Legopolis

The Bombay High Court has dismissed a petition filed by a physically-challenged person, seeking quashing of the FIR registered in Mumbra Police Station for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 354 (Assault or criminal force to outrage modesty), 354-D (stalking), 342 (wrongful confinement) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code. According to the respondent no 3 (original complainant), the incident took place in March 2021, when she had gone to Amrut Nagar, Kausa, Mumbra for purchasing vegetables. She has alleged that the petitioner held her hand, disclosed his name. The respondent no 3 has further alleged that whenever she went out to the market, the petitioner met and stopped her. She has stated that she ignored the petitioner, however, the petitioner followed her till her house. She has stated that as she was scared, she did not disclose the incident to her family. The respondent no 3 has further alleged that in June, 2021, when she had gone to Tanwar N

The Supreme Court has issued notice to the Central government on a public interest litigation which challenges its power under Section 62(5) of the Representation of People Act prohibiting a prisoner to cast his vote. A Bench of Chief Justice of India UU Lalit and Justice S Ravindra Bhat and Justice Hima Kohli issued notice on the plea which was filed through advocate Zoheb Hossain and has listed the matter for hearing on December 29, 2022. The public interest litigation (PIL) was filed way back in 2019 by one Aditya Prasanna Bhattacharya, who was then a Law student at the National Law School of India University, Bangalore in his third year. The petitioner had pointed out that the word used in Section 62(5) of Representation of People Act uses ‘confinement’ as the yardstick which has created lot of irregularities. As per the Section 62(5) any person who has confined to a prison has been deprived of his right to vote at any election. As per the provision no person shall vote at an

The Supreme Court will hear on November 4 a petition challenging the Calcutta High Court, which directed Jitendra Narain, former chief secretary of Andaman and Nicobar Islands, to appear before the SIT probing the gangrape allegations made by a woman against him. The matter was raised before a Bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) U.U. Lalit, demanding an early hearing on the matter. CJI Lalit assured that the Apex Court will hear the matter on Friday. Earlier on October 28, a Special Investigation Team (SIT) of Andaman and Nicobar police had questioned Narain for over eight hours at the Police Lines in Port Blair. A 21-year-old woman in the Union Territory had lodged an FIR on October 1, alleging that she was called to the Chief Secretary’s residence on the pretext of a government job, where top officials, including Narain, raped her on April 14 this year. The woman further alleged that the accused repeated the crime on May 1. In her FIR, the woman had accused Labour

The Supreme Court on Monday quashed the defamation criminal complaint filed against founder-director of India Today Aroon Purie over a news article published in India Today magazine in 2007 against the then Indian deputy consul general in Edinburgh, O.P. Bhola. The Bench of Chief Justice U.U. Lalit, Justice Ravindra Bhat and Justice Bela M. Trivedi granted relief to Purie, but refused to quash the case against the author of news article ‘Mission Misconduct’. Appearing for Purie, Senior Advocate K.V. Vishwanathan contended that he was the Editor-in-Chief at the time of publication and could not be held liable considering the decision in the case of KM Mathew vs State Of Kerala. CJI Lalit then observed that the government officials and the Editor may be granted relief, however, it refused to give the same to the correspondent. Earlier in April, the Single-Judge Bench of Justice Yogesh Khanna in the Delhi High Court had dismissed Purie’s plea in April this year and also refused to qu

The Central government has told the Supreme Court that the 2019 Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) does not affect the legal, democratic or secular rights of any of the Indian citizens. In its latest affidavit filed by the government centre informed that the existing regime for obtaining citizenship of India by foreigners continues to remains untouched by the CAA . It also added that the legal migration on the basis of valid documents and visa, continues to be permissible from all countries of the world including from the three countries specified in the CAA The affidavit clearly mentions that the CAA is merely a limited legislative measure, circumscribed in its application which does not affect the existing legal rights or regime concerning citizenship [falling outside the purview of specialized measure] in any manner. The Centre has questioned the locus of the petitioners, informing that the matters pertaining to immigration policy, citizenship and exclusion of immigrants lies with

The Central government has told the Supreme Court that the 2019 Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) does not affect the legal, democratic or secular rights of any of the Indian citizens. In its latest affidavit filed by the government centre informed that the existing regime for obtaining citizenship of India by foreigners continues to remains untouched by the CAA . It also added that the legal migration on the basis of valid documents and visa, continues to be permissible from all countries of the world including from the three countries specified in the CAA The affidavit clearly mentions that the CAA is merely a limited legislative measure, circumscribed in its application which does not affect the existing legal rights or regime concerning citizenship [falling outside the purview of specialized measure] in any manner. The Centre has questioned the locus of the petitioners, informing that the matters pertaining to immigration policy, citizenship and exclusion of immigrants lies with

Coming down heavily on a petitioner for misusing the public interest litigation jurisdiction of the court by filing a malafide litigation, the Rajasthan High Court imposed a cost of Rs 50,000 on the petitioner, to be deposited within the next 30 days. The Division Bench of Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Kuldeep Mathur dismissed the PIL questioning the alleged encroachment on land of public park situated at Karda Road Awasiya Colony, Bhinmal, Jalore. The private respondents have filed reply to the petition with a pertinent assertion that the land in question was khatedari land, which was acquired by the Municipality, Bhinmal for establishing a residential colony. The plot in question was allotted to the respondents in 1988 by way of compensation. Attention of the Court is drawn to the order dated April 20, 2022, passed by the Civil Judge, Bhinmal, whereby the Civil Court has rejected the application for temporary injunction, filed against the answering respondents. The Court is,

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court directed the Petitioner to approach the competent authority for recognition of Hindi language as the official language in the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir. The Division Bench of Chief Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey and Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul disposed of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking recognition of Hindi language as the official language in the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir as well as in the Union Territory of Ladakh in tune with the mandate of Articles 343 and 251 of the Constitution of India. It is observed by the Court that that the subject of the PIL squarely comes within the domain and powers of the executive. Therefore the Court disposed of the PIL with direction to the Petitioner to approach the competent authority/ forum for seeking the relief as claimed. It is pertinent to note that the PIL is filed by one Jagdev Singh. The post Jammu and Kashmir High Court rejects PIL seeking recognition of Hindi as official

A court in Kerala has restrained the makers of Kannada film ‘Kantara,’ which was released recently, from playing the song ‘Varaha Roopam’ in the movie without the permission of popular Kerala-based music band, Thaikkudam Bridge. The order was passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge of Kozhikode on a suit for injunction moved by the band, alleging copyright infringement of its song ‘Navarasam’. This information was shared by the music band on its Instagram account. As per the information shared by the band on Instagram, the Court injuncted the producer, director, music composer and streaming platforms such as Amazon, Spotify, YouTube, Wynk Music, Jiosavan and others from playing Varaha Roopam in the movie without the permission of the band. The movie, directed by Rishabh Shetty, was released on September 30 and became a blockbuster soon after its release. Music Composer of the film B Ajaneeshh Loknath faced allegations of copyright infringement around the song ‘Varaha R

A complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act cannot be transferred as per the convenience of the accused, the Supreme Court has ruled. However, the Single-Judge Bench of Justice Abhay S. Oka noted that in case the accused was a woman or a senior citizen, they could seek exemption from personal appearance from the concerned Trial Court. The Apex Court passed the order recently, while dismissing a petition filed by one S. Nalini Jayanthi, seeking transfer of the complaint filed against her under Section 138. Justice Oka directed the Trial Court to favourably consider the application, in case it was made by the petitioner, seeking grant of exemption from physical presence. The top court of the country then observed that a judge should compel the petitioner to appear before it, only when her presence was absolutely mandatory for the conduct of the trial. (Case title: S Nalini Jayanthi vs M. Ramasubba Reddy) The post Complaint under Negotiable Instruments Act canno

The Union government has issued a notification on amendments to the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules of 2021, making significant changes to the grievance redressal mechanism, including setting up of a committee for the purpose. The Central government published the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules, 2022 in the official gazette on Friday, introducing Rule 3A, which provides for setting up of a Grievance Appellate Committee. The newly-introduced Rule 3A mandated the Union of India to establish one or more Grievance Appellate Committees within three months from the date of commencement of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules, 2022. Each Grievance Appellate Committee shall consist of a Chairperson and two whole time members appointed by the Central government, of which one shall be a member ex-officio and two shal

The Union government has issued a notification on amendments to the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules of 2021, making significant changes to the grievance redressal mechanism, including setting up of a committee for the purpose. The Central government published the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules, 2022 in the official gazette on Friday, introducing Rule 3A, which provides for setting up of a Grievance Appellate Committee. The newly-introduced Rule 3A mandated the Union of India to establish one or more Grievance Appellate Committees within three months from the date of commencement of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules, 2022. Each Grievance Appellate Committee shall consist of a Chairperson and two whole time members appointed by the Central government, of which one shall be a member ex-officio and two shal

The Supreme Court has given explanation regarding it’s judgement of April 19, 2022, in which death sentence awarded to a man convicted for raping and murdering a four-year-old girl was commuted to life imprisonment for 20 years. The Apex Court noted that in the said judgement, the Court had commuted the death sentence imposed for the offence of murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code as life imprisonment. It also modified the sentence of life imprisonment for the remainder of life, imposed for the offence under Section 376A IPC(punishment for causing death of rape victim), as life imprisonment for 20 years. The convict, who was also sentenced for offences punishable under Section 376(2)(i) (rape of a women aged below 16 years), Section 376(2)(m) (endangering life of woman while committing rape) of IPC, Section 5(i) (penetrative sexual assault causing grave injury to child) and Section 5(m) (penetrative sexual assault of girl aged below 12 years) of the POCSO Act, had fill

The Delhi High Court on Friday issued notice on a petition filed by State President of Delhi Congress Chaudhary Anil Kumar regarding the delimitation order of wards issued by the AAP government in the national capital, just before the elections to Municipal Corporations. Advocate Salman Khurshid, appearing for the Kumar, contended that following the delimitation, there was a dis-balance of population, with many wards reporting decrease in population, while others reported increase in the same.  This violated the population equation in the wards, which should also have been taken care of while announcing delimitation, noted the Counsel. He said the Congress also wanted MCD elections, but the same should be held in a fair and transparent manner. He further submitted before the High Court that the petition would become infructuous, if they notified the election. The Counsel apprised the Court that they had filed a representation in this regard, but were not given an opportunity to be

Shiksha Mitra turned teachers have filed a petition in the Allahabad High Court seeking benefits of the old pension scheme. A Single Bench of Justice Ashutosh Srivastava heard the petition filed by Gurucharan and 7 Others. By means of the writ petition, the petitioners pray for issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent authorities to take into account the previous services of the petitioners rendered by them on the post of Shiksha Mitra in different primary schools of the State of U.P, for the purpose of computation of pension benefits under the old pension scheme as they have been initially appointed on the post of Shiksha Mitra before the year 2005. Considering the nature of the issue involved in the writ petition and the relief sought by the petitioners the Court is of the opinion that the same can be adjudicated only after calling for a counter affidavit. The Court has granted four weeks time to the respondents to file counter affidavit and one week time to file

The Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court has observed that a married woman being asked to do household work for the family cannot claim that she has been treated like a maid servant, and that the same does not amount to cruelty towards her. The Division Bench of Justice Vibha Kankanwadi and Justice Rajesh S. Patil noted that if the woman did not wish to do household activities, she should have told the groom’s side before the marriage, so that they could rethink about the wedding itself or if it was after marriage, then such problem should have been sorted out earlier. Quashing the first information report (FIR) registered against the husband and in-laws for cruelty under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the High Court observed that mere use of the word harassment ‘mentally and physically’ was not sufficient to attract ingredients of Section 498-A of IPC.  It said the collection of evidence with regards to the allegations was not sufficient even at this prima facie

By Adv. Saju Jakob-Lily Thomas Jr and Adv. Mili Verma The shackles of caste and casteism still bind India even after 75 years of Independence. India is home to millions of Dalits who share a common history of oppression, discrimination and humiliation because of untouchability based on their birth. This is combined with a high level of social, educational and economic backwardness, which determines a person’s status as a Scheduled Caste (SC), irrespective of their religious affiliations.G It is no secret that ethnic divisions and oppressed/Dalit communities are present in every religion. In spite of the fact that most of us have only heard about Dalits belonging to indigenous religions, i.e., Dalit Hindus, Dalit Sikhs and Dalit Buddhists, there are also Dalit Muslims and Dalit Christians. This leads to questions about their whole existence per se. In terms of social welfare and policy making, only Dalits who are classified as SCs are recognised. After Independence, various welfare

A local court in Rampur on Thursday convicted Samajwadi Party (SP) leader Azam Khan in a case related to an alleged provocative speech he made against Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath and the then DM Aunjaneya Kumar Singh in 2019. The Special MP/MLA court will decide the quantum of sentence later. A case was registered against Khan at Milak Kotwali in Rampur on April 9, 2019 under Sections 153a (promoting enmity between two groups) and 505-1 (statement conducing to public mischief) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), along with Section 125 of the Representation of People Act 1951. Advocate and BJP leader Akash Saxena, who had contested against Khan in MLA elections of 2022, said that he had raised concerns against Khan, who was trying to incite violence among  two communities by delivering provocative statements. The lawyer further alleged that Khan used foul language against IAS officer Aunjaneya Singh and his mother. He said the Returning Officer had taken cognisance of

The Meghalaya High Court has issued a suo motu contempt notice to the Secretary in the Home Department of the state for deliberately disregarding an order of the High Court, seeking report on action taken against misuse of official vehicles by the Police Department and embezzlement of funds over their purchase. The Division Bench of Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice W. Diengdoh issued the notice on a PIL filed by Riewad Vicharwant Warjri and another. The notice was returnable on November 2, noted the Court, while stating that the state government had tried to obfuscate the issue and stand as an impediment to a fact-finding exercise in the matter of defalcation of public funds. The High Court noted that the petition was not filed immediately upon the publication of the articles. Considerable time had elapsed between the initial publication and the filing of the petition. It has been evident that the petitioners waited for some action to be taken by the appropriate authoritie

The Allahabad High Court has dismissed bail petition of a Juvenile, after observing that the court can refuse bail in a case, where his release is likely to defeat the ends of justice. The Single-Judge Bench of Justice Jyotsna Sharma directed the Juvenile Justice Board to expedite the hearing and conclude the same at the earliest. The order was passed on a Criminal Revision filed by a minor under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice Act, challenging the order dated December 6, 2021 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Mainpuri. The petition further challenged the February 10, 2022 order passed by the Special Judge (POCSO Act), Mainpuri in Criminal Appeal affirming the order of the Juvenile Justice Board and declining bail to the juvenile in a matter arising out of case under Section 376AB of Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 5M/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, registered at Police Station Elau in Mainpuri district. The petitioner contended that t

The Madras High Court held that acquittal of a person in a criminal case cannot be a ground to absolve them in an inquiry which is departmental as these inquiries are different from those followed in a criminal court of law. Madras High Court has held that acquittal of a person in a criminal case cannot be a ground for exoneration in independent departmental inquiry initiated by the employer against such person since the procedures and standard of proof adopted in a departmental inquiry are different from those followed in a criminal court of law. Single-judge Justice SM Subramaniam, has refused to grant any relief to a Tamil Nadu police constable, who has been facing disciplinary proceedings after he was named as an accused in a murder case, although he was he was subsequently acquitted in the criminal case by the trial court The judgement passed said that the Court is of the view that the procedures to be adopted for departmental disciplinary proceedings and the Criminal Court of