Calcutta High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts


Calcutta High Court: The Division Bench of Subrata Talukdar and Krishna Rao, JJ. has allowed an appeal filed against the order passed by the Single Judge wherein he had refused to interfere with the order of transfer issued against the appellant by the Chairman, North 24 Parganas District Primary School Council.

The appellant was initially appointed as Assistant Teacher of Primary School on 25-12-1998. On 07-10-2021 the appellant was transferred to Beraberi F.P. Primary/Junior Basic School under Habra Circle aggrieved by which appellant had preferred a Writ Application and the Single Judge had passed an order of stay and directed the DPSC North 24 Parganas to file report specifying the reasons of such transfer and accordingly, the District Inspector of School had filed a report before the Single Judge and after considering the report, the order of transfer was set aside.

After the order passed by the Single Judge, the Chairman issued an order of transfer of the appellant on 24-12-2021 by transferring the appellant to Subhasnagar F.P. School under the same circle. Being aggrieved with the order of transfer, the appellant had preferred a writ application and the Single Judge had dismissed the writ petitioner which is impugned in the instant appeal.

Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant by referring to the West Bengal Primary Education (Transfer of Teacher including Head Teacher) Rule, 2002 submitted that the District Primary School Council may either on its own motion or on an application from a teacher can transfer an approved teacher within its jurisdiction from one Primary School to another Primary School.

The Court noted that in the present case the Chairman has invoked the authority of the Council by transferring the appellant from one school to another School, which is not permissible under law. Rule 4 specifically authorized the council to transfer an approved teacher and in the instant case admittedly the Chairman had issued the order of transfer and North 24 Parganas District Primary School Council never took any decision for transfer of the appellant. The Court thus held that the impugned transfer order can’t sustain in the eyes of law.

The Court while allowing the appeal was of the opinion that the Chairman, North 24 Parganas District Primary School Council did not have the authority or jurisdiction to issue the impugned transfer order to the appellant. The appellant had already joined the transferred post without prejudice to her right and contentions thus, she was directed the respondent council to allow the appellant to resume her duties at Barasat Mahatma Gandhi G.S.F.P. School No.1 under Barasat West Circle where she was discharging her duties before.

[Dipika Bala Biswas v. State of West Bengal, MAT 3 of 2022, decided on 05-08-2022]

Advocates who appeared in this case :

Joytosh Majumdar and Shamim-ul-Bari, Advocates, for the Appellant;

Jahar Datta and Milon Kumar Maity, Advocates, for the State;

Arabinda Chatterjee, Bhaskar Prasad Vaisya and Pinaki Bhattacharyya, Advocates, for the DPSC North 24 Parganas.

*Suchita Shukla, Editorial Assistant has reported this brief.

Allahabad High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Allahabad High Court: Vikram D. Chauhan, J. took cognizance of transfer application which was filed for the transfer of the case under Section 125 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bhadohi at Gyanpur to the court having competence jurisdiction in District Prayagraj disallowing it and emphasizing on the importance of digitalisation in judicial system.

The digitalisation is not only about implementation of technology. It encompasses the transformation of the courts and justice delivery system using technology in order to enable the experiences to be better, effective and within the reach of the ordinary citizens. The digitalisation is bridging the gap between the courts and the litigant.

Counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is wife, who had filed application under Section 125 of the Code, however, when the applicant visited the Court, opposite party 2 and his family members physically assaulted the applicant. There is apprehension of danger of life of the applicant. The applicant had also sought transfer on the ground of financial crisis.

The Court stressed that the various digitalisation processes including addressing the court through video conference has been put in place with the advancement of technology and telecommunication including internet services the litigant is empowered to approach his counsel through telecommunication / Internet. The Court further reminded that the Supreme Court had constituted an e-committee, Supreme Court of India for effective implementation of the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) by the Judicial system in India. The Court pointed out that the information and technology induction will enhance the Judicial productivity both qualitatively and quantitatively, making the justice delivery system accessible, reliable, cost effective and transparent.

A drastic step in this respect has been taken by Allahabad High Court by framing “Rules for Video Conferencing for Courts in the State of Uttar Pradesh, 2020” (Rules of 2020) which has been notified by notification dated 27-11-2020. The principal object of the aforesaid rules is to consolidate, unify and streamline the procedure relating to the use of video conference for the Courts. The Court thus opined that Rules of 2020 effectively address the concern of the litigants including the distance factor and threat perception.

Once the Rules of 2020 have been notified in exercise of powers under Article 225 and 227 of the Constitution of India, for providing video conferencing to the litigant in the Courts and such an alternative channel will be able to address the concerns of the litigant as has been raised in the present transfer application. No ground for transfer of the case from one district to another is made out in view of the observations made herein above.

The transfer application was disposed of with the liberty to the applicant to apply under Rules for Video Conferencing for Courts in the State of Uttar Pradesh, 2020 for video conference facility in judicial proceedings.

[Sunita Devi v. State of U.P., 2022 SCC OnLine All 530, decided on 02-08-2022]

Advocates who appeared in this case :

Om Prakash Singh, Advocate, Counsel for the Applicant;

G.A., Dileep Kumar Srivastava, Advocate, Counsel for the Opposite Party.

*Suchita Shukla, Editorial Assistant has reported this brief.

Case BriefsSupreme Court

Supreme Court: In a highly controversial extortion case of about Rs. 200 crores in Delhi’s Tihar jail, the 3-judge Bench of Uday Umesh Lalit, S. Ravindra Bhat, and Sudhanshu Dhulia, JJ., has directed conman Sukash Chandra to reveal names of the persons involved in the alleged crime syndicate.

The petitioner, Sukash Chandra Shekhar-infamously known as Conman Sukash for extorting about Rs 200 crores while sitting in a cell of Delhi’s Tihar jail-had filed the instant petition under Article 32 of the Constitution alleging that he was subjected to threats and was a victim of extortion racket run by some of the officers of the prison where he is presently lodged. Asserting that his health and safety are in danger, he has prayed for various reliefs including his transfer from Tihar jail.

Earlier, by the order dated 17-06-2022, the Court had directed the authorities concerned to suggest the appropriate jail for transferring conman Sukash to which the respondents had suggested that Mandoli jail in Delhi, which is guarded by paramilitary forces, would be appropriate. However, the respondents had pressed that shifting of the petitioner from Tihar Jail is unwarranted. Similarly, the Enforcement Directorate had also approached the Court seeking vacation/recall of order dated 17-06-2022.

On the contrary, the Commissioner of Police, NCT of Delhi (Respondent 2) asserted that while being inside Tihar Jail, the petitioner was running a crime syndicate and was paying approximately Rs. 1.5 crores every month for getting certain facilities, including mobile phone, without any hindrance, to pass messages to the members of his syndicate. It was further alleged that some of the jail officials were on a monthly payroll of the petitioner.

Relying on the assertions made by Respondent 2, counsel for the petitioner, Senior Advocate R. Basant submitted that Respondent 2 itself had accepted that the jail officials were receiving certain money from and on behalf of the petitioner. It was further submitted that during the period between July, 2020 to August 2021, the amounts paid by the petitioner or on his behalf aggregated to about Rs. 12.5 crores, major part of which was in cash.

However, on being asked by the Court as to who were the persons who made payments on behalf the petitioner, the petitioner expressed his inability to respond to the query immediately, only to add later that the persons could be identified from the affidavit submitted in reply. The Court noted,

“If we go by the assertions made in the affidavit in response, while being in jail, the petitioner was able to garner support from outsiders who paid Rs. 12.5 crores on his behalf to the public servants or other interested persons.”

Opining that in order to come to the conclusion, whether the petitioner was subjected to extortion (as asserted in the petition) or he was running a crime syndicate and was bribing his way through (as asserted by the respondents), it would be necessary to understand the identity of the persons and the manner in which they made the payments on behalf of the petitioner, the Court directed the petitioner to submit a list of persons, giving all the details as to the payments made by any and every one of them and to whom the payments were made.

The matter is listed on 26-07-2022 for further hearing.

[Sukash Chandra Shekhar v. Union of India, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 894, decided on 13-07-2022]

Advocates who appeared in this case :

AOR Aftab Ali Khan, Senior Advocate R. Basant and Advocates Ashok K. Singh, Ankita Baluni, Sandeep Kumar Bhardwaj, Deepak Kumar, Akshay Sahay, Sonakshi Monga, Tanishq Mehta, Advocates, for the Petitioners;

SG Tushar Mehta, ASG S.V. Raju, ASG K.M. Nataraj, AOR Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Gurmeet Singh Makker, Zoheb Hossain, Piyush Beriwal, Rajat Nair, Sairica Raju, Swati Ghildiyal, Anand Kirti, Advocates, for the Respondent(s).

Calcutta High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Calcutta High Court: Ananda Kumar Mukherjee, J. took cognizance of a petition which was preferred by the petitioner -wife praying for transfer of Matrimonial Suit pending before the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Coochbehar to any other Court of Additional District Judge at Siliguri, allowing the transfer.

Petitioner’s marriage with the respondent was solemnized on 11-03-2020 and they stayed together as husband and wife in the house of the respondent at Coochbehar for 15 days. The respondent filed the Matrimonial suit under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 against the petitioner praying for a decree of divorce as a counter blast of the F.I.R. lodged by her. The petitioner contended that she is residing with her mother at Siliguri and has no earning of her own. On the contrary, the husband is employed. She further contended that the relationship between the wife and her husband is strained, and she feels insecure to travel to Coochbehar Court for the purpose of taking part in the proceedings.

Counsel for the respondent submitted that he is a contractual worker, having work for 26 days with a marginal monthly income and is also suffering from Cardiac ailments which requires immediate surgery. He further argued that the petitioner had voluntarily left the matrimonial home within 15 days of the marriage and the present suit for divorce has been filed on the ground of cruelty. Regarding transfer of the case, it was contended that there is conveyance facility to conveniently travel to Coochbehar and the petitioner has no cogent ground for preferring this revisional application and the same is liable to be dismissed.

The Court heard the parties and agreed that travelling at odd hours of the day is a physical hardship for the petitioner and by filing a suit for divorce directly without any attempt to restore the marital relationship, the petitioner-wife cannot be put to such inconvenience. The Court drew its support from the judgment relied on by the counsel of the petitioner in Madhu Saxena v. Pankaj Saxena, (2005) 13 SCC 158 where the principle of “showing leniency towards the wife” was followed.

The Court allowed the petition and opined that it would be appropriate to transfer the Matrimonial Suit from the Court of Additional District Judge, F.T.C., Coochbehar to the Court of District Judge, Darjeeling.

[Sandipa Gupta v. Suraj Gupta, 2022 SCC OnLine Cal 2027, decided on 14-07-2022]

Advocates who appeared in this case :

Mr Sanjay Mazoomdar, Ms Sukanya Adhikary, Advocates, for the Petitioner;

Mr Subhasish Mishra, Mr Swarup Das, Advocates, for the Respondent.

*Suchita Shukla, Editorial Assistant has reported this brief.

Appointments & TransfersNews


The President transfers Justice Satish Chandra Sharma, Chief Justice, Telangana High Court, as the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court. 


The President appoints Justice Rashmin Manharbhai Chhaya, Judge of the Gujarat High Court, to be the Chief Justice of Gauhati High Court with effect from the date he assumes charge of his office.



The President appoints Justice Shinde Sambhaji Shiwaji, Judge of the Bombay High Court, to be the Chief Justice of Rajasthan High Court with effect from the date he assumes,charge of his office.



The President appoints Justice Vipin Sanghi, Judge of the Delhi High Court, to be the Chief Justice of Uttarakhand High Court with effect from the date he assumes charge of his office.



The President appoints Justice Amjad Ahtesham Sayed, Judge of the Bombay High Court, to be the Chief Justice of Himachal Pradesh High Court with effect from the date he assumes charge of his office.



The President appoints Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, Judge of the Telangana High Court, to be the Chief Justice of Telangana High Court with effect from the date he assumes charge of his office.


The President appoints Justice Alok Aradhe, senior-most Judge of the Karnataka High Court, to perform the duties of the office of the Chief Justice of that High Court, with effect from 03.07.2022.


Ministry Of Law & Justice


Case BriefsHigh Courts

Allahabad High Court: Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J. allowed a petition which was filed assailing order dated 16-04-2022 passed by the opposite party 1 transferring as many as 163 employees in different Zones serving at Central Bank of India from one place to another.  


The petitioner is serving on the post of Officer (Scale-II) in Central Bank of India. Counsel  for the petitioner drew attention of the Court towards Unique Disability ID issued by the Competent Authority of the Government of India relating to wife of the petitioner, who is permanent disable person having 100% disability. Further attention was drawn towards the policy/norms framed on Transfer of Mainstream/ Specialized Officer in Scale-I, II & III of the Bank. He drew  attention of this Court towards para-3 (i) & (iii) of the aforesaid office memorandum of DOPT dated 08-10-2018, which read as under:- 

“(i) A Government employee who is a care-giver of dependent daughter/ son/ parents/ spouse/ brother/ sister with Specified Disability, as certified by the certifying authority as a Person with Benchmark Disability as defined under Section 2 (r) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 may be exempted from the routine exercise of transfer/rotational transfer subject to the administrative constraints.  

(iii) The term ‘Specified Disability’ as defined herein is applicable as grounds only for the purpose of seeking exemption from routine transfers/ rotational transfer by the Government employee, who is a care-giver of dependent daughter/ son/ parents/ spouse/ brother/ sister as stated in para-3 (i) above.” 


Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that so as to understand the meaning of ‘care-giver’, ‘benchmark disability’ and ‘permanent disability’, the relevant provision of Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016. It was therefore prayed that the transfer order, so far as it relates to the petitioner, may be stayed and the petitioner may be accommodated at anywhere at Lucknow Region if he may not be permitted to be posted at a place from where he has been transferred to Cooch Behar, Kolkata. 


The Court was of the opinion that if there is any beneficial or compassionate policy to accommodate any employee for the specific and certain reason, the same must be abided by in its letter and spirit. The Court further explained that since the wife of the of the petitioner is a permanent disable person having 100% disability and to look-after and take care of her is a sole responsibility of the petitioner, then his status shall come within the meaning of term ‘care-giver’ as defines under Section 2 (d) of the Act, 2016. The rotational transfers are meant for a person who has not been protected by any compassionate or beneficial policy but if any employee has been protected from any beneficial or compassionate policy, the same may not be ignored unless there is any administrative reason to transfer such person from one zone to another zone.


The Court allowed the petition and held that the transfer is an exigency/ incidence of service and no courts are ordinarily interfered with the transfer orders but if such transfer may be avoided for any specific compelling reason and that reason is unavoidable, the Competent Authority being model employer should consider such condition sympathetically. 

[Neeraj Chaturvedi v. Central Bank Of India, 2022 SCC OnLine All 399, decided on 09-06-2022] 

Counsel for Petitioner :- Shireesh Kumar 

Counsel for Respondent :- Gopal Kumar Srivastava 

*Suchita Shukla, Editorial Assistant has reported this brief.

Appointments & TransfersNews

Centre Notifies the Transfer Orders of the following High Court Judges:

S. No.

Name of the Judge Present High Court

High Court to which Transferred

1. Shri Justice Lanusungkum Jamir Manipur HC Gauhati HC
2. Shri Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah Andhra Pradesh HC Patna HC
3. Shri Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav Madhya Pradesh HC Delhi HC
4. Shri Justice Chitta Ranjan Dash Orissa HC Calcutta HC
5. Shri Justice Subhasis Talapatra Tripura HC Orissa HC
6. Shri Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh HC Bombay HC


Ministry of Law and Justice

[Notification dt. 1-6-2022]

Appointments & TransfersNews

Supreme Court Collegium has recommended transfer/repatriation of Judges of High Courts, as mentioned below:

S. No.

Name of the Judge


S/Shri Justice

Present HC

HC where transferred or repatriated

1. Ahsanuddin Amanullah Andhra Pradesh


2. Chitta Ranjan Dash Orissa Calcutta
3. Subhasis Talapatra Tripura Orissa
4. Lanusungkum Jamir


Manipur Gauhati
5. Dhiraj Singh Thakur


Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh Bombay
6. Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav


Madhya Pradesh Delhi

Supreme Court Collegium

Appointments & TransfersNews

Supreme Court Collegium has recommended the transfer of Mr Justice Satish Chandra Sharma, Chief Justice, Telangana High Court to Delhi High Court.

Supreme Court Collegium

[Notification dt. 17-5-2022]

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Delhi High Court: The Division Bench of D.N. Patel, CJ and Jyoti Singh, J., held that the Chairman of Central Administrative Tribunal has been conferred the power to transfer a matter from one Bench to another, on his own motion, without any application from any party.

Petitioner filed the present petition assailing the order of Central Administrative Tribunal and sought a direction that Original Application filed by the petitioner be heard and disposed of by the Tribunal, Kolkata Bench.

Factual Matrix

Petitioner had joined AS in 1987 and was allocated the West Bengal cadre, in 2021 he was superannuated and at that time was working as the Chief Secretary of the State of West Bengal.

On May 26th, a cyclone named ‘YAAS’ had hit parts of West Bengal and Odisha and on 31st May, a Show Cause Notice was issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs to the petitioner for abstaining himself from a crucial review meeting chaired by the Prime minister for assessing loss of life and property and damage to the infrastructure caused by the cyclonic storm.

In June, 2021 a major penalty charge sheet was also issued to the petitioner by the respondents for not attending the aforesaid meeting, as well as for not apprising the Prime Minister about the hardships and sufferings faced by the people of West Bengal amongst other allegations mentioned in the statement of Articles of Charges and imputation of the alleged misconduct or misbehavior.

When the hearing notice arrived, the petitioner filed an application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 challenging the charge sheet. During the pendency of OA respondents filed a transfer petition before the Tribunal under Section 25 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 Act seeking transfer of the OA filed by the petitioner.

Transfer petition was allowed, and the order was challenged by the petitioner before the Calcutta High Court. Principal Bench of the Tribunal issued a notice and the was accepted on behalf of the respondents, later the Calcutta High Court allowed the petition filed by the petitioner and set aside the Tribunal’s Order passed in Transfer Petition.

The above judgment of the Calcutta High Court was challenged on the ground that the said Court lacked territorial jurisdiction to entertain the challenge, later Supreme Court had allowed the Calcutta High Court’s decision.

Since the Supreme Court had given liberty to the petitioner to assail the Principal Bench order in the Transfer Petition before Jurisdictional High Court, the petitioner approached this, Court.

Analysis, Law and Decision

Firstly, the High Court expressed that under Section 25 of the 1985 Act, the Chairman can on his own motion, without any notice, transfer any case pending before one Bench for disposal to another Bench.

Further, since the cause of action arose in New Delhi, no error could be found with the impugned order.

Rule 6(2) of 1987 Rules gives an option to the applicant who has ceased to be in service, to file an application before a Bench, within whose jurisdiction such person is ordinarily residing at the time of filing of the application.

The question that arose in the present matter:

Whether the above-stated right of an applicant can control or regulate the administrative powers of a Chairman under Section 25 of the 1985 Act?

High Court answered it in negative.

The Bench agreed with the argument of My Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General that the power of a Chairman of CAT under Section 25 of the 1985 Act is purely an administrative power to transfer cases from one Bench to another, which can be exercised on an application by any party or even on his own motion in a given case and where the facts and circumstances so warrant.

High Court held that it may not be wrong to hold that the administrative powers are akin to the power of the Master of Roster, who alone has the prerogative to constitute the Benches and allocate cases.

Hence for the present matter, Court stated that, while the petitioner has the option to approach the Bench at a place where he was ordinarily residing at the time of filing the application, however, the Chairman of the Tribunal has the administrative powers to transfer the matter to another Bench, albeit for sound reasons and after notice to and hearing the parties to the lis.

The scope of judicial review of an administrative decision is extremely limited and can only be exercised to scrutinize the decision-making process.

High Court found no infirmity in the exercise of the administrative power, either on the procedural aspects or on the merits.

Being purely an administrative power of the Chairman, it is not for this Court to substitute its decision or wisdom for that of the Chairman as no illegality, arbitrariness or infirmity has been found in the decision making process.

In view of the above. The petition was dismissed. [Alapan Bandyopadhyay v. Union of India, 2022 SCC OnLine Del 683, decided on 7-3-2022]

Advocates before the Court:

For the Petitioner:

Mr Karthikey Bhatt, Advocate

For the Respondents:

Mr Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General along with Mr Vikramjeet Banerjee Additional Solicitor General with Mr Kirtiman Singh, Central Government Standing Counsel with Mr Waize Ali Noor, Mr Taha Yasin and Ms Srirupa Nag Advocates for UOI.

High Court Round UpLegal RoundUp

82 reports on High Court Judgments to read from February 2022.

Allahabad High Court


 22-year-old woman, burnt and buried due to demand of dowry: All HC denies bail to accused husband

Noting the brutality with wife a 22-year-old lady and mother of a one year’s infant child in causing her death, beating her cruelly by “her husband” Vikas Kunvar Srivastav, J. held that the said act was not only grave in nature but heinous also.

Read report, here…

Law on S. 311 CrPC

Power to the Court to summon a material witness or to examine a person present in Court or to recall a witness already examined: All HC discusses

Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J., while addressing a matter with regard to recalling of the witnesses expressed that, Section 311 of the Code confers a wide discretion on the Court to act as the exigencies of justice require.

Read report, here…

Law on Recovery of Maintenance

Limitation of 1 year for recovery of maintenance under S. 125(3) of CrPC and the law on enforcement to claim order of maintenance under S. 128 CrPC: All HC explains

Dr Yogendra Kumar Srivastava, J., while addressing a matter regarding recovery of maintenance amount, expressed that,

“Sentencing to jail can only be seen as a means of recovering the amount of arrears and not a mode of discharging liability.”

Read report, here…

Andhra Pradesh High Court

If the de facto complainant feels insulted as he was beaten in front of public and if he takes a hasty decision to commit suicide; will the accused be held responsible in the eyes of law?

Cheekati Manavendranath Roy J. partly allowed the petition by quashing FIR for the offence punishable under Sections 306 r/w 116 IPC.

Read report, here…


AP HC considered alleged attempt to threatening witness as a vague allegation; Cancellation of bail sought was rejected

“…nothing was brought to the notice of the police or the investigating agency stating that the accused are interfering with course of investigation by way of threatening the witnesses through their men.”

Read report, here…

Bombay High Court

 Law on Voluntarily Causing Grievous Hurt

In a land dispute, a person subjected to grievous injury with the use of ‘Khurpi’: Will he be punished under S. 326 or 325 Penal Code, 1860? Bom HC explains

The Division Bench of S.S. Shinde and N.R. Borkar, JJ., upheld the decision of the Trial Court in a case of causing grievous injury voluntarily.

Read report, here…


Constant quarrels between husband and wife: Bom HC observes while granting bail to husband accused of dowry and cruelty

Sarang V. Kotwal, J., on noting that the husband and wife cannot live together and there were constant quarrels between them, granted bail to the husband who was accused under the provisions of Dowry Prohibition Act and Penal Code, 1860. 

Read report, here…

Provocation by Wife

Wife subjected husband to humiliation by publicly calling him impotent and abusing him resulting in assault by husband: Husband will be convicted for murder or culpable homicide? Bom HC analyses

The Division Bench of Sadhana S. Jadhav and Prithviraj K. Chavan, JJ., modified the conviction of a husband who in provocation by wife on being subjected to abuses assaulted wife.

Read report, here…

Abetment to Suicide

Employer setting big targets, not granting leave and not accepting resignation would be acts in normal course of business: Bom HC grants anticipatory bail to employer accused of abetting suicide committed by employee

 Sarang V. Kotwal, J., addressed a matter wherein an employer was accused of abetting the suicide of an employee.

Read report, here…

Law on Custody

9-year-old child prefers to stay with mother’s father and his family members and shows animosity towards father: Whether father will get custody of child or not? Bom HC decides 

Addressing a matter wherein a child’s mother was diagnosed with cancer due to which she started living at her parental home with the child, and after the passing of the mother, a custody battle arose between the father of the child and the father and brother of wifeDivision Bench of S.S. Shinde and N.J. Jamdar, JJ., noted animosity of the child towards his father, to which the Court expressed that, the same must have occurred due to ‘parental alienation syndrome’.

Read more, here…


Appellate court can reverse the finding and sentence of the trial court ordering re-trial

The Division Bench of S.S. Shinde and Milind N. Jadhav, JJ. allowed an appeal against conviction of the Appellant by the Trial Court. The appellant was convicted of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Penal Code, 1860, (“IPC”) read with Section 34 IPC. He was sentenced to suffer life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 15,000.

Read report, here… 

Transparency in Functioning

Disqualification of Sarpanch in suspicion of benefitting her close relations by allotting work under Panchayat’s order, without establishment of direct or indirect involvement as per S. 14(1)(g) of Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act: Is it correct? Bom HC analyses

Quoting a phrase from a story of a Roman Ruler Julius Caesar that, “Caesar’s wife should be above suspicion”, Bharati H. Dangre, J., remarked that,

“…those who are vested with the powers are to be made more accountable and transparent in their functioning and subjected to social audit with a view to minimize their discretionary decisions.”

Read report, here…


Cinema Halls, Theaters, Malls, Restaurants, etc. permitted to carry on business with 50% capacity but banquet halls/Mangal Karyalaya & lawns not permitted with same capacity: Bom HC issues notice

The Division Bench of Sunil B. Shukre and Anil L. Pansare, JJ., addressed a petition wherein a grievance was filed stating that an unreasonable classification resulting in impermissible discrimination had been made by the respondents as Cinema Halls, Theaters, Malls, Restaurants and also other establishments have been permitted to carry on their business or operations with 50% capacity of the customers or attendees, provided customers or attendees are armed with two doses of vaccination, and whereas, Mangal Karyalaya/ Banquet Halls and Lawns where marriage functions are held and solemnised are not being permitted to carry on their business and operations with the same capacity of persons who have taken both the doses of vaccination. 

Read report, here… 

Consumer Protection

Consumer Protection Act requires State Government to constitute a State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and create circumstances to its effective functioning: Bom HC at Goa directs State of Goa to ensure filling up of vacant positions expeditiously

Stating that the State Administration comprises several IAS Officers, the least expected out of them is to find the solution to problems, so that State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission functions effectively, The Division Bench of M.S. Sonak and R.N. Laddha, JJ., directed the State of Goa to ensure that the post of President and 3 other members of the Commission which are vacant be filled expeditiously.

Read report, here…

Dead Person

Notice to a dead person under S. 148 of Income Tax Act cannot be issued: Bom HC

The Division Bench of K.R. Shriram and N.J. Jamdar, JJ., reiterated that notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to a dead person cannot be issued.

Read report, here…

Legal Profession

“Notaries operating from public taxis around vicinity of Court”: Dignity of the profession needs to be maintained and the legal profession cannot be allowed to function from the streets | Bom HC

The Division Bench of S.J. Kathawalla and Milind N. Jadhav, JJ., requested the Department of Legal Affairs to give due consideration to this Court’s Order and the Report dated 9-12-2021 submitted by Nausher Kohli, Advocate whilst enacting the Draft Bill.

Read report, here…

Murder or Culpable Homicide?

Husband killed wife brutally in a heat of passion leaving husband with a wounded pride: Bom HC decides whether the said offence will come under “Murder” or “Culpable Homicide not amounting to Murder

Stating that, in the moment of anger spouses almost forgot about the two children who were hardly three years old at the time of incident, the Division Bench of Sadhana S. Jadhav and Prithiviraj K. Chavan, JJ., found that the case of a husband killing wife with a knife was a case of culpable homicide not amounting to murder.

Read report, here…


Bombay HC rejects argument that a dispute cannot be referred for arbitration on account of fraud: Read why

B.P. Colabawalla, J., addressed an arbitration application filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

Read report, here…

Gangubai Kathiawadi

Can after certification granted by Board, public exhibition of a film be prohibited? Bom HC answers 

In respect to petitions with regard to the release of movie Gangubai Kathiawadi, Division Bench of Dipankar Datta, CJ and M.S Karnik, J., while expressing that “Once the film is granted a certificate by the competent statutory authority, i.e. the Board, the producer or distributor of the film has every right to exhibit the film in a hall unless, of course, the said certificate is modified/nullified by a superior authority/Court”, held that, there cannot be any kind of obstruction for the exhibition of a film, which is certified, unless the said certificate is challenged and Court stays its operation.

Read report, here…


If husband and wife get their marriage registered under Special Marriage Act & under Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936 as well, would this require them to get nullity of marriage under both Acts or one? Court decides

G.S. Kulkarni, J., expressed that, there is no provision under legislations, that if a marriage between the same couple is annulled under a competent law as enacted by the Parliament, it can as well be of a legal effect in the corresponding enactment.

Read report, here…

Calcutta High Court


S. 37 of the NDPS Act mandates a more stricter approach than an application for bail sans the NDPS Act: Cal HC

The Division Bench of Bibhas Ranjan De and Debangsu Basak, JJ., while addressing a bail application in a case under NDPS Act, remarked that,

Section 37 of the NDPS Act mandates a more stricter approach than an application for bail sans the NDPS Act.

Read report, here…

Sexual Assault

14-yr old girl subjected to penetrative sexual assault by man who called her grand daughter: Is girl’s complaint vital to form basis of conviction? Cal HC explains

The Division Bench of Joymalya Bagchi and Bivas Pattanayak, JJ., in a penetrative sexual assault case of a 14-year-old girl, expressed that,

“Crime against woman is increasing as a whole. Such type of crime is a direct insult to the human dignity of the society and therefore imposition of any inadequate sentence not only results in injustice to the victim and the society in general but also stimulates criminal activities.”

Read report, here…


Disparagement or mere puffery? Court decides in matter of offending/misleading advertisements [Dabur India v. Baidyanath Ayurved]

Saraf, J. decided on a petition which was filed seeking remedy against impugned advertisements disparaging the goodwill and reputation of the petitioner and its product.

Read report, here…

Chhattisgarh High Court


 Limited jurisdiction has been given to the High Court confined to the substantial question of law only

Anoop Kumar Dhand J. dismissed the appeal as it does not fulfill the requirement mandated under Section 30 of Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923.

Read report, here…

If the party is able to make out an exceptional case and the court finds irretrievable injustice would occur if writ jurisdiction is not invoked, High Courts do have the power to entertain the writ petition

Sam Koshy J. partly allowed the petition and partly disposed of the petition expressing no opinion on the termination notice issued against the petitioner.

Read report, here…

Child Custody

Due to father’s field job, mother granted custody of child: Did Chh HC also grant contact and visitation right to father? Read

In a child custody battle, the Division Bench of Goutam Bhaduri and Rajani Dubey, JJ., reiterated the position of law in the Supreme Court’s decision of Yashita Sahu v. State of Rajasthan(2020) 3 SCC 67, wherein it was held that the court cannot provide one happy home with two parents to the child then let the child have the benefit of two happy homes with one parent each, further this Court granted visitation and contact right to the father.

Read report, here…


If husband brings home concubine due to which wife leaves house, would that lead to desertion by wife? Chh HC explains

The Division Bench of Goutam Bhaduri and Rajani Dubey, JJ., expressed that,

“If the husband keeps another lady; gives shelter to her; and proceeds to have child with the said lady and for that reason if the first wife has to leave the matrimonial home because of physical and mental torture meted out to her it cannot be presumed as a desertion on the part of wife.”

Read report, here…

Delhi High Court

Trademark Dispute

Baazi v. WinZo | Trademark is used by a manufacturer or service provider to distinguish products from those of competitors: Here’s how Winzo appeared dishonest and unfair in adopting Baazi

“When people are satisfied with the products supplied by a manufacturer or service provider, they buy them on the basis of the trade mark and over time it becomes popular and well known. Thus, the use of a similar or identical trademark by a competitor in the same product would lead unwary customers to believe that it originates from the same source.”

Read report, here…

Deadly Weapons

Whether a ‘blade’ would be covered under S. 397 IPC as a deadly weapon? Del HC explains in view of settled position of law

Mukta Gupta, J., explained under what circumstances would Section 397 of penal Code, 1860 would be attracted.

Read report, here…

Law on Bail

Investigation complete, charge sheet filed, accused in jail since 6 months: Read whether Del HC grants bail

Dhari Singh, J., granted bail while referring to a catena of Supreme Court decisions with regard to the law on bail.

Read report, here…

4 years as undertrial, 2 witnesses examined out of 14, no probability of trial to be concluded in near future: Whether Del HC will grant bail to accused under S. 37(b)(ii) of NDPS Act? Read

Chandra Dhari Singh, J., granted bail to an accused on being satisfied with “reasonable grounds” as per Section 37 (b)(ii) of the NDPS Act, 1985.

Read report, here…

Judicial Separation 

Can judicial separation be granted instead of divorce for which party has approached the Court? Read what Del HC says

Expressing that the Family Court’s decision was based on optimism and hope rather than the actual factual matrix of the case, the Division Bench of Vipin Sanghi and Jasmeet Singh, JJ., while addressing a matter wherein matrimonial dispute occurred between the parties, observed that,

“..a decree of judicial separation can be rescinded by the same court; but a decree of divorce can be reversed only by a judicial order: either in review or in appeal. If it is passed ex parte, it may be recalled on an application being made for that purpose.” 

Read report, here…

Money Laundering

Money laundering offence under PMLA is, layered and multi-fold and includes stages preceding and succeeding offence of laundering money: Del HC

While expressing the object of PMLA Act Chandra Dhari Singh, J., expressed that, offence of money laundering is threefold including the stages of placement, whereby the criminals place the proceeds of crime to the general and genuine financial system, layering, whereby such proceeds of crime are spread into various transactions within the financial system and finally, integration, where the criminals avail the benefits of crime as untainted money.

Read report, here…

Uphaar Case

Manner in which judicial records tampered revealed well-planned & methodical attempt to subvert justice system: Suspending sentence of Ansal brothers would amount eroding faith of public? Read Del HC’s decision

Stating that the manner in which Court records tampered was insidious and revealed a well-planned and methodical attempt to subvert the justice system in order to escape conviction in the Main Uphaar CaseSubramonium Prasad, J., held that since the matter relates to tampering of judicial record, the same has to be decided expeditiously in order to ensure faith of the public in the judicial system.

Read report, here…

Law on Review

Can review be sought wherein Court has to delve into materials, apply its mind afresh after re-evaluating materials? Del HC throws light

Expressing that, Minor mistakes of inconsequential importance are insufficient to seek a review, Asha Menon, J., elaborated that, while seeking review of orders passed in a Civil Suit, the grounds mentioned in Order XLVII Rule 1 of the CPC have to be satisfied, which would not equate the hearing with the original hearing of the case or a hearing in an appeal 

Read report, here… 


Group of leading artistes asked to vacate Government allotted premises under Discretionary Quota: Right to continue in public premises infinitely? Detailed report

Expressing that a state of indecision could not have given rise to a legitimate expectation, Yashwant Varma, J., held that, while the petitioners undisputedly were illustrious and pre-eminent exponents in their respective fields of the classical arts, the Court was not shown any material which may justify the continued retention of public premises in Delhi or that they would be unable to propagate the classical arts in any other State or city of the nation.

Read report, here… 

Shared Household

Where the residence is a shared household, would it create any embargo upon owner to claim eviction against his daughter-in-law? Read what Del HC says

Yogesh Khanna, J., held that right of residence under Section 19 of the Domestic Violence Act is not an indefeasible right of residence in a shared household, especially when the daughter-in-law is pitted against aged father-in-law and mother-in-law.

Read report, here…

Section 138 NI Act

Vicarious Liability of Directors of Company for offences committed under S. 138 NI Act: Person claiming to not being able to manage business due to his age, could this be accepted as defence? Del HC answers

Subramonium Prasad, J., addressed a matter pertaining to vicarious liability of directors of the company alleged for offences under Section 138 NI Act.

Read report, here…


Adoptive Father of a minor girl seeks issuance of her passport with details of adoptive parents so that she could write her TOEFL examination: Here’s what Del HC directed

Kameswar Rao, J., addressed a matter wherein a minor child was not able to apply for a passport either in the name of her biological parents or in the name of her adoptive parents, was unable to pursue her academics in the USA.

Read report, here…


Power under Article 227 of Constitution of India cannot be exercised to upset conclusions, howsoever erroneous they may be, unless there was something grossly wrong or unjust: Del HC

Asha Menon, J., while expressing the scope of power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India dismissed the present petition. 

Read report, here…

Gujarat High Court


Opportunity of being heard needs to be granted; Court decided in matter of the Will of Guru Ranchhoddas

A.P. Thaker, J. decided over a petition wherein the case of the petitioner was that the properties in question were originaly private properties of Guru Keshavdas, and after the death of Guru Keshavdas, Guru Karsandas became the Mahant and succeeded the properties under his Will. On the death of Guru Karsandas his chela Guru Atmaram became Mahant and succeeded to the properties of Guru Karsandas under his Will dated 08.12.1941. Thereafter, Guru Atmaram died leaving his Will dated 06-05-1947, appointing Guru Ranchhodas as Chela.

Read report, here…

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Couples have to make their choice at the threshold between career prospects and family life; HP HC observes in a case where a mother seeks job transfer to be with her daughter

“…mandamus is a public remedy and this remedy lies, when a public authority fails to perform the duty entrusted to it by law.”

Read report, here…

Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court

Inherent Power

Instead of filing an appeal before the Sessions Court petitioner rushed to this Court invoking its inherent power. Can High Court exercise its inherent power? Read J&K and Ladakh HC’s decision

Mohd. Akram Chowdhury, J., reiterated the settled position of law that if an alternate efficacious remedy is available under the statute, the inherent power of this Court cannot be invoked.

Read report, here…

Jharkhand High Court


Does Lokayukta have power to pass directions upon disciplinary authority to take action against erring officials? Jharkhand HC elaborates in light of Jharkhand Lokayukta Act, 2001

Sujit Narayan Prasad, J., addresses a very pertinent question of whether the Jharkhand Lokayukta Act, 2001 provides power for issuance of direction upon the disciplinary authority to take action against erring officials or can it’s order be limited to a recommendation.

Read report, here…

Kerala High Court


Is not taking treatment for mental illness to bring out a peaceful family atmosphere a form of cruelty and thus, a ground for divorce? HC answers

In an interesting case the Division Bench of A.Muhamed Mustaque and C.R. Sophy Thomas, JJ., held that not taking treatment for mental illness in order to bring out a peaceful and harmonious family atmosphere can also be counted as cruelty to the persons at the receiving end.

Read report, here…

If Court finds that marriage failed due to incompatibility, but one of the parties withholds consent for mutual separation, would that be ‘Cruelty’? Kerala HC elaborates

Expressing that, “If the conduct and character of one party causes misery and agony to the other spouse, the element of cruelty to the spouse would surface, justifying grant of divorce”, the Division bench of A. Muhamed Mustaque and Sophy Thomas, JJ., held that, Court cannot leave the life of a spouse to the mercy of the opposite spouse.

Read report, here…

Constitutional & Statutory Obligation

Whether State empowered to reject medical reimbursement for treatment being from unrecognized department of recognized hospital? HC decides

Murali Purushothaman, J., held that there is a Constitutional as well a statutory obligation on the part of the State to bear the expenses for treatment of the government servant and his family.

Read report, here…


“Marrying a Christian man would not wipe off the benefit of reservation granted to a scheduled caste persons”, HC reiterates caste of a person is to be decided on the basis of birth

Raja Vijayaraghavan V, J., held that marrying a Christian man would not wipe off the benefit of a reservation granted to scheduled caste persons.

Read report, here…

Corporal Punishment

Teacher administering moderate and reasonable force to enforce discipline in classroom, can be exposed to criminal prosecution? Kerala HC answers 

While explaining that inflicting corporal punishment on a Child by a parent or teacher is forbidden, Dr Kauser Edappagath, J., observed that,

“Hurt of a less serious crime is not forbidden when inflicted in the reasonable chastisement of a child by a parent or by a school teacher.”

Read report, here…

Registration of Marriage

If a foreign embassy doesn’t issue ‘Single Status Certificate’ or NOC of an OCI card holder, can Declarations and Certificates be accepted for registration of marriage in India? Ker HC answers

While addressing a matter wherein an Indian Citizen intended to soleminse and register his marriage with a British Citizen, an OCI card holder, N. Nagaresh, J., held that f a foreign Embassy does not issue a Single Status Certificate or NOC due to the law, rules and regulations prevailing in that country, Declarations or Certificates evidencing the same should be accepted in India for registration of marriage.

Read report, here…

Tobacco at residence

If a person keeps tobacco at residence, would that amount to being an offence? Ker HC answers

While addressing a matter for an offence alleged under Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act, Juvenile Justice Act and Kerala Police Act, Dr Kauser Edappagath, J., expressed that mere keeping tobacco at residence would not amount to being an offence.

Read report, here…

Admin of WhatsApp Group

Can an Admin of a messaging service group be held criminally liable for the offensive content posted by member of a group? Kerala HC addresses

While addressing the question of whether the creator or administrator of a WhatsApp group is criminally liable for offensive content posted by a group member, Dr Kauser Edappagath, J., held that a person can be criminally liable for the acts of another if they are party to the offence.

Read report, here…

Karnataka High Court

 Hijab Case

When Karnataka High Court temporarily restrained students from wearing hijab, religious flags, saffron shawls, etc.: Read Court’s interim order

While expressing that, “Endless agitations and closure of educational institutions indefinitely are not happy things to happen”, the Bench of Ritu Raj Awasthi, CJ and Krishna S Dixit and JM Khazi, JJ., restrained all the students regardless of their religion or faith from wearing saffron shawls (Bhagwa), scarfs, hijab, religious flags or the like within the classroom, until further orders.

Read report, here…


Conviction sentence not to affect career and not be treated as a remark for employment; Kar HC confined the sentence to fine only in accordance with Ss. 279 and 337 IPC

Sreenivas Harish Kumar, J., disposed of the petition and modified the judgment of the appellate court.

Read report, here…

GST Exemption 

Whether GST exemption can be claimed for leasing out residential premises as hostel to students and working professionals? Kar HC answers 

The Division Bench of Alok Aradhe and M.I. Arun, JJ., addressed whether GST exemption can be claimed for leasing of residential premises as a hostel to students and working professionals.

Read report, here…

Madras High Court

Negotiable Instruments Act

Whether proceedings under Ss. 138 and 141 of NI Act can be initiated against corporate debtor during moratorium period? Madras HC answers

Sathish Kumar, J., while addressing a matter with regard to the dishonour of cheques under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, held that the moratorium provision contained in Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, would apply only to corporate debtor, but the natural persons mentioned in Section 141 of Negotiable Instruments Act continue to be statutorily liable under Chapter XVII of the Negotiable Instrument Act.

Read report, here…

Religious Practice

“One of the basic tenets to be followed by every Hindu is tolerance. Tolerance must be his own community or religion and in particular, to also to every other religious practice”: Madras HC

“Fundamental Rights and Duties are sacrosanct and binding on the Courts which adjudicate issues relating to the religion.”

Read report, here…

Madhya Pradesh High Court

 MBBS Seat

CBI’s self-contained note cannot form basis for rejecting application for increase of MBBS Seat; HC directs NMC to consider the application afresh 

The Division Bench of Sujoy Paul and Arun Kumar Sharma, JJ., quashed the National Medical Commission’s decision rejecting L.N. Medical College & Research Centre’s application for increase of MBBS seats.

Read report, here…

Writ of Mandamus

Provision for redressal of grievance in matter of radiation by mobile tower exists; Permission for installation can’t be revoked

Nandita Dubey, J. heard a petition which was filed seeking issuance of the writ of mandamus to the respondents to take appropriate effective steps against the Reliance Telecom Services not to permit them for installation of the mobile tower in the premises of Jai Hind School, V.V. Giri Ward, Pipariya.

Read report, here…

Departmental Inquiry

Desirable to stay the departmental proceedings till conclusion of the criminal case; Court prohibits Department to continue inquiry

Atul Sreedharan, J. decided on a petition which was filed by the petitioner who was aggrieved by the departmental proceedings against him on the identical charges by the CBI in the criminal case. 

Read report, here…

Land Acquisition

What would be an appropriate factor by which market value of land was to be multiplied to assess the compensation in the case where the land was situated in the rural area? [NH- 148N land acquisition] 

The Division Bench of Vivek Rusia and Rajendra Kumar Verma, JJ. took up a bunch of petitions which had similar facts that the petitioners were owners of agricultural land that came under the acquisition for construction of 12 lanes Delhi-Mumbai Expressway i.e. NH-148N under the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956 (‘the NH Act of 1956’). 

Read report, here…


Unless the acquittal in criminal trial is honourable/clean, the employer has enough discretion to find a candidate to be unfit for employment

The Division Bench of Sheel Nagu and Sunita Yadav, JJ. while hearing a petition under Article 227 against order the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur Bench., dismissed the petition.

Read report, here…

Meghalaya High Court

Meghalaya Civil Service and the Meghalaya Police Service

There is no question of apples and orange being put in the same basket: Court calls State’s action foolish and justification of such act real tragedy

Sanjib Banerjee, CJ. while deciding in the matter between groups of persons in the Meghalaya Civil Service and the Meghalaya Police Service, pertaining to seniority between or among them, disposed the writ petition in favour of petitioners.

Read report, here…

Rape Case | Confession

Unequivocal confession leads to dismissal of appeal in a Rape case with minor

The Division bench of Sanjib Banerjee, CJ. and W. Diengdoh, J. dismissed the appeal which was filed on behalf of the convict with counsel engaged by the Legal Services Authority.

Read report, here…

Police Service 

“It is elementary that when the law requires a certain thing to be done in a particular manner, it has to be done in such manner or not at all”; Court upholds the dismissal of police official for passing information to outlaws 

“….the appellant had links with the banned outfit and had passed on information about police movements and operations to the outlawed organisation” 

Read report, here…

Orissa High Court

Ever-growing stock of seized vehicles

PIL filed about the ever-growing stock of seized vehicles and other properties in the various police stations in the State of Odisha; Directions issued

Muralidhar, CJ. issued directions regarding the ever-growing stock of seized vehicles and other properties in the various police stations in the State of Odisha

Read report, here…

Punjab and Haryana High Court

 Drug Menace

“Drug menace has become deep rooted and is taking its toll like a slow poison for the young generation”; HC expresses anguish over callously casual approach of officers

In a case exposing callous attitude of authorities while dealing with drug menace in the State of Punjab, Meenakshi I. Mehta, J., observed that in some paras of the Statu sreports/Reply, the police officers concerned had mentioned the tablets, allegedly recovered as ‘CLAVIDOL-100 SR’ whereas in certain other paras the same had been described as ‘CLOVIDOL-100 SR’. Criticizing the lackadaisical attitude of officers, the Bench remarked…

Read report, here…

State of Punjab which was known as one of the prosperous States is now at the brink of drug-trafficking

Expressing that, State of Punjab which was known as one of the prosperous States is now at the brink of drug-trafficking, Harnaresh Singh Gill, J., held that in order to curb the menace of drug trafficking the accused person are to be dealt with stringently even at the stage of granting her/him bail in NDPS Act cases involving commercial quantity.

Read report, here…

Patna High Court

Mental Health 

Mental health of a person and/or treatment of those who are in need, more so during the time of Covid-19, is the least priority of the State Government

The Division Bench of Sanjay Karol, CJ and S. Kumar, J., directed the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar to take all steps ensuring the establishment of State Mental Health Authority as per Section 45 of the Mental Health Care Act, 2017.

Read report, here…

Rajasthan High Court

 Compensation | Motor Vehicle

Money cannot substitute a life lost but an effort has to be made for grant of just compensation having uniformity in approach; Court observes in a MV accident case demanding higher compensation 

Birendra Kumar J. allowed the appeal and enhanced the award considering the settled guidelines in the subsequent judgments to reach at “just compensation”.

Read report, here…

Customs Act 

DRI officer is not Competent Authority to issue show cause notice and adjudicate the same as “proper officer”; Show cause notice set aside 

A Division Bench of Akil Kumar, CJ and Sameer Kureshi, J. allowed the writ petition and set aside the proceedings issued by show cause notice and subsequent demands confirmed by OIO. 

Read report, here…

Rajasthan Public Service Commission

It would be open for RPSC to conduct written main examination on the rescheduled date, Single Judge bench order stayed

A Division Bench of Akil Kureshi CJ and Sudesh Bansal J. stayed the impugned judgment and left it open for RPSC to conduct a written main examination on the rescheduled date.

Read report, here…

Compassionate Appointment

“…on the ground of delay itself, the heir of the deceased employee shall not be entitled to appointment on compassionate ground.”; Raj HC observes in a case where delay is of almost 13 years 

A Division Bench of Manindra Mohan Srivastava and Anoop Kumar Dhand, JJ. dismissed the petition on the ground that the writ petition filed by the petitioners is without any substance. 

Read report, here…


Accepting requests for inter-district transfer can lead to chain reaction and at times considerable administrative difficulties; Raj HC observes while dealing a case related to inter-district transfer

A Division bench of Akil Kureshi CJ and Madan Gopal Vyas J. dismissed the petition stating that nothing would come in the way of the petitioner in seeking inter-district transfer if the Government rules and regulations recognize any such policy.

Read report, here…

 Tripura High Court

 Qualifying Examination

No grievance for non-selection; Court finds criteria fixed by ONGC clear and categorical

Indrajit Mahanty, CJ. dismissed a petition which was filed by the petitioner who was appointed as Junior Security Supervisor at (A-1 Level) in the category of Scheduled Tribe and had appeared for the computer-based test and physical standard test conducted by the ONGC. It was alleged that in the selection process the petitioner was awarded 72 marks but was not selected whereas the candidate (respondent 3) who got only 66.10 marks was wrongly and illegally selected by the respondent 2.

Read report, here…

Conjugal Rights

Whether maintenance granted to the wife under S. 125 CrPC can be cancelled in view of husband’s obtaining a decree for restitution of conjugal rights and wife’s refusal for the same?

S.G. Chattopadhyay, J., decided on a petition which was filed by the petitioner challenging order passed by the Additional Judge, Family Court which stated that the petitioner was not entitled to any maintenance allowance under section 125 Cr.P.C from her husband in view of her refusal to restore conjugal relationship with her husband pursuant to the judgment and decree passed by the District Judge for restitution of conjugal rights.

Read report, here…


Tests provided under S.37(1)(ii) of the NDPS Act should qualify in order to seek bail; Court rejects application 

S.G. Chattopadhyay, J., rejected a bail application which was filed for releasing the accused on bail who had been undergoing imprisonment since 16-09-2021 under NDPS Act, 1985. Successive applications of the accused for pre-arrest bail were rejected.

Read report, here…

Die-in-Harness Scheme

Exclusion of married daughters from the die-in-harness scheme of the State Government discriminatory? Court discusses

The Division Bench of Indrajit Mahanty, CJ. and S.G. Chattopadhyay, J. decided over a bunch of petitions which had a similar question pertaining to exclusion of married daughters from the die-in-harness scheme of the State Government. 

Read report, here…

Migratory Birds

More than 1000 ‘Rare’ Birds dead, no carcasses found; Court directs committee inspection 

The Division Bench of S.G. Chattopadhyay and Indrajit Mahanty, JJ., took up a PIL which was filed on the basis of press reports that in the Sukhsagar water body of Udaipur, Khilpara, large number of migratory birds of more than 1000 in numbers were found dead. Notices were issued and following the directions of this Court a report had come to be filed by the State wherein the State had taken note of the fact that many migratory birds come and find sanctuary in water bodies in the State of Tripura and they come all the way from Spain, Portugal, South East France, Italy and North Western Africa and have all been listed as “Rare” birds by the European Union, but it seems that the same has been detailed as localized by the State.

Read report, here…

Uttaranchal High Court

Right to Information

Husband seeking personal information such as salary of wife under Right to Information Act, 2005; Whether acceptable or not?

“….The only exception as to the information given under the Act under Section 8 of the RTI Act, is an exemption from disclosure of information.”

Read report, here…

Termination of Pregnancy

Compelling to continue pregnancy, infringement under Art. 21; Rape victim allowed to terminate Intrauterine Fetus of 28 weeks 5 days

Alok Kumar Verma, J., decided on a petition which was filed by the father of the minor petitioner to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent to ensure immediate medical termination of petitioner’s pregnancy after taking all precautions as required to be taken medically and legally.

Read report, here… 


Denial of bail on sole ground of apprehension that he may commit crime again, overturned by the Court

R.C. Khulbe, J. granted bail in a criminal revision petition moved against the order of Juvenile Justice Board (JJB), Dehradun as well as a judgment by Addl. Sessions Judge (POCSO)/FTC, Dehradun against the petitioner.

Read report, here…

8 Legal Stories of the Week: From High Courts to District Courts

7 Legal Stories of the Week: From High Courts to District Courts

11 Legal Stories of the Week: From Hijab ban to a Sexual Harassment complaint from an employee in ScoopWhoop & more

8 Legal Stories of the Week: From the release of movie Gangubai Kathiawadi to WhatsApp Admin’s liability if a member of group shares objectionable content on group and many more such stories

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Rajasthan High Court: A division bench of Akil Kureshi CJ and Madan Gopal Vyas J. dismissed the petition stating that nothing would come in the way of the petitioner in seeking inter-district transfer if the Government rules and regulations recognize any such policy.

The facts of the case are such that the petitioner was selected for the post of PTI Grade-II by the State Government in Jhunjhunu district. It appears that the select list was reshuffled on account of litigation and consequent Court orders. The State Government thereupon issued a circular to give effect to the reshuffling of the select list wherein it states that those candidates, who on account of such reshuffle are being included in the select list, would be called for counseling for allotment of appropriate district. This counseling would not be necessary for the PTI already appointed. Some aggrieved persons filed Civil Writ Petition which was dismissed permitting those petitioners to make a representation to the authorities. The authorities thereupon issued a fresh circular that those representations in which the request for movement within district are made, may be considered. However, the request for inter-district transfers would not be accepted. The aggrieved petitioner thereupon approached the High Court contending that less meritorious persons have been accommodated in Alwar district, whereas she is sent to Jhunjhunu. The present appeal was filed by the original petitioner to challenge the impugned judgment.

The Court relied on judgment Nirmla Jat v. State of Rajasthan , S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5753/2020, decided on 14-9-2020 and observed that the question of appointment or absorption in particular district, division or zone at the time of recruitment is essentially for the convenience of the selected candidate but this always is subject to administrative exigencies. No person has a vested right to be posted at a particular place. The selections and recruitments must attain finality. Posting orders which are consequential to such selection and recruitment also must not be allowed to be raised after a reasonable period of time. Accepting such request for inter-district transfer can lead to chain reaction and at times considerable administrative difficulties.

The Court observed and held that the transfer liability of the cadre of teachers was reckoned division-wise. Accordingly, the observations were made for the movement of teachers within division. In the present case, we are concerned with the post of PTI Grade-III where the cadre is maintained district-wise. The learned Single Judge was of the opinion that the observations and directions of the Court in the case of Nirmala Jat (supra) therefore have to be suitably modified for adoption in the present case. Thus, the petitioner did not have choice of inter-district transfer and the communication of the authority dated 12.10.2021 not accepting any such representation for inter-district transfer was correct.

[Soniya Burdak v. State of Rajasthan, 2022 SCC OnLine Raj 412, decided on 04-02-2022]


For Appellant(s): Mr. Vikram Singh Bhati

Arunima Bose, Editorial Assistant has reported this brief.

Himachal Pradesh High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Himachal Pradesh High Court: A Division Bench of Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Satyen Vaidya, JJ. dismissed the petition being devoid merits.

The facts of the case are such that the petitioner was appointed as Staff Nurse at IGMC Shimla, however, prior to joining the respondents Department, marriage of the petitioner was solemnized in the year 2016 and her husband is employed in Delhi in a private company. The only ground on which the petitioner sought her transfer was that since from the birth of her daughter Mrinali Thakur, the petitioner has never been able to enjoy the company of her daughter except for the period when the petitioner was sanctioned maternity leave and any other kind of duly sanctioned leave and the fact, that since the nature of the job of the petitioner has been such like that she hardly spares time for her child and as such she could not afford to keep her daughter with herself at Shimlahe instant petition was filed seeking relief in the nature of mandamus and the respondents may be directed to decide the representation moved by the petitioner sympathetically and transfer the petitioner from IGMC Shimla to SLBS Medical College & Hospital Ner Chowk, Mandi, against the vacant post, keeping in view the genuine request of the petitioner as mentioned in the representation.

The Court observed that mandamus is a public remedy and this remedy lies, when a public authority fails to perform the duty entrusted to it by law. In other words, a writ of mandamus is issued against a person, who has a legal duty to perform, but has failed or neglected to do so. The mere fact that the representation has been filed before the respondents does not furnish any cause of action in favour of the petitioner to maintain the instant petition; for there is no corresponding duty cast upon the respondents to decide such representation. While choosing career and particular service, the petitioner very well knew that she could not be transferred to the station where her husband is posted in a private job in Delhi and was thus required to be prepared to face such hardships

The Court thus held the instant petition and the same is accordingly dismissed, so also the pending application(s).[Lata Devi v. State of HP, 2021 SCC OnLine HP 8908, decided on 04-09-2021]

Arunima Bose, Editorial Assistant has reported this brief.


For petitioner: Mr. Rajiv Rai

For respondent: Mr. Ajay Vaidya

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Gujarat High Court: A.P. Thaker, J. decided over a petition wherein the case of the petitioner was that the properties in question were originaly private properties of Guru Keshavdas, and after the death of Guru Keshavdas, Guru Karsandas became the Mahant and succeeded the properties under his Will. On the death of Guru Karsandas his chela Guru Atmaram became Mahant and succeeded to the properties of Guru Karsandas under his Will dated 08.12.1941. Thereafter, Guru Atmaram died leaving his Will dated 06-05-1947, appointing Guru Ranchhodas as Chela.

Second Class Magistrate Baroda held that Ranchhodas was shishya and heir of Guru Atmaram. However, the then District Magistrate set aside the order and held that Guru Ranchoddas had failed to prove that he was shishya of Guru Atmaram. Against that the petitioner had filed Civil Suit which came to be finally disposed of by the Supreme Court in appeal filed by Guru Ranchoddas with a finding that he has failed to prove that he was appointed as chela or shishya by Guru Atmaram. In the year 1968, during the pendency of the suit, one Vitthaldas Patel had applied for registration of the said Ramji Mandir as public trust. Assistant Charity Commissioner in this respect held that the properties of the Mahant were of his ownership and were not any properties of any trust. The said decisions had become final as there has not been any further proceedings undertaken under the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950.

Thereafter, Guru Ranchoddas under his Will appointed the deceased petitioner no.1 as his

Chela or heir. The Government of Gujarat took a decision to handover the property to the deceased petitioner no.1 immovable properties and cash of Ramji Mandir under temporary custody of Mamlatdar Vadodara.

After llistening to the arguments of the parties it was established that property in question does not belong to the government. Not only it appears fom the record that the property is of private property of late Mahant Atmaram but also the government has assessed the property as unclaimed property. The Court noted that the deceased petitioner was

declared to be a “Chela” or heir of Guru Ranchhoddas by his Will. The petitioner approached the Court of Civil Judge for Succession Certificate by filing Succession Application  and while it was pending decision to hand over the movable and immovable property in favour of the petitioner was taken by the then State Government and proceeding of entrustment of properties to the petitioner was initiated. In that view of the matter, the petitioner withdrew said Succession Application for issuance of succession certificate due to decision of earlier State Government of handing over movable and immovable property to the petitioner. Thus, the petitioner has relinquished his right to get succession certificate.

Next government had stayed the proceedings and intimated the Collector to keep inabayance of the order and granting the properties in favour of the deceased petitioner. Upon considering the averments made in the affidavit in reply it clearly appears that at no point of time any opportunity was given to the petitioner. It is tried law that any order affecting any legal rights of any person, an opportunity of being heard needs to be granted especially when there is one order passed in his favour in respect of moveable or immovable property and the same order has partly implemented. Therefore, it is immediate requirement of principles of natural law and before passing any adverse orders such persons needs to be granted appropriate opportunity of being heard.

The Respondents were directed to give appropriate opportunity to the petitioners of being heard for cancellation of the order of granting moveable and immovable property in favour of deceased petitioner 1.[Mahant Suryaprakash Ranchhoddas v. State of Gujarat, 2022 SCC OnLine Guj 94, decided on 02-02-2022]

Suchita Shukla, Editorial Assistant has reported this brief.

Appointments & TransfersNews

President transfers Justice Birendra Kumar, Judge of the Patna High Court as a Judge of the Rajasthan High Court.

Ministry of Law and Justice

[Notification dt. 21-12-2021]

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Delhi High Court: Division Bench of Manmohan and Navin Chawla, JJ., dismissed a petition for transfer request on grounds of suffering from bronchial asthma as the Court opined that the same is very common in North India.

Instant petition was filed challenging the impugned order whereby the petitioner’s request for posting on medical grounds was declined. Petitioner also sought directions to the respondents to grant posting to the petitioner on Medical Grounds at his hometown.

Further the petitioner in alternative sought for posting on medical grounds to any other place in the southern region having a moderate climate and requisite paraphernalia at the Military Hospital.

Counsel for the petitioner stated that he was posted to Agra to the Para Troopers Training School, Agra and further, she pointed out that in the year 2019, petitioner began experiencing shortness of breath and due to heavy cold climatic conditions as well as due to dust and other pollutant particles, the petitioner’s breathing issues aggravated.

Further, the petitioner was diagnosed with Bronchial Asthma and was advised to undergo treatment for the same. Since no pulmonologist was available at Military Hospital, Agra the treatment given to the petitioner by medical specialist was merely symptomatic and did not lead to any improvement in his health.

Analysis, Law and Decision

High Court stated that the posting of Airman falls within the exclusive purview of Air Force Records Office and Courts are normally reluctant to interfere with the same unless and until the same is contrary to law and/or the facts of the case are ‘so gross’ that they warrant interference by a Court in writ jurisdiction.

Bench mentioned that this Court has been entertaining the petition for transfer only in extreme cases where the Airman or his immediate family members have been suffering from life-threatening disease(s) or are disabled.

In the present matter, Court expressed that,

Petitioner is suffering from Bronchial Asthma, which is very common in North India. 

In Court’s opinion, the alleged disease was not of such nature that would warrant a transfer in writ jurisdiction and since no one is suffering from a life-threatening disease writ petition along with pending application was dismissed. [CPL Sandeep Krishnan U K v. Union of India, 2021 SCC OnLine Del 5028, decided on 17-11-2021]

Advocates before the Court:

For the Petitioner:

Ms Ria Gandhi, Advocate

For the Respondents:

Kavindra Gill, GP for UOI

Appointments & TransfersNews

Transfer Notification

Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari of Allahabad High Court transferred as Judge of Madras High Court.

Ministry of Law and Justice

[Notification dt. 16-11-2021]

Appointments & TransfersNews

Transfer Notification

President transfers Justice Satish Kumar Sharma, Judge of Rajasthan High Court, as a Judge of Madhya Pradesh High Court.

Ministry of Law and Justice

[Notification Dt. 16-112021]

Appointments & TransfersNews

Supreme Court Collegium in its meetings held on 28th October 2021 has recommended the transfer of the following Judges of High Courts:

1. Birendra Kumar from Patna High Court to Rajasthan High Court

2. Satish Kumar Sharma from Rajasthan High Court to Madhya Pradesh High Court

Collegium Statement 

[Statement dt. 28-10-2021]

Appointments & TransfersNews

Centre Notifies Transfer of 15 High Court Judges

The President, after consultation with the Chief Justice of India, is pleased to transfer the following High Court Judges and to direct them to assume charge of their offices in High Courts where they have been transferred to:-



Name of judge


Transfer from High Court Transfer to High Court
I Jaswant Singh Punjab and Haryana Orissa
2 Smt. Sabina Rajasthan Himachal Pradesh
3 Sanjaya Kumar Mishra Orissa Uttarakhand
4 Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Chhattisgarh Rajasthan
5 Ahsanuddin Amanullah Patna Andhra Pradesh
6 Ujjal Bhuyan Bombay Telangana
7 Paresh R.Upadhyay Gujarat Madras
8 M.S.S.Ramachandra Rao Telangana Punjab and Haryana
9 Arindam Sinha Calcutta Orissa
10 A.M.Badar Kerala Patna
11 YashwantVarma Allahabad Delhi
12 Vivek Agarwal Allahabad MadhyaPradesh
13 ChandraDhariSingh Allahabad Delhi
14 AnoopChitkara Himachal Pradesh Punjab and Haryana
15 RaviNathTilhari Allahabad Andhra Pradesh

Ministry of Law and Justice