Supreme Court refuses to hear challenge against functioning of Ghaziabad district judiciary

The Supreme Court today dismissed the PIL filed by an advocate aggrieved by the current response and functioning of the District Court, Ghaziabad.

The bench of Justice D.Y. Chandrachud and Justice M.R. Shah did not entertain the petition filed by petitioner-in-person Sanjeev Gupta. The petitioner stated that he has been everywhere, but there is a complete abdication of Allahabad HC, he has given a letter to PM, letter to the Supreme Court, letter to Administration. The lawyers at district courts don’t get the certified copy, if one wants a date one needs to go on a date to ask for one. 

The bench observed that the petitioner’s plea under Article 32 cannot be entertained and he should file the same under Article 226 to move the concerned High Court, otherwise the Supreme Court will be flooded by such petitions.

Justice M.R. Shah stated, “Agar aapko koi dikkat hai toh Ghaziabad court jaiye ya Allahabad HC jaeiye bhaiya.”

Whereas, Justice Chandrachud stated, “We are not going to allow this application, otherwise we have to entertain applications against different district judiciary from all over India. This is a case for Allahabad High Court to handle since you have grievances in Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh.” 

The post Supreme Court refuses to hear challenge against functioning of Ghaziabad district judiciary appeared first on India Legal.



from India Legal https://ift.tt/3zPkNf0

Popular posts from this blog

Criminal proceedings against encroachment on land of Gram Sabha can be taken together under Section 67 of Revenue Code: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court on September 23 said that criminal proceedings against encroachment on the land of Gram Sabha can be taken together under Section 67 of the Revenue Code, under Section 3/4 of the Prevention of Damage to Civil and Public Property Act. A Single Bench of Justice Yogendra Kumar Srivastava passed this order, while hearing an application filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by one Srikant, seeking to quash the charge sheet dated May 14, 2015 as well as the cognizance order dated April 6, 2016 and also the entire proceedings of case under Section 3/4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1894, registered at Police Station Jigna, District Mirzapur, pending before the 4th Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Mirzapur. The records of the case indicate that the criminal proceedings were initiated, pursuant to an FIR dated March 26, 2015 lodged against the applicant, which was registered as case under Section 3/4 of PDPP ...
Read more

Touching private parts of minor, kissing on lips does not amount to offence under Section 177 of IPC: Bombay High Court

Image
The Bombay High Court has observed that touching private parts of a minor and kissing on lips do not amount to unnatural offence under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code. A Single-Judge Bench of Justice Anuja Prabhudessai made the remarks, while granting bail to an accused, after noting that the POCSO offences with which the accused was charged, were punishable with maximum imprisonment up to five years and the accused had been in custody for almost a year. It noted that the statement of the victim as well as the First Information Report prima facie indicated that the Applicant had touched the private parts of the victim and had kissed his lips. Section 377 defines unnatural offences as voluntarily having carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal and the punishment is imprisonment for life or imprisonment of either description for a term extending up to 10 years, noted the Bench. It added that the section clarifies that penetratio...
Read more

Centre notifies rules for consumer protection, direct selling entities not to promote pyramid schemes

The Central Government on Tuesday has notified the rules for Consumer Protection. The Ministry Of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs by exercising the powers conferred by clause (zg) of sub-section (2) of section 101 read with section 94 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, has made the Consumer Protection rules. The rules notified by the Centre to be called as Consumer Protection (Direct Selling) Rules, 2021. The Central government prohibited direct selling companies from promoting Pyramid Schemes. The notification also prohibits any person from enrolling into such a scheme in order to undertake direct selling business. The Consumer Protection (Direct Selling) Rules, 2021 further prohibits participation in money circulation schemes by such sellers and directs them to comply with the given rules within three months from the date of publication of the Consumer Protection (Direct Selling) Rules, 2021 in the Official Gazette i.e., December 28...
Read more