Legopolis

The Union of India on Thursday apprised the Supreme Court that the status of Jammu and Kashmir as a Union Territory was only a temporary phenomenon, however, it refused to provide an exact timeline for conversion to a full-fledged state. Appearing for the Central government, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said the Central government was prepared for elections but the timing of these polls and whether they should commence at the panchayat or district level, would be determined by the UT administration and the Election Commission of India (ECI). SG Mehta made the submission before the Constitution Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud, Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Justice Sanjiv Khanna, Justice BR Gavai and Justice Surya Kant, which continued hearing for the 13th day, the petitions challenging the abrogation of Article 370. Apprising the Apex Court about the steps taken by the Centre, the SG informed the Constitution Bench that in January 2022 alone, 1.8 crore tourists

The website of the Supreme Court of India was on Thursday subjected to a phishing attack, as the perpetrators took out personal details and confidential data of visitors using a different URL. The Registrar (Technology) disclosed the information to the public by way of a notice. As per the notice, the Registry has strongly advised the public at large to neither click nor share on links they receive without verifying the authenticity. It further said that the Registry, Supreme Court of India will never ask for personal information, financial details or other confidential information.” Further, victims of the attack have been advised to change the passwords of all their online accounts, and contact their banks to report any unauthorised access. The Registry has informed law enforcement agencies of the development for necessary action, the notice added. The post Supreme Court website comes under phishing attack appeared first on India Legal . from Top News of the Day – India Le

The High Court of Delhi on Thursday directed former Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir Omar Abdullah to pay Rs 1.5 lakh as interim maintenance to his estranged wife Payal Abdullah. On April 26, 2018, a trial court had ordered the National Conference President to pay interim maintenance of Rs 75,000 per month to Payal Abdullah and Rs 25,000 to their son. The Single-Judge Bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad today enhanced the maintenance amount, directing Abdullah to Rs 1.5 lakh to his estranged wife and Rs 60,000 per month for the education of his son. The High Court observed that though a father was not legally responsible for the college education of major children, Abdullah was still liable to pay Rs 60,000 for the education of his son. The Single-Judge Bench passed the order on a petition filed by Payal Abdullah, challenging the trial court verdict, which ordered Omar Abdullah to pay Rs 75,000 per month to Payal. The petitioner claimed that the maintenance awarded was too low

The Allahabad High Court has while dismissing the petition said that the trial court in exercise of its powers under Section 216 Cr.P.C cannot delete the charges framed by it for the offences as the criminal procedure code does not confer such powers on the court. The trial court can only alter a charge or to add to a charge, which has already been framed. A Single Bench of Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra passed this order while hearing a Criminal Revision filed by Dev Narain. The criminal revision has been preferred against the order dated 30.1.2023, passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge (FTC), Chitrakoot in Sessions trial, arising out of Case under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 323 IPC & 3/4 of D.P Act, 1961, Police Station Karwi Kotwali Nagar, District Chitrakoot, whereby the court below rejected the application 29-Kha moved under Section 216 Cr.P.C by the revisionist for alteration of charges framed against him. The facts of the case are that in case FIR was lodg

Former Chief Justice of India (CJI) N.V. Ramana has been appointed as a member of the International Mediation Panel of the Singapore International Mediation Centre (SIMC). The announcement was made by SIMC chairperson George Lim, who presented Justice Ramana with the letter of appointment in Singapore on Tuesday. Justice Ramana has gone to Singapore to take part in the “Singapore Convention Week”, the annual convention organised by Singapore’s Ministry of Law, the United Nations Commission on International Law (UNCITRAL) and over 20 partner organisations. During his visit to the Lion City, Justice Ramana met the representatives of SIMC and four Indian corporate majors – Tata, Reliance, Mahindra and Aditya Birla groups on Tuesday.  These top four Indian multinational corporations (MNCs) have come forward to sign the ‘Declaration of Intent’ to support mediation at the initiative of Justice Ramana. During his tenure as a judge, Justice Ramana had strongly advocated for adoption of

Former Chief Justice of India (CJI) N.V. Ramana has been appointed as a member of the International Mediation Panel of the Singapore International Mediation Centre (SIMC). The announcement was made by SIMC chairperson George Lim, who presented Justice Ramana with the letter of appointment in Singapore on Tuesday. Justice Ramana has gone to Singapore to take part in the “Singapore Convention Week”, the annual convention organised by Singapore’s Ministry of Law, the United Nations Commission on International Law (UNCITRAL) and over 20 partner organisations. During his visit to the Lion City, Justice Ramana met the representatives of SIMC and four Indian corporate majors – Tata, Reliance, Mahindra and Aditya Birla groups on Tuesday.  These top four Indian multinational corporations (MNCs) have come forward to sign the ‘Declaration of Intent’ to support mediation at the initiative of Justice Ramana. During his tenure as a judge, Justice Ramana had strongly advocated for adoption of

The Supreme Court on Tuesday granted Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal four-weeks’ time to file a rejoinder to the counter-affidavit submitted by the State of Uttar Pradesh in a 2014 case registered against him for allegedly saying that all those who believed in ‘Khuda’ won’t be pardoned by ‘Khuda’ if they voted for BJP. The Bench of Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice J.B. Pardiwala adjourned the hearing to the last week of September after the Counsel appearing for the national convenor of Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) sought two-weeks’ time to file the rejoinder The petition filed by Kejriwal challenged the Allahabad High Court order of January 2023, which refused to grant him discharge in a criminal case arising out of his controversial remarks made during the campaigning of 2014 elections. The counsel appearing for the Uttar Pradesh government said that the State had no objection to the request for adjournment of the hearing. The Supreme Court had, in February 2023, granted a tempora

The Bombay High Court disposed of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL)  raising a grievance with regard to discrimination in the fee structure from one school to another school and prayed that such fee structure should be as per the fee structure prevalent in Government schools. It is further prayed that there should be uniformity of the fee structure from Kindergarten to the College level.  According to the petitioners, they have formed an Association  to raise grievances in the matter of increase in fees in each academic year from Kindergarten to XIIth Standard- H.S.C. The Association has entered into various communications with the Authorities including the Deputy Director of Education as well as the Collector, Nagpur. It is stated that imparting education and receiving the same being a fundamental right of the students, there ought to be no discrimination in the fee structure of the private schools on par with the Government schools. Instances of increase in the fee structure espec

The Supreme Court has orally observed that Article 35A of the Constitution, which came to be repealed in 2019, was one which effectively took away the fundamental rights of non-residents of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K). A Constitution Bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud along with Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Justice Sanjiv Khanna, Justice BR Gavai and Justice Surya Kant said that Article 35A conferred special rights on the people of Jammu and Kashmir. However, it also curtailed three fundamental rights of persons domiciled in the rest of the India. The CJI said that by enacting Article 35A, the fundamental rights of non-residents of Jammu and Kashmir were virtually taken off. The bench added that what was taken away was employment under the State government, so there were special rights for residents and (that was) taken away for non-residents. These include equality in government employment under Article 16(1), right to acquire immovable property under Ar

The Allahabad High Court has directed to conduct the election of Meerut’s Supreme Tower Apartment Association within two months. A Single Bench of Justice Kshitij Shailendra passed this order while hearing a petition filed by Supreme Tower Apartment Owner Associates. The petition has been filed substantially with a prayer that fresh elections be held, whereas petition has been filed challenging the order dated 13.12.2021 whereby the Deputy Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Meerut, after making an observation to the effect that the elections dated 03.10.2021 conducted under the supervision of an Observer J.P Uppal, who was appointed by the office of the Deputy Registrar, are valid and raising doubts on the elections dated 15.09.2021 set up by the petitioner and declaring the same as without any competence, it has been observed that since under the provisions of Section 25(1) of the Societies Registration Act, 1860, it is the Prescribed Authority, i.e the Sub-Divisional Officer o

The Central government has said in the Supreme Court that Census being a statutory process under the Census Act, 1948, only the Union of India had the right to conduct the exercise. The Centre made the submission by way of an affidavit on Monday on a batch of appeals challenging the caste-based survey undertaken by the Bihar government. Submitted by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) on behalf of the Office of the Registrar General, which comes under the Union Ministry, the affidavit contended that the subject of census fell under the Union List as per Entry 69 in the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution. Several petitions have been filed in the top court of the country against the Patna High Court verdict of August 1, which upheld the constitutional validity of the caste survey currently underway in Bihar, calling it ‘perfectly valid’. Earlier on August 18, the Apex Court had contemplated over the question whether the right to privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution would be

The Allahabad High Court while rejecting an application held that the protection of Section 197 of CrPC is not available to the Waqf Board for prosecuting a mutawalli. In this section, the permission of the government is necessary before prosecuting public servants. The Single-Judge Bench of Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal passed this order while hearing an application filed by Abu Talib Husain and Another. The 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of case under Sections-323, 504, 506, 354 I.P.C, Police Station-Kotwali Nagar, District- Saharanpur as well as summoning order dated 3.9.2022 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saharanpur and is pending before the first Additional Civil Judge (Jr Div)/Judicial Magistrate, Saharanpur. Contention of the counsel for the applicants is that the impugned FIR was lodged and charge sheet was filed after conducting investigation on which cognizance was also taken by the Court but as per Section-1

The Karnataka High Court dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by the petitioner praying to quash the communication dated 13.01.2023 forwarded by the Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Finance Department (Excise) to the Commissioner of Excise, Bengaluru.   The Division Bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B. Varale and Justice M.G.S. Kamal on perusal of the said communication noted that a proposal is sought from the Commissioner of Excise on certain issue. “Admittedly, there is nothing on record to show that the Commissioner of Excise submitted his response to the Government or in turn, the Government has passed any order.” Thus, the petitioner has filed the petition on assumption that on receipt of the said communication, the Commissioner of Excise would submit a favourable proposal to the Government. Firstly, the petitions on such assumptions and presumptions of the parties will not be entertained and secondly, the subject matter is a policy decision of the Govern

The Supreme Court on Monday upheld the constitutional validity of self-respect marriages by overruling the Madras High Court verdict, which ruled that marriages performed in the offices of Advocates were not valid as per the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The Bench of Justice S. Ravindra Bhat and Justice Aravind Kumar, while considering the special leave petition, upheld the fundamental right of a person to choose a life partner. The case pertained to the self-marriage system as per Section 7A, which was inserted in the Hindu Marriage Act by a Tamil Nadu Amendment.  As per Section 7A of the Act, two Hindus can marry without following rituals or without solemnisation by a priest by declaring marriage in the presence of their friends or relatives or other persons. A Division Bench of the Madras High Court, while hearing the case S. Balakrishnan Pandiyan vs Inspector of Police in 2014, ruled that marriages performed by the Advocates were not valid and that Suyamariyathai marriage (self-re

Former Supreme Court judge, Justice Indira Banerjee hailed former Chief Justice of India, Justice M.N. Venkatachaliah, for conducting his court with unmatched dignity and grace.  Speaking during the book discussion on ‘Exploring the Legacy of Justice M N Venkatachaliah,’ organised by the SKOCH India Law Forum on Sunday, Justice Banerjee said Justice Venkatachaliah was extremely courteous with bar members.  He never entered into an argument with the members of the bar and always asked relevant questions during court proceedings. Justice Banerjee said she was a ‘toddler in the profession’ when Justice Venkatachaliah became a Supreme Court judge in 1987. She said though she did not get to appear before his court, she was fortunate enough to read his ‘erudite’ judgements, which showed the knowledge Justice Venkatachaliah possessed.  She said the former CJI was a role model for any judge. Talking about the basic characteristics of a judge, she said a judge must be independent, impartia

The Karnataka High Court while observing that Public Interest Litigation (PIL) which has been filed only on assumptions and presumptions cannot be entertained by the Court, dismissed a PIL praying to quash the Certificate of Registration granted in favour of respondent No 8 (clinic). R C Nagaraj , counsel for the petitioners vehemently submits that respondent No.8 has obtained the Certificate of Registration by misleading the Authorities that the Diagnostic Centre is situated beyond 300 meters from the Government Hospital. He invited the attention of the Court to the Certificate of Registration which shows that the period of validity of Certificate of Registration is from 31.10.2022 to 30.10.2027. He submits that Clause (2) of the Certificate of Registration makes it clear that any contravention of the Act and Rules shall result in suspension or cancellation of the Certificate of Registration before the expiry of the said period of five years apart from prosecution. He further sub

Highlighting the importance of holistically considering applications for premature release or remission of eligible convicts, the Supreme Court has laid down factors for the remission board or the government to consider while deciding on such petitions. The Bench of Justice S. Ravindra Bhat and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra recently observed that while deciding on remission, the board or the government should consider the potential of the convict to commit crimes in the future; his socio-economic conditions, age, state of health, familial relationships, the possibility of reintegration and the extent of earned remission. It should further take in view the post-conviction conduct including, but not limited to, whether the convict has attained any educational qualification while in custody, volunteer services offered, job or work done, jail conduct, whether they were engaged in any socially aimed or productive activity, and the overall development as a human being; As per the Apex Co