushed with humanitarian consideration as the hammer, so as to ensure the peaceful family living of the parties, and most importantly, to ensure the well-being of the children born to them,” the Bench of Justice A Badharudeen said on July 22, acting on a petition filed by the accused.

The Supreme Court on Friday got irked over a lengthy judgement penned by a single judge bench of the Delhi High Court in a case related to an arbitral award involving media baron Kalanithi Maran and SpiceJet, saying there was no “application of mind”.

Suggesting that the case be now transferred to another judge by the Delhi High Court, the top court said the judgement "has to be carefully articulated" and "the judge must apply mind to grounds of challenge and then deduce if interference is warranted". The strong observations against the single judge bench came from a bench headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud during the hearing of an appeal by Kalanithi Maran and Kal Airways against a Delhi High Court order setting aside an arbitral award asking the SpiceJet to refund Rs 579 crore plus interest to the media baron and his firm.

The bench, also comprising justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, did not allow the submission of senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for Maran and his firm, that the legal aspects of the dispute be considered.

"Come to the single judge order first...all that we can say about the single judge is filling up 250 pages is not writing a judgment under section 34 (of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act) "This is atrocious. Just a number of the Supreme Court judgements (is cited) saying (scope of ) interference is limited. Let us not make any observations about this single judge. Where has he even applied his mind?" the CJI observed.

Section 34 of the Act deals with applications for setting aside arbitral awards.

"(By) Reading the single judge (bench) order, it does not seem there is any application of mind. The Delhi High Court should now assign the case to a judge other than the single judge who was assigned the case," the CJI said. The bench refused to entertain a plea of Maran, who also owns the Sun Group that runs television channels and several publications, and Kal Airways against the Delhi HC order that had set aside an arbitral award asking the low-cost carrier to refund monies plus interest to the media baron and his firm.

A single judge bench of the Delhi High Court had on July 31, 2023 upheld the arbitral award asking Spicejet promoter Ajay Singh to refund Rs 579 crore plus interest to Maran and his company Kal Airways.

Congress leader Rahul Gandhi on Friday appeared in an MP-MLA court in Sultanpur for a defamation case against him, dismissing it as an attempt to gain "cheap publicity." Gandhi’s lawyer, Kashi Prasad Shukla, stated that the Congress MP, addressing Special Judge Shubham Verma, denied making any statements that could be considered defamatory.

Local BJP leader Vijay Mishra filed the complaint on August 4, 2018, against Rahul Gandhi for his alleged objectionable comments against Amit Shah at a press conference in Bengaluru in May of that year during the Karnataka elections. The complainant referred to Gandhi's comment that the BJP claims to believe in honest and clean politics but has a party president who is an "accused" in a murder case. Shah was BJP president when Gandhi made the comment.

Advocate Santosh Kumar Pandey, representing Mishra, said Gandhi has recorded his statement before the judge and evidence will be presented on August 12.

The Supreme Court on Friday directed the continuation of its July 22 interim order staying the directives issued by the BJP-ruled Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, and Madhya Pradesh, asking eateries along the Kanwar Yatra routes to display the names of their owners, staff and other details.

A bench of Justices Hrishikesh Roy and S V N Bhatti said it won’t issue any clarification on the July 22 order as "We have said what needed to be said in our July 22 order. Can't force anyone to disclose names."

The bench asked the Madhya Pradesh and Uttarakhand governments to file their response to the pleas challenging their respective directives. It allowed the petitioners to file their responses to the replies of the state governments and posted the matter on August 5.

In its reply, the Uttar Pradesh government defended its directive requiring eateries along the Kanwar Yatra route to display the names of their owners and staff, saying the idea was to bring in transparency, avoid "potential confusion" and ensure a peaceful yatra.

On July 22, the apex court ordered an interim stay on the directives issued by the BJP-ruled Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, and Madhya Pradesh governments.

The Bombay High Court on Friday rejected pleas for default bail or bail on technical grounds filed by five accused, including advocate Surendra Gadling, in the Elgar Parishad Maoist links case.

A division bench of Justices Ajay Gadkari and Shyam Chandak rejected the applications filed by Gadling, Shoma Sen, Mahesh Raut, Sudhir Dhawade and Rona Wilson. The detailed order is awaited.

Gadling originally filed an application for default bail in 2018 in the sessions court when the Pune police were investigating the case. The application termed the 90-day extension granted by the sessions court to the police for filing a chargesheet as "illegal", and hence, the accused were entitled to bail under the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).

In his petition before the high court, Gadling claimed the special court did not consider the fact that the Pune court had "no jurisdiction to extend the time for completion of the investigation". Sixteen persons were arrested in the case, including Jesuit priest Stan Swamy, who died at a private hospital while in judicial custody.

The case relates to alleged inflammatory speeches delivered at the Elgar Parishad conclave held in Pune on December 31, 2017, which the police claimed triggered violence the next day near the Koregaon-Bhima war memorial in Pune district.

The Pune police also claimed Maoists backed the conclave. The probe was later transferred to the NIA.

A Delhi court on Friday extended the judicial custody of Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Manish Sisodia and Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) leader K Kavitha until July 31 in the excise policy case, according to ANI.

Both are being held in connection with a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) corruption probe related to the alleged Delhi excise policy scam. The leaders appeared via video conference from Tihar Jail. ANI reported that the CBI has recently filed a supplementary charge against Kavitha.

K Kavitha, daughter of former Telangana Chief Minister K Chandrashekar Rao, was initially arrested by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on March 15 for a money laundering case linked to the excise policy, and subsequently by the CBI on April 11.

India has over five crore pending cases in courts across the country, with over 1.18 core cases in subordinate courts of Uttar Pradesh, according to the government's written reply in the Lok Sabha.

Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal said while 84,045 cases are pending in the Supreme Court, 60,11,678 were pending in the various high courts. District and subordinate courts are the biggest contributors, with 4,53,51,913 cases pending with them, according to the minister. Factors contributing to the pendency include the availability of physical infrastructure, supporting court staff, complexity of facts, evidence nature, and cooperation among stakeholders. Proper application of rules and procedures is also crucial, he said.

Delays in case disposal include a lack of prescribed time frames, frequent adjournments, and inadequate arrangements for monitoring and tracking cases, he added.

The Supreme Court on Friday sought responses from the Centre and the secretaries to the Governors of West Bengal and Kerala on separate pleas of the two state governments against denial of the assent to Bills and referring those for the consideration of the President.

A Bench of Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud, Justice J B Paridwala and Justice Manoj Misra issued notices to the Union Ministry of Home Affairs and the secretaries to both the Governors. Senior advocate K K Venugopal, appearing for Kerala, said they were challenging the Governor’s decision to refer Bills for consideration by the President.

Similarly, senior advocates Abhishek Singhvi and Jaideep Gupta, appearing for West Bengal, said every time the matter was listed in the Supreme Court, the office of the Governor referred Bills to the President.

Congress leader Rahul Gandhi is scheduled to appear before the MP-MLA court in Uttar Pradesh’s Sultanpur today for a hearing in a defamation case.

Congress district president Abhishek Singh Rana said on Thursday that Gandhi, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, will land at Lucknow airport this morning and then proceed towards Sultanpur. Local BJP leader Vijay Mishra filed a defamation case on August 4, 2018, against Gandhi for making alleged objectionable remarks against the then BJP president and current Home Minister Amit Shah.

The court granted bail to Gandhi in this case on February 20. However, Special Magistrate Shubham Verma has summoned Gandhi to record his statement today.

The Delhi High Court has permitted Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal to hold two additional virtual meetings with his lawyers every week in jail, saying special situations call for special remedies.

Kejriwal, lodged in judicial custody in the alleged excise scam, was hitherto entitled to two meetings with his lawyers a week, in accordance with prison rules.

Justice Neena Bansal Krishna granted the relief to Kejriwal in recognition of his fundamental right to a fair trial and effective legal representation. The AAP leader’s counsel had submitted he was facing around 35 cases across the country, and for a fair trial, he required two additional meetings with his lawyers via video conference.

The plea was vehemently opposed by the counsel for the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and Tihar jail authorities.

The Delhi High Court has asked the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) to fence the floodplain of the Yamuna river after removing encroachments from there to ensure no illegal construction takes place in the future.

A Bench headed by Acting Chief Justice Manmohan, which had earlier directed the removal of all encroachments and illegal constructions on the river bank, passed the order while dealing with a petition seeking the demolition of an allegedly illegally built dargah and graveyard near the Signature Bridge. The court asked the DDA to consider the petitioner’s representation concerning the alleged encroachment within six weeks but turned down a prayer to direct the constitution and deployment of a special force to deal with illegal construction on the river's flood plain.

The court said the authorities should instead employ technology to monitor any upcoming illegal construction.

“It (special force) will lead to further corruption. They need to be more vigilant and use technology,” the Bench, also comprising Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, said.

The National Green Tribunal has stayed the Central Pollution Control Board’s direction imposing Rs 1 crore fine on Reliance Industries Ltd for not installing vapour recovery systems at the company’s fuel stations and storage terminals across the National Capital Region.

A vapour recovery system (VRS) is a device that captures displaced vapours emerging from inside a vehicle’s fuel tank when petrol or diesel is filled into it.

In October 2018, the tribunal had directed oil marketing companies (OMCs) to install the device. A Bench of judicial member Justice Arun Kumar Tyagi and expert member A Senthil Vel was hearing an appeal by Reliance Industries against the CPCB direction dated June 13 to pay environmental compensation of Rs 1 crore within 15 days for allegedly failing to meet the timeline prescribed by the tribunal for installing VRS.

In an order passed on July 19, the NGT noted the submissions of the company’s senior advocate that Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (IOCL), Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd (HPCL) and Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd (BPCL) had appealed against the tribunal’s order in the Supreme Court, which later extended the timeline. According to the company’s counsel, a show cause notice was not issued before directing the payment of environmental compensation and the direction was liable to be set aside as it was violative of the principle of parity (with the public sector OMCs) and the principle of natural justice.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has said it took the Union government nearly five decades to realise that an “internationally renowned” organisation like Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh was wrongly placed in the list of organisations banned for government employees.

The HC’s remark came while a bench of Justices Sushruta Arvind Dharmadhikari and Gajendra Singh disposed of the writ petition of retired Central government employee Purushottam Gupta.

Gupta had filed a petition in the High Court on September 19 last year challenging the Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules as well as the office memorandums of the Centre that were preventing the participation of government employees in the activities of the Sangh. “The court laments the fact that it took almost five decades for the Central government to realise its mistake; to acknowledge that an internationally renowned organisation like RSS was wrongly placed amongst the banned organisations of the country and that its removal therefrom is quintessential,” the Bench said.

The Bench directed the Union government's Department of Personnel and Training and the Ministry of Home Affairs to publicly display on the home page of their official website the July 9 office memorandum through which the ban on government employees from joining Sangh activities was lifted.

The Delhi High Court has refused to impose an interim stay on the release of Netflix series ‘Tribhuvan Mishra CA Topper’, saying it appeared to be in the genre of comedy and cannot be perceived as derogatory to the profession of chartered accountancy.

The High Court issued notice to Netflix and others on a plea by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) and four Chartered Accountants (CA) contending that depiction of the profession in such a “scandalous” manner is bound to defame the profession and the toppers in the examination which is conducted by the institute. After watching the trailer of the web series, Justice Navin Chawla said he does not find any prima facie case in favour of the plaintiffs for the grant of an ad-interim injunction in their favour at this stage.

“The artistic expression, even in the form of a commercial speech, cannot be curtailed based on an oversensitive approach,” the judge said.

The plaintiffs are aggrieved by the release of the trailer of the serial. The trailer announced the release of the series on Netflix on July 18. They claimed that the trailer showed the profession of chartered accountancy in an “extremely vulgar and derogatory” sense.