{"id":313030,"date":"2024-02-04T11:00:59","date_gmt":"2024-02-04T05:30:59","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=313030"},"modified":"2025-08-18T10:31:41","modified_gmt":"2025-08-18T05:01:41","slug":"high-court-monthly-roundup-january-2024-legal-news-updates","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/04\/high-court-monthly-roundup-january-2024-legal-news-updates\/","title":{"rendered":"High Court Roundup January 2024 | Stories on Taxability of Granite, excommunication from community, child pornography, convict\u2019s right to procreate, and more"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT<\/p>\n

[Anti Conversion Law] Allahabad HC rejects pleas filed by Hindu-Muslim couples for protection of life, due to non-compliance<\/p>\n

In writ petitions filed by eight Hindu-Muslim couples for directing the State authorities not to harass their peaceful matrimonial life and to provide protection of life and liberty to them, Saral Srivastava, J while dismissing their petitions, said that the solemnization of marriage between the petitioners is not in accordance with law, as their marriages were not in compliance with the provisions of Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[X v State of UP, Writ \u2014 C No. \u2014 44371 of 2023, Order dated 16-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Husband is a healthy man and can earn money, thus liable to maintain his wife: Allahabad HC upheld Family Court\u2019s order<\/p>\n

In a criminal revision preferred by the husband against the order passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, whereby the application under Section 125<\/a> of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> (\u2018CrPC\u2019) moved by the wife was partly allowed and the husband was directed to pay Rs.2,000\/- per month to her from the date of application of maintenance, Renu Agarwal, J. while upholding the impugned order, said that the husband could not mention any irregularity or illegality in the impugned order, and by not paying any amount towards maintenance showed his negligent conduct to maintain his wife.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Kamal v State of U.P, Criminal Revision No. 461 of 2023, Order dated 25-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Granite stone is \u201cstone\u201d under Entry 109 as not processed in any manner, and taxable at 5%; Allahabad HC upholds Tribunal\u2019s order<\/p>\n

In a sales tax revision filed against the Tribunal order classifying granite stone as \u201cstone\u201d under Entry 109 of the Schedule II Part A as per notification dated 31-03-2011, Shekhar B. Saraf, J. upheld the Tribunal order.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Commissioner v Peethambra Granites Pvt Ltd, sales\/Trade Tax Revision No. 79 of 2023, Order dated 16-01-2023<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Allahabad High Court explains scope of Sections 311 and 233 CrPC concerning production of defence witness during trial<\/p>\n

In a criminal revision filed in a murder case by the accused challenging the order passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, whereby the permission to examine 5 defence witnesses, were refused, Jyotsna Sharma, J. while setting aside the impugned order , allowed the accused to move an application, within a week of production of certified copy of this order, and to give name of 2 persons (out of 5 named) he sought to summon as defence witness. Further, it directed the Trial Court to issue summons for their production as defence witnesses.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Anupam Sharma v State of UP, Criminal Revision No. 794 of 2018, Order dated 17-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Exigence of writ of habeas corpus by husband to regain his wife would be rare and not available as a matter of course: Allahabad HC<\/p>\n

In a habeas corpus petition filed alleging that the wife of the petitioner is under illegal detention of her maternal uncle Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava, J. has set aside the habeas corpus petition as the wife left her matrimonial home, on her own volition, and there was no material to establish the factum of illegal detention. Further, the Court added that the behest of a husband to regain his wife would be rare and may not be available as a matter of course and the power in this regard may be exercised only when a clear case is made out.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Jaishree v State of UP, Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No. 1041 of 2023, Order dated 18-01-2024]<\/p>\n

Truck is a capital asset of transporter utilised for generating income, seizure without show cause notice violates civil rights: Allahabad HC<\/p>\n

In a writ filed by the petitioner\/ transporter being aggrieved by the seizure of his truck, the division bench of Saumitra Dayal Singh and Manjive Shukla, JJ. while stating that as no opportunity of hearing has been granted to the petitioner before the truck has been seized and since amount of Rs. 1 lakh has otherwise become due for release of the vehicle, gave the following directions: The petitioner was directed to treat the penalty order as show cause notice and to furnish reply to respondent 2 only to obtain release of the truck. Respondent 2 was directed to give an appropriate reasoned order after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and to complete such exercise within one week from the date of compliance made by the petitioner.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Akbar Ali Transport Services v. State of U.P., 2024 SCC OnLine All 118<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Appeal against claim petition filed prior to enforcement of Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 2019<\/a> entertainable as per unamended provision: Allahabad HC<\/p>\n

In an appeal, regarding maintainability of the instant appeal under Section 173(2)<\/a> of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988<\/a>, (MVAct,1988\u2019) in view of the report submitted by the Stamp Reporter. Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava, J. held that an appeal against an award of the Claims Tribunal, even if the amount in dispute in the appeal is less than \u2018one lakh rupees\u2019 would be entertainable provided that the amount in dispute is not less than \u2018ten thousand rupees\u2019, and it relates to a claim petition filed prior to 01-04-2022. Further, it held the objection of the Stamp Reporter regarding maintainability of the appeal under Section 173(2) of M V Act, 1988, unsustainable.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Suresh, 2024 SCC OnLine All 122<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Allahabad HC directs UP Bar Council to ensure that applications received for grant of license are subjected to police verification<\/p>\n

In a complaint against the respondent with respect to concealment of vital information regarding pendency of fourteen criminal cases, and obtaining a license to practice law, the division bench of Saumitra Dayal Singh and Vinod Diwakar,JJ. directed respondent 3 to undertake and complete the disciplinary proceedings brought by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of three months, in accordance with law. Further, directed UP Bar Council to issue necessary directions and to ensure appropriate police report be called from the Police Stations concerned about all pending and fresh applications for issuance of license as is being done\/followed for issuance of Passports.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Pawan Kumar Dubey v. State of U.P., 2023 SCC OnLine All 2923<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT<\/p>\n

Fundamental right to hold passport cannot be curtailed; Andhra Pradesh High Court directs Police to release siezed passport of a Non-resident Indian<\/p>\n

In a petition filed under Article 226<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>, B. S. Bhanumathi, J., opined that since, the fact that the petitioner had applied for renewal of the visa stamping and the alloted date was not in dispute, the passport was very much required to the petitioner and his fundamental right to hold his passport could not be curtailed. The Court opined that if at all, there was any violation of notices issued to the petitioner, the remedy was open to the respondents under appropriate provisions of the law and as such, for the time being, no need for imposing any condition against the petitioner and directed to release the petitioner\u2019s passport under due acknowledgement. Thus, the Court directed Respondents 3 and 4 to return the petitioner\u2019s passport under due acknowledgement.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Yesasvi Bodduluri v. Regional Passport Office, 2023 SCC OnLine AP 4113<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

BOMBAY HIGH COURT<\/p>\n

Bombay High Court denies anticipatory bail to advocate for cheating her client by forging bail order<\/p>\n

An anticipatory bail application was filed by the applicant, who is a practicing advocate in connection with a case registered under sections 420<\/a>, 465<\/a>, 467<\/a>, 468<\/a>, 471<\/a> of Penal Code, 1860<\/a>. Sarang V Kotwal, J., denies anticipatory bail to the advocate for cheating her client by forging the bail order.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Hiral Chandrakant Jadhav v. State of Maharashtra, 2024 SCC OnLine Bom 32<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

CALCUTTA HIGH COURT<\/p>\n

\u2018Examination of exact testing methodology beyond purview of judicial review\u2019; Calcutta High Court upholds tender process<\/p>\n

In a writ petition challenging the tender process due to alleged irregularities during the tender process, issuing of Shortfall Notice, subsequent sampling procedures, and the ultimate selection of another bidder, a single-judge bench comprising of Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya,* J., upheld the respondent authority\u2019s right to test and reject bids based on quality criteria specified in the tender document. The Court rejected the present writ petition, emphasising that the tender issuing authority is the best judge of interpreting tender requirements and that judicial review should exercise restraint in administrative matters requiring technical expertise.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Swear Healthcare (P) Ltd. v. State of W.B., W.P.A. No. 2784 of 2023, order dated 29-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Calcutta High Court directs fresh consideration of Insurance Claim due to \u2018Arbitrariness and palpable illegality in repudiation process\u2019<\/p>\n

In an writ petition challenging the repudiation of the insurance claim by the respondent as being arbitrary, a single-judge bench comprising of Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya*, J., held that the repudiation of the petitioner\u2019s claim by the respondent was arbitrary, considering the elaborate process involving an independent expert\u2019s report and a subsequent Addendum Report by the surveyor, both of which were accepted by the respondent. The Court partially allowed the writ petition, and setting aside the repudiation, directed the insurer to re-evaluate the claim, considering specified reports and providing a reasoned decision by 29-02-2024.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[W.B. Power Development Corpn. Ltd. v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd., W.P.O. No. 2532 of 2022, order dated 29-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

\u2018Excommunication from entire community violates right to live with dignity under Article 21\u2019; Calcutta High Court orders costs of Rs. 1.5 lakh<\/p>\n

In a writ petition challenging the petitioner\u2019s excommunication from the from the Agrahari Sikh Community violating his fundamental rights under Article 21<\/a> of the Constitution of India<\/a>, a single-judge bench comprising of Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J., allowed the writ petition, setting aside the excommunication notice and quashing the Gurudwara\u2019s decision. The Court restrained the respondents from future excommunication and ordered the respondents 8 to 10 to individually pay Rs. 50,000 each as compensation to the petitioner for the trauma suffered.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Sardar Lalu Singh v. State of W.B., WPA No. 787 of 2024, order dated 22-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Calcutta High Court grants conditional permission for Sit-in-Demonstration in front of Sourav Ganguly Cricket Coaching Camp<\/p>\n

In an application challenging an order of refusal by the respondent authorities to permit a sit-in-demonstration in front of the Sourav Ganguly Cricket Coaching Camp for seven days organised by the petitioners, a single-judge bench comprising of Jay Sengupta,* J., permitted the sit-in-demonstration from 01-02-2024 at 1 PM to 04-02-2024 at 1 PM on the service road in front of Sourav Ganguly Cricket Coaching Camp subject to certain conditions.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[2022, Prathamik Tet Pass D. El.ED. Aikka Mancha v. State of W.B., WPA 1948 of 2024, order dated 29-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Income Tax | Calcutta High Court dismisses appeal challenging Re-assessment Order; Says same can be challenged before Appellate authority<\/p>\n

In an appeal challenging the order dismissing the writ petition contesting the re-assessment order issued under Section 147<\/a> of the Income Tax Act, 1961<\/a> (the Act), a division bench comprising of T.S. Sivagnanam,* CJ., and Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J., held that since, the appellant did not question the initiation of the reopening of the assessment under Section 148A (b) of the Act or challenge the order passed under Section 148(d) of the Act, therefore, the appellant is precluded from questioning the correctness of the order passed under Section 148A (d) of the Act. The Court dismissed the appeal, and the liberty is reserved for the appellant to raise all points before the appellate authority if intending to file an appeal against the re-assessment order.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Ananda Bag Tea Co. Ltd. v. Union of India, APO NO. 187 OF 2023, order dated 25-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Calcutta High Court upholds Arbitration Clause; directs parties to resolve dispute arising from distributor agreement through Arbitration<\/p>\n

While deciding an application under Section 8<\/a> of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996<\/a> (the Act), seeking arbitration based on the agreement, a single-judge bench comprising of Krishna Rao,* J., found that the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case of non-existence of the agreement. The Court deemed the arbitration clause in the agreement valid, and the parties were directed to arbitration based on the forum selection clause.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Suresh Dhanuka v. Shahnaz Husain, GA 2 of 2022 in CS 118 of 2021, order dated 24-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Calcutta High Court upholds legality of trial proceedings; dismisses Revision due to advance trial stage and absence of prejudice<\/p>\n

In a revision petition challenging the transfer of the trial from the Sessions Judge to the Additional Sessions Judge, a single-judge bench comprising of Suvra Ghosh,* J., dismissed the revisional application in absence of prejudice to the petitioners and the trial being near to completion. The Court highlighted that the initial orders of remand by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM), though irregular, did not strike at the root of the case since cognizance was later taken by the Court of Sessions.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Sukhlal Soren v. State of W.B., C.R.R. 3524 of 2023, order dated 24-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Calcutta High Court postpones decision on supplementary affidavit due to delay in production of seized electronic devices by CBI<\/p>\n

The division bench comprising of Debangsu Basak and Md. Shabbar Rashidi, JJ. has allowed a bunch of application seeking the addition of parties in a matter related to selection of the candidates who have scored less marks than the petitioners in the Selection Test, 2016 for Assistant Teachers in secondary schools. The petitioners also sought permission to rely on a supplementary affidavit affirmed by petitioner in WPA 5538 of 2022 on 24-01-2024 and the Court decided to keep the supplementary affidavit with the record, postponing the decision on its admissibility. The matters are listed for further hearing on 05-02-2024.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Subhamay Bhunia v. State of W.B., CAN\/6\/2024 in WPA 25380 of 2022, order dated 24-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Calcutta High Court upholds conviction under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954<\/a>; orders immediate imprisonment and fine recovery<\/p>\n

In a revision petition challenging the judgment and order by the Additional District and Sessions Judge affirming the conviction and sentence imposed on the revisionists by the Municipal Magistrate for an offense under Section 16(1)(a)(i)<\/a> of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954<\/a> (the Act), a single-judge bench comprising of Rai Chattopadhyay,* J., dismissed the revision petition, upholding the judgments of the Magistrate and Additional District and Sessions Judge. The petitioners\u2019 contentions were deemed unconvincing, and the Court emphasised the importance of maintaining the sanctity of the trial process. The petitioners were directed to serve the imposed sentence and pay the fine.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Jhuma Ghosh v. State of W.B., 2024 SCC OnLine Cal 490<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Calcutta High Court upholds Appellate Court\u2019s order on pre-emption rights and limitation<\/p>\n

In a revisional application challenging the impugned order holding that the application for pre-emption was not barred by limitation, a single-judge bench comprising of Biswaroop Chowdhury,* J., held that the issue of limitation was not raised in lower courts and cannot be entertained for the first time in revision. The Court upheld the Appellate Court\u2019s findings and dismissed the revisional application.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Ajit Kumar Bhunia v. Prabhash Chandra Maity, 2024 SCC OnLine Cal 487<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

\u2018No conviction solely based on accused\u2019s statements under Section 313 of CrPC\u2019; Calcutta High Court sets aside conviction<\/p>\n

In a revision was filed against an order and judgment dated 19-02-2019, passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge modifying the judgment dated 07-03-2015, passed by the Judicial Magistrate at Barrackpore in a criminal case under Section 138<\/a> of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881<\/a> (NI Act), directed to pay compensation of Rs. 2,00,000\/- instead of Rs. 2,25,000\/- to the complainant\/respondent, a single-judge bench comprising of Shampa Dutt (Paul),* J., held that the \u201cjudgment and order under revision and the judgment of the Trial Court being not in accordance with law are liable to be set aside for ends of justice and to prevent abuse of process of law.\u201d<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Sarit Kumar Bose v. Rita Mallick, 2024 SCC OnLine Cal 370<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Calcutta High Court establishes appeal\u2019s maintainability under Order 43(1)(a) and Section 104 of CPC, refers to appropriate jurisdiction<\/p>\n

While deciding an appeal involving the order of transfer made by a Civil Court to the Commercial Court in a district, a division bench comprising of Biswaroop Chowdhury and I.P. Mukerji,* JJ., held that when a civil court, under Section 15<\/a> of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015<\/a>, decides on the transfer, the court functions as an ordinary civil court, not a commercial court under the Act. The Court asserted its jurisdiction to entertain the appeal but referred the same to the appropriate bench having jurisdiction over appeals from orders passed by a regular court of civil jurisdiction.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Prasad Ecostructure L.L.P. v. City Devcon (P) Ltd., 2024 SCC OnLine Cal 494<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Calcutta High Court grants permission to All India Secular Front for Foundation Day meeting, imposes conditions for Peaceful Assembly<\/p>\n

In a petition by All India Secular Front, a registered political party and its General Secretary, seeking permission to hold a mass meeting in front of Victoria House or any adjacent place on 21-01-2024, to celebrate the Foundation Day, a single-judge bench comprising of Jay Sengupta,* J., considering the rights of the petitioners and the State\u2019s concerns, granted permission for the meeting with specified conditions to ensure a peaceful and well-regulated event.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[All India Secular Front v. State of W.B., 2024 SCC OnLine Cal 468<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Calcutta High Court sets aside nomination of Waqf Board member under Section 14(1)(d)<\/a> of Waqf Act, 1995<\/a>; calls for fresh appointment<\/p>\n

In a writ petition involving a dispute over the appointment of a member to the Board of Waqf under the Wakf Act, 1995<\/a> (the Act) and challenging the qualifications of the appointed individual and seeking remedies, a single-judge bench comprising of Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya,* J., held that the appointment is arbitrary, as the State failed to adhere to the legal provision and nominated an individual with a conflict of interest. The Court set aside and quashed the appointment and directed the State to make a fresh nomination under Section 14(1)(d) of the Act adhering to the rule of law and principles of transparency within two months.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Professor Syed Haider Hassan Kazimi v. State of W.B., 2024 SCC OnLine Cal 393<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Calcutta High Court dismisses application for appointment of Arbitrator; rules \u201cMay\u201d in Clause 13 renders dispute resolution ambiguous<\/p>\n

In a matter before the Court for the appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11<\/a> of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996<\/a> (the Act), a single-judge bench comprising of Moushumi Bhattacharya,* J., held that Clause 13 of the General Terms and Conditions in the e-tender notice does not constitute a valid arbitration agreement under Section 7 of the Act and hence, dismissed the present application on the grounds of maintainability.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[BGM & M-RPL-JMCT (JV) v. Eastern Coalfields Ltd., AP 745 of 2023, order dated 19-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Calcutta High Court grants permission to All India Secular Front for Foundation Day meeting, imposes conditions for Peaceful Assembly<\/p>\n

In a petition by All India Secular Front, a registered political party and its General Secretary, seeking permission to hold a mass meeting in front of Victoria House or any adjacent place on 21-01-2024, to celebrate the Foundation Day, a single-judge bench comprising of Jay Sengupta,* J., considering the rights of the petitioners and the State\u2019s concerns, granted permission for the meeting with specified conditions to ensure a peaceful and well-regulated event.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[All India Secular Front v. State of W.B., 2024 SCC OnLine Cal 468<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Calcutta High Court sets aside nomination of Waqf Board member under Section 14(1)(d)<\/a> of Waqf Act, 1995<\/a>; calls for fresh appointment<\/p>\n

In a writ petition involving a dispute over the appointment of a member to the Board of Waqf under the Wakf Act, 1995<\/a> (the Act) and challenging the qualifications of the appointed individual and seeking remedies, a single-judge bench comprising of Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya,* J., held that the appointment is arbitrary, as the State failed to adhere to the legal provision and nominated an individual with a conflict of interest. The Court set aside and quashed the appointment and directed the State to make a fresh nomination under Section 14(1)(d) of the Act adhering to the rule of law and principles of transparency within two months.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Professor Syed Haider Hassan Kazimi v. State of W.B., 2024 SCC OnLine Cal 393<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Calcutta High Court dismisses Revisional Application on claim of collusion and fraud; Case to proceed for Trial<\/p>\n

In a revisional application challenging the impugned order dismissing the application of the petitioner for rejection of plaint, a single-judge bench comprising of Bivas Pattanayak,* J., dismissed the civil revisional application and affirmed the lower court\u2019s decision not to reject the plaint. The Court found no merit in the petitioner\u2019s arguments and held that the case will proceed for trial on the issues raised in the suit.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Amit Begwani v. Ranu Parui, 2024 SCC OnLine Cal 324<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Calcutta High Court allows live telecast and puja ceremony of Shri Ram Mandir inauguration at Kolkata\u2019s Deshpran Sasmal Park<\/p>\n

In an application praying for direction to allow live telecast and organization of the inauguration of Shri Ram Mandir, along with puja, in South Kolkata, a single-judge bench comprising of Jay Sengupta,* J., permitted the petitioner to hold the function at Deshpran Sasmal Park from 9 am to 6 pm on 22-01-2024, on roughly half of the park.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Kalighat Bahumukhi Seva Samiti v. State of W.B., WPA 811 of 2024, order dated 18-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Calcutta High Court affirms Section 148A(d) IT Act order; directs active participation in re-assessment proceedings<\/p>\n

In an intra-court appeal against the impugned order challenging an order passed under Section 148-A(d)<\/a> of the Income Tax Act, 1961<\/a> (the Act), a division bench comprising of T.S. Sivagnanam,* CJ., and Supratim Bhattacharya, J., held that the assessing officer had followed the procedure under Section 148A of the Act meticulously and the appellant\u2019s objections, seeking to challenge the initiation of proceedings, are baseless and frivolous.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Champa Impex (P) Ltd. v. Union of India, 2024 SCC OnLine Cal 367<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Calcutta High Court directs formation of SIT amidst allegations of bias and ineffectiveness in Enforcement Directorate officials attack case<\/p>\n

In a petition seeking transfer of investigation to Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for a fair and effective probe into the violent attack on Enforcement Directorate officials during a raid related to the Public Distribution System Scam, a single-judge bench comprising of Jay Sengupta,* J., considering the ineptitude of the local police and allegations of bias, suggested the formation of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) comprising CBI and State police personnel for a fair and effective investigation. The Court issued directions for the SIT, including the nomination of a CBI officer as the team head, equal representation from State and CBI, and reporting directly to the jurisdictional Magistrate.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Enforcement Directorate v. State of W.B., 2024 SCC OnLine Cal 418<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Calcutta High Court upholds CBMWTF\u2019s administrative decision of reallocation of Bio-Medical Waste Management Facilities in West Bengal<\/p>\n

In a writ petition preferred by the petitioners, a Common Bio-Medical Waste Treatment Facility (CBMWTF), and its Director challenging an order issued by the Senior Special Secretary, Government of West Bengal, Health and Family Welfare Department, a single-judge bench comprising of Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya,* J., dismissed the writ petition, upholding the impugned order, citing administrative discretion and lack of rule contravention as grounds for the decision.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Greentech Environ Management (P) Ltd. v. State of W.B., 2024 SCC OnLine Cal 366<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

\u2018Right to get pension immediately after retirement is a recognised right\u2019; Calcutta High Court directs payment of retiral benefits<\/p>\n

In a writ petition claiming benefits under the (Death-cum-Retirement) Benefit Regulations, 1990, a single-judge bench comprising of Raja Basu Chowdhury,* J., directed the Calcutta State Transport Corporation to release the petitioner\u2019s pension from March 2024 onwards, and arrear pension from February 2018 to February 2024 was to be disbursed with interest.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Shyamal Chandra Dey v. State of W.B., 2024 SCC OnLine Cal 295<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Calcutta High Court upholds eviction decree on non-compliance of stringent requirements under Section 7<\/a> of the W.B. Premises Tenancy Act, 1997<\/a><\/p>\n

While deciding whether the Appellate Court had authority to consider grounds not decided by the Trial Court, a division bench comprising of Harish Tandon and Madhuresh Prasad, JJ., held that Section 107(2)<\/a> of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908<\/a> (CPC) allows the Appellate Court to decide issues not decided by the Trial Court when both parties had presented evidence. The appeal was dismissed since no substantial question of law was identified.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Anupam Dutta v. Bela Mukherjee, 2024 SCC OnLine Cal 265<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Calcutta High Court upholds Presidency Small Cause Court\u2019s jurisdiction to decide ejectment suit under W.B. Premises Tenancy Act, 1997<\/a><\/p>\n

In a writ petition challenging the jurisdiction of Presidency Small Cause Court to try an ejectment suit under the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997<\/a> (W.B. Premises Tenancy Act), a single-judge bench comprising of Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee,* J., dismissed the petitioner\u2019s challenge to the Presidency Small Cause Court\u2019s jurisdiction, affirming the validity of Section 12A of the W.B. Premises Tenancy Act and emphasizes the need for legislative amendments to clarify jurisdictional matters between the two Acts.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Anupam Dutta v. Bela Mukherjee, 2024 SCC OnLine Cal 265<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Calcutta High Court quashes KMC\u2019s action under Section 17A of West Bengal Inland Fisheries Act, 1984<\/a> over Water Body Restoration dispute<\/p>\n

In an appeal against the order directing the Kolkata Municipal Corporation (KMC) to inspect and decide on the water body\u2019s existence, a division bench comprising of Arijit Banerjee* and Apurba Sinha Ray, JJ., allowed the appeal and KMC\u2019s actions were deemed illegal due to the absence of evidence supporting Section 17A\u2019s applicability. The Court directed further proceedings to determine the land\u2019s status under Section 17A with proper notice and evidence.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Anuradha Sen v. Kolkata Municipal Corpn., 2024 SCC OnLine Cal 185<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Calcutta High Court rejects Post-Retirement Regularisation due to irregular appointment and lack of sanctioned post<\/p>\n

In a writ petition seeking regularisation of service post-retirement and claim to entitlement to pension and other retiral dues, a single-judge bench comprising of Kausik Chanda,* J., rejected the petitioner\u2019s plea for regularisation of service post-retirement, emphasising the absence of a sanctioned post for the petitioner\u2019s appointment. The Court also dismissed claims of discrimination and highlighted the negative stance of previous judgments on the regularisation of ad-hoc and illegal appointments.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Tarak Bhattacharya v. State of W.B., 2024 SCC OnLine Cal 201<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Calcutta High Court allows revision application for addition of parties; remits for reconsideration pending special officer\u2019s report<\/p>\n

In a three separate revisional applications challenging the order of rejection of the applicant-petitioner\u2019s application for addition of parties, a single-judge bench comprising of Biswaroop Chowdhury,* J., found that the trial court failed to consider the petitioner\u2019s contentions and documents filed in support of their application. The Court set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter for reconsideration upon receipt of the special officer\u2019s report.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Effect Publication v. Rita Bhattacharya, 2024 SCC OnLine Cal 106<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Proposed accused has no right to hearing at the stage of inquiry under Section 340(1) of CrPC: Calcutta High Court<\/p>\n

In an application under Section 340<\/a> of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> (CrPC) seeking a preliminary inquiry into the alleged fraudulent and illegal acts of the respondents with regards to appointment of arbitrator, a single-judge bench comprising of Moushumi Bhattacharya,* J., held that the respondents\/proposed accused do not have a right to be heard at the stage of inquiry under Section 340(1) of the CrPC. The Court granted liberty to the petitioner to mention the matter for an early hearing on merits, indicating that the respondents have no right to be heard in the present application.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Al Amin Garments Haat (P) Ltd. v. Jitendra Jain, 2024 SCC OnLine Cal 110<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Calcutta High Court affirms convictions in night-time dacoity involving robbery, murder and rape<\/p>\n

In the appeals challenging convictions under Sections 395, 396, 376, and 354 of IPC in a dacoity incident where the appellants are contending false implication, lack of corroboration, and inadequacy of evidence and prosecution is asserting on witness consistency and voluntariness of the confession, a division bench comprising of Sugato Majumdar and Tapabrata Chakraborty,* JJ., after reviewing the findings of the lower court, held that there was no ground for interference, and dismissed the criminal appeals filed by the appellants.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Chimu Sarder, In re, 2024 SCC OnLine Cal 3<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Calcutta High Court dismisses petition challenging provisional attachment of bank account under Section 83 of CGST Act, 2017<\/p>\n

In a writ petition challenging the provisional attachment order under Section 83<\/a> of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017<\/a> (CGST Act), a single-judge bench comprising of Md. Nizamuddin,* J., dismissed the writ petition, finding no merit in challenging the legality of the provisional attachment. The Court emphasised the compliance with Rule 159(5) of CGST Rules and the absence of any challenge to the attachment within the specified remedy period.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Arramva Corpn. v. Additional Director General, 2023 SCC OnLine Cal 5749<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Calcutta High Court dismisses Berger Paint\u2019s trademark infringement plea against JSW Paints due to lack of deceptive similarity<\/p>\n

While deciding whether the defendant\u2019s use of \u201cSILK\u201d constitutes trademark infringement or is merely a descriptive term in the paint industry, a single-judge bench comprising of Krishna Rao,* J., took into account the distinctive features of each party\u2019s label marks and the absence of fraudulent intent by the defendant and dismissed the petitioner\u2019s application for injunction. \u201cUpon examining the containers and labels, this Court found that there is no actual similarity between the marks \u201cSILK\u201d of both the plaintiff and the defendant. This Court held that the plaintiff failed to establish deceptive similarity.\u201d<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Berger Paints India Ltd. v. JSW Paints (P) Ltd., 2023 SCC OnLine Cal 4949<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Calcutta High Court upholds Kolkata Municipal Corporation\u2019s authority to levy Stallage and related charges and penalties<\/p>\n

On a writ petition revolving around the legality of the charges imposed by Kolkata Municipal Corporation (KMC) under the authority conferred upon them by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980<\/a> (the Act), a single-judge bench comprising of Saugata Bhattacharyya,* J., upheld the validity of the demand notice, stating that KMC has the authority to levy stallage and related charges. The Court opined that the penalty for transfer of interest without prior approval was waived due to post facto approval. The Court directed the petitioners to pay the outstanding dues, with the interim deposit adjusted.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Nizam’s Restaurant (P) Ltd. v. Kolkata Municipal Corpn., 2023 SCC OnLine Cal 5723<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Calcutta High Court upholds forfeiture of earnest money in e-auction sale dispute<\/p>\n

In an application challenging the order of Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) and Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) upholding the validity of the equitable mortgage created with a certified copy of the deed, stating that the petitioner was aware of it and willingly participated in the auction, a single-judge bench comprising of Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee,* J., on finding no jurisdictional error or illegality in the concurrent findings of the Tribunals, dismissed the application under Article 227<\/a> of the Constitution of India<\/a> and upheld the forfeiture of earnest money by the bank.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[NRSKL Health Care (P) Ltd. v. SBI, 2023 SCC OnLine Cal 5707]<\/span><\/p>\n

CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT<\/p>\n

Complaint\/FIR filed by second wife for offence u\/s 498A of IPC against husband or in-laws will not be tenable: Chhattisgarh High Court<\/p>\n

In a case, wherein the question arose that whether the complaint\/FIR filed by the second wife for commission of punishable under Section 498-A<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (\u2018IPC\u2019) would be tenable or not, the Division Bench of Sanjay K. Agrawal* and Sachin Singh Rajput, JJ, relied on the principles laid down in Shivcharan Lal Verma v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2007 15 SCC 369 and opined that the complaint\/FIR lodged by second wife for commission of offence punishable under Section 498-A of the IPC\u201c) would not be tenable.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Suman Sharma v. State of Chhattisgarh, CRMP No. 711 of 2022, decided on 18-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Appeal against order of acquittal u\/s 138<\/a> of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881<\/a> lies to High Court u\/s 378(4) of CrPC: Chhattisgarh High Court<\/p>\n

In a revision petition filed under Section 397<\/a> and 401<\/a> of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> (\u2018CrPC\u2019), Deepak Kumar Tiwari, J., opined that the appeal against the order of acquittal in prosecution for the offence punishable under Section 138<\/a> of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881<\/a> (\u2018the NI Act\u2019) would lie to the High Court under Section 378(4) of the CrPC.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Tarkeshwar Sahu v. Amit Lilhare, 2024 SCC OnLine Chh 187<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/p>\n

Delhi High Court dismisses plea to grant injunction to Lotus Herbals for mark \u2018Lotus\u2019 against Deepika Padukone\u2019s brand \u2018Lotus Splash\u2019<\/p>\n

C. Hari Shankar, J.*, noted that in each of the packs of defendants\u2019 product, the mark \u201882\u00b0E\u2019 figured at the lower edge of the bottle, which indicated that the trade mark of defendants was \u201882\u00b0E\u2019 and not \u2018Lotus Splash\u2019. The Court opined that there was no prima facie case of passing off as the only common feature between plaintiffs and defendants\u2019 mark was the word \u2018lotus\u2019. The products were completely dissimilar in appearance with a wide difference in the prices of the products and a consumer who used such products would be aware of the difference between \u2018Lotus Splash\u2019 and plaintiff\u2019s lotus family of products. It could not be said, therefore, that defendants by using the name \u2018Lotus Splash\u2019, were seeking to pass off its product as plaintiff\u2019s product. Thus, no prima facie case for grant of injunction was made out.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Lotus Herbals (P) Ltd. v. DPKA Universal Consumer Ventures (P) Ltd., 2024 SCC OnLine Del 498<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Gag orders should be passed to prevent substantial risk to fair trial; Delhi High Court imposes cost of Rs. 10,000 on a man seeking gag order against newspapers<\/p>\n

In a writ petition seeking to direct Dainik Jagran, Respondent 2 and Hindustan Times, Respondent 3 to conceal the petitioner\u2019s identity while circulating news or any article that was carried out by them, Subramonium Prasad, J.*, opined that merely because a publication was related to a Court proceeding, it could not be concluded that the publication tended to impair the Court\u2019s impartiality or affected the Court\u2019s ability to determine the true facts. One had to carefully see the nature of the publication and find out as to the content of the publication would cause prejudice to the trial of a case or not. The Court opined that it could not be concluded that the guidelines laid down in Sahara India Real Estate Corpn. Ltd. v. SEBI, (2012) 10 SCC 603 was not violated, as it was well settled that the gag orders should be passed only when it was necessary and to prevent substantial risk to fairness of a trial. Thus, the Court directed the petitioner to pay Rs. 10,000 to the Armed Forces Battle Casualty Welfare Fund for wasting the judicial time of this Court.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Ajay Kumar v. Union of India, W.P.(C) 15373 of 2023, decided on 25-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Delhi High Court dismisses appeal by wife on failure to establish shared household in Domestic Violence claim<\/p>\n

An appeal was filed by the wife under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act against a judgment and order of a Family Court in Delhi rejecting the appellant\u2019s application under Sections 17<\/a> and 19<\/a> of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005<\/a>, seeking the right of residence. The bench of Suresh Kumar Kait and Neena Bansal Krishna, JJ. held that the appellant was unable to establish that the house at Punjabi Bagh Extension, Delhi was ever a shared household and there is no error in the impugned order dated 29-02-2023 calling for interference.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Sonia Khurana v Pradeep Khurana, Matt Application (FC) No. 80\/2023, decided on 25-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Delhi HC orders Meta Platforms Inc., Telegram to block mobile numbers, delete groups, created to defraud people under mark \u2018SEQUOIA, \u2018SEQUOIA CAPITAL\u2019<\/p>\n

The present suit seeks to permanently restrain unauthorized use of plaintiff\u2019s registered trade marks \u201cSEQUOIA\u201d, \u201cSEQUOIA CAPITAL\u201d, \u201c\u201d, \u201c\u201d etc. by Defendant 1, who was operating a fraudulent cryptocurrency trading and investment online gateway. Sanjeev Narula, J., restrained Defendant 1 or any person acting on their behalf, from using plaintiff\u2019s registered \u201cSEQUOIA\u201d trade marks or its variations, as a part of their domain names, websites, mobile applications, social media handle names\/profiles credentials\/description, promotional\/business activities on digital or print media, bank accounts and\/or any business papers etc. in any manner that would amount to infringement of plaintiff\u2019s trade marks.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Sequoia Capital Operations LLC v. John Doe, CS(COMM) 69 of 2024, Order dated 24-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Delhi High Court upholds Legitimacy of GST Anti-Profiteering Mechanism with a Cautionary Note on Potential Arbitrary Exercises of Power<\/p>\n

The petitions were filed challenging the constitutional validity of Section 171<\/a> of Central Good and Services Tax Act, 2017<\/a> (CGST Act) and Rules 122, 124, 126, 127, 129, 133 and 134 of the Central Good and Services Tax Rules, 2017<\/a> (CGST Rules) as well as the legality of the notices proposing imposition or orders imposing penalty issued by the National Anti-Profiteering Authority (\u2018NAA\u2019) under Section 122 of CGST Act read with Rule 133(3)(d) of CGST Rules and the final orders passed by NAA, whereby the petitioners, who are companies running diverse businesses ranging from hospitality, Fast-Moving Consumer Goods (\u2018FMCG\u2019) to real estate, have been directed in accordance with Section 171 of Act, 2017, to pass on the commensurate benefit of reduction in the rate of tax or the Input Tax Credit to its consumers \/ recipients along with interest. A division bench of Manmohan, CJ., and Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J., held that Section 171, as enacted, is not manifestly arbitrary, and no fundamental or other rights of the petitioners are affected by requiring the benefit to be passed on through a commensurate reduction in prices.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Reckitt Benckiser India Private Limited v Union of India, W.P.(C) 7743\/2019, decided on 29-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Court barred from taking cognizance of defamation on police report, it can only be taken on complaint filed by aggrieved party: Delhi High Court<\/p>\n

In an application filed under Section 482<\/a> of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> (\u2018CrPC\u2019), seeking ad-interim stay of the proceedings in a complaint case, pending before the ACMM-04, Rouse Avenue Court, New Delhi (\u2018the Trial Court\u2019), Swarana Kanta Sharma, J.*, noted that the Additional Sessions Judge, observed that the purpose of Section 210 of the CrPC was to avoid taking cognizance of the same offence again, and to avoid separate trial for the same offence. The Court opined that, however, in the present case, the complaint had been filed for the offence of defamation and the FIR had been registered for the offences of cheating and forgery, thus, the question of taking cognizance of the same offence would not arise. Further, the Court was also barred from taking cognizance of the offence of defamation on a police report, it could only be taken on a complaint filed by the aggrieved party. The Court noted that the present complaint was not merely based on the imputations made against the complainant by the accused persons on a letter dated 04-04-2016, but the complainant also referred to several other incidents and allegations against the accused persons. Thus, the Court opined that it was not inclined to stay the proceedings before the Trial Court and dismissed the present application.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Manjinder Singh Sirsa v. State (NCT of Delhi), CRL.M.C. 316 of 2024, decided on 24-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Delhi High Court holds South Asian University to be out of the purview of \u2018State\u2019 and thus not amenable to writ jurisdiction<\/p>\n

In a matter concerning the maintainability of writ petition against the South Asian University, Chandra Dhari Singh, J., held that the present petition being non-maintainable is liable to be dismissed and the petitioners are advised to approach the appropriate forum i.e. the Arbitral Tribunal for adjudication of the dispute on merits as the University to be neither a State under Article 12, nor under the ambit of Article 226<\/a> of the Constitution of India<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Snehashish Bhattacharya v South Asian University, W.P.(C) 9083 of 2023, decided on 23-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

\u2018Child suffers most casualty in custody battle, loses everything due to polarization of familial relations\u2019; Delhi HC modifies father\u2019s visitation rights<\/p>\n

An appeal was filed under Section 19<\/a> of the Family Courts Act, 1984<\/a> by appellant-mother, against the judgment dated 22-09-2022 of the Family Court, South, Saket Courts, New Delhi (\u2018the Family Court\u2019) wherein, both parents were declared as joint guardians of the minor child and visitation rights were granted to respondent-father, while the custody of the minor was granted to appellant till the age of eighteen years. The Division Bench of Suresh Kumar Kait and Neena Bansal Krishna*, JJ. upheld the decision of the Family Court and modified the visitation rights granted to respondent. The Court directed appellant to bring the child to the children\u2019s room of the Family Court on the first and third Saturday of every month. The Court held that respondent should be allowed to talk to the child on mobile phone at least once a week and further held that the order would remain effective till the child attains majority.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[X v. Y, Mat. App. (F.C.) 47 of 2023, decided on 12-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

[Delhi Cantt Rape Case] Delhi High Court nods closure on Rahul Gandhi\u2019s Tweet Controversy disclosing identity of minor victim<\/p>\n

A PIL was initiated by Makarand Suresh Mhadlekar, a social activist seeking legal action and the registration of an FIR against Congress leader Rahul Gandhi aimed to address the alleged disclosure of the identity of a minor girl involved in a heinous crime. A Division Bench of Manmohan, CJ and Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, J., held that considering that tweet stands deleted, the prayers mentioned in the writ petition stands satisfied.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Makarand Suresh Mhadlekar v. Rahul Gandhi, W.P.(C) 8210\/2021, decided on 24-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Delhi High Court upholds registration of mark \u2018Premier League\u2019 in favour of Football Association Premier League Ltd.<\/p>\n

This appeal was filed under Section 91<\/a> of the Trade Marks Act, 1999<\/a> (\u2018the Act\u2019) read with Rule 156 of the Trade Mark Rules, 2017 (\u2018the Rules) assailing order dated 02-02-2023 passed by Respondent 2, the Registrar of Trade Marks, Delhi, rejecting the opposition of appellant, Premier SPG and WVG Mills Pvt. Ltd to register respondent\u2019s mark in Class 25. Anish Dayal, J.*, opined that there was a lack of opposition by appellant to the earlier registration of respondent\u2019s mark \u2018BARCLAYS PREMIER LEAGUE\u2019 as it did not support appellant\u2018s plea of the challenge to respondent\u2019s mark. If at all \u2018PREMIER\u2019 was also contained in the earlier mark of \u2018BARCLAYS PREMIER LEAGUE\u2019, and if at all distinctiveness was sought based on the word \u2018PREMIER\u2019, an opposition ought to have been filed at that stage itself. The said mark of \u2018BARCLAYS PREMIER LEAGUE\u2019 subsisted on the trade marks register for at least a period of 10 years, and appellant had not presented any step which was taken by them for opposition\/rectification. Thus, the Court dismissed the appeal.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Premier SPG and WVG Mills (P) Ltd. v. Football Association Premier League Ltd., C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 15 of 2023, decided on 22-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Non-filing of GST returns for some period does not mean taxpayer\u2019s GST registration will be cancelled retrospectively: Delhi HC<\/p>\n

In a petition challenging the show cause notice dated 08-11-2022, order of cancellation dated 07-02-2023 and order in appeal dated 24-08-2023, the Division Bench of Sanjeev Sachdeva* and Ravinder Dudeja, JJ., opined that the registration could not be cancelled with the retrospective effect mechanically and it could be cancelled, only if the proper officer deemed it fit to do so. Further, such satisfaction could not be subjective but must be based on the objective criteria. The Court opined that, \u201cmerely, because a taxpayer has not filed the returns for some period does not mean that the taxpayer\u2019s registration is required to be cancelled with retrospective date also covering the period when the returns were filed, and the taxpayer was compliant.\u201d Thus, the Court set aside the show cause notice dated 08-11-2022, order of cancellation dated 07-02-2023 and order in appeal dated 24-08-2023. The Court restored the GST registration of the petitioner and directed the petitioner to file the returns for the relevant period within a period of two weeks from 08-01-2024.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Shree Balaji Transport v. Commr. (CGST), W.P.(C) 15377 of 2023, decided on 08-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Delhi High Court refuses to interfere with corruption proceedings against Jharkhand Mukti Morcha\u2019s Shibu Soren<\/p>\n

A petition was filed by Shibu Soren, a sitting Member of the Parliament in Rajya Sabha nominated from the State of Jharkhand seeking to quash the complaint filed before Lokpal along with orders passed by Lokpal, regarding allegations of corruption by amassing huge wealth, properties and assets by unscrupulous means. Subramonium Prasad, J., refused to interfere in the proceedings as it is for the Lokpal to decide as to whether there is sufficient material to proceed further for investigation or not to subserve the purpose for which the Act has been brought out.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Shibu Soren v Lokpal, W.P.(C) 13213\/2022, decided on 22-02-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Delhi HC directs National Testing Agency to ensure uploading of final answer key prior to final declaration of result<\/p>\n

In the petition filed by the petitioner regarding publication of final result by the National Testing Agency (\u2018NTA\u2019), before releasing the final answer key, C. Hari Shankar*, opined that it had been assured by the NTA, that in future, this would not happen and any exercise of consideration of objections to the provisional answer key would be undertaken only prior to the final result of the examination of the CUET. The Court had also been assured that the final answer key would be uploaded on the website of the NTA at least a day prior to the final declaration of result, though it would be accessible only through the individual login ID and password of the candidate concerned. The Court directed the NTA to ensure that, in future, these assurances were scrupulously adhered to.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Aashish Gupta v. Union of India, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 393<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Delhi High Court orders to permanently block websites defrauding people on pretext of recruiting for part-time jobs with Croma<\/p>\n

The instant suit concerned infringement and passing off of plaintiff\u2019s registered trade marks CROMA, INFINITI RETAIL, and their formative variants, by Defendants 1 to 4. Sanjeev Narula, J.*, held that plaintiff was entitled to a permanent injunction and further directed Defendants 5 to 7 to permanently block access to the impugned websites namely, www.croma-share.com, www.croma-2.com and www.croma-1.com.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Infiniti Retail Ltd. v. Croma-Share, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 424<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Delhi HC directs Chairperson, DTC to file affidavit stating details of officer who appointed person suffering from colour blindness as a driver<\/p>\n

The instant application was filed by petitioner under Section 151<\/a> of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908<\/a> seeking the relief to allow petitioner to file and place on record additional documents i.e., letter dated 29-10-2008 and 13-03-2013 in the present writ petition. Chandra Dhari Singh, J.<\/p>\n

,<\/p>\n

directed the Chairperson, Delhi Transport Corporation to file a personal affidavit, after due investigation, stating therein the details of the officer who was responsible for appointing the person suffering from colour blindness\/medically unfit for the position of driver with petitioner.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[DTC v. Chet Ram, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 442<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Delhi High Court refuses to quash S. 376 IPC FIR based on conduct of parties, misguided facts and misinformed religious conversion<\/p>\n

A petition was filed by the accused under Article 226 and 227 read with Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) for quashing of FIR registered at Police Station for offence under Sections 376<\/a> and 506<\/a> of Penal Code, 1860<\/a>, centers on the conflicting stories presented by the accused and prosecutrix, while the prosecutrix alleging forced sexual assault and the conflicting stand of the petitioner that it was a consensual live-in sexual relationship. Swarana Kanta Sharma, J., dismissed the petition refusing to quash the FIR highlighting inconsistencies, misconduct, and suspicions on both sides, leading to unresolved questions about the validity of the marriage and the overall credibility of the parties involved.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Maksood Ahmad v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2024 SCC OnLine Del 418<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Income derived from transmission of \u2018live feed\u2019 not taxable as \u2018royalty income\u2019 u\/s 9(1)(vi)<\/a> of Income Tax Act, 1961<\/a>: Delhi High Court<\/p>\n

In an appeal filed against the orders of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (\u2018ITAT\u2019) (\u2018impugned orders\u2019) regarding the taxability of total license fee earned in respect of live telecast as royalty; the Division Bench of Yashwant Varma and Girish Kathpalia, JJ., upheld the impugned orders and held that the income of respondent towards live transmission could not be classified as \u2018royalty income\u2019 under Section 9(1)(vi)<\/a> of the Income Tax Act, 1961<\/a> (\u2018the Act\u2019).<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[CIT v. Fox Network Group Singapore Pte. Ltd., 2024 SCC OnLine Del 433<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Delhi High Court restrains Bohemia from engaging with third parties for making sound recordings without prior written approval from Saga Music<\/p>\n

An application was filed under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908<\/a> in respect of the suit filed by plaintiff seeking inter alia declaration that plaintiff had rights, title and interest in the literary works, musical works, sound recordings and cinematographic film created\/produced by Defendant 1 with exclusively and\/or collaboration with any party during the term of agreement dated 15-12-2019 and addendum dated 05-01-2021, and permanent injunction restraining defendants and all other persons acting on his behalf and for him from infringing the copy right which accrued to the benefits of plaintiff by virtue of the above-mentioned agreements. Anish Dayal, J., opined that plaintiff had made out a prima facie case for ex-parte ad interim relief and thus restrained Defendant 1 from engaging with third party\/entities for the purpose of making any sound recording\/cinematographic film\/musical work created by Defendant 1 and any performance by Defendant 1, without the prior written approval of plaintiff.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Saga Music (P) Ltd. v. Roger David, CS(COMM) 22 of 2024, Order dated 16-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

\u201cWhat the F*** is going on this Court\u201d; Delhi High Court issues contempt notice to woman for hurling abuse at Judge<\/p>\n

In a case during final arguments, the plaintiff allegedly made derogatory remarks against the court via video conference. Neena Bansal Krishna, J., issued a show-cause notice, requiring the plaintiff to explain why she should not be punished under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971<\/a> and directed her to appear in person on the next hearing date, along with her passport and visa impoundment if she returns to India.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Anita Kumari Gupta v Ved Bhushan, CS(OS) 1093 of 2011, decided on 10-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Delhi High Court quashes charges under Prevention of Money Laundering Act against doctor accused of being involved in illegal kidney transplantation racket<\/p>\n

In a revision petition filed under Section 397 read with Section 401<\/a> of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> (\u2018CrPC\u2019) to set aside the impugned order dated 24-04-2012, Sudhir Kumar Jain, J.*, opined that the complaint filed by the Enforcement Directorate (\u2018ED\u2019) and the consequential proceedings could not survive. The Court opined that considering that the petitioner had been acquitted by the Trial Court, and that the said judgement had not been challenged till date, there could be no offence of money laundering under Section 3<\/a> of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002<\/a> (\u2018PMLA\u2019) against the petitioner, and accordingly, set aside the impugned order along with all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Jeevan Kumar v. Prabhakant, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 276<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Delhi High Court restrains Gujarat-based AAJ TAK WATCH NEWS from using India Today Group\u2019s popular mark AAJ TAK<\/p>\n

A suit was filed by Living Media India Limited (plaintiff) seeking an injunction against the defendant for using deceptively similar mark \u201cAAJ TAK\u201d in \u2018AAJ TAK WATCH NEWS\u2019. Anish Dayal, J., restrained the defendants from using the plaintiff\u2019s marks \u201cAAJ TAK\u201d\/ \u00e0\u00a4\u00e2\u20ac\u00a0\u00e0\u00a4\u00c5\u201c \u00e0\u00a4\u00a4\u00e0\u00a4\u00e2\u20ac\u00a2\u201d, or any other trademark identical or deceptively similar to plaintiff\u2019s registered trademarks, in any manner, in relation to any digital media platform including websites, social media and any other content sharing digital platform.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Living Media India Ltd. v. Jay Jayeshbhai Tank, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 312<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Power to transfer ordinary suit to Commercial Court is not available to District and Sessions Judge u\/s 24 of CPC: Delhi High Court<\/p>\n

The petition was filed by petitioner challenging the order dated 06-03-2023 passed by the Additional District Judge-06, South-East District, Saket Courts, New Delhi (\u2018the Additional District Judge\u2019) wherein, the Court observed the dispute between the parties to be a commercial dispute and directed the file of the suit to be placed before the Court of the Principal District and Sessions Judge, South-East District, Saket Courts, New Delhi (\u2018the Principal District and Sessions Judge\u2019) to pass appropriate order. Petitioner further challenged the order dated 14-03-2023 passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, wherein it was directed to withdraw the suit from the Court of the Additional District Judge, and the same was to be transferred to the Court of District Judge, Commercial Court-06, Saket Courts, New Delhi (\u2018the Commercial Court\u2019) to proceed further in accordance with law. Navin Chawla, J.*, set aside the orders dated 06-03-2023 and 14-03-2023 and held that the Additional District Judge and the Principal District and Sessions Judge had erred in passing the respective orders and it further held that the High Court and not the District and Sessions Judge had the power to transfer the suit to the competent Court under Section 24 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (\u2018CPC\u2019).<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Living Media India Ltd. v. Jay Jayeshbhai Tank, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 312<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Delhi High Court dismisses PIL against \u2018Aankh Micholi\u2019 movie being derogatory and discriminatory against persons with disabilities<\/p>\n

Petitioner, a person with disability, filed this writ petition as a Public Interest Litigation being aggrieved by the actions of Respondent 1, Sony Pictures Films India Pvt. Ltd., in producing a movie \u2018Aankh Micholi\u2019 (\u2018Movie\u2019), in which, allegedly derogatory and discriminatory remarks were made against the Persons with Disabilities (\u2018PwDs\u2019). Petitioner seeks a direction to Respondent 2, Central Board of Film Certification (\u2018CBFC\u2019), to include an expert on the subject matter of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016<\/a> (\u2018RPWD Act\u2019) within the Board of Film Certification under Section 3<\/a> of the Cinematograph Act, 1952<\/a> (\u20181952 Act\u2019) and advisory panel constituted under Section 5 of said Act. The Division Bench of Manmohan, ACJ.*, and Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, J.*, dismissed the petition and held that there were no grounds or legal basis in the petition justifying the said relief and the Central Government had already issued guidelines under Section 5-B(2) of the 1952 Act, to CBFC for the purpose of sanctioning film, which included guidelines for handicapped persons.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Nipun Malhotra v. Sony Pictures Films India (P) Ltd., 2024 SCC OnLine Del 337<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

\u2018Case of twin promise of marriage\u2019; Delhi HC directs Sessions Court to frame rape charges against a man for allegedly making false promise of marriage to a woman<\/p>\n

In a criminal revision petition filed by the petitioner before the Court, Swarana Kanta Sharma, J.*, opined that the present case, was a case of twin promise of marriage, and if Respondent 2 had not promised the petitioner, she would not have entered into physical relationship with him. It was also proved that during trial, whether it was breach of promise to marry, or false promise to marry for the sexual relationship, a mini trial could not have been conducted to reach this decision at the stage of framing of charge itself. Thus, the Court opined that there was sufficient material on record to frame charge against Respondent 2 under Sections 376 and 506 of the IPC, and accordingly, set aside the impugned order dated 08-06-2023 and directed the Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi (\u2018the Sessions Court\u2019), to frame charge against Respondent 2 under Sections 376 and 506 of the IPC.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[X v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2024 SCC OnLine Del 311<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

\u2018Attempt to indulge in smart copying\u2019; Delhi HC restrains Hermes Distillery from selling liquor under label \u2018PEACE MAKER\u2019 in suit by Allied Blenders and Distillers<\/p>\n

Plaintiff, Allied Blenders and Distillers (P) Ltd. filed the present suit under Sections 134<\/a> and 135<\/a> of the Trade Marks Act, 1999<\/a> seeking an injunction against defendant, Hermes Distillery (P) Ltd.\u2019s labels. Prathiba M. Singh, J.*, restrained defendant from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale whisky or any other liquor products under the impugned label . The injunction did not preclude defendant from using the red and white color combination in a manner to not cause any confusion or deception or be imitative of plaintiff\u2019s mark\/label \u2018OFFICERS CHOICE\u2019.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Allied Blenders v. Hermes Distillery (P) Ltd., 2024 SCC OnLine Del 217<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

\u2018Mark\u2019s removal for non-use requires clear, unequivocal evidence of abandonment\u2019; Delhi High Court dismisses application for removal of mark \u2018BAOJI\u2019<\/p>\n

In a case wherein a rectification application was filed by petitioner, Rong Thai International Group Co. Ltd. invoking Section 47(1)(b)<\/a> of Trade Marks Act, 1999<\/a> (\u2018the Act\u2019) to seek cancellation of the mark \u2018BAOJI\u2019, registered in Class 25 in favour of Respondent 1, Ena Footwear Pvt. Ltd. on the ground of non-use, Sanjeev Narula, J.*, dismissed the petition and held that a mark\u2019s removal for non-use required clear, unequivocal evidence of abandonment, which was not present in the case.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Allied Blenders v. Hermes Distillery (P) Ltd., 2024 SCC OnLine Del 217<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

\u2018Foreigners cannot claim right to reside and settle in India as per Article 19(1)(e), their rights limited to Article 21\u2019; Delhi HC dismisses petition against illegal detention<\/p>\n

While hearing a writ petition filed by petitioner under Article 226<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a> read with Section 482<\/a> of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> (\u2018CrPC\u2019) to issue an appropriate direction and orders to Respondent 2, Foreign Regional Registration Office (FRRO) for illegal detention and custody of the nephew of petitioner, the Division Bench of Suresh Kumar Kait* and Manoj Jain*, JJ., dismissed the appeal and held that the power of Government of India to expel foreigners was absolute and unlimited and the fundamental right of foreigners was limited to the one given under Article 21<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a> and such acts of the authorities were in accordance with the law.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Kinadhan Chakma v. Union of India, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 139<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

\u2018Only being a woman cannot grant additional protection to the accused\u2019; Delhi High Court refuses anticipatory bail to woman accused<\/p>\n

An application was filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) seeking anticipatory bail registered under Sections 420<\/a>, 468<\/a>, 471<\/a> and 120-B<\/a> of Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (IPC). Navin Chawla, J., refused anticipatory bail to the accused for want of custodial interrogation.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Preeti Anand v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2024 SCC OnLine Del 207<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

\u2018Forging order of an arbitrator is a serious offence\u2019; Delhi HC dismisses anticipatory bail application<\/p>\n

In a case wherein an application under Section 438<\/a> of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> (\u2018CrPC\u2019) was filed seeking anticipatory bail in the FIR, registered under Sections 420<\/a>, 467<\/a>, 468<\/a>, 471<\/a>, 506<\/a> and 34<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a>, Navin Chawla, J.*, dismissed the bail application and held that merely because no action was taken against the erring police officers, who misbehaved with petitioner-applicant, anticipatory bail couldn\u2019t be granted and also that forging an arbitration order was a serious offence.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Vipul Jain v. State, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 206<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

True love between individuals cannot be controlled through State action; Delhi HC quashes FIR against a man who eloped with an alleged minor girl<\/p>\n

In a petition filed under Article 226<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a> read with Section 482<\/a> of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> (\u2018CrPC\u2019) seeking to quash the registered FIR for offences punishable under Sections 363<\/a>, 366<\/a> and 376<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (\u2018IPC\u2019), Swarana Kanta Sharma, J.*, opined that this Court had repeatedly concluded that a true love between two individuals, one or both of who might be minor(s) on the verge of majority, could not be controlled through rigours of law or State action. The Court opined that the cases like the present one, though limited individuals were there in the memo of the parties, but the effect of orders were such that travelled beyond the memo of the parties. Thus, the Court opined that if the FIR was not quashed, it would affect the daughter\u2019s future, who were born from this union, and would eventually result in failure of effective and real justice, and accordingly, quashed the impugned FIR dated 10-01-2015.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Arif Khan v. State, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 138<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

\u2018Male chromosome not female chromosome determines gender of unborn child\u2019; Delhi High Court refuses bail in dowry death case<\/p>\n

An application was filed under Section 439 read with Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) seeking a grant of regular bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304-B<\/a>, 498-A<\/a> and 34<\/a> of Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (IPC). Swarana Kanta Sharma, J., refuses bail to the applicant because the allegations are grave and serious in nature, the charges are yet to be framed and the material witnesses are yet to be examined.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Hardesh Kumar v. State, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 111<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Delhi High Court denies parole to Ravi Kapoor serving life imprisonment in Soumya Vishwanathan and Jigisha Ghosh murder cases<\/p>\n

Petitioner, who was serving his life sentence, approached this Court under Article 226<\/a>, 227<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a> read with Section 482<\/a> of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> seeking parole for four weeks on the ground of maintaining social ties with his family and for undergoing a knee surgery. Swarana Kanta Sharma, J.*, opined that petitioner was a habitual offender, who was involved in about twenty criminal cases and was convicted in two cases involving commission of offences such as murder and robbery. Thus, after considering petitioner\u2019s criminal history, his overall conduct inside the jail premises and the gravity of the offences committed by him, the Court held that it was not inclined to grant parole to petitioner at this stage.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Ravi Kapoor v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2024 SCC OnLine Del 203<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Benefit of interim maintenance cannot be denied merely based on unproven allegations of illicit relationship: Delhi High Court<\/p>\n

A petition filed by petitioner-husband under Section 482<\/a> of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> (\u2018CrPC\u2019) to quash\/modify order dated 15-09-2021 passed by the MM, Tis Hazari Court whereby in an application for interim maintenance under Section 23<\/a> of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005<\/a> (\u2018DV Act\u2019), the husband was directed to pay Rs. 6000 per month to respondent-wife towards rent along with interim maintenance of Rs. 11,460 per month to the wife and Rs. 9,800 towards the expenditure of both minor daughters. Anoop Kumar Mendiratta, J.*, opined that the wife could not be denied the benefit of interim maintenance under the DV Act merely based on the allegations of illicit relationship which were yet to be proved during the trial. The Court thus held that the contentions raised by the husband for quashing of the proceedings under Section 12 of the DV Act were without any merit and therefore, there were no reasons to interfere in the impugned order of maintenance passed by the Trial Court.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Ajay Kumar v. UMA, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 148<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Delhi High Court issues directions for immediate financial assistance and recovery of back wages for rescued child labourers<\/p>\n

Petitioner was the father of a child who had been a victim of bonded labour and the present two petitions were filed seeking relief for petitioner\u2019s minor child as well as similarly placed children who had not received the benefit of financial assistance under the statutory schemes. Petitioner was seeking directions for expeditious recovery of long pending backwages of petitioner\u2019s minor child and 115 similar other child victims of bonded labour. The Division Bench of Manmohan, ACJ.*, and Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, J.*, approved the Joint Suggestions that were made in coordination with all the Government departments and thus, with the consent of the parties, the Court issued directions in relation to the mechanism to be adopted in the post rescue protocol for rescued child labourers.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Kaum Faqeer Shah v. Ministry of Labour & Employment, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 128<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

\u2018Similar to mark GK HAIR\u2019; Delhi High Court restrains use of mark \u2018GK WELLNESS\u2019 for hair care products in infringement suit by company Van Tibolli<\/p>\n

Plaintiffs alleged that defendants\u2019 mark \u201cGK WELLNESS\u201d and their logos and infringed plaintiffs\u2019 registered trade mark \u201cGK HAIR\u201d, within the meaning of Section 29(2)<\/a> of the Trade Marks Act, 1999<\/a> (\u2018the Act\u2019). Thus, plaintiff seeks an interlocutory injunction against the use by defendants, in any manner, of the impugned mark \u201cGK WELLNESS\u201d and the logos and . C. Hari Shankar, J.*, held that defendants and others acting on their behalf, shall, consequently, stand restrained, pending disposal of the present suit, from using the mark \u201cGK WELLNESS\u201d in any form, including the logos , , and any domain name of which \u201cgk wellness\u201d was a part, or any other mark which was confusingly or deceptively similar to plaintiffs\u2019 registered trade mark \u201cGK HAIR\u201d, or for any goods or services dealing with hair care or hair treatment, or any other goods or services which were allied or cognate therewith.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Van Tibolli v. K. Srinivas Rao, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 8384<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

[Contempt of Court] Delhi High Court sentences advocate to six months in jail for making scandalous, unwarranted and baseless imputations against Judges<\/p>\n

The Division Bench of Suresh Kumar Kait and Shalinder Kaur, JJ.*, opined that the respondent had made contumacious allegations in the appeal and also, made scandalous, unwarranted and baseless imputations against the Judges of the present Court and District Courts who had been discharging judicial functions. Further, being an officer of the Court, and making such averments in the judicial proceedings were more serious in nature. It was incumbent upon the Courts of justice to check such actions with a firm hand which otherwise would have pernicious consequences. Therefore, the Court opined that the respondent had committed contempt of court under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971<\/a> (\u2018the Act\u2019) and thus, found him guilty. Accordingly, the Court sentenced the respondent to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months with a fine of Rs. 2,000 and in default of payment of fine, he should undergo simple imprisonment of seven days.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Court on its Own Motion v. Virendra Singh, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 145<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Delhi High Court sets aside Single Judge\u2019s order affirming revocation of PepsiCo\u2019s registration for potato variety FL 2027 used in Lay\u2019s chips<\/p>\n

The appeal arose from the judgment dated 05-07-2023 passed by the Single Judge dismissing the appeal preferred by appellant, PepsiCo India Holdings (P) Ltd. (\u2018PepsiCo\u2019) under Section 56<\/a> of the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers\u2019 Rights Act, 2001<\/a> (\u2018the Act\u2019) and which had challenged the order of revocation dated 03-12-2021 passed by the Authority constituted under the Act. The order of revocation had annulled the registration accorded in favor of PepsiCo in respect of plant variety FL 2027. The Division Bench of Yashwant Varma* and Dharmesh Sharma, JJ., affirmed the Single Judge\u2019s decision that the mistake of styling the variety as \u2018new\u2019 was remediable and in any case not fatal to the cause especially since the Registrar itself had decided to process the same as relating to the \u2018extant\u2019 category.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Pepsico India Holdings (P) Ltd. v. Kavitha Kuruganti, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 153<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

Delhi High Court restrains manufacturers from selling cosmetic products imitative of Blue Heaven\u2019s products and packaging<\/p>\n

Prathiba M. Singh, J., opined that the products involved in the present case were cosmetics, and the use of identical artwork and packaging was likely to create deception amongst the consumers that defendants\u2019 products also emanated from that of plaintiff. Thus, the Court restrained defendants and anyone acting for and\/or on their behalf from using, manufacturing, offering for sale, the cosmetic products under the mark \u2018NAMO NAVKAR\u2019, which were imitative of plaintiff\u2019s \u2018BLUE HEAVEN\u2019 products and packaging…. Prathiba M. Singh, J., opined that the products involved in the present case were cosmetics, and the use of identical artwork and packaging was likely to create deception amongst the consumers that defendants\u2019 products also emanated from that of plaintiff. Thus, the Court restrained defendants and anyone acting for and\/or on their behalf from using, manufacturing, offering for sale, the cosmetic products under the mark \u2018NAMO NAVKAR\u2019, which were imitative of plaintiff\u2019s \u2018BLUE HEAVEN\u2019 products and packaging.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Blue Heaven Cosmetics (P) Ltd. v. Anish Jain Trading, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 8509<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

No income arises on investment in shares in an Indian subsidiary as it is a capital account transaction: Delhi High Court reiterates<\/p>\n

The present writ petitions were filed seeking quashing of the impugned notices and orders passed under Section 148-A(b)<\/a> and Section 148-A(d)<\/a>, respectively of the Income Tax Act, 1961<\/a> (\u2018the Act\u2019). Petitioners also challenged the legality and constitutional validity of Explanation 1 to Section 148 of the Act. The Division Bench of Manmohan, ACJ., and Mini Pushkarna, J., opined that investment in shares in an Indian subsidiary could not be treated as \u2018income\u2019 as the same was in the nature of capital account transaction not giving rise to any income. The Court thus set aside the impugned orders and notices passed under Section 148-A(d) and Section 148 of the Act, respectively.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Angelantoni Test Technologies SRL v. CIT, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 8486<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Delhi High Court grants ad interim injunction in favour of Mannat Group of Hotels for its mark \u2018MANNAT\u2019<\/p>\n

A suit was filed by Mannat Group of Hotels (plaintiff) seeking ad interim injunction against eating joints at Murthal in Delhi-Chandigarh Highway wherein the notice has been issued and Local Commissioner appointed. Anish Dayal, J., restrained defendants from using any mark or branding inter alia MANNAT, MANAT DHABA, , MANNATT DHABA, Shri MANNATT DHABA, New MANNATT DHABA, Apna MANNAT DHABA et al., and\/or any other mark or trade indicia which is identical to or deceptively similar to the Plaintiffs\u2019 well-known and registered trademarks, MANNAT, MANNAT DHABA, MANNAT GROUP, MANNAT RESORTS, et al., which use by the Defendants amounts to infringement of the Plaintiff\u2019s exclusive and proprietary rights in their registered marks.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Mannat Group of Hotels (P) Ltd. v. Mannat Dhaba, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 71<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Strengthen e-filing, streamline weeding out and digitization of disposed of record: Delhi High Court<\/p>\n

A Public Interest Litigation (\u2018PIL\u2019) was filed seeking a direction for implementation of a uniform procedure for all miscellaneous filing including documents, applications, list of judgments, etc during proceeding\/case\/trial pending before a District Court, through the filing counter\/filing department\/ registry and a complete embargo on all miscellaneous filing across the bar in the District Courts except in cases which warrant an exception to be adopted in grave facts and circumstances, or in cases where such miscellaneous filing or receiving of the documents directly by the Court was provided under the law. The Division Bench of Manmohan, ACJ.*, and Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, J., opined that there was a pressing need to take dedicated measures in the District Courts for first strengthening e-filing and secondly, streamlining weeding out as well as digitization of disposed of record.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Karan S. Thukral v. District & Sessions Judge, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 94<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Special Courts not barred to try offences pending against former MPs\/MLAs: Delhi High Court<\/p>\n

In a petition filed under Article 226<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>, Pratibha M. Singh, J.*, opined that non-adherence to timelines had resulted in extended waiting periods of two to three years in some cases before a decision was made, which contradicted the intent and also, the letter and spirit of the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994<\/a> (\u20181994 Act\u2019) and the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Rules, 2014 (\u20182014 Rules\u2019). Such prolonged delays could cause significant mental and physical anguish for donor, recipient and their respective families to proceed with the decision-making process.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Manjinder Singh Sirsa v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2024 SCC OnLine Del 70<\/span>]<\/p>\n

\u2018Nothing concrete has been done for last twelve years\u2019; Delhi HC directs Chief Secretary to provide road map regarding construction of Sales Tax Bar Association\u2019s chamber<\/p>\n

In a petition filed regarding the construction of chambers for the Sales Tax Bar Association\u2019s members, Subramonium Prasad, J., opined that nothing concrete had been done for the last twelve years and orders of the present Court could not be permitted to be flouted with impunity. The Court directed the Chief Secretary to give a road map regarding when the construction would be completed and the Orders of the Court would be implemented, before the next date of hearing. Further, the Court requested Special Commissioner, DTT and Special Secretary, PWD, to appear before the Court on the next date of hearing.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Sales Tax Bar Assn. (Regd) v. Union of India, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 58<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Article 21 includes the right of a convict to procreate for preserving lineage; Delhi High Court grants parole to convict<\/p>\n

A petition was filed seeking issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of order dated 08-08-2023, passed by the Deputy Secretary (Home), Government of NCT of Delhi, and for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondent to release the petitioner on parole for a period of 12 weeks and also to determine whether, in the face of a rejected parole application, the preservation of familial lineage through procreation constitutes a compelling enough ground to warrant intervention. Swarana Kanta Sharma, J., granted the plea for parole to facilitate medically-assisted procreation, due to the advanced age of the convict and his wife, is grounded in a genuine desire to protect and preserve their lineage because even a convict does not forfeit their fundamental rights and remains entitled to equal consideration before the law.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Kundan Singh v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2023 SCC OnLine Del 8364<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Delhi High Court restrains Indian Mart website from displaying counterfeit PUMA products<\/p>\n

A suit was filed by PUMA SE (plaintiff) against the website www.indiamart.com owned by IndiaMART IndiaMESH Ltd. for displaying various counterfeit goods, bearing fake \u201cPuma\u201d marks, put up by third-party sellers for purchase. C Hari Shankar, J., restrained the defendant from providing any of the registered trade marks of the plaintiff, including PUMA, in respect of any goods whatsoever, as search options in the drop down menu presented to prospective sellers at the time of their registration on the Indiamart platform.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Puma Se v. Indiamart Intermesh Ltd., 2024 SCC OnLine Del 17<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

CBSE Circulars specifically proscribe any revision; marks once uploaded will be treated as final for preparing CBSE\u2019s result: Delhi High Court<\/p>\n

The present writ petition seeks a writ of mandamus directing Central Board of Secondary Education (\u2018CBSE\u2019) to correct Petitioner 2\u2019s internal assessment marks in Social Studies for Class X in the academic year 2019-2020 from 18 to 20. C. Hari Shankar, J.*, opined that the Circulars dated 08-11-2019 and 30-01-2020 of CBSE were clear and categorical and they did not allow any change in the internal assessment marks for a student as uploaded by the school on CBSE\u2019s website. The Court dismissed the writ petition and held that as Circulars issued by CBSE were not under challenge and as CBSE\u2019s decision was in sync with the Circulars, no sustainable grievance existed in the present writ petition.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Nilkanth Das v. CBSE, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 84<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Candidate applying for admission to Kendriya Vidyalaya School in EWS category need to furnish certificate from State Government where school is situated: Delhi HC<\/p>\n

In a petition filed under Article 226<\/a> and 227<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>, Anup Jairam Bhambani, J.*, opined that insofar as Kendriya Vidyalaya (\u2018KV\u2019) was concerned, being an institution owned and controlled by the Central Government, the \u2018appropriate government\u2019 for notifying the annual income threshold to decide, whether a child belonged to EWS category was the Central Government. The Court noted that the Central Government had notified the gross annual family income threshold for determining EWS Category as below Rs. 8 Lakhs and a certificate for that purpose was to be issued by an officer, not below the Tehsildar rank in the State. The Court opined that this implied that for a candidate applying for admission to KV schools anywhere in the country, under EWS category, needed to furnish a certificate issued from the State Government, where the school was situated, but such certificate was required to be furnished by an officer of the specified rank in the State, where such verification was possible. Thus, the Court directed KVS to grant regular admission to the petitioner\u2019s son in KV, Narela for Academic Session 2023-2024.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Hare Krishna Pathak v. KVS, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 8350<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Accused cannot be coerced to reveal\/disclose password in regard to digital evidence while trial is ongoing: Delhi High Court<\/p>\n

In a case wherein, a bail application was filed under Section 439<\/a> of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> (\u2018CrPC\u2019) seeking bail in FIR dated 07-07-2022, registered under Sections 120-B<\/a>, 170<\/a>, 384<\/a>, 420<\/a> and 503<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a> and under Sections 66-C<\/a>, 66-D<\/a>, 75<\/a> and 85<\/a> of the Information and Technology Act, 2000<\/a>, Saurabh Banerjee, J., allowed the bail application and held that applicant-accused was protected under Article 20(3)<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a> against self-incrimination and therefore could not be coerced to reveal password or any other details in view of the protection provided to him under the Constitution<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Sanket Bhadresh Modi v. CBI, Bail Appln. 3754 of 2023, Order dated 18-12-2023<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Delhi HC restrains Dr. Reddy\u2019s Laboratories Ltd. from commercially launching any product consisting of \u2018Olaparib\u2019 till 12-03-2024<\/p>\n

The present suit was filed by plaintiffs, Kudos Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Astrazeneca AB and Astrazeneca Pharma India Ltd. against defendant, Dr. Reddy\u2019s Laboratories Ltd for infringing plaintiffs\u2019 patent IN228720 (\u2018suit patent\u2019). Prathiba M. Singh, J.*, held that defendant shall stand permanently restrained from commercially launching any product consisting of Olaparib, Olaparib API or any other product except as permissible under Section 107-A<\/a> of the Patents Act, 1970<\/a> in terms of Bayer Corporation v. Union of India, 2019 SCC OnLine Del 8209 (\u2018Bayer Corporation Case\u2019). Further, the Court held that post the expiry of plaintiffs\u2019 patent on 12-03-2024, the above embargo would cease automatically.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Hare Krishna Pathak v. KVS, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 8350<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Persons with Disabilities to be given choice for transfer\/posting at preferred place; May be exempted from rotational transfers: Delhi High Court<\/p>\n

Chandra Dhari Singh, J., after considering the medical conditions and the ongoing treatment of petitioner, opined that petitioner should not be transferred to any other State, except Delhi, as the same might create hindrances to his treatment. The Court set aside the impugned transfer and relieving orders and held that Respondent 1, IRCON International Ltd. acted in violation of Article 14<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a> since it ignored the special needs of petitioner and posted him to a far-off place.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Bhavneet Singh v. IRCON International Ltd., W.P.(C) 12404 of 2022, Order dated 15-12-2023<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Delhi High Court grants bail to a man accused of raping woman he met on dating app on pretext of marriage<\/p>\n

In a petition filed for seeking regular bail in connection with FIR registered under Sections 376<\/a> and 420<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (\u2018IPC\u2019), Vikas Mahajan, J.*, opined that the probative value of evidence, the credibility and reliability of the complainant, would be seen by the Trial Court during the trial, but the present Court could not be unmindful of the gaps that had appeared in the complainant\u2019s version, which tilted the balance in the petitioner\u2019s favour for the grant of bail. The Court opined that it was not in dispute that the petitioner did not have any criminal record and since, the investigation was complete and the petitioner\u2019s custody was no more required for making recoveries for him, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the petitioner in jail. Thus, the Court granted bail to the petitioner, subject to his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 of the like amounts, subject to the satisfaction of the Trial Court or Jail Superintendent.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Anil Nirwan v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2024 SCC OnLine Del 3<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Delhi HC directs MCD and DFS to constitute a Joint Task Force to inspect coaching centres in Mukherjee Nagar in respect of fire and public safety norms<\/p>\n

The Division Bench of Yashwant Varma and Ravinder Dudeja, JJ., directed the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (\u2018MCD\u2019) and the Delhi Fire Services (\u2018DFS\u2019) to constitute a Joint Task Force (\u2018JTF\u2019) to examine and inspect all coaching and teaching centres\/institutes situated in Mukherjee Nagar and draw up a comprehensive report indicating the infractions and other non-conforming aspects that might come to the fore.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Sanjay Singhal v. State (NCT of Delhi), W.P.(C) 12182 of 2016, Order dated 14-12-2023<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Filing SLP to challenge dismissal of criminal appeal is crucial right of convict; Delhi High Court grants four-weeks parole to convict for filing SLP<\/p>\n

In a petition filed under Article 226<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a> read with Section 482<\/a> of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> seeking to release the petitioner on parole, Swarana Kanta Sharma, J.*, opined that the Courts had consistently emphasized the convict\u2019s right to file a Special Leave Petition (\u2018SLP\u2019) to challenge the dismissal of their criminal appeal was a crucial right and this right could not be denied based on the availability of free legal aid in jail and the possibility of filing the SLP from the jail premises. Thus, the Court granted parole to the petitioner for a period of four weeks from the date of his release on the condition that the petitioner should furnish a personal bond of Rs. 15,000 with one surety of the like amount to the Jail Superintendent\u2019s satisfaction.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Vinod Kumar v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2023 SCC OnLine Del 8460<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Delhi High Court denies interim injunction to Khadi and Village Industries Commission in a trade mark infringement dispute<\/p>\n

In an application filed by the plaintiff under Order 39 Rules 1<\/a> and 2<\/a> of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908<\/a>, C. Hari Shankar, J.*, opined that in order to maintain a plea of passing off against the defendant, the plaintiff would have to establish that between 2000 and 2005, the user of the mark \u2018Khadi\u2019 for soaps had not only commenced, but had also gained considerable goodwill and reputation. However, no such material was forthcoming. Further, the Court opined that the considerations of balance on convenience and irreparable loss would also be against the grant of injunctive interlocutory relief to the plaintiff at the present stage. The Court opined that even if one were to regard the defendant\u2019s claim to user of its mark since, 2001 as arguable, the undeniable fact remained that the mark was registered in Defendant 1\u2019s favour since 2005. It was only a decade and half later, that the plaintiff filed an application seeking cancellation of the defendants\u2019 mark. During that time, the defendants\u2019 business in \u2018Girdhar Khadi\u2019 mark had grown by leaps and bounds. Thus, the Court opined that the grant of interlocutory injunction, restraining the use of \u2018Girdhar Khadi\u2019 and \u2018BR Khadi\u2019 marks by the defendants was declined.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Khadi & Village Industries Commission v. Girdhar Industries, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 8446<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

\u2018Collecting money ostensibly for charitable activity not permitted when foreigner comes to India on business visa\u2019; Delhi HC upholds deportation of a US citizen<\/p>\n

Petitioner approached this Court under Article 226<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a> challenging her deportation from Trivandrum, Kerala Airport on 28-11-2022 as arbitrary, unreasonable, illegal, and unconstitutional. Subramonium Prasad, J.*, held that collecting money ostensibly for charitable activity was not permitted when a foreigner comes to India on a business visa. The Court opined that since petitioner had acted contrary to what was permitted, the decision taken by the authorities to blacklist petitioner could not be said to be arbitrary.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Khadi & Village Industries Commission v. Girdhar Industries, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 8446<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

To constitute a valid service u\/s 34(3) of A&C Act, a signed copy of Arbitral Award must be delivered to each party and not to their agent or lawyer: Delhi HC<\/p>\n

The present appeal was filed under Section 37<\/a> of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996<\/a> (\u2018the Act\u2019) assailing the judgment dated 12-09-2019 passed by a Single Judge of this Court (\u2018Impugned Judgment\u2019) which dismissed the petition of appellants filed under Section 34 of the Act, on account of delay. The Division Bench of Rajiv Shakdher and Tara Vitasta Ganju*, JJ., held that every Arbitral Award and any corrigendum must be served upon all the parties for it to constitute valid service under Section 34(3) of the Act.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Ministry of Health & Family Welfare v. Hosmac Projects Division of Hosmac India (P) Ltd., 2023 SCC OnLine Del 8296<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Delhi High Court instructs YouTuber Shyam Meera Singh to delete tweets against Dera Sacha Sauda head Gurmeet Ram Rahim<\/p>\n

In a defamation and suit for injunction filed by Dera Sacha Sauda head, Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh against YouTuber Shyam Meera Singh regarding a video posted by Shyam Singh on his YouTube channel, Manoj Jain, J. Directed Shyam Singh to delete the tweets against Gurmeet Ram Rahim.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Saint Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh Insan Shishayeva Gaddinashin Shah Satnam Singh Ji Maharaj v. Youtube LLC, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 8447<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

GAUHATI HIGH COURT<\/p>\n

Gauhati HC upholds judgment by Foreigners Tribunal declaring a woman to be a foreigner who entered India illegally<\/p>\n

In the instant petition filed, wherein the petitioner challenged the decision of the Foreigner\u2019s Tribunal declaring her to be a foreigner illegally entering India on or after 25-03-1971; the Division Bench of Manash Rajan Pathak and Mithali Thakuria*, JJ., concurred with the judgement passed by the Foreigners Tribunal, Hojai, where the Tribunal found the petitioner to be a foreigner. The Court held that , the petitioner failed to discharge her burden of proof, under Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, as there was no legitimate evidence to establish the claims of her being an Indian citizen. Thus, the Court dismissed the petition and further held there was no requirement of any interference with the order passed by the Foreigner\u2019s tribunal.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Musstt. Naima Begum v. Union of India, 2023 SCC OnLine Gau 4210<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Gauhati High Court holds State liable to compensate an advocate for handcuffing him without just cause<\/p>\n

In a writ petition filed by the petitioner under Article 226<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a> for the violation of his basic fundamental rights under Article 21 for handcuffing him without just cause, Devashis Baruah, J. observed that it is high time that Assam Police Manual is required to be amended in accordance with the law laid down by the Supreme Court in in Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration, (1978) 4 SCC 494 and Prem Shankar Shukla v Delhi Administration, (1980) 3 SCC 526. The Court further observed in the case of Sunil Batra (supra) that bar fetters should be avoided as violative of human dignity, both within and without prisons.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Sabahalzarid v. State of Assam, 2023 SCC OnLine Gau 4244<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

GUJARAT HIGH COURT<\/p>\n

\u2018File affidavit on Internal Complaints Committee\u2019s mechanism ensuring no manual intervention or pressure\u2019: Gujarat HC to GNLU in sexual harassment case<\/p>\n

While hearing a suo motu Public Interest Litigation against the sexual harassment allegations by a Gujarat National Law University (\u2018GNLU\u2019) student, the Division Bench of Sunita Agarwal, CJ and Aniruddha P. Mayee, J. directed the GNLU to submit an affidavit disclosing the measures taken by the ICC to ensure that the complaints lodged before the Committee reach it without any manual intervention.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Suo Motu v. Gujarat National Law University (GNLU), R\/Writ Petition (PIL) No. 110 of 2023, Order Dated: 31-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

\u201cVadodara boat capsize incident shocked conscience of public\u201d; Gujarat HC while taking suo motu cognizance<\/p>\n

In a suo motu cognizance of the boat capsize incident on 18-01-2024 in Vadodara, wherein total of 14 people died including 12 children and 2 teachers, the Division Bench of Sunita Agarwal, CJ. and Aniruddha P. Mayee, J. called upon the Secretary, Home Department, State of Gujarat, to submit a report on action taken in the matter by 29-01-2024.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[In Re: 12 Students and 2 Teachers drown in Harni Lake, Order Dated: 19-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Gujarat HC allows accused to travel UK to assist son and daughter-in-law to raise grandson<\/p>\n

In an application by accused for offences under Section 302<\/a>, 304-A<\/a>, 305<\/a> and 311<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a>, to issue appropriate order or direction permitting him to visit the United Kingdom (UK) for a period of one year, the Division Bench of Sunita A. Agarwal and Aniruddha P. Mayee, JJ. directed the Trial Court to release the accused person\u2019s passport and to apply for the UK Visa.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Rameshbhai Manibhai Patel v. State of Gujarat, 2024 SCC OnLine Guj 428<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

\u2018Absolutely Gender Insensitive of GPSC for expecting woman to travel 300 Kms to interview after 3 days of delivering child\u2019: Gujarat HC<\/p>\n

In an application against Gujarat Public Service Commission\u2019s action of calling the petitioner to travel 300 kilometers for an interview after 3 days of delivery of child, Nikhil S. Kariel, J. condemned this action and directed the respondent to not declare the interview results for the post of Assistant Manager (Finance and Accounts) Class II, till further orders of the Court.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Radhika Shankarbhai Pawar v. Gujarat Public Service Commission (GPSC), 2024 SCC OnLine Guj 316<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Read Why Gujarat High Court pulled up State for payment of compensation to dependents of deceased manual scavengers<\/p>\n

In a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) against the unpaid compensation to the dependents of the deceased sanitation workers, the Division Bench of Sunita Agarwal, CJ and Aniruddha P. Mayee, J. directed for payment of compensation to the dependents of the deceased.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Manav Garima v. State of Gujarat, 2024 SCC OnLine Guj 169<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT<\/p>\n

Not permissible to conduct mini-trial u\/s 482 of CrPC to determine if an allegation constitutes an offence: Himachal Pradesh High Court<\/p>\n

In a petition filed before the Court for quashing of the complaint filed under Section 12<\/a> of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005<\/a> (\u2018the DV Act\u2019) and summoning order issued by the Trial Court, Rakesh Kainthla, J.*, opined that the powers under Section 482<\/a> of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> (\u2018CrPC\u2019) could be exercised to prevent the abuse of process and secure the ends of justice. The Court could quash the FIR, if the allegations did not constitute an offence or make out a case against the accused, however, it was not permissible for it to conduct a mini-trial to arrive at such findings. The Court further opined that the Trial Court had discussed the contents of the complaints and the witnesses\u2019 statements to conclude that the offences punishable under Sections 406, 407, 420 and 427 of the CrPC were not made out, but the offences punishable under Sections 379 and 120B were made. Thus, the Court opined that the summoning order was quite detailed and reasoned, and accordingly, dismissed the present petition.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Abhilasha Sharma v. State of Himachal Pradesh, Cr. MMO No. 965 of 2022, decided on 02-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

\u2018Equal pay for equal work\u2019; Himachal Pradesh HC grants similar pay scale to an employee who was given different pay scale for discharging similar work in same cadre<\/p>\n

In a petition filed by the petitioner seeking that he should be entitled to the pay scale of Rs.1640-2925 with all the consequential benefits, Bipin Chander Negi, J.* opined that the petitioner must succeed on the principle of equal pay for equal work, as no tangible explanation had been offered by the respondents to justify the date of appointment becoming relevant for fixing different pay scales for discharging similar work in the same cadre. The Court set aside rejection orders based on the clarification dated 17-12-1991 and held that the plaintiff is entitled to the pay scale of Rs.1640-2925\/- with all consequential benefits. Thus, the Court quashed the clarification dated 17-12-1991 and, consequently, set aside other orders which were based on this clarification and held that the petitioner was entitled to the pay scale of Rs. 1640-2925 with all consequential benefits.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Narayan Dutt v. State of H.P., 2024 SCC OnLine HP 120<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Calling a person corrupt per se defamatory; Himachal Pradesh High Court sets aside the Trial Court order<\/p>\n

In a revision petition filed by the petitioner, Rakesh Kainthla, J.*, opined that Trial Court fell in error while holding that the respondent was justified in calling the petitioner corrupt, and such right could not be given to anyone as long as the offence of defamation existed in the statute books. The Court opined that calling a person corrupt was per se defamatory as it lowered the estimation of the person in the eyes of the public and could not be justified by resorting to Article 19<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>. The Court opined that the Trial Court was swayed by the promotion of healthy and vibrant democracy by the right of criticism and there was a right to criticism but not a right to abuse and defame any person. Therefore, the Court set aside the order dated 26-04-2022, passed by the Trial Court and the Court ordered the respondent to be summoned for an offence punishable under Section 500 of the IPC.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Jagat Singh Negi v. Surat Singh Negi, Cr. Revision No. 401 of 2022, decided on 11-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Himachal Pradesh High Court quashes FIR registered against family accused of stalking through CCTV camera<\/p>\n

In a petition filed by the petitioner to quash the FIR and the challan pending before the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class-V, Shimla, Rakesh Kainthla* J., opined that the contents of FIR did not satisfy the ingredients of Section 354-D<\/a> of the Penal Code 1860<\/a> (\u2018IPC\u2019), as in the present case, there was no proof that the petitioners had contacted Respondent 2 to foster a personal relationship. Thus, the Court quashed FIR registered under Sections 354D and 201 of the IPC and held that the proceedings would continue against the petitioners for the commission of offence punishable under Sections 504, 506 and 509 of IPC.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Sumehar Chand Narwal v. State of H.P., 2024 SCC OnLine HP 85<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Child victim had to suffer untold miseries; Himachal Pradesh HC grants compensation to minor rape victim after hospital asks demeaning questions, conducts two-finger test<\/p>\n

The Division Bench of Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Satyen Vaidya, JJ., during the course of hearing, in the present appeal, noticed that the Civil Hospital, Palampur had issued medico legal certificate (\u2018MLC\u2019), which was demeaning, self-incriminating and self-inculpatory to the child victim. Further, apart from this, the doctors issuing the MLC even conducted the \u2018two-finger test\u2019 on the child victim. The Court opined that what was worse was that the child victim had to suffer untold miseries, especially when confronted with the questions of the MLC, which were humiliating and self-incriminating. Further, those irresponsible medical professionals, who designed the proforma and who medically examined the child victim, could not be allowed to go scot-free, and the child victim essentially and legally needed to be compensated. Thus, the Court directed the respondents to pay Rs. 5 Lakhs as compensation to the child victim for the trauma, embarrassment, humiliation and harassment that was caused to her by the Doctors in the Civil Hospital Palampur.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Sachin Kumar v. State of H.P., 2024 SCC OnLine HP 84<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Himachal Pradesh High Court stays registration of contempt of court case against HPNLU Vice Chancellor<\/p>\n

The Division Bench of Ramachandra Rao, CJ and Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J., opined that even before the registration of contempt case against the Vice Chancellor of Himachal Pradesh, National Law University (\u2018HPNLU\u2019), the Single Judge could not have given a finding that she had committed wilful disobedience of this Court\u2019s order and thus, temporarily stayed the order dated 09-01-2024, passed by the Single Judge.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Nishtha Jaswal v. Mitesh Jorwal, 2024 SCC OnLine HP 59<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Allegations of extra marital relationship constitutes grave assault on reputation of spouse, thus amounts to worst form of cruelty: Himachal Pradesh HC upholds divorce<\/p>\n

In an appeal filed by the appellant-wife under Section 19<\/a> of the Family Courts Act, 1984<\/a> read with Section 28<\/a> of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955<\/a> (\u2018the HMA\u2019) to set aside the impugned judgment dated 14-08-2019, the Division Bench of Vivek Singh Thakur and Sandeep Sharma*, JJ, opined that cruelty must not only be physical or mental, but it must be something more serious than ordinary wear and tear of married life. The Court opined that levelling disgusting accusations of indecent familiarity with a person outside wedlock and allegations of extra marital relationship constituted grave assault on the character, honour, reputation, and status of the spouse. Such aspersions definitely amounted to the worst form of insult and cruelty, which itself was sufficient to substantiate cruelty in law. Thus, the Court after considering the entire evidence on record and reasons assigned therein, found no scope to interfere with the decree of divorce granted by the Family Court in favour of the respondent-husband, and upheld the impugned judgment.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Kamlesh Thakur v. Sushil Thakur, 2023 SCC OnLine HP 1745<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Redemption and rehabilitation of prisoners must receive due weightage; Himachal Pradesh HC grants parole to convict for solving his personal and family issues<\/p>\n

In a petition filed by the petitioner seeking to be released on parole, the Division Bench of Tarlok Singh Chauhan* and Bipin Chander Negi, JJ., opined that there was no presumption that a person who was convicted of a serious or a henious crime was to be ipso facto treated as a hardened criminal. The Court further opined that the convicts too must breathe fresh air for atleast some time, provided they maintain good conduct consistently during incarceration and show a tendency to reform themselves and become good citizens. Redemption and rehabilitation of such prisoners must receive due weightage, while they were undergoing imprisonment. Thus, the Court directed the respondents to release the petitioner on parole for a period of twenty-eight days, subject to his furnishing a personal bond of Rs, 2,00,000, with two local sureties of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Superintendent, Model Central Jail, Kanda, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Sewak Ram v. State of H.P., 2023 SCC OnLine HP 1673<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

JAMMU AND KASHMIR HIGH COURT<\/p>\n

\u201cPress must refrain from publishing contents that are manifestly defamatory in nature, Must duly verify such content\u201d; J&K and Ladakh HC observes<\/p>\n

While hearing the instant petition seeking to quash an FIR filed by the respondent under Section 499, 500, 501, 502 of the Ranbir Penal Code (\u2018RPC\u2019) and order dated 27-03-2017 passed by the Trial Court for initiation of process against the petitioner who had allegedly published a defamatory news report against the respondent; a single Judge bench of Vinod Chatterji Koul, J.*, dismissed the petition and held that the Court is not inclined to quash the impugned FIR and order of the Trial Court due to the complicity of the petitioner with the charges framed against him. The Court observed that the press must refrain from publishing contents in the newspaper that are manifestly defamatory in nature against an individual. The content published should be duly verified and there should be sufficient reason to believe that it is true and serves the public good. Truth is no defence for publishing defamatory material against a private citizen where no public interest is involved.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Pritam Chand v. Kamal Saini, 2023 SCC OnLine J&K 1282<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

J&K and Ladakh HC quashes the detention order issued in 2022 based on an FIR registered against a detenue in 2004<\/p>\n

While considering the instant petition wherein the petitioner challenged the order detaining him under Section 8(a) of the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978, to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to security, sovereignty and integrity of the State, the bench of Sanjeev Kumar, J*., quashed the impugned order of detention for being unsustainable in law. The Court pointed out that there was nothing on record, more particularly in the order of detention, that after the petitioner was released, he indulged in new activities till the passing of impugned order of detention. \u201cThere is not even a whisper about the prejudicial activities\u201d. Therefore, the Court did not see any reason to press into service an FIR registered in the year 2004, more particularly when the petitioner has already faced trial in the aforesaid FIR and has been acquitted by the competent Court of jurisdiction.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Bashir Ahmad Koka v. State (UT of J&K), 2023 SCC OnLine J&K 1120<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Contractual Appointment can\u2019t be terminated without affording opportunity of hearing: Jammu & Kashmir & Ladakh HC reiterates<\/p>\n

In an instant petition, where the petitioners were employed on contractual\/contingency\/consolidated\/need basis, were disengaged on the recommendation of Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) by the Jammu Kashmir Handicrafts Corporation; a Single Judge Bench of M. A. Chowdhary, J.,* quashed the impugned order dated 16-09-2022 and directed the respondent corporation, J&K Handloom Corporation (JKHC) to re-engage the petitioners on their assigned duties. Placing reliance on several Supreme Court precedents, the Court pointed out that if an order is founded on allegations, the order is stigmatic and punitive, then services of an employee cannot be dispensed with without affording him an opportunity of defending the accusations\/allegations made against him in a full-fledged inquiry. \u201cHence, it is settled law that even a contractual appointment cannot be terminated without affording an opportunity of hearing, if founded on allegation and\/or misconduct, which casts a stigma on such an employee\u201d.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Feroz Ahmed Sheikh v. State (UT of J&K), 2023 SCC OnLine J&K 1095<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

\u201cS. 22, POCSO Act prohibits prosecution and punishment of a minor for perjury\u201d: J&K and Ladakh HC, reiterates<\/p>\n

While deciding an appeal, wherein the appellant argued that the respondents were required to be prosecuted for perjury under Section 340 of the CrPC as they had resiled from their earlier statement, a Single Judge Bench of Rajnesh Oswal, J.*, opined that for constituting the offence of perjury the false statement must be made deliberately and consciously. Taking note that the accused in the instant case was charged for commission of offences under Sections 376<\/a>\/506<\/a> of Penal Code, 1860<\/a> and Section 4 of POCSO Act, the Court opined that a perusal of the Section 22(2) of POCSO Act reveals that if a false complaint has been made or false information has been provided by a child, no punishment shall be imposed upon such child. \u201cOnce, the special Act prohibits the punishment of a child in respect of false information provided by a child, the child cannot be prosecuted for commission of offence of perjury\u201d. Thus, the Court upheld the decision of the Trial Court and dismissed the appeal.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[State (UT of J&K) v. X, 2023 SCC OnLine J&K 1124<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

JHARKHAND HIGH COURT<\/p>\n

\u2018Duty of woman to serve ailing mother-in-law\u2019: Jharkhand High Court cites Indian culture; rejects maintenance to wife<\/p>\n

In a criminal revision preferred against order passed by a Family Court directing husband to pay Rs 30,000 and Rs 15,000 towards maintenance of wife and son on a monthly basis, Subhash Chand, J. cited several texts depicting Indian culture and held that a married woman was duty bound to serve the ailing mother-in-law and took the same as a ground for rejecting maintenance granted in her favour after wife left matrimonial home without any reasonable cause.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Rudra Narayan Ray v. Piyali Ray Chatterjee, Criminal Revision No. 172 of 2022, decided on 22-01-2023<\/span>]<\/p>\n

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT<\/p>\n

Know why Karnataka High Court held a pillion rider liable for contributory negligence towards her accident<\/p>\n

While considering the instant appeal wherein the issue was that whether the claimant, who was a pillion rider, had contributed her negligence towards the accident and that whether she is entitled for compensation towards loss of future income due to disability; the Bench of Hanchate Sanjeevkumar, J.*, pointed out that the claimant knew fully well that 4 people were riding on the motorcycle, and invited the risk for herself while travelling on the motor cycle a pillion with the other 3; therefore, she had also contributed her negligence amounting to 20% towards the accident. Hence, whatever amount of compensation is determined, the claimant is entitled to only 80% of the total compensation amount determined.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[ICICI Lombard Co. Ltd. v. Harshitha B., MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.5505 OF 2017, decided on 02-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

[8 Stray Puppies\u2019 Death] S. 372, CrPC does not give victim a right to appeal to challenge the quantum of punishment: Karnataka HC<\/p>\n

While considering the instant revision petition wherein the complainant had challenged the quantum of punishment given to the accused who was convicted under Section 429<\/a>, Penal Code, 1860<\/a>, Section 93 of Karnataka Police Act and Section 11<\/a> of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960<\/a> and was sentenced to pay fine of Rs 700, Rs 100 and Rs 200 as per the respective provisions and undergo simple imprisonment; the Bench of J.M. Khazi, J.*, held that plain reading of Section 372 of CrPC makes it clear that the victim has no right of appeal to challenge the quantum of punishment; they can only challenge the acquittal or conviction for a lesser offence or imposing inadequate compensation.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Harish K.B. v. Ponnamma, 2024 SCC OnLine Kar 1<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Snatching away a job offends pith and substance of fundamental right to life: Karnataka HC<\/p>\n

In an appeal filed under Section 4<\/a> of Karnataka High Court Act, 1961<\/a> praying to set aside the order of reinstatement by a Single Judge Bench of the High Court; the Division Bench of Prasanna B. Varale, C.J.* and Krishna S. Dixit, J., opined that an employee cannot be dismissed on the basis that a criminal case was registered against him. Dismissal from service cannot be ordered without holding an enquiry. The Court opined that snatching away a job offends the pith and substance of fundamental right to life and liberty guaranteed under Article 21<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Attikaribettu Grama Panchayath v. Ganesha, 2024 SCC OnLine Kar 2<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Why Karnataka High Court rejected petition challenging imposition of quality control on plastic imports into India?<\/p>\n

In a petition filed under Article 226<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a> challenging the Notification dated 15-04-2021 issued by Government of India which imposes quality control on import of plastic into the shores of the nation to become effective from 05-01-2024, M. Nagaprasanna, J.*, opined that the Court would not tinker with a Notification which wants to bring in quality usage, by necessitating a seal of the BIS at the stage raw material itself. \u201cIf the quality emerges right from the word go till the finished product under the \u2018Make in India programme\u2019, it is only then that the country would be able to compete with others. A step towards that will not be interfered with by this Court except, that if the step towards that, depicts palpable and demonstrable arbitrariness, which is neither pleaded nor present\u201d.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[All India HDPE\/PP Woven Fabric Manufacturers’ Assn. v. Union of India, 2024 SCC OnLine Kar 3<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Para medical practitioner is not entitled to registration of private clinic under Karnataka Private Medical Establishment Act 2007: Karnataka HC<\/p>\n

In a Writ Petition filed by the petitioner under Article 226<\/a> and 227<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a> where the petitioner sought for quashment of an endorsement dated 25-09-2023 issued by Respondent under the Karnataka Private Medical Establishment Act 2007 declining to issue registration certificate to petitioner for his Sangeetha clinic; the single judge bench of M. Nagaprasanna, J.*, whilst dismissing the petition, opined that petitioner is not a medical practitioner, he is para medical practitioner and therefore not entitled to any registration under the 2007 Act which is essential for continuation of practice as a medical practitioner. \u201cIt is rather strange as to how the petitioner addresses himself as a practicing doctor for all these years. Time has come to pull the curtain down on such people who are practicing medicine without qualification and hoodwinking poor people in rural areas\u201d.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Annaiah N. v. State of Karnataka, 2023 SCC OnLine Kar 149<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Karnataka High Court directs BBMP officials to implement systems like Digi-locker to credentialize documents issued by them<\/p>\n

While considering a \u201cstrange case\u201d wherein it seemed that Bengaluru Bruhat Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) had issued Katha in respect of the same property to two different persons, and questions were raised on the veracity of the Katha certificate; a Single Bench of Suraj Govindraj, J.*, directed the Chief Commissioner, BBMP along with the Principal Secretary, E-governance, are directed to look into the matter and formulate a suitable mechanisms like Digi-locker to credentialize all documents issued by the BBMP so these situations can be avoided.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Sharmada B.K. v. Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike, 2023 SCC OnLine Kar 147<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Know why Karnataka HC recommended a Trial Court Judge to undergo training in Karnataka Judicial Academy vis-\u00e0-vis POCSO cases<\/p>\n

While considering the instant appeal challenging judgment and order of acquittal in a POCSO case, the Bench of Hanchate Sanjeevkumar, J.*, took strict note of the insensible and inhuman way Additional District and Special Judge, Ballari, appreciated the evidence in the instant case and delivered a verdict of acquittal. \u201cThe appreciation of the evidence does not mean that finding fault with the prosecution case with an intention to search fault in the prosecution case\u201d. Upon reading the order of acquittal, the Court found that the POCSO Judge assigned flimsy reasons and appreciated the evidence on record in a casual way. The Court noted that POCSO Court Judge had not understood properly what is meaning of the theory beyond reasonable doubt in appreciating the evidence in POCSO cases.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[State of Karnataka v. Venkatesh, 2023 SCC OnLine Kar 112<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

KERALA HIGH COURT<\/p>\n

Action contrary to departmental rules not criminal misconduct by public servant: Kerala HC<\/p>\n

In a petition seeking to quash First Information Report (\u2018FIR\u2019), final report and further proceedings as registered by the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau under Sections Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2)<\/a> of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988<\/a> (\u2018PC Act\u2019) and Section 120-B<\/a> read with Section 34<\/a> of Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (\u2018IPC\u2019), K. Babu, J. allowed the petition clarifying that dishonest intention was integral to attract the offence under Section 13(1)(d) of PC Act, and that conduct or action merely being contrary to departmental norms does not mean criminal misconduct on part of the public servant.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[C. Surendranath v. State of Kerala, 2024 SCC OnLine Ker 210<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Divorced Muslim woman need not be sent to Court for recording talaq: Kerala High Court<\/p>\n

In a petition filed under Article 226<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>, P.V. Kunhikrishnan, J.*,opined that a divorced woman should not be handicapped by registering the marriage, following the registration rules under the Kerala Registration of Marriages (Common) Rules, 2008 (Rules 2008), and the power to record the divorce was inherent to the authority concerned. The Court opined that a divorced Muslim woman need not be sent to a court of law for recording the talaq and the officer concerned could record the talaq without insisting on a court order. The Court further stated that there was a lacuna in Rule 2008 and the legislature should think about the same. Thus, the Court directed the Registry to forward a copy of the judgement to the Chief Secretary, State of Kerala, to do the needful in accordance with law. The Court further directed Respondent 1, that if Respondent 3 conceded the talaq, consequential entry should be made in the Register of Marriage and if there was any dispute regarding the validity of divorce, the Registrar need not record such divorce in the Register without an order from the competent court.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Neyan Veettil Behsana v. Vatakara Municipality, 2024 SCC OnLine Ker 61<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Know why Kerala High Court refused abortion for minor impregnated by minor brother<\/p>\n

In a writ petition seeking directions for medical termination of pregnancy of a 12 years old girl who was impregnanted by her own minor brother, Devan Ramachandran, J. rejected the petition for medical termination of the pregnancy considering the fact that gestation period was 34 weeks and the Medical Board also recommended delivery of the child after completion of 36 weeks of pregnancy.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[XXXXX v. State of Kerala, 2023 SCC OnLine Ker 10457<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT<\/p>\n

\u2018An accused has fundamental right to fair trial\u2019; Madhya Pradesh High Court allows petition to call witnesses in a cross-case<\/p>\n

While deciding a petition filed under Section 482<\/a> of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> (CrPC) which was filed by the petitioner against the order passed by the Special Judge, SC\/ST Act, Raghogarh, District Guna where his application for calling the witness under Section 311 of CrPC has been rejected, a single-judge bench of Anand Pathak,* J., quashed the impugned order of the trial court and held that to prevent the miscarriage of justice and to uphold the ultimate goal of justice, the trial court was directed to call relevant witnesses as sought to be called by the petitioner.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Veer Singh v. State of M.P., 2024 SCC OnLine MP 349<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

MADRAS HIGH COURT<\/p>\n

[Palani Temple dispute] Non-Hindus cannot be allowed inside temple without written undertaking: Madras HC issues directions<\/p>\n

In a writ petition praying to direct the State to permit only Hindus to the Hill Temple Premises and its sub temples and consequently directing the Executive Officer, Arulmigu Palani Dhandayuthapani Swamy Devasthanam, to display boards to that effect in all entrances, S. Srimathy, J. gave the following directions: The State was directed to install Boards indicating that \u201cnon-Hindus are not allowed inside temple after Kodimaram\u201d in the entrance of the temples, near Kodimaram and at prominent places in the temple. The State was directed not to allow the non-Hindus who do not believe in Hindu religion. If any non-Hindu claims to visit particular deity in the temple, then the Government was directed to obtain undertaking from the said non-Hindu that he is having faith in the deity and he would follow the customs and practices of Hindu religion and also abide by the Temple customs and on such undertaking the said non-Hindu may be allowed to visit the temple. It added that, whenever a non-Hindu is allowed based on the undertaking the same shall be entered in the register which shall be maintained by the temple. The State was directed to maintain the temple premises by strictly following its agamas, customs and practices.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[D. Senthilkumar v Government of Tamil Nadu, W.P.(MD).No.18485 of 2023, Order dated 30-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Explained | Madras High Court verdict on constitutionality of Section 204 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code<\/p>\n

In writ petition filed for declaring that Section 204(a), (b), (c), (d) and (e)<\/a> of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016<\/a>, (\u2018IBC\u2019) as ultra vires, the provisions of Article 14, 19(1) (g) and 21 of the<\/p>\n

Constitution, being manifestly arbitrary, substantively unreasonable, excessive legislation and repugnant to the objectives of IBC, the division bench of R.Sanjay V. Gangapurwala, CJ. D. Bharatha Chakravarth *, J. upheld the constitutional validity of the Regulation 23A of the IBBI (Model Byelaws and Governing Board of Insolvency Professional Agencies) Regulations, 2016. Further, it held that Section 204 of IBC is only an enabling provision and therefore, there is no constitutional infirmity in any of the provisions under Section 204 (a) (b) (c) (d) and (e) of IBC.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[CA V. Venkata Sivakumar v IBBI, Writ Petition Nos.16650 of 2020, Order dated 22-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Civil Courts have no jurisdiction to entertain the suits filed by app developers challenging Google\u2019s Billing Policy: Madras HC<\/p>\n

In an appeal filed by Info Edge (India) Ltd. (\u2018Info Edge\u2019) against the judgment of Single Judge, wherein the Court allowed the application filed by Google and rejected the plaints, and observed that the plaints filed by Info Edge were barred by Section 61<\/a> of the Competition Act, 2002<\/a> (\u2018Act, 2002\u2019), the division bench of Sanjay V. Gangapurwala and P.D.Audikesavalu, JJ. while upholding the impugned judgment, held that the civil court may not exercise the jurisdiction in the present case, as the conditions, clauses and the payment\/billing system between the parties are already tested before the Competition Commission of India and the Commission has passed an exhaustive order. The parties are bound by the said order. Therefore, if certain further terms are executed, the same should be tested by the Competition Commission of India and not by the other fora.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Info Edge (India) Ltd. v. Google India (P) Ltd., 2024 SCC OnLine Mad 150<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Is wife entitled to know husband\u2019s salary details to make a rightful claim of maintenance? Madras HC answers<\/p>\n

In a writ petition filed by the husband\/petitioner against the order of the State Information Commissioner dated 20-10-2020 and to quash the same and consequently, refrain the State Information Commissioner, Registrar and the Appellate Authority and Deputy Registrar and the Public Information Office of the Alagappa University from furnishing any personal and private information about the petitioner to his wife, G.R. Swaminathan, J. while upholding the impugned order, said that unless the wife knows the quantum of salary received by the husband, she cannot make her rightful claim.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[V.A. Anand v. T.N. Information Commission, 2024 SCC OnLine Mad 152<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

[Compassionate appointment] Madras High Court directs District Education Officer to provide job to son of deceased Head Mistress<\/p>\n

In a writ petition filed against the order passed by District Education Officer (\u2018DEO\u2019) and to direct DEO to provide suitable job to the petitioner under compassionate ground on the death of his mother on 19-12-2018 as per the petitioner\u2019s application dated 30.09.2020, L Victoria Gowri, J. noted that if any person in the deceased Government Servant\u2019s family was employed even before the death of the Government Servant but was living separately without extending any help to the family, then the case of other eligible dependant will be considered. Thus, it quashed the impugned order and directed the DEO to provide a suitable job to the petitioner under compassionate ground within 12 weeks from the date of this order.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[M. Yogamagi v. State, 2024 SCC OnLine Mad 151<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Family Court grants dissolution of marriage on ground not pleaded in petition: Madras HC sets aside order<\/p>\n

In an appeal filed under Section 19<\/a> of the Family Courts Act, 1984<\/a> read with Section 28(4)<\/a> of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955<\/a> against the order dated 13-10-2017 by the Family Court, wherein the Court held that levelling allegations of illicit relationship against the spouse, amounts to mental cruelty and granted relief on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of the marriage, the division bench of RMT. Teekaa Raman* and P.B. Balaji, JJ. while setting aside the impugned order, said that the order of dissolution of marriage passed by the Family Court is legally unsustainable as the reason of levelling of allegation of illicit relationship is not the case of the husband, however, the same was taken as a ground by the judicial officer for granting the relief.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[X v A, CMA(MD) No.1121 of 2017, decided on 22-12-2023<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Read why Madras High Court set aside bail granted to Bhavninder Singh in cheating case filed by actress Amala Paul<\/p>\n

In a Criminal Original Petition filed by actress Amala Paul to cancel the bail granted to Bhavninder Singh Dhatt (\u2018BS Dhatt\u2019) accused under Sections 120(B)<\/a>, 465<\/a>, 511<\/a>, 467<\/a>, 468<\/a>, 471<\/a>, 420<\/a>, 406<\/a>, 419<\/a>, 379<\/a>, 354(C)<\/a>, 384<\/a>, 500<\/a>, 506(2)<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (\u2018 IPC\u2019) and Section 66(D)<\/a> of the Information Technology Act, 2000<\/a> and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002, by the Judicial Magistrate, C.V. Karthikeyan, J. has set aside the impugned order granting bail to BS Dhatt and directed him to surrender before the Investigating Agency (\u2018IA\u2019) within a period of 15 days from the date on which this order is uploaded on the Court\u2019s website, failing which the IA is directed to take him into custody.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Amala Paul v. State, 2023 SCC OnLine Mad 8020<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Is watching child pornography an offence under POCSO Act or S. 67B of IT Act? Madras High Court answers<\/p>\n

In a petition filed under Section 482<\/a> of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> (\u2018CrPC\u2019), praying to quash the criminal proceedings against the accused alleging downloading of pornographic materials pertaining to children in his mobile phone, N. Anand Venkatesh, J. while quashing the criminal proceedings against the accused, does not hold him guilty of the offence under Section 67-B<\/a> of Information Technology Act, 2000<\/a> (\u2018IT Act\u2019) and Section 14(1)<\/a> of Protection of Child from Sexual Offences Act, 2012<\/a> (\u2018POCSO\u2019).<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[S. Harish v. State, 2024 SCC OnLine Mad 2<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Can removal of Uterus due to ovarian cancer amount to cruelty to husband for grant of divorce? Madras HC answers<\/p>\n

In an appeal filed by the husband challenging the order of rejection of the relief of dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty filed under Section 13(1)(ia)(ib)<\/a> and 5(ii)(b)<\/a> of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955<\/a>, (\u2018HMA\u2019), the division bench of RMT. Teekaa Raman* and P.B. Balaji, JJ. while upholding the Family Court\u2019s judgment, held that during the subsistence of marriage, the wife was diagnosed with \u2018Ovarian Cancer\u2019 and during the treatment, her Uterus was removed, thus, the same cannot be treated as a cruelty to the husband much less \u2018mental cruelty\u2019, since it is not \u2018Act of the wife\u2019 but only as \u2018Act of fate or destiny\u2019.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Sankara Subramanian v. Sivalekshmi, 2023 SCC OnLine Mad 8012<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Madras HC directs Patent Controller to reconstitute Opposition Board as evidence is filed after issuance of Board Recommendations<\/p>\n

In a writ petition filed against the post grant opposition proceedings against petitioner\u2019s Patent application and quash the same and consequently, direct the Controller of Patents and Designs (\u2018Controller\u2019) to constitute a fresh Opposition Board to give fresh recommendation in the post grant opposition proceedings against Patent after disposal of the Form 13, Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, J. has directed the Controller of Patents and Designs to constitute within 30 days a fresh Opposition Board comprising officers other than the officers who formed the previous Opposition Board.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Optimus Drugs (P) Ltd. v. Union of India, 2023 SCC OnLine Mad 8013<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Madras High Court upholds State Government\u2019s power to appoint Public Prosecutors and Additional Public Prosecutors under S. 24 (6A) of CrPC<\/p>\n

In a petition, filed for directing the Principal Secretary and Director General of Police to consider and issue necessary orders for appointing only regular cadre of Public Prosecutors \/ Additional Public Prosecutors in all District Courts, R. Sakthivel, J. while dismissing the petition, said that the insertion of sub-section 6A by the Tamil Nadu Amendment to Section 24 CrPC gave power to the State Government to appoint Public Prosecutors and Additional Public Prosecutors.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[R. Suresh Kumar v. State, 2023 SCC OnLine Mad 7947<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

ORISSA HIGH COURT<\/p>\n

Read why Orissa HC altered brother\u2019s conviction from S. 307 to S. 326 IPC for shooting arrow at brother and causing grievous injury<\/p>\n

In a jail criminal appeal against the conviction order of the Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Champua, for offences punishable under Section 307 of the Penal Code (\u2018IPC\u2019), S.K. Sahoo*, J. allowed the appeal and altered the conviction under Section 307 of the IPC to under Section 326 of the IPC.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Bagina Munda v. State of Odisha, JCRLA No.26 of 2011, Decided on: 10-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Bar on grant of anticipatory bail in cases under SC and ST Act not absolute when alleged offences, prima facie, not made out: Orissa HC reiterates<\/p>\n

In an application under Section 438<\/a> of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973<\/a> (\u2018CrPC\u2019) filed by a Doctor against the apprehension of his arrest in relation to a case for offences under Section 376(2)(n)\/313\/506 of the Penal Code, 1860 (\u2018IPC\u2019), Section 6<\/a> of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012<\/a> (\u2018POCSO Act\u2019) and Sections 3(1)(r) read with Section 3(1)(s)<\/a> and 3(2)(va)<\/a> of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989<\/a> (\u2018SC and ST Act\u2019), Sashikanta Mishra, J. allowed the application and granted anticipatory bail to the Doctor.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Dr. Satyendra Prakash Verma v. State of Odisha, Anticipatory Bail Application No. 50 of 2024, Decided on: 25-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

[Hindu Marriage and Divorce (Orissa High Court) Rules, 1956] Joinder of \u2018Paramour\u2019 as necessary party not mandatory in all divorce cases: Orissa HC<\/p>\n

In an appeal against Trial Court\u2019s decision, whereby, the appellant-Husband\u2019s petition for grant of divorce on grounds of cruelty was made ex-parte, however, divorce was not granted, the Division Bench of Arindam Sinha and M.S Sahoo, JJ. allowed appeal and held that Rule 5 of the Hindu Marriage and Divorce (Orissa High Court) Rules, 1956 mandates making of the paramour as a necessary party, however, the mandate can be interpreted as \u2018to be made party where possible\u2019.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Harekrushna Behera v. Manasi Jena, Matrimonial Appeal No. 36 of 2023, Decided on 03-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

PATNA HIGH COURT<\/p>\n

Patna High Court rejects PIL filed by a teacher seeking exemption from attending LLB classes due to his employment in a school<\/p>\n

In a case wherein, a Public Interest Litigation (\u2018PIL\u2019) was filed by a teacher seeking exemption from LLB classes on the ground of his employment in a school, the Division Bench of K. Vinod Chandran, CJ.*, and Rajiv Roy, J., dismissed the PIL and held it as misconceived and a clear abuse of the jurisdiction invoked under Article 226<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>, as a PIL.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Manoj Kumar v. University of Bihar Raj Bhawan, Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 17945 of 2023, decided on 05-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

\u2018No tax recovery can be made when GST Tribunal not constituted\u2019; Patna HC imposes cost of Rs 5000 on GST Assessing Officer for \u2018coercive\u2019 tax recovery<\/p>\n

In a case wherein, a writ petition was filed by the assessee-petitioner, National Insurance Company Limited against the order of rejection of appeal by the first Appellate Authority despite the payment of 20% of the tax in dispute for proper institution of appeal, the Division Bench of K. Vinod Chandran, CJ.,* and Rajiv Roy, J., allowed the writ petition and directed the refund of tax recovered and further, imposed a cost of Rs 5000 on the Assessing Officer who issued the demand and appropriated the money from the bank account of petitioner.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. State of Bihar, Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 777 of 2023, decided on 15-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

\u2018Minor wife\u2019s stay at Girls Care Home not detrimental\u2019; Patna High Court denies custody to husband<\/p>\n

While deciding a criminal writ application filed by petitioner seeking for direction to Respondent 8, State Girls Care Home, Gaighat, Patna for release of Respondent 11, the Division Bench of P.B. Bajanthri and Ramesh Chand Malviya*, JJ., held that Respondent 11 who had not attained the age of majority could not be directed to be released by giving her custody to her husband and also to stay with the parents after her refusal to go along with them. Thus, the Court dismissed the petition and upheld her stay at State Girls Care Home as lawful and not detrimental.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Nitish Kumar v. State of Bihar, 2024 SCC OnLine Pat 274<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Delay in issuance of advertisement will not create any right\/legitimate expectation to seek relaxation in upper age limit for an examination: Patna HC reiterates<\/p>\n

The writ petition was filed for issuance of an order\/direction or a writ of certiorari for quashing paragraph 3 of Advertisement No. BSJS\/1\/2023 dated 11-12-2023 published for appointment to the post of District Judge (Entry Level) to the extent to which the cut-off date for determination of maximum age limit was fixed at 01-01-2023. The Division Bench of K. Vinod Chandran, CJ., and Rajiv Roy, J.*, reiterated that delay in issuance of advertisement by itself would not create any right or legitimate expectation in favour of a person to seek relaxation in the upper age limit as prescribed for a preliminary examination.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Shahjahan v. Honble High Court of Judicature at Patna, 2024 SCC OnLine Pat 157<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Adjustment of entry tax paid on damaged cement against VAT liability not admissible under Bihar Entry Tax Act: Patna High Court<\/p>\n

In an appeal filed by appellant, ACC Ltd. against the order of Commercial Taxes Tribunal, Bihar (\u2018the Tribunal\u2019) wherein the Tribunal did not allow the adjustment of entry tax paid on damaged cement against value added tax liability (\u2018VAT liability\u2019) under the provisions of Bihar Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas for Consumption, Use, or Sale therein Act, 1993 (\u2018the Act\u2019), the Division Bench of K. Vinod Chandran, CJ.*, and Rajiv Roy, J., dismissed the appeal and held that the adjustment of entry tax paid on damaged cement against VAT liability was not permissible under the Act.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Vivek Tiwari v. Bar Council of India, 2024 SCC OnLine P&H 136<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT<\/p>\n

Stipend for Junior Lawyers | Punjab and Haryana High Court issues notice to BCI, BCPH<\/p>\n

The Division Bench of Ritu Bahri, ACJ and Nidhi Gupta, J. issued notice to Bar Council of India as well as Punjab and Haryana in a matter seeking payment of stipend\/remuneration for young lawyers.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Vivek Tiwari v. Bar Council of India, 2024 SCC OnLine P&H 136<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

Minor girl kidnapped, 20-year-old boy in jail for more than a year; Punjab and Haryana HC pulls Punjab Police for callous approach<\/p>\n

In a petition seeking regular bail in a First Information Report (\u2018FIR\u2019) after the complainant\u2019s minor daughter went missing, alleging kidnap by the petitioner, involving offences under Sections 363<\/a> and 365<\/a> of Penal Code, 1860<\/a>, Sandeep Moudgil, J. pulled the senior police officials for callous approach and restricted any unwarranted investigation against the young petitioner who was in jail for more than a year and had produced some photographs of missing girl wandering freely.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Aman v. State of Punjab, Criminal Main No. 13821 of 2023, Order dated 18-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT<\/p>\n

Installation of mobile tower is not public utility service u\/s 22A(b) of Legal Services Authority Act: Raj HC<\/p>\n

In a petition filed to annul the impugned order dated 29-05-2023, passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur (\u2018the PLA\u2019), Anoop Kumar Dhand, J., opined that the disputes related to installation of mobile tower was not covered by the definition of public utility service under Section 22A(b)<\/a> of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987<\/a> (\u20181987 Act\u2019), therefore, the PLA had no jurisdiction to adjudicate such matters. Hence, under these circumstances, the impugned order passed by the PLA was not sustainable in the eye of law. Thus, the Court quashed and set aside the impugned order dated 29-05-2023 passed by the PLA.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd. v. Harish Agarwal, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9488 of 2023, Order dated 25-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Bona fide necessity to run business from a place will be decided by landlord; tenant cannot resist eviction dictating landlord alternative places: Rajasthan HC<\/p>\n

In a writ petition filed under Article 226<\/a> and 227<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a> to set aside the impugned judgment dated 16-03-2023, passed by the Appellate Rent Tribunal, Jodhpur (\u2018the Appellant Rent Tribunal\u2019), Dr. Nupur Bhati, J.* opined that the bona fide necessity of the respondent- landlord was to be decided by herself and even if, the alternate premises were available, then also it was for the landlord to choose a more suitable premise for carrying on the business by herself and the petitioner-tenant could not dictate as to from which premise she should start the business. Further, the Court opipatned that the tenant was not able to demonstrate the extreme hardship caused to him upon vacating the premises in dispute. The litigation had consumed ten years and thus, the hardship suffered by the landlord was more than the tenant. Furthermore, the object of Section 9(i)<\/a> of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001<\/a> (\u2018the 2001 Act\u2019) was to relieve the landlords from hardship so that he gets the suit premises vacated early for his personal use. Thus, the Court opined that the order dated 16-03-2023, passed by the Appellate Rent Tribunal, Jodhpur did not require any interference, and accordingly, dismissed the writ petition.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[ABC v. XYZ, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7177 of 2023, decided on 18-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

\u2018Real celebration will be if society follows ideals of Lord Ram\u2019; Raj HC directs District Collector to ensure that in future roads are not blocked in name of religious celebrations<\/p>\n

In a suo motu petition, taking note of the chaotic situation and complete jam on the main highway road, connecting main city to the High Court, Dinesh Mehta, J, opined that the real celebration would be if society respected and followed the ideals and virtues which Lord Ram embodied and was worshipped as an ideal person. The Court further directed the Commissioner of Police and the District Collector to ensure that in future the roads, particularly the road leading towards the High Court, was not blocked in the name of any \u2018julus\u2019, \u2018dharna\u2019 and religious celebrations.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[In the matter of Pran Pratishtha Mahotsava of Ram Temple Ayodhya, In re, Order dated 22-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Section 357A of CrPC and Rajasthan Victim Compensation Scheme, 2011 are applicable to incidents occurred prior to their enactment: Rajasthan High Court<\/p>\n

In a petition filed under Article 226<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>, Anoop Kumar Dhand, J., opined that the provisions contained under Section 357-A<\/a> of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> (\u2018CrPC\u2019) and the Rajasthan Victim Compensation Scheme, 2011 (\u20182011 Scheme\u2019), were applicable to the incidents occurred prior to their enactment and the minor victim in the present case was entitled to the compensation in terms of 2011 Scheme. The Court opined that the crime of rape committed with the minor victim was a dehumanizing one and an affront to the human dignity. Hence, compensation should be awarded as a solace to the victim. Thus, the Court directed the respondents to pay compensation of Rs. 3,00,000 to the victim after adjusting the amount of compensation already recieved by her.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[G.K. v. State of Rajasthan, 2024 SCC OnLine Raj 64<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

[Habeas Corpus] Detainee illegally confined by parents over her relationship with a transgender man to be taken to the place of her choice: Rajasthan HC<\/p>\n

In a petition filed by the petitioner under Article 226<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a> to produce the corpus of the detainee who was in the illegal custody of the detainee\u2019s father, the Division Bench of Pankaj Bhandari and Bhuwan Goyal, JJ., noted that the detainee was produced before the Court and stated that she had been detained by her father. The Court further stated that the detainee should be taken to the place of her choice under police protection and disposed of the present petition.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Jeeshan Vasani v. State of Rajasthan, 2024 SCC OnLine Raj 48<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

TELANGANA HIGH COURT<\/p>\n

\u2018Advocates practicing in other states ineligible for post of District Judge\u2019; Telangana HC upholds Rule 5(1)(a) of Telangana State Judicial (Service and Cadre) Rules, 2023<\/p>\n

A batch of writ petitions were filed by practicing advocates and Additional Public Prosecutors seeking quashment of order which rejected their applications seeking recruitment to the post of District Judge in the State of Telangana. Petitioners also sought a declaration to struck down Rule 5(1)(a) of Telangana State Judicial (Service and Cadre) Rules, 2023 (\u2018the Rules 2023\u2019) as arbitrary and discriminatory and a consequential direction to respondents to permit petitioners to appear in written examination of District Judge. The Division Bench of Alok Aradhe, CJ.*, and T. Vinod Kumar, J., dismissed the writ petitions and held that the advocates practicing in other states were ineligible for the post of District Judge in Telangana.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[Bodugula Brahmaiah v. State of Telangana, 2023 SCC OnLine TS 4105<\/a><\/span>]<\/p>\n

UTTARANCHAL HIGH COURT<\/p>\n

Uttaranchal HC takes suo motu cognizance of illegal felling of trees in jungle areas of Kaladhungi to Bajpur; directs State to take action against erring officials<\/p>\n

The Division Bench of Sharad Kumar Sharma* and Pankaj Purohit, JJ., opined that the dereliction in performance of the assigned official duties was a professional misconduct, and at least, the Senior Officers of the department could not say, and have an excuse, that they were not aware of law, because ignorentia of law is non excusat. The Court held that the head of the department, i.e., Principal Secretary, Forest, and other subordinate senior officials were conscious of their responsibilities, but still they had knowingly persisted to continue the forest to be plundered by persons not eligible and that too for decades together. The Court thus directed the State to take action against the erring officials in accordance with the provisions of Government Servants (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 2003.<\/p>\n

Read more…<\/a><\/p>\n

[In the matter of illegal felling of trees areas of Kaladhungi to Bajpur, In Re, Writ Petition (PIL) No. 190 of 2023, decided on 28-12-2023<\/span>]<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

This blog helps catch up with top stories from High Courts across the country and stay updated on various matters.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67513,"featured_media":313036,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[46069,45673],"tags":[62443,49584,20531,65014,42768],"class_list":["post-313030","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-high-court-round-up","category-columns-for-roundup","tag-high-court-news","tag-high-court-roundup","tag-high-courts","tag-january-legal-updates","tag-legal-updates"],"yoast_head":"\nHigh Court Monthly Roundup - January 2024 | SCC Blog<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"High Court Roundup Jan 2024 - Stories on Taxability of Granite, excommunication from community, child pornography, convict's right to procreate, and more.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/04\/high-court-monthly-roundup-january-2024-legal-news-updates\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"High Court Roundup January 2024 | Stories on Taxability of Granite, excommunication from community, child pornography, convict\u2019s right to procreate, and more\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"High Court Roundup Jan 2024 - Stories on Taxability of Granite, excommunication from community, child pornography, convict's right to procreate, and more.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/04\/high-court-monthly-roundup-january-2024-legal-news-updates\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2024-02-04T05:30:59+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-08-18T05:01:41+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/round-up-2.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Ridhi\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"High Court Roundup January 2024 | Stories on Taxability of Granite, excommunication from community, child pornography, convict\u2019s right to procreate, and more\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Ridhi\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"101 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/04\/high-court-monthly-roundup-january-2024-legal-news-updates\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/04\/high-court-monthly-roundup-january-2024-legal-news-updates\/\",\"name\":\"High Court Monthly Roundup - January 2024 | SCC Blog\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/04\/high-court-monthly-roundup-january-2024-legal-news-updates\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/04\/high-court-monthly-roundup-january-2024-legal-news-updates\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/round-up.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-02-04T05:30:59+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-08-18T05:01:41+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/a21428c608a56b14de2f1880af8ab8ea\"},\"description\":\"High Court Roundup Jan 2024 - Stories on Taxability of Granite, excommunication from community, child pornography, convict's right to procreate, and more.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/04\/high-court-monthly-roundup-january-2024-legal-news-updates\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/04\/high-court-monthly-roundup-january-2024-legal-news-updates\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/04\/high-court-monthly-roundup-january-2024-legal-news-updates\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/round-up.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/round-up.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"High Court January\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/04\/high-court-monthly-roundup-january-2024-legal-news-updates\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"High Court Roundup January 2024 | Stories on Taxability of Granite, excommunication from community, child pornography, convict\u2019s right to procreate, and more\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/a21428c608a56b14de2f1880af8ab8ea\",\"name\":\"Ridhi\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/5bb725ff04af51d6ea760aba8bfa827caa7c4b3ff053baff285d71a0ab546955?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/5bb725ff04af51d6ea760aba8bfa827caa7c4b3ff053baff285d71a0ab546955?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Ridhi\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc_editor\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"High Court Monthly Roundup - January 2024 | SCC Blog","description":"High Court Roundup Jan 2024 - Stories on Taxability of Granite, excommunication from community, child pornography, convict's right to procreate, and more.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/04\/high-court-monthly-roundup-january-2024-legal-news-updates\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"High Court Roundup January 2024 | Stories on Taxability of Granite, excommunication from community, child pornography, convict\u2019s right to procreate, and more","og_description":"High Court Roundup Jan 2024 - Stories on Taxability of Granite, excommunication from community, child pornography, convict's right to procreate, and more.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/04\/high-court-monthly-roundup-january-2024-legal-news-updates\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2024-02-04T05:30:59+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-08-18T05:01:41+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/round-up-2.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Ridhi","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"High Court Roundup January 2024 | Stories on Taxability of Granite, excommunication from community, child pornography, convict\u2019s right to procreate, and more","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Ridhi","Est. reading time":"101 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/04\/high-court-monthly-roundup-january-2024-legal-news-updates\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/04\/high-court-monthly-roundup-january-2024-legal-news-updates\/","name":"High Court Monthly Roundup - January 2024 | SCC Blog","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/04\/high-court-monthly-roundup-january-2024-legal-news-updates\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/04\/high-court-monthly-roundup-january-2024-legal-news-updates\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/round-up.webp","datePublished":"2024-02-04T05:30:59+00:00","dateModified":"2025-08-18T05:01:41+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/a21428c608a56b14de2f1880af8ab8ea"},"description":"High Court Roundup Jan 2024 - Stories on Taxability of Granite, excommunication from community, child pornography, convict's right to procreate, and more.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/04\/high-court-monthly-roundup-january-2024-legal-news-updates\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/04\/high-court-monthly-roundup-january-2024-legal-news-updates\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/04\/high-court-monthly-roundup-january-2024-legal-news-updates\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/round-up.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/round-up.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"High Court January"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/04\/high-court-monthly-roundup-january-2024-legal-news-updates\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"High Court Roundup January 2024 | Stories on Taxability of Granite, excommunication from community, child pornography, convict\u2019s right to procreate, and more"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/a21428c608a56b14de2f1880af8ab8ea","name":"Ridhi","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/5bb725ff04af51d6ea760aba8bfa827caa7c4b3ff053baff285d71a0ab546955?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/5bb725ff04af51d6ea760aba8bfa827caa7c4b3ff053baff285d71a0ab546955?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Ridhi"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc_editor\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/round-up.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":312484,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/30\/anti-conversion-law-allahabad-high-court-reject-pleas-filed-hindu-muslim-couples-protection-of-life\/","url_meta":{"origin":313030,"position":0},"title":"[Anti Conversion Law] Allahabad HC rejects pleas filed by Hindu-Muslim couples for protection of life, due to non-compliance","author":"Apoorva","date":"January 30, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Allahabad High Court allowed the petitioners to prefer fresh writ petition in case they solemnize marriage after following the due procedure of law","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"allahabad high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/allahabad-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/allahabad-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/allahabad-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/allahabad-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":377639,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/03\/07\/family-law-february-2026-roundup\/","url_meta":{"origin":313030,"position":1},"title":"Family Law February 2026 Roundup: Key Rulings on custody, alimony, adoption, succession, and more","author":"Soumya Yadav","date":"March 7, 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"This month saw several significant rulings from the Supreme Court and High Courts on custody, maintenance, adoption, property disputes, and personal law.","rel":"","context":"In "Legal RoundUp"","block_context":{"text":"Legal RoundUp","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Family Law February 2026 Roundup: Key Rulings on custody, alimony, adoption, succession, and more","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/BLOG-51-13.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/BLOG-51-13.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/BLOG-51-13.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/BLOG-51-13.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":287649,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/03\/24\/allahabad-hc-rejects-quashing-of-proceedings-under-muslim-women-protection-of-rights-on-marriage-act-legal-research-legal-news-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":313030,"position":2},"title":"Allahabad HC rejects plea for quashing of proceedings under Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act","author":"Apoorva","date":"March 24, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Allahabad High Court said that if a case disclosing commission of an offence under remedial statute like Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 is nipped in the bud, the Statute aforesaid, which seeks to curtail a long-standing practice in society, would be bogged down.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Allahabad High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-476.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-476.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-476.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-476.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":376808,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/02\/25\/allahabad-hc-grants-relief-to-12-interfaith-live-in-couples\/","url_meta":{"origin":313030,"position":3},"title":"Interfaith live-in relationships are legal, right to choose partner covered under Art. 21: Allahabad HC grants relief to 12 interfaith live-in couples","author":"Sonali Ahuja","date":"February 25, 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe right to human life is to be treated on a much higher pedestal, regardless of a citizen\u2019s religious belief. The mere fact that the petitioners are living in an interfaith relationship would not deprive them of their fundamental right as envisaged in the Constitution, being citizens of India.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"interfaith live-in couples","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/interfaith-live-in-couples.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/interfaith-live-in-couples.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/interfaith-live-in-couples.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/interfaith-live-in-couples.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":265333,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/04\/11\/weekly-legal-roundup-high-courts-legal-news-legalstories\/","url_meta":{"origin":313030,"position":4},"title":"Political clearance for Judges to visit abroad, Duty of Law Officers, Extra-marital affair of mother and more | Read 7 interesting legal stories of the week","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"April 11, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"7 Interesting Picks of the Week Gone by. Under Muslim Personal law, can Family Court dissolve the marriage of a couple? Bom HC elaborates The Division Bench of V.K. Jadhav and Sandipkumar C. More, JJ., addressed whether Family Court under Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937 read with Section\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "High Court Round Up"","block_context":{"text":"High Court Round Up","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/high-court-round-up\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/Roundup_Weekly.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/Roundup_Weekly.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/Roundup_Weekly.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/Roundup_Weekly.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/Roundup_Weekly.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":336539,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/12\/04\/family-law-roundup-november-2024\/","url_meta":{"origin":313030,"position":5},"title":"Family Law Roundup| A quick recap of the top family law cases from November 2024","author":"Apoorva","date":"December 4, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Read about the significant family law matters heard and decided by the Supreme Court and High Courts in November 2024","rel":"","context":"In "Legal RoundUp"","block_context":{"text":"Legal RoundUp","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Family Law Roundup","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/Family-Law-Roundup.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/Family-Law-Roundup.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/Family-Law-Roundup.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/Family-Law-Roundup.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/313030","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67513"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=313030"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/313030\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/313036"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=313030"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=313030"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=313030"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}