Latest High court News | Top High court News Headlines Today | Today India news | Breaking High court News Today | English High court News Headlines - TheDailyGuardian

DPS Dwarka Revokes Student Expulsions After High Court Order Over Free Hike

June 5, 2025, 5:01 pm

In a relief to over 30 students, DPS Dwarka informed the Delhi High Court on Wednesday that it has withdrawn its decision to remove their names due to non-payment of increased tuition fees for the 2024–25 academic session.

The school’s counsel submitted this update before Justice Sachin Datta’s bench, which was scheduled to deliver a verdict on a plea filed by aggrieved parents challenging the school’s action. The move was made in light of an earlier order passed by a coordinate bench led by Justice Vikas Mahajan, which directed the students to pay 50% of the disputed fee amount while the Directorate of Education (DoE) reviews their representation.

Justice Datta Addresses Grievance

Justice Datta acknowledged the submission, noting that the core grievance raised in the petition had been resolved. “I’ll take note of the fact that you have withdrawn the order. I’ll pass an appropriate order with observations and directions,” he said, according to Hindustan Times.

The school’s counsel also informed the court that an affidavit confirming the withdrawal of the suspension order had been submitted earlier in the week.

Delhi Govt to Introduce School Fee Regulation Bill

This development comes amid rising tensions over fee hikes in Delhi’s private schools. On June 2, ANI reported that the Delhi government is drafting a new ordinance to regulate school fees. Titled the Delhi School Education Bill, 2025, the proposed legislation aims to bring fee structures of private and government schools under tighter scrutiny. The draft has been sent to the Law Department for review.

The move follows a high-level meeting chaired by Delhi Chief Minister Rekha Gupta on April 29, where the Cabinet approved a bill focused on regulating educational expenses in the national capital.

The DPS Dwarka case has sparked widespread debate about the accountability of private schools and the need for clear regulations to protect the rights of students and parents alike.

RG KAR CASE: Was it rape or gang-rape? Calcutta HC asks CBI

March 24, 2025, 10:24 pm

The Calcutta High Court asked the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on Monday to clearly spell out whether the 31-year-old trainee doctor killed at Kolkata’s RG Kar Medical College and Hospital on August 9 last year was raped by a single person or gang-raped.

The Court was hearing a plea filed by the parents of the deceased doctor, seeking a fresh investigation into the incident. The parents sought a probe into the larger conspiracy around the rape of the victim and subsequent cover-up by the college authorities.

The High Court, which has also asked the agency if there was a conspiracy behind the crime, also ordered CBI to produce the case diary related to its investigation on the next date of hearing on March 28.

Justice Ghosh asked CBI if it ever found reasons to believe that the crime was committed by more than one person and not just just Sanjoy Roy, a former Kolkata police civic volunteer who was convicted for her rape and murder in January and handed down a life term by the Sealdah trial court.

Justice Ghosh also directed the CBI to explain the suspected conspiracy to cover up the crime.

“You must tell me if at any time you took into consideration an investigation under section 70 of BNS (gang rape)? The accused was convicted. What was the nature of your charge? Was it a sole accused or a gang rape? You must make it clear,” justice Ghosh told deputy solicitor general Rajdeep Majumder who appeared for CBI.

The High Court had taken the case from the Kolkata Police which had arrested Sanjoy Roy, and handed it over to the CBI on August 13, days after protests across the country

On September 14, CBI arrested Sandip Ghosh, the then principal of the medical college and Abhijit Mondal, the then officer-in-charge of Tala police station on charges of tampering with the evidence.

But the CBI did not file a charge sheet against them in connection with the doctor’s murder. A charge sheet was, however, filed against Ghosh in November last year accusing him of corruption at the hospital.

Justice Ghosh said: “If you ever believed more than one person was involved, who were the people in your mind? You must tell the court. Was it gang rape or destruction of evidence where multiple people were involved?”

Lawyer Sudipta Moitra, who represented the petitioners, told the court that there is no evidence that the CBI formed a special investigation team (SIT) for the case.

Lawyer and Trinamool Congress MP Kalyan Banerjee, who appeared for the State Government, told the court that the Government did not have any objection to further investigation but asked if there was any legal provision for it since the Sealdah court proceedings ended with Roy’s conviction after a 57-day in-camera trial.

The victim’s parents told reporters that the CBI did not make any attempts to expose the conspiracy behind the crime.

“My daughter was constantly protesting against corruption at the hospital. She used to say many patients died because of spurious medicines. The conspirators wanted to silence her. We told this to the CBI officials several times but they did not pay heed,” the victim’s mother said outside the High Court.

While the hearing was on, a few hundred doctors and nurses marched to the CBI office at the Salt Lake CGO Complex alleging that the agency did not carry out a thorough investigation.

The victim’s parents recently met the CBI director in Delhi and sought a fresh investigation and also moved the Supreme Court which directed the High Court to hear the petition.

In January this year, the trial court convicted and sentenced the prime accused, Sanjay Roy on charges of rape and murder after an in-camera trial that lasted 57 days.

Roy, a civic volunteer with the city police, was arrested by the Kolkata Police on August 10, 2024 a day after the incident. He was sentenced to life imprisonment.

In February this year, the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the State government seeking the death penalty for Roy. A bench of Justices Debangsu Basak and Md Shabbar Rashid refused to grant permission to the State to file such an appeal since it was the CBI which had probed the matter and conducted the prosecution.

It thus allowed the CBI to file an appeal for the same punishment.

High Court criticizes Haryana government for token Rs 1 pay hike, Calls it mockery of court orders

January 24, 2025, 8:23 pm

The Punjab and Haryana High Court strongly criticized the Haryana Government for granting just a Rs 1 increase in the pay scale of Executive Engineers, in compliance with the High Court’s earlier direction to revise salaries-terming the move as mockery of court’s orders. The bench, comprising Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma and Justice Meenakshi I. Mehta, termed the revised pay as “non-functional” and “patently illegal.”

“The action of the State authorities makes a mockery of the Court’s orders. Officers responsible for such decisions must be held accountable. We strongly disapprove of this practice, which amounts to mere lip service to judicial directives.”, the judges remarked. The sharp observations came during a hearing on the Haryana government’s appeal against a single judge’s ruling that directed the revision of pay scales for Executive Engineers and Superintending Engineers.

The case was filed in 2012 when the Haryana Federation of Engineers, Hisar, petitioned the Court, seeking a revision in pay scales for Executive Engineers and Superintending Engineers. They demanded that the Executive Engineers should receive a pay scale one step higher than Assistant Engineers and the Superintending Engineers should receive a pay scale one step higher than Executive Engineers.

The single judge had ruled in favor of the federation, stating that Executive Engineers and Superintending Engineers deserved higher standard pay scales, effective from May 1, 1989, to December 31, 1995. The Court also directed the government to release all consequential benefits, including arrears, to eligible engineers within six weeks. Instead of complying with the ruling, the Haryana Government revised the pay scale for Executive Engineers by a mere Rs 1, which the High Court deemed a deliberate disregard for its orders. The Court noted that this action undermined the intent of the single judge’s judgment and deprived the engineers of their rightful benefits.

The bench emphasized the need for strict compliance with judicial orders and hinted at possible consequences for officers responsible for such defiance.

Supreme Court admonishes ED, Former Congress MLA Surendra Panwar acquitted in money-laundering case

January 3, 2025, 7:48 pm

In a major relief to the former Haryana Congress MLA Surendra Panwar the Supreme Court has upheld the decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, in which Panwar’s arrest in a money laundering case was declared illegal.

Rejecting the special leave petition (SLP) filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED), the court clarified that the High Court’s decision was based only on the legality of the arrest and it would not affect the merits of the case.

Panwar was arrested by the ED on July 20 last year on charges of illegal mining and money laundering. He alleged that after the arrest, he was kept for continuous interrogation for 15 hours.

However, the High Court rejected his arrest on 23 September 2024 and Panwar was released on September 25, ahead of voting of Haryana Assembly Elections which he contested on Congress ticket from Sonipat assembly constituency. Later the ED challenged the High Court’s decision in the Supreme Court.

Meanwhile, ED lawyer Zoheb Hussain argued in the Supreme Court that the High Court wrongly recorded that Panwar was questioned continuously for 14 hours and 40 minutes, claiming that Panwar was given a dinner break at night and the agency took care of human rights in the interrogation. However, the Supreme Court rejected this argument of the ED and called the long interrogation inhuman.

Dismissing the Enforcement Directorate (ED)’s plea against the High Court order, the Bench held, “We are not inclined to interfere with the finding of the high court that the arrest of the respondent was illegal.” The High Court’s findings, it said, were only for deciding whether Panwar’s arrest was illegal. “These findings will not affect the merits of the pending complaint under Section 44 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002,” said the Bench in its order on December 2.

The court said the ED’s approach in conducting the probe was a “shocking state of affairs” where a person was virtually forced to make a statement. ED’s counsel Zoheb Hussain said the high court had erred in its finding that Panwar was continuously quizzed for 14.40 hours, pointing to a dinner break during the interrogation. The lawyer said ED in a 2024 circular asked its officials to maintain certain standards of interrogations and to ensure people were not interrogated during late night and in early hours of the day.

On September 29, 2024, the High Court said primarily, as per the grounds of arrest, the allegation(s) against the petitioner pertained to illegal mining or supplying the illegally mined material. Therefore, it said, the foundation of the case was illegal mining whereas the rest of the allegations in all the nine FIRs were peripheral, relatable to illegal mining. “Of course, ‘illegal mining’ is an offence under Section 21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (MMDR Act), but neither ‘illegal mining’ nor the MMDR Act has been included under the schedule attached with the PMLA. In other words, ‘illegal mining’ is not a scheduled offence under the PMLA. Hence, prima facie, petitioner cannot be prosecuted on that count,” said the High Court.

It noted the ED itself said Panwar was issued summons under Section 50 of the PMLA and appeared before the agency at around 11 am in Gurugram on July 19, 2024 and was constantly interrogated till 1.40 a.m. (July 20, 2024) for 14 hours and 40 minutes. The High Court observed the continuous interrogation for over 14 hours “was not heroic” on ED’s part and it was rather against the dignity of a human being. “For future, in view of the mandate under Article 21 of the Constitution, this court is observing that Directorate of Enforcement shall take remedial measures and sensitize the officers to follow some reasonable time limit for investigation in one go against the suspect(s) in such cases,” it said.

Instead of subjecting someone to “unnecessary harassment” for such a long duration, the high court called for a necessary mechanism to carry out a fair investigation of the accused in line with the basic human rights laid down by the United Nations. It said there was no material with the ED to substantiate that petitioner was directly or indirectly involved in any process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime, in any manner or projected it as untainted by any means. Panwar, 55, was taken into custody in the wee hours of July 20, 2024, in Gurugram and produced before a special PMLA court in Ambala which sent him to the custody of the ED till July 29, 2024 in an illegal mining-linked money laundering case.

The agency raided the premises of the former Sonepat MLA in January, 2024, on charges of “large-scale illegal mining” in the Yamunanagar area of the State. The money-laundering case stems from several FIRs registered by the Haryana Police for probing alleged illegal mining of boulders, gravel and sand that took place in the past in Yamunanagar and nearby districts despite a ban imposed by the NGT. The ED is also probing an alleged fraud in the “e-rawana” scheme, an online portal that was introduced by the Haryana government in 2020 to simplify the collection of royalties and taxes and prevent tax evasion in mining areas. According to the ED, the alleged illegal mining generated slush funds of about Rs 400-500 crore over the last few years.

After the Supreme Court’s decision Panwar’s lawyers called it a victory of justice stating that the court’s ruling has proved that the action taken under political pressure cannot last.

Centre To Respond In High Court On Plea To Revoke Rahul Gandhi’s Citizenship

November 27, 2024, 12:40 am

Allahabad High Court has directed the Union Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) to decide on a plea seeking revocation of the Indian citizenship of Congress leader Rahul Gandhi over allegations that he holds dual British citizenship. The Lucknow bench passed the order on 25 November, and the case is scheduled for further hearing on 19 December.

Deccan Chronicle reported that Deputy Solicitor General of India had stated to the court that MHA received petitioner’s representation. It has directed Additional Solicitor General SB Pandey to gather updates from the MHA within three weeks and appear before the court on its next date for presentation. A PIL has been filed by S. Vignesh Shishir, who is a Karnataka BJP worker seeking a CBI inquiry to scrutinize Gandhi’s citizenship.

Earlier, on November 6, the Delhi High Court learned of a CBI inquiry initiated into the matter. This case stemmed from BJP leader Subramanian Swamy’s petition urging the MHA to address his representation seeking Gandhi’s citizenship cancellation and to provide a status report.

Also Read: Former CJI DY Chandrachud Responds to Rahul Gandhi’s Remarks on Judiciary’s Role

Shishir had earlier withdrawn a similar plea in July, choosing instead to seek redress under the Citizenship Act. He had later made two fresh representations to the MHA. The court clarified that its focus now was on whether the central government had received the representations and what it was proposing to do about it, not on the general allegations.

Kulhad Pizza Couple Faces Nihang Threats: High Court Grants Police Protection | VIDEO

October 20, 2024, 10:30 am

Sehaj Arora and Gurmeet Kaur, known as the “Kulhad Pizza couple,” recently made a comeback on social media after a year-long hiatus following an alleged MMS scandal. The couple, who became popular for sharing unique food recipes from their restaurant, took time off after a morphed video circulated online, damaging their reputation.

Backlash from the Sikh Community

Despite their efforts to rebuild their online presence, they are now facing severe backlash, particularly from the Sikh community. The couple recently encountered hostility when a group of Nihangs confronted Sehaj at their Kulhad Pizza shop. The Nihangs demanded that Sehaj either stop wearing his turban in his videos or cease content creation altogether, raising tensions even further.

HAVE A LOOK AT THE VIRAL POST:

The Punjab & Haryana High Court granted police security to the ‘Kulhad Pizza couple,’ Sehaj Arora (Sajan Manchanda) and Gurpreet Kaur. The couple filed a petition in the High Court amid threats from various individuals. pic.twitter.com/twPdCYGil9

— Gagandeep Singh (@Gagan4344) October 19, 2024

Seeking Support from Akal Takht Sahib

In response to these threats, Sehaj and Gurmeet reached out to the Akal Takht Sahib, the highest temporal authority in Sikhism, for intervention and protection. In a heartfelt Instagram video, they pleaded with the Jathedar (religious head) to address their concerns and ensure the safety of their family.

WATCH THE VIRAL VIDEO:

After the Nihang Singh incident, Kulhad Pizza couple Sehaj Arora said that he will soon visit Akal Takht Sahib and submit a request letter to the Jathedar Sahib, asking whether he is allowed to tie a turban or not. He also added that he requests the administration and Akal Takht… https://t.co/1LE6l1PNCY pic.twitter.com/crqR7tqmmW

— Gagandeep Singh (@Gagan4344) October 13, 2024

Court Grants Police Protection

Amid the ongoing threats, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted police protection to the Kulhad Pizza couple. The court’s decision followed the couple’s petition, seeking security due to the escalating situation involving the Nihangs.

Seeking Safety and Acceptance

As the couple continues to navigate threats and scrutiny, their plea for protection from both religious authorities and the court highlights their desire for safety and acceptance. Despite the challenges, they are determined to carry on with their culinary ventures, hoping to regain the trust of their community.

Badlapur Encounter Controversy: Akshay Shinde’s Father Approaches High Court For SIT Investigation Into Son’s Death

September 24, 2024, 11:08 pm

The father of Akshay Shinde, the accused in a sexual assault case from Badlapur who was killed in an encounter with Thane Police, approached the Bombay High Court on Tuesday. He is seeking a special investigation team (SIT) inquiry into his son’s death, which he claims was the result of a “fake encounter.”

According to police reports, 23-year-old Shinde was being taken by the Thane Crime Branch from Taloja Central Jail for questioning regarding allegations made by his estranged second wife. He had been charged under Section 377 (unnatural sex) of the Indian Penal Code. The police stated that when the vehicle transporting him reached the Mumbra Bypass, Shinde allegedly seized the pistol from Assistant Police Inspector Nilesh More and fired three shots, injuring the officer in the thigh.

In response, Senior Inspector Sanjay Shinde fired a shot that hit Akshay Shinde in the head. He was rushed to the hospital but was pronounced dead upon arrival. “The accused was being brought from Taloja Central Jail when he opened fire on the police with their revolver. The investigation is underway…,” said Thane police PRO Shailesh Salvi, as reported by ANI.

Shinde’s family, including his mother and uncle, claimed that there was a conspiracy involving the police and the management of the Badlapur school.

The encounter has sparked a political dispute between the ruling Mahayuti government and the opposition Maha Vikas Aghadi. CM Shinde commented, “Akshay Shinde’s ex-wife had accused him of sexual violence and the police were taking him for a probe regarding these allegations. He snatched the gun of a police personnel and opened fire. Police fired back in self-defense.”

In contrast, the opposition has raised questions about the encounter, suggesting it was a conspiracy. “This murder or encounter that has taken place was done to save the main accused (the school management). How convincing is it that a janitor snatches a gun from a policeman and fires a locked weapon? This is a basic question,” stated Shiv Sena (UBT) Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Raut on Tuesday.

High Court criticises incomplete investigations in realtor Jarnail Bajwa’s cases

September 23, 2024, 5:29 am

Punjab and Haryana High Court has expressed its shock over the “approach of the law enforcement agency” in investigating multiple FIRs filed against Mohali-based realtor Jarnail Singh Bajwa. Justice Sandeep Moudgil, presiding over the case, voiced concern after reviewing an affidavit submitted by Mohali SSP Deepak Pareek.
The affidavit revealed that investigations into 20 FIRs registered in Mohali and 16 FIRs at the NRI police station against Bajwa remain incomplete. Justice Moudgil noted that in FIR No. 14, filed in April 2019 at Singh Bhagwantpura police station in Rupnagar, Bajwa has yet to be arrested, despite the case being over five years old. Similarly, his arrest has been pending in FIR No. 28, dated July 2019, at the State Crime BOI police station in Mohali, with five such cases of delayed arrests brought before the court.
The court expressed particular shock over FIR No. 328, registered at Kharar police station on October 2, 2008, which has been under investigation for more than 16 years without Bajwa’s arrest. Justice Moudgil also highlighted FIR Nos. 87 and 178, filed in 2017 at Kharar police station, where Bajwa’s arrest has been pending for over seven years.
During the hearing, Bajwa’s counsel, Senior Advocate Bipin Ghai, was asked to provide details of Bajwa’s assets and properties. However, the court found the affidavit incomplete, as it lacked key information such as property specifications and measurements. The affidavit also listed nine luxury cars without registration numbers and cash holdings of Rs 10 lakh, but omitted bank account details and other moveable assets like fixed deposits and policies. Ghai requested additional time to provide the complete details.
In light of the situation, the High Court has directed Bajwa not to transfer, sell, or dispose of any properties listed in the affidavit until further orders. The court is hearing the petition filed by Kuldeepak Mittal against the State of Punjab and other respondents.

High Court Not Subordinate To SC, Says HC Judge

August 7, 2024, 1:41 am

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has said that it is not subordinate to the Supreme Court and emphasised that the apex court has no authority to issue directions regarding specific proceedings pending before it.

Justice Rajbir Sehrawat highlighted the independent status of the high court, comparing the relationship between the high court and the Supreme Court to that of a high court and a civil judge within its jurisdiction. This remark came during the hearing of a case wherein the Supreme Court had stayed contempt proceedings before the high court.
“Probably more caution on the part of the Supreme Court would have been more appropriate,” said Justice Sehrawat. He further noted that such an order could be seen as avoiding responsibility for potential consequences and reflecting a tendency to view the Supreme Court as more ‘supreme’ than it is, and the high court as less ‘high’ than it constitutionally is.

Justice Sehrawat asserted that the Supreme Court’s order created issues of constitutional conformity and increased the case backlog in the high court. He noted that the high court’s power under Article 215 of the Constitution is articulated in the same language as Article 129, which grants the Supreme Court authority to punish for contempt of its orders. The power to initiate and continue contempt proceedings regarding its orders is exclusively with the high court under Article 215 and Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act.
He clarified that the Supreme Court’s role is limited to hearing appeals against high court Division Bench orders convicting a contemnor. An appeal against an order by a Single Bench does not go directly to the Supreme Court but is heard by the high court Division Bench. Justice Sehrawat questioned the Supreme Court’s power to stay the operation of Article 215 and the Contempt of Courts Act.

He noted that an order staying contempt proceedings in an SLP had deprived about 35 per cent of the Punjab and Haryana superior Judiciary of their selection grade and super time scale for several years. While the Supreme Court likely did not intend such drastic consequences, this situation arose as the high court, on its administrative side, interpreted the stay as suspending the final judicial order passed by its Division Bench.
“A legitimate question arises as to who is responsible for this plight of judicial officers manning the Superior Judiciary of Punjab and Haryana. Is it the high court or the Supreme Court? A soul-searching on this aspect by both may surprise them equally,” the Bench observed.

High Court Calls Out Police Failures ‘Mercifully You Didn’t Fine Rainwater’, Transfers UPSC Students’ Deaths Probe To CBI

August 3, 2024, 7:25 am

The Delhi High Court on Friday criticized the Delhi Police for failing to conduct a thorough “scientific investigation” into the tragic deaths of three UPSC aspirants in a flooded basement at a coaching center. The court highlighted “glaring omissions” in the police’s approach and transferred the case to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to ensure an unbiased and comprehensive probe.

The court emphasized the need for an independent agency to handle the investigation to maintain public trust, as the incident involved potential negligence by government officials and possible corruption. The tragic event occurred on July 27 when heavy rains caused flooding in the basement library of Rau’s coaching center, leading to the drowning of three students.

A bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela directed the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) to appoint a senior officer to oversee the CBI investigation, ensuring it is conducted promptly. The judges expressed disbelief at the police’s failure to determine why the students could not escape the basement, questioning whether the exits were blocked or the staircases were too narrow.

The bench pressed the Delhi Police for answers, asking, “Why were the students unable to exit the basement? Water does not fill a basement instantly; it takes a few minutes.” The court also criticized the police for not interrogating Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) officials and failing to secure relevant documents promptly.

Senior advocate Sanjay Jain, representing the Delhi Police, faced the court’s ire as the judges remarked, “No disrespect, but we don’t think your police are equipped to handle this case.” The bench reprimanded the police for arresting an SUV driver and placing undue blame on him, sarcastically commenting, “Mercifully, you have not fined the rainwater for entering the basement.”

MCD commissioner informed the court that stormwater drains in the area were not functioning, prompting the bench to order the immediate removal of encroachments and unauthorized constructions obstructing these drains. The court questioned why police had not interrogated the municipal official responsible for the dysfunctional stormwater drain and stressed the importance of holding officials accountable.

The court criticized both the police and MCD for their lack of seriousness and adherence to judicial orders, highlighting a lack of respect for the law and accountability for human lives. The High Court’s decision to transfer the investigation to the CBI underscores the need for a meticulous and independent probe to uncover the truth behind the tragic deaths of the UPSC aspirants.

Delhi High Court Slams ‘Freebie Culture’ Over IAS Coaching Centre Deaths, Summons MCD Commissioner

July 31, 2024, 3:33 pm

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday strongly criticized the Delhi government’s “freebie culture” in light of the recent deaths of three civil service aspirants due to flooding in the basement of Rau’s IAS coaching center in Old Rajinder Nagar on July 27. The court expressed concerns about the government’s failure to upgrade the city’s infrastructure, particularly its drainage system, amidst a growing population.

Court Orders Immediate Action on Encroachments

The court directed the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) commissioner, the deputy commissioner of police (DCP), and the investigating officer to appear in court on Friday. It also ordered the removal of all encroachments on drains in Old Rajinder Nagar by Friday, stressing the urgency of addressing the issue.

Tragic Incident at Rau’s IAS Study Circle

The incident, which occurred on July 27, claimed the lives of three UPSC aspirants: Shreya Yadav from Uttar Pradesh, Tanya Soni from Telangana, and Navin Dalwin from Kerala. They were trapped in the flooded basement of Rau’s IAS Study Circle. The court is hearing a plea for the constitution of a high-level committee to investigate the incident, with the next hearing scheduled for Friday at 2:30 PM.

High Court Warns of Possible CBI Investigation

A division bench consisting of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela emphasized the need to fix responsibility for the incident. They warned that if local authorities failed to do so, the investigation might be transferred to a central agency such as the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) or the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC). The court highlighted the severity of the incident as a case of infrastructure failure and negligence.

Demand for Accountability

The court demanded the presence of the investigating officer, the concerned DCP, and the MCD commissioner with all relevant files on Friday. The court criticized the investigation’s progress, calling it “strange” and highlighting that actions were being taken against “passersby” rather than holding MCD officials accountable. The court stated that someone needs to be held responsible, noting that only one MCD official had been jailed so far.

Infrastructure Concerns

The Delhi High Court also expressed dissatisfaction with the civic authorities’ failure to upgrade the century-old infrastructure. The court pointed out the disconnect between liberalizing laws and failing to modernize infrastructure, labeling the civic authorities as “bankrupt.” The bench criticized the lack of spending on infrastructure and questioned the administrative capacity to govern the city effectively. They highlighted the ongoing issues of unauthorized construction despite buildings being officially sealed.

This tragic incident has brought to light the urgent need for infrastructure upgrades and accountability within the city’s civic administration, as well as the potential repercussions of governmental negligence.

Will Remove All Protesters From Toll Plazas: Punjab Police To High Court

July 28, 2024, 3:23 pm

The Punjab government has pledged to remove all protests leading to the closure of any toll plazas in the state within four weeks, as submitted to the Punjab and Haryana High Court.

This commitment was presented by Punjab’s counsel, instructed by Special DGP (Law and Order) Arpit Shukla, during a hearing of a petition by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI). The NHAI sought security and administrative support for the smooth operation of toll plazas in Punjab, which have been forcibly stopped and illegally operated by protesters.

Accepting this pledge in the interest of justice, Justice Vinod S Bhardwaj ordered, “An affidavit confirming compliance with the court’s undertaking must be filed by the respondents.” The next hearing is scheduled for September 13.

During the resumed hearing, an affidavit from Special DGP Shukla was presented, highlighting that security measures for the toll plazas had not been implemented. Shukla had previously assured on February 15, 2023, that the police would prevent any incidents or damage to the toll plaza infrastructure. This assurance was reiterated in a subsequent affidavit on July 12, 2023. The court noted that the recurring issues indicate a lack of commitment and an ad hoc approach by the government.

When questioned about any statutory violations or breaches of the National Highways Act, 1956, by the NHAI or concessionaires, the counsel could not point to any illegality justifying the protesters’ actions to take control of the toll plazas.

Justice Bhardwaj referred to a Supreme Court judgment in the “Beenu Rawat and others Vs. Union of India and others” case, stating that while protesters have the right to demonstrate against public authorities, the police must maintain law and order, ensuring protesters do not break the law.

Justice Bhardwaj concluded, “Protesters must adhere to the law and not infringe on the rights of others, including statutory authorities. Both the police and the protesters have failed to fulfill their respective duties and responsibilities.”

Delhi HC Dismisses PIL Against Dalai Lama Over Child Kiss Controversy

July 9, 2024, 5:11 pm

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that sought action against Dalai Lama, the spiritual leader of the Tibetan people, under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The PIL was filed in response to a viral video from April 2023 showing Dalai Lama kissing a child on the lips.

The plea, brought by a confederation of NGOs and Jeroninio Almeida, raised concerns about the impact of the incident on the child’s well-being and called for guidelines to protect children during spiritual gatherings. It described the incident as a violation under the POCSO Act and criticized the reactions from the Tibetan community, which cited cultural practices.

Delhi HC dismisses PIL against Dalai Lama on child kiss controversy

Read @ANI Story | https://t.co/cly4jDlv7l #DelhiHC #DalaiLama #PIL pic.twitter.com/WrX9XEAWP3

— ANI Digital (@ani_digital) July 9, 2024

In response, the bench of Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela noted that the incident had occurred one and a half years ago in public view and that Dalai Lama had issued a public apology on April 10, 2023. The court emphasized that Dalai Lama’s apology addressed the issue, and thus dismissed the PIL.

The plea highlighted broader societal indifference towards child protection and urged stricter enforcement of laws safeguarding children from sexual offences. It underscored the need for responsible behavior towards children by spiritual leaders and other figures in authority.

Dalai Lama’s apology acknowledged the controversy surrounding the incident, which sparked global debate and criticism. Despite the dismissal of the PIL, the case has drawn attention to the intersection of cultural practices, child protection, and legal accountability in spiritual contexts.

Hamare Baarah: Bombay HC Approves Release After Makers Remove Objectionable Content

June 19, 2024, 1:28 pm

The Bombay High Court on Wednesday permitted the release of the controversial film “Hamare Baarah” after its makers agreed to delete objectionable portions, according to a report by Live Law.

The division bench, comprising Justice BP Colabawalla and Justice Firdosh Pooniwalla, passed the order allowing the film’s release a day after they determined that it does not offend the religious sentiments of the Muslim community or distort the teachings of the Quran. The court observed that the film, which has sparked widespread discussion due to its narrative on overpopulation, is actually aimed at the upliftment of women.

The movie, starring Annu Kapoor, faced controversy following the release of its first trailer, which the court also found objectionable. After reviewing the complete film, the bench noted that all such objectionable scenes had been removed.

“The movie is in fact for the upliftment of women. The movie has a Maulana misinterpreting the Quran and in fact, one Muslim man objects to the same in the scene. So this shows that people should apply their mind and not blindly follow such Maulanas,” the high court stated.

Furthermore, the court observed that imposing a ₹5 lakh fine on the filmmakers for releasing the trailer with uncertified scenes would be appropriate. The court directed that this amount be donated to a charity of the petitioner’s choice.

“Violation was their vis-a-vis the trailer. So, you will have to pay something towards charity of the petitioner’s choice. Cost will have to be paid. This litigation has got the film so much unpaid publicity,” the court remarked.

“Hamare Baarah” was initially scheduled for release on June 7, later postponed to June 14. However, the new release date has not yet been announced.

The film’s controversy and subsequent clearance highlight the ongoing tensions between creative expression and societal sensitivities in Indian cinema. As the film industry continues to navigate these challenges, “Hamare Baarah” stands as a notable case of judicial intervention shaping the final product presented to the audience.

Woman Delivers Baby On Hospital Floor, ‘Sorry State Of Affairs If…’, Says Chhattisgarh Court

June 12, 2024, 9:54 am

The Chhattisgarh High Court has initiated suo moto proceedings following a profoundly disconcerting incident wherein a 25-year-old woman was compelled to deliver her baby on the floor of a health centre in Surguja district due to the unavailability of doctors and nurses. The court remarked that this situation epitomizes a deplorable state of affairs.

A bench comprising Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Sachin Singh Rajput took cognizance of a newspaper report on Monday. The report elucidated that on June 8, at the Navanagar Sub-Health Centre (SHC), the woman, in the throes of labor, arrived accompanied by a Mitanin (Community Health Worker). In the absence of medical professionals, she had no recourse but to give birth on the health centre’s floor.

The court’s order underscored that the woman’s relatives made frantic attempts to contact the medical staff, but their efforts were futile. Amidst this negligence, the community health worker intervened to assist with the delivery. Subsequently, postnatal care was administered by a traditional village midwife, as only a Class IV employee was present at the health centre.

The bench emphasized that this was not an isolated occurrence; similar incidents had been reported previously. The court directed the Health Department secretary to submit a personal affidavit concerning the incident, highlighting systemic inadequacies and advocating for prompt corrective measures.

This distressing scenario accentuates the imperative for reform and accountability within the healthcare system, ensuring such neglect and abandonment do not recur. The High Court’s intervention aims to rectify these egregious lapses and restore dignity and adequate care to those in need.

“It is a very sorry state of affairs if the aforesaid situation is prevailing at SHC, Navanagar. When the state government is incurring a huge amount of money for providing medical facilities to the public at large residing in the remotest part of the state, and authorities and the staff responsible for managing health centres are themselves absent and missing when they are needed the most, the state ought to take some stringent measures,” it added.

Additional Advocate General Yashwant Singh Thakur informed the High Court that the implicated medical officer has been suspended immediately, and an investigation is underway. However, regarding the nurse reportedly on duty who met with an accident, no corroborative documents have been submitted.

The bench, led by Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Sachin Singh Rajput, instructed the Health and Social Welfare Department secretary to file a personal affidavit delineating the steps taken in response to this grievous incident. Additionally, the bench ordered the immediate cessation of the circulation of the video of the incident, which has proliferated online.

The court mandated that the secretary must also apprise the bench of any measures taken to appoint another medical officer at the Navanagar SHC. This incident, occurring on June 8, has already led to the suspension of Dr. PN Rajwade, the Block Medical Officer of the area, for prima facie negligence.

This judicial intervention reflects the acute urgency and gravity with which the court is addressing the systemic failures in the healthcare system. The court’s directives seek to ensure accountability, halt the further dissemination of the distressing video, and restore public trust through the implementation of immediate corrective measures.

In the midst of these developments, the High Court’s actions serve as a potent reminder of the critical need for diligence, responsiveness, and unwavering commitment to maintaining the standards of care that every citizen rightfully deserves.

Dera Sacha Sauda Chief Gurmeet Ram Rahim Acquitted In Murder Case By Punjab And Haryana High Court

May 28, 2024, 11:52 am

In a surprising turn of events, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has acquitted Dera Sacha Sauda chief Gurmeet Ram Rahim and four others in the murder case of Dera manager Ranjit Singh.

This decision comes after a special Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) court in 2021 had found Ram Rahim and other accused guilty of Singh’s murder, sentencing them to life imprisonment.

The acquittal by the high court marks a significant development in the case that has been closely followed by the public. Ram Rahim, a controversial figure, has been at the center of various legal controversies over the years.

The latest ruling has stirred mixed reactions among the populace, with some expressing relief while others questioning the judicial process. Further details are awaited as the story continues to unfold.

Supreme Court Disposes Hemant Soren’s Plea Regarding High Court Order Delay

May 10, 2024, 5:27 pm

Former Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren’s plea regarding the delayed pronouncement of an order by the High Court challenging his arrest has been disposed of by the Supreme Court. Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta noted that the petition has become moot as the order has already been issued.

Jharkhand’s High Court recently rejected Soren’s petition challenging his arrest in a money laundering case. Soren subsequently appealed this decision to the Supreme Court, allowing him to address all concerns in a separate petition challenging the High Court’s May 3, 2024 order.

Soren’s original plea, which questioned the legality of his arrest and subsequent remand, was submitted to the High Court. He sought interim bail while arguing that his arrest was unwarranted and carried out with malicious intent.

The Directorate of Enforcement (ED) arrested Soren in January amid speculation and media scrutiny surrounding a land scam investigation. The probe centers on the fraudulent acquisition of large land parcels using forged documents, generating substantial illegal profits.

MP High Court Raises Concerns Over Exploitation Of Women Remarrying Without Divorce

May 5, 2024, 4:20 pm

The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently expressed dismay over the exploitation of women who remarry without obtaining a divorce. The court highlighted the “legal loopholes” that hinder a woman who remarries without divorcing her previous husband from seeking maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). Justice Prem Narayan Singh, presiding over the high court bench, remarked that despite the provision’s aim to promote social justice, it falls short in preventing the exploitation it aims to address.

“This Court finds it unfortunate that many women, specially those belonging to the poorer strata of society, are routinely exploited in this manner, and that legal loopholes allow the offending parties to slip away unscathed and unquestioned,” the court stated.

Centre notifies elevations of several judges of different HCs as Permanent Judges

January 31, 2024, 2:09 pm

The Ministry of Law and Justice, representing the Central Government, has promoted several judges across various High Courts—Calcutta, Kerala, Jharkhand, and Punjab & Haryana—elevating them from additional judges to permanent judges. In individual notifications issued on January 30, the government formalized the appointments for each judge.

As per the notifications, Justice Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, previously serving as an Additional Judge in the High Court of Jharkhand, will now assume the role of a Judge in that High Court. Similarly, Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen, who held the position of Additional Judge in the Kerala High Court, has been appointed as a Judge of the same High Court.

In the case of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, Justice Lapita Banerji, formerly an Additional Judge, has been designated as a Judge to fill a vacancy in the permanent judgeship of the Calcutta High Court. The appointment is effective from the date she assumes office, as indicated in the notification.

Furthermore, the notifications also confirm the elevation of Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul), Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury, Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay, and Justice Rai Chattopadhyay—previously serving as Additional Judges in the Calcutta High Court—to the position of Judges in the same High Court. Their appointments take effect from the respective dates they assume charge of their offices, according to the related notifications.

These appointments align with the recent recommendations made by the Supreme Court Collegium, which comprises Chief Justice of India Dr. Justice DY Chandrachud, Justice Sanjiv Khanna, and Justice BR Gavai. The Collegium resolved to propose the names of these judges for permanent appointments in their respective high courts.

SC rejects plea to remove Senthil Balaji as TN minister

January 5, 2024, 4:09 pm

The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a plea seeking the removal of Tamil Nadu Minister V Senthil Balaji from the State Cabinet due to his implication in a money laundering case.

A bench consisting of Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan made an oral observation stating that the Chief Minister’s recommendation is required for a Governor to remove a Minister. The top court declined to intervene in the Madras High Court’s decision to deny the request to remove the minister representing the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) from the Cabinet.

“We have perused the impugned judgment of the High Court and concur with the view taken. No interference is called for under Article 136,” said the bench while dismissing the appeal filed against the High Court order.
The appeal was filed by ML Ravi against the Madras High Court which left it to the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu to take a call on Balaji’s continuation in the Tamil Nadu Cabinet as a Minister without portfolio.
The plea in the High Court challenged Balaji’s continuation in the Tamil Nadu Cabinet consequent to his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED).
Balaji was arrested by the ED last year in a money laundering case.
He was accused of being involved in a cash-for-jobs scam during his tenure as Transport Minister in the AIADMK-led Tamil Nadu government between 2011 and 2015. Later had joined the DMK and became a minister in 2021.

Rape case filed against Cadila CMD after HC order

January 2, 2024, 2:02 am

Police have acted on a high court directive and registered a case against the chairman and managing director of Cadila Pharmaceuticals for alleged rape, assault and intentional insult on a complaint by a Bulgarian woman, who had joined the company as a flight attendant, an official said recently.

The police have said that they can only investigate the matter and submit a report to the high court for now.
The CMD of the Ahmedabad-based pharma company was booked on Sunday under Indian Penal Code (IPC) sections 376 (rape), 354 (assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty), and 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace), Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) HM Kansagra said here.

The case was registered against the company’s CMD and one of his company employees at the Sola police station of the city after the Gujarat High Court in its order on December 22 directed the police to do the same, Kansagra said.

“Following the direction of the honourable Gujarat High Court, we have registered an offence against CMD of Cadila Pharma Rajiv Modi and one more person identified as Johnson Matthew on the basis of a complaint filed by the victim,” the police official said.
The court had directed police investigation into the matter under CrPC (Code of Criminal Procedure) following which an FIR (first information report) was registered, Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) Lavina Sinha said.

“An FIR was registered on the basis of an inquiry registered under section 156 (3) of CrPC on the direction of the court. We will carry out an investigation and submit a report to the court. We cannot take action on it, we can only investigate and report back to the court,” she said.

In its order dated December 22, the HC had directed the chief judicial magistrate to pass an order of investigation by a competent police official into the complaint.
The investigation should be carried out under the supervision of a senior IPS officer nominated by the Deputy Inspector General (Law and Order) and completed within two months, the high court had said in its order.

The Bulgarian woman had approached the HC for directions for the registration of an FIR against Rajiv Modi on charges of rape, assault, criminal intimidation and human trafficking, among others, and action against police officials for not registering a case on her complaint.

In her plea before the court, she said that despite approaching the police with a complaint, they failed to initiate an investigation and register an FIR. When she approached a magistrate court with a private complaint against the accused persons, it dismissed the same, she said.

The complainant said in her plea that she came to India on November 24, 2022, for a job as a flight attendant and joined the pharma firm. Her job profile was changed and she was made a butler-personal attendant and appointed to travel and remain with the CMD of the firm.
During the course of her job, she was subjected to sexual harassment, and when she did not surrender to the “illicit demands” of the accused, she was removed from her job on April 3, 2023, she alleged.

The petitioner wrote to the Bulgarian embassy and Foreign Regional Registration Offices in this regard. She alleged that she was pressured to withdraw her complaint and forced to file an affidavit in Mahila police station stating that she had settled the dispute with her employer against which she received a demand draft of Rs 24 lakh from the employer.
She then addressed a second complaint to the police commissioner, and filed a private complaint before the magistrate court which passed an order dismissing the complaint.

The high court observed that the magistrate was duty-bound to send the complaint for police investigation under Section 156(3) of the CrPC as the offences were cognisable.

Jharkhand HC dismisses PIL filed against CM Hemant Soren, his relatives

December 28, 2023, 5:30 am

The Jharkhand High Court on Wednesday dismissed the PIL filed against Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren and his relatives in an illegal mining case. The PIL was filed by one Sunil Kumar Mahato.

The court said the petition is the repetition of an old PIL that was filed by Shiv Shankar Sharma. “There’s nothing new in this PIL,” the court said. Notably, Chief Minister Hemant Soren is respondent number 7 in the said Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by one Shiv Shankar Sharma seeking a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe against Soren for getting a stone mining lease allotted in his name, completely misusing his official position.
The matter pertains to the allotment of the stone mine lease in his favour in the Angara block of Ranchi.

Hemant Soren, being the minister of the mines department, issued a mining lease for quarrying stones in his name on over 88 decimals of land in 2021 in Angara block in Ranchi. Soren had the mining lease earlier and on its expiration, he re-applied for it. However, when the lease was granted and the matter was highlighted, forcing him to surrender it.

SC stays Calcutta HC order suspending Andaman chief secretary

August 4, 2023, 2:07 pm

On Friday, the Supreme Court blocked the Calcutta High Court’s order suspending Keshav Chandra, the chief secretary of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, and fining Admiral DK Joshi, the lieutenant governor of the Union Territory (UT), Rs 5 lakh for disobeying a previous court order.

The plea was also given notice, and the matter was scheduled for hearing on August 11 by a bench consisting of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra.
After Attorney General for India R. Venkataramani mentioned an appeal against the High Court ruling and noted that the orders appeared to be a little excessive, the supreme court stayed the judgement of the Port Blair bench of the Calcutta High Court.
“For such an order to be issued, you must have something truly drastic… Next week, we’ll continue in these two directions and list this. The bench stayed the order and remarked that the suspension and penalties were a touch excessive.

A division bench of Justices Rajasekhar Mantha and Bibhas Ranjan De on Thursday said that the two high functionaries made a ‘mockery’ of the contempt of court proceedings initiated against them and, therefore, directed both of them to be present in court on the next date of hearing.

BBC documentary screening: DU moves to HC against setting aside order debarment of NSUI Secretary

July 14, 2023, 3:59 pm

The Delhi University has filed an appeal with the Delhi High Court’s division bench, appealing a single bench judgement that overturned the University’s decision to debar NSUI National Secretary Lokesh Chugh.

On Friday, a panel of Justice Satish Chander Sharma and Justice Nazmi Wajiri requested the response of Lokesh Singh, PhD scholar and national secretary of the Congress’ students wing, to the Delhi University’s appeal. In April, a bench led by Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav overturned the debarment ruling and reinstated the admission.

“The order is set aside. Admission is restored,” said justice Kaurav said. The bench stated that a review of the record will show that the petitioner (Lokesh Singh) was not given a fair hearing and that his position was not considered by the Committee.

The University violated the concept of natural justice, according to the high court. It was also highlighted that the order was issued without any explanation for the decision.
After hearing Attorney General R Venkatramani’s submission, the high court allowed the University the right to take action in accordance with the law.

The bench took note of Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal’s submission on behalf of petitioner Lokesh Chugh. He said that neither the petitioner nor the police detained him at the rally. The FIR did not name him.

It was also claimed that, in response to the show cause notice issued to the petitioner, he came before the university’s committee and justified his actions. His submission did not appear in the sequence.

Excise policy case: HC reserves order on Sisodia, Vijay Nair’s regular bail petitions

June 2, 2023, 3:17 pm

The Delhi High Court has postponed its decision on the regular bail petitions of Former Delhi’s Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia and Vijay Nair, former Communication in-charge of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) in an Enforcement Directorate (ED) case related to the Delhi Excise Policy matter. Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma, presiding over the bench, reserved the order after the completion of arguments on Friday. This comes after the same bench had previously reserved the order on Thursday regarding the bail plea of Abhishek Boinpally, a Hyderabad businessman involved in the same case. The Trial Court had previously denied bail to all the individuals involved.

Meanwhile, Sisodia’s legal team also moved an interim bail plea in Delhi High Court citing his wife’s medical illness. The interim bail is seeking court direction to grant six weeks of bail.The interim bail is opposed by the ED through Additional Solicitor General SV Raju who can visit his wife in a police escort. The court continues to hear the interim bail plea on Friday.Recently Delhi High Court dismissed the bail plea of Manish Sisodia in a CBI case alleging corruption in the implementation of the previous liquor policy in the national capital.

Last month, Delhi High Court issued notice to ED on Manish Sisodia’s bail petitions in a money laundering case in connection with the alleged excise scam.The Rouse Avenue Court earlier dismissed the bail plea of Manish Sisodia in a money laundering case related to the excise scam stating that “This case of economic offences having serious repercussions upon the general public and society at large as the evidence collected during investigation speaks volumes of his involvement in the commission of the said offence”

Gujarat HC stays proceedings against Delhi LG VK Saxena in 2002 assault case

May 24, 2023, 4:05 pm

The Gujarat High Court has halted the trial of Delhi Lieutenant Governor VK Saxena in an alleged assault case filed by activist Medha Patkar. The court cited constitutional protection provided to Saxena as long as he remains in the position of LG. The case stems from a complaint filed by Patkar in 2002, accusing Saxena and three others of assaulting her. The Gujarat High Court issued a restraining order to a lower court in Ahmedabad, preventing it from proceeding with the trial against the Delhi LG. The court acknowledged Saxena’s argument that he is protected under the Constitution while holding the LG office and stated that his counsel’s arguments require further consideration. Additionally, notices were issued to Patkar. Saxena’s counsel also pointed out that the delay in the 2002 trial was caused by Patkar’s 94 adjournment applications.

In the petition, Saxena contented that Patkar “falsely implicated” him as he had exposed her “anti-Gujarat” and “anti-Sardar Sarovar Project” activities under the guise of ‘Narmada Bachao Andolan’ in the year 2000.His counsel submitted that the Delhi LG has been ab intio vigorously defending the “motivated, vexatious and vindictive” prosecution instituted by the complainant, Medha Patkar.Saxena, who has challenged the May 8, 2023 order of the trial court, also sought an interim stay on further proceedings which was granted by the High Court.

“Meanwhile, ad-interim relief (of stay of Trial Court order) in terms of para 11 (B) qua the present petitioner (VK Saxena) Direct service is permitted,” said Justice M K Thakker in the interim order passed on May 23.The HC said the contentions raised by Saxena’s counsel “requires consideration” and issued notices to Patkar and the state returnable on June 19.
Senior advocate Jal S Unwalla and advocate Ajay Kumar Choksi, appearing for the LG, submitted that he has been protected by Article 361 (2) (3) of the Constitution and the trial court has arrived at apparently erroneous findings that granting protection to him and recording statements of witnesses after he demits office of LG would delay the trial.

Madras High Court: Even After 125 Years, Revenue Authorities Still Haven’t Understood Its Purport; Tamil Nadu Land Enforcement Act

May 23, 2023, 12:26 am

The Madras High Court in the case Mathiyari v The District Collector and Others observed and has stated that even after 125 years of enactment, the revenue authorities have still not understood the purport of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905. Therefore, the court stated while criticizing revenue authorities for indirectly aiding encroachers.
The Division bench comprising of Justice R Subramanian and Justice L Victoria Gowri in the case observed wherein the court was dealing with the plea moved challenging an order passed under Section 7 of the Act. Thus, the court in the case noted after going through the order, that the order disclosed the extraordinary magnanimity of the Zonal Deputy Tahsildar to help the petitioner. Thus, the court in the case was satisfied that the order was passed for some illegal consideration.

Further, the court in the case noted that as per the Act, the Tahsildar or the Authorised Officer is to give a show cause notice to the encroacher giving him time in order to submit his objections. The court in the case also observed that the said Act requires the officer to pass orders after considering the objections and the said procedure was not being followed by the officer.
The bench in the case also noted that the courts have been repeatedly intervening in such illegal orders which have been passed to help the encroachers.
Accordingly, the court imposed a cost of Rs. 10,000 on the Zonal Deputy Tahsildar Devakkottai and has directed the Tahsildar to deposit the amount to M.S Chellamuthu Trust and Research Foundation.

The counsel, Mr.R.Anandharaj for Mr.S.Suresh Kumar appeared for the petitioner.
The counsel, Mr.P.T.Thiraviam Government Advocate represented the respondent.

Filing Piecemeal Chargesheet Defeats Right To Default Bail, Goes Against Article 21 : Delhi HC Grants Bail To Accused In Loan Fraud Case

May 22, 2023, 1:50 am

While taking potshots at the apathetic manner in which the CBI filed the piecemeal chargesheet, the Delhi High Court in a most learned, laudable, landmark, logical and latest judgment titled Avinash Jain vs Central Bureau of Investigation in Bail Appln. 583/2023 & CRL.M.(Bail) 274/2023 in Neutral Citation Number which is 2023:DHC:3429 and cited in 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 423 while permitting the CBI to pick up one aspect of the investigation and file a piece-meal charge sheet to defeat the right of an accused to default bail goes against the mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution.

It must be mentioned here that the Court was hearing a plea challenging the denial of default bail to an accused in a loan fraud case by the CBI Court in February this year. While granting the default bail to Jain, Hon’ble Mr Justice Amit Sharma clearly stated that the fundamental right to personal life and liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and its co-relation with 167(2) of the CrPC has been, over the years, clearly established by way of judicial precedents of the Supreme Court of India as well as various High Courts. The Court also made it plainly clear that, “The right of an accused to default bail under Section 167(2) of the CrPC would arise in a case where the chargesheet is not filed within the stipulated period. The other circumstance giving rise to the right to default bail would be in case where the prosecution files a preliminary or incomplete chargesheet, within the period prescribed for offences mentioned therein and in that process, defeating the right of the accused to statutory bail.”

At the very outset, this brief, brilliant, bold and balanced judgment authored by Hon’ble Mr Justice Amit Sharma sets the ball in motion by first and foremost putting forth in para 1 that, “The present application under Section 439 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC‘) seeks the following prayers:

A. Pass necessary orders and directions, thereby directing for grant of statutory/default bail to the Petitioner and directing for the release of the Petitioner from custody in FIR bearing No. RC2232020A0009 dated 19.11.2020 u/s 120B r/w 420, 468 and 471 of the IPC and 13(2) r/w 13 (1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 registered by CBI, ACV, New Delhi, on such terms and conditions as may deem fit and proper.
AND

B. Pass necessary orders and directions, thereby setting aside the order dated 10.02.2023 passed by the Ld. Trial Court in the matter titled as ‘CBI vs. M/s Arise India Ltd.’ in IA No. 1/23 in CBI Case No.10/2023 pertaining to FIR bearing No. RC2232020A0009 dated 19.11.2020 u/s 120B r/w 420, 468 and 471 of the IPC and 13(2) r/w 13 (1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 registered by CBI, AC-V, New Delhi.
AND

C. Pass any other necessary and appropriate orders and direction, as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice.”
Background
To put things in perspective, the Bench envisages in para 2 that, “The present FIR was registered on the basis of a complaint received from S. Bavani Sankaran, Deputy General Manager, State Bank of India, SAMB-I (‘SBI’) on behalf of a consortium of six banks alleging that M/s Arise India Ltd. (‘the company’) and its directors, including the present applicant alongwith other unknown public servants availed credit facilities from the said consortium of banks led by the SBI and diverted the borrowed funds for purposes other than those for which they were released.

The loan account of the company was declared as a Non-Performing Asset (‘NPA’) by the SBI on 27.02.2017 and subsequently by other banks in the consortium, with a total outstanding amount of Rs. 512.67 Crores. After a forensic audit, the account of the company was declared as a ‘fraud’ by the SBI on 27.05.2019.”

As it turned out, the Bench enunciates in para 3 that, “On the basis of the aforesaid complaint, the present FIR was registered against M/s Arise India Ltd., Avinash Jain (applicant herein), Virender Mishra, Rajnish, unknown public servants and other unknown private persons under Section 120B read with Sections 420, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (‘PC Act’) for causing wrongful loss of public money on 19.11.2020. The applicant was arrested on 14.11.2022 in the said FIR for offences under Section 120B read with Sections 420, 468 and 471 of the IPC and Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the PC Act. He was produced before the learned Special Judge on 15.11.2022 and remanded to judicial custody for one day. Thereafter, after five days in police custody granted vide order dated 16.11.2022, he was remanded to judicial custody on 21.12.2022. The CBI filed a chargesheet, dated 30.12.2022, on 06.01.2023 qua the applicant and other accused persons under Section 120B read with Sections 420 and 471 of the IPC and substantive offences thereof. In the said chargesheet, it was stated that further investigation was continuing in terms of Section 173(8) of the CrPC.”

As we see, the Bench observes in para 4 that, “An application for default bail under Section 167(2) of the CrPC was moved on behalf of the applicant herein on 01.02.2023, which was dismissed vide order dated 10.02.2023 passed by Sh. Raghubir Singh, Special Judge (PC Act) (CBI) – 18, Rouse Avenue District Courts, New Delhi. While dismissing the application, the learned Special Judge observed as under:

11. On the basis of the findings given hereinabove, it becomes clear that the investigating agency had filed the Charge Sheet u/s 173 Cr. P.C qua 08 accused persons including the applicant/accused well before the expiry of 60 days period by keeping the option of further investigation ‘open’ as per provisions u/s 173 (8) Cr. P.C as the requisite permission u/s 17A was in the process and it was beyond the control of the IO to conduct & conclude the investigation in the absence of the same. The right to statutory bail stands defeated once the Charge Sheet is filed within the stipulated period as held in Suresh Kumar Bhikamchand Jain Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors., SLP (Crl) No.147/2013 and as reaffirmed by the Apex Court in SFIO Vs. Rahul Modi & Ors. Hon’ble the Apex Court has gone to the extent of saying that even the aspect of not taking cognizance was not at all to be considered for the purpose of default bail. Accordingly, the application in hand is disposed of as dismissed.”
Most significantly and most commendably, the Bench then minces absolutely no words to hold in para 38 that, “In Chitra Ramkrishna (supra), after a detailed analysis of the precedents on the subject, a distinction was drawn between ‘completion of investigation’ and ‘further investigation’.

It was observed that further investigation can be resorted to only after completion of investigation and filing of the chargesheet. It was held that a chargesheet can be filed before the Court of competent jurisdiction only when the investigation with respect to the FIR is complete in all respects and an opinion has been given with regard to the offences alleged against the accused in the FIR. It was held that the investigating agency cannot fragment or break the FIR, and file different chargesheets.

It was held that if the investigating agencies are permitted to file a chargesheet piece-meal, it would defeat the right of an accused under Section 167(2) of the CrPC and that would be violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The contention of learned SPP for the CBI was that the said judgement was passed in a different factual context. The said contention does not appeal to this Court, inasmuch as the basic principle of the law that investigation for the offences in relation to which an accused has been arrested, should be complete at the time the chargesheet has been filed will not vary on facts.

A supplementary chargesheet is permissible only when certain aspects of the investigation, which are otherwise complete in the main chargesheet, are still required to be looked into.”
Most forthrightly and most remarkably, the Bench mandates in para 42 that, “It is reflected from the records of the case that the FIR was registered on 19.11.2020 under Section 120B read with Sections 420, 468 and 471 of the IPC and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the PC Act. The present applicant was arrested on 14.11.2022 under the aforesaid sections.

The CBI, on 16.12.2022, sought approval from the competent authority under Section 17A of the of the PC Act, but proceeded to file the chargesheet, before the expiry of the stipulated term of 60 days, while keeping the investigation for offences under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the PC Act open. Therefore, it is clear that the CBI had not completed the investigation with respect to offences under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the PC Act, for which the applicant was arrested. Permitting the CBI to pick up one aspect of the investigation and file a piece-meal chargesheet with respect to the same and consequently, defeating the right of the applicant to default bail, goes against the mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution, as held by the Hon‘ble Supreme Court in M. Ravindran (supra), Fakhrey Alam (supra) and Satender Kumar Antil (supra).” Of course, the Bench then directs in para 43 that, “In the facts and circumstances of the present case, the application is allowed. The applicant is admitted to default bail under Section 167(2) of the CrPC in case RC2232020A0009 registered by the CBI at PS: AC-V, Delhi upon his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- alongwith two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court/Link Court, further subject to the following conditions:

i. The memo of parties shows that the applicant is residing at B-38, Jain Chowk, Mangala Puri, Palam, New Delhi, NCT of Delhi, South West Delhi – 110045. In case of any change of address, the applicant is directed to inform the same to the Investigating Officer.

ii. The applicant shall not leave India without the prior permission of the learned Trial Court.

iii. The applicant is directed to give all his mobile numbers to the Investigating Officer and keep them operational at all times.
iv. The applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, tamper with evidence or try to influence the witness in any manner.

v. In case it is established that the applicant tried to tamper with the evidence, the bail granted to the applicant shall stand cancelled forthwith.”
For sake of clarity, the Bench clarifies in para 44 that, “Needless to state, nothing mentioned hereinabove is an opinion on the merits of the case pending before the learned Trial Court.”

Further, the Bench directs in para 45 that, “The application stands disposed of along with all the pending application(s), if any.”
Furthermore, the Bench also directs in para 46 that, “Let a copy of this judgment be communicated to the concerned Jail Superintendent.”
‖Finally, the Bench concludes by holding in para 47 that, “Order be uploaded on the website of this Court, forthwith.”
In sum, we thus see that the Delhi High Court has made it indubitably clear that filing piecemeal chargesheet defeats the right to default bail and goes against the mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution. It thus goes without saying that all the police and CBI officers must ensure always that piecemeal chargesheet is not filed and adhere in letter and spirit to what the Delhi High Court has held so very clearly, cogently and convincingly in this leading case. No denying it!

HC refuses to interdict Lokpal proceedings against ex-IAS officer

May 15, 2023, 5:06 am

NEW DELHI : The Delhi High Court has refused to interfere with Lokpal proceedings initiated against ex-IAS officer Ramesh Abhishek for alleged possession of disproportionate assets. Justice Prathiba M Singh, while dealing with former Forward Markets Commission Chairman’s challenge to an order passed by the Lokpal directing a probe by the Enforcement Directorate, said repeated petitions to interdict the proceedings before the ombudsman would defeat the purpose of the law. The petitioner, who retired in July 2019, assailed the Lokpal proceedings on several grounds, including that under the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, an enquiry can relate to only the period during which the public servant is holding a position in serving capacity. The judge noted in the present case, an order for initiating prosecution against the petitioner was yet to be passed and the investigating agency was also yet to file its final report in the matter.