JUDICIARY/ LAW– 2016 January to April - 2016

Compiled By Fr. Paul G Documentation Centre∗

1. Can't challenge order after entering into settlement: HC (19)

New Delhi: The Delhi high court forced a woman to withdraw her plea challenging a divorce decree as

she had already received Rs 5 crore as settlement. Justice Manmohan in a recent order took a grim

view of the fact that despite getting the settlement amount the woman again turned up in court

claiming that the decree had been passed in a fraudulent manner. She challenged the divorce decree

granted by a matrimonial court on the ground that the husband initially promised to pay her more than

double the amount. The woman also sought to restrain him from marrying a second time in her plea.

HC agreed to hear the matter but asked the woman to first cough up the Rs 5 crore she had been

paid and deposit it with court registry. The court opined that if the woman claims the decree was

obtained by fraud both parties must start on a fresh note. At the next hearing however the wife

promptly withdrew her case admitting it was not "maintenable." The high court's order came on a

contempt petition filed by the estranged husband who complained that even after a court endorsed

settlement and payment of a huge alimony his ex-wife wants to revive the dispute a year later on the

eve of his second marriage. Appearing for the husband advocate Prabhjit Jauhar informed the court

his client and former wife entered into a settlement approved by a matrimonial court where the wife

surrendered all claims and maintenance for a lump sum of Rs 5 crores. Accusing her of contempt the

husband urged HC to begin proceedings since the woman had breached the terms of the settlement

terms and her own undertaking before court. Justice Manmohan upheld the principle that no person

after entering into a settlement before a court can back-track and challenge it on the ground of fraud.

(Times of India 2/1/16)

2. 43% of high court judges posts vacant, backlog of cases may hit 1-crore mark by year-end

NEW DELHI: Despite the best efforts to speed up disposal of cases, pendency in the high courts may

spiral to a monstrous one crore cases by the end of this year from the present 45 lakh cases as 24

HCs are functioning at present with 43% vacancies with only 599 judges as against a sanctioned

strength of 1044. The disposal of cases suffered as the process for appointment of judges came to a

standstill for almost a year because of the Constitutional tug-of-war between the Legislature and

Judiciary over the validity of National Judicial Appointments Commission, which was scrapped by the

Supreme Court. The SC too has five vacancies and last one to be appointed was Justice Amitava

Thakur on February 27 last year. The SC has a pendency of around 60,000 cases, HCs have 45 lakh

cases and trial courts around 2.75 crore cases making it a total of around 3.25 crore cases. Judges

fear that it might touch 4 crore cases by the end of this year because of large number of vacancies.

The SC had revived the collegium system, in which a CJI-headed group of judges chooses persons

for appointment as judges on recommendation of a similar collegium in the HCs. But it is expected to

resume functioning only by the beginning of February after the Centre finalizes the memorandum of

procedure in consultation with Chief Justice T S Thakur. Even if the collegium gets on with the task of

selecting persons for appointment as judges, filling 445 vacancies would take a long time, may be

more than a year. By that time more judges would retire throwing the judiciary into a complex web of

pendency caused by the huge number of vacancies. But this is just the beginning of the problem for

judiciary and its newly appointed captain in CJI Thakur. The Centre is finalizing the memorandum of

procedure (MoP) for selecting HCs and SC Judges and it could change many rules that had been

entrenched into the system since 1998, when the Judiciary had decided to make itself the sole

∗ This is a collection of previously published news and views from the print as well as the electronic media, whose

reference marked at the end of each news items. Department of Documentation and Library (DDL) of the Indian Social

Institute, New Delhi neither claims to the veracity of the facts in the news nor subscribes to the views expressed.

selector of judges erasing Constitutionally prescribed Executive's role. For years, judges for the

Supreme Court have been selected from among the Chief Justices of the high courts mainly on the

basis of their seniority. Except a few, the senior-most among them have all been appointed as judges

of the SC. But, the Centre wants this to change. It feels that merit should get as much consideration

as seniority among the Chief Justices of the HCs. It also wants to insert in the MoP a clause that a

high court judge with outstanding merit and ability to do justice should be appointed as a SC judge

ahead of the CJs of HCs. This departure from tradition could cause severe heart-burns and

disappointment among many CJs aspiring to become a judge of the apex court. .. (Times of India

7/1/16)

3. UP lower courts show the way in disposing of cases (19)

NEW DELHI: The performance of subordinate judiciary in UP, surprisingly, has improved considerably

compared to other states. Last month they had disposed of 1,04,425 cases as against 76,479 new

ones registered. The rate at which pendency has been reduced in the last three years has been

impressive too. The disposal of cases by the subordinate and district courts in UP has gone up by

almost 2 lakh a year in the last three years — from 27.98 lakh cases disposed of in 2012 to 31.82 lakh

in 2014. Among other states, Karnataka and Kerala have also shown better performance during this

period where disposals have gone up from 10.35 lakh to 13.67 lakh cases and 11 lakh to 13.55 lakh

cases, respectively. Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh and Tamil Nadu are among those which need to

further strengthen their court procedure, to avoid being tagged laggards. The subordinate courts in

Maharashtra had disposed of 20.48 lakh cases in 2012, which has come down to 15.36 lakh cases in

2014. Similar is the trend in MP and Tamil Nadu. The statistics released by the law ministry recently

indicate the performance of subordinate judiciary has overall improved in the last few years. In

comparison, the trend in 24 High Courts together show a dismal performance. More than 3 crore

cases are pending in HCs and subordinate courts together — 41.50 lakh in HCs and 2.64 crore in

subordinate and district courts across the country. UP still remains at the top with highest number of

pendency at 48 lakh cases, followed by Maharashtra, Gujarat, West Bengal and Bihar. (Times of India

8/1/16)

4. Beef ban: High Court reserves judgement (19)

MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court on Friday reserved its verdict on the petitions challenging the

constitutional validity of the law imposing an extensive ban on beef in Maharashtra. A division bench

of Justices AS Oka and SC Gupte had started the final hearing last month. The President granted

assent to the Maharashtra Animal Preservation (Amendment) Act last February. While the original Act

of 1976 banned cow slaughter, the amendment prohibits slaughter of bulls and even possession and

consumption of beef. Slaughter attracts a five-year jail term and a Rs 10,000 fine while possession of

meat attracts one year. —PTI (The Hindu 9/1/16)

5. Unhappy kids and the politics of divorce (19)

Kochi: Unlike in the West -where the husband and wife usually maintain cordial relationship after their

divorce -couples here go in opposite directions, often scarring their children's lives. Children are

caught between warring parents as they fight a bitter battle for divorce fuelled by vengeance. One

such instance came up in the high court after a nine-month old girl's father complained that the child

was denied treatment by his estranged wife. After verifying the veracity of his complaint, the court

ordered immediate medical treatment for the child battling liver cirrhosis. In another instance, Devika

(name changed) and her brother chose to live with their mother, who left her husband because of the

`other woman' in his life. When Devika applied for PG admission, she needed her father's signature

on a document. When sought the same, he refused saying: "Why should I sign? You are staying with

your mother and not with me." She could not apply for the course because of the steep fee and non-

submission of the certificate. Despite the 'alarming' increase in divorce cases, most couples are not

looking at amicable settlement, said family counsellors involved in such cases. They said that the

judiciary tries to avoid a situation where the child (above eight years) has to take a decision on staying

with a particular parent. "We are seeing cases where one parent files for custody just to wreak

vengeance on the other. They sometimes agree to file a joint petition but suddenly one would file for

custody . Then it gets bitter," said Shiela Maria Oommen, a counsellor attached to the Ernakulam

family court. Women usually file for maintenance, return of gold and money and men seek child

custody ."In most cases, fathers are given visiting rights, sometimes overnight stay and in case of

others, a few hours of visiting time each week," said advocate Thomstine Augustine, adding that most

cases involved nurses and IT industry professionals. "We are seeing a trend where young couples

with small children end up in courts. At that age, children need both parents and even parents want to

keep the child. Then grandparents and relatives also add to the issue," said Augustine. Women

activists say that the earlier trend was joint property holdings by a couple. Now it is better if properties

are registered under a single person's name. "In most cases, we found that often all joint properties

are near the man's hometown or his circle. After divorce, if there is a contest, then it becomes difficult

for the woman to travel all the way from her place to contest the case. I had a few cases where

women struggled and finally gave up," said Moly Kuruvilla, head, Centre for women's studies, Calicut

University . (Times of India 12/1/16)

6. Centre may take judiciary on board for accountability bill (19)

NEW DELHI: Bringing accountability in the working of the higher judiciary is next on the government's

agenda. But to avoid any confrontation with top judges, the government may consult judges of the

apex court and high courts along with other stakeholders before finalizing the Judicial Standards and

Accountability Bill. The accountability bill proposes a five-member inquiry panel called the National

Judicial Oversight Committee (NJOC) to deal with complaints against judges. As of now, there is no

formal mechanism to deal with complaints against judges. All complaints are referred to the Chief

Justice of India who decides how they are to be dealt with. The accountability bill was passed by Lok

Sabha in 2012 but it lapsed with the dissolution of the 15th Parliament. Consultations with bar

associations, jurists and political parties is likely to begin in the next 15 days and may be completed

for tabling in the budget session of Parliament, a source said. The five-member panel is proposed to

be headed by a former CJI and will comprise a sitting judge of the SC, a high court chief justice, the

attorney general and an eminent person. The NDA government wanted to initiate the accountability

bill soon after it came to power in May 2014 but deferred it till the constitution of the National Judicial

Appointments Commission which the SC struck down as unconstitutional in October last year. While

striking down the NJAC Act, the SC had observed that the Act impinged on the independence of the

judiciary and all appointments to higher judiciary should be left to the SC collegium. The government

was, however, asked to prepare a revised memorandum of procedure (MoP) in consultation with the

CJI, which would guide the collegium on all appointments. This time, the government is treading with

caution and would prefer to evolve a consensus with the higher judiciary before engaging with political

parties for their views on the accountability bill. Though the original bill drafted during the UPA

government talked about setting up an inquiry committee with the executive having primacy, this may

be tweaked after the NJAC Act experience. The higher judiciary had earlier expressed concern when

the UPA government proposed a clause in the bill barring judges from making comments on

constitutional authorities in open court. This gag clause was part of the accountability bill.Former chief

justice of Delhi High Court A P Shah had opposed the accountability bill saying this would have a

"debilitating effect on judicial independence" and was against the constitutional safeguards to the

higher judiciary which "doesn't allow Parliament to create another forum that results in impeachment

proceedings resulting from a complaint filed by one person".The proposed bill allows complaints from

the public alleging misbehaviour on the part of a sitting SC or HC judge which can ultimately result in

impeachment. (Times of India 14/1/16)

7. PIL plea seeks closure of unrecognised schools (19)

CHENNAI: The Madras High Court has ordered notice on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking

direction to the State government to ensure that all the unrecognised schools in the State are shut

down by the end of this academic year. The PIL wanted the government to transfer the students of

such schools to other government, government aided or unaided recognised schools in the

neighbourhood. The petitioner activist A. Narayanan also sought the court to quash two Government

Orders (GO) and to restrain the government from granting recognition to the schools, which have not

fulfilled the norms specified in GO dated July 21, 2004. Mr. Narayanan submitted that based on the

report of Justice Sampath Commission, which was appointed to probe the Kumbakonam school fire

accident, and the recommendations made by Prof. Chittibabu Committee relating to infrastructural

facilities for matriculation schools, the government issued an order on July 21, 2004. The order stated

that as a condition for recognition, all the matriculation schools should fulfil the minimum land area

and other infrastructural facilities prescribed in the GO. Subsequently, two more GOs were passed

granting seven years time to fulfil the norms, which ended in 2011. Thereafter, the School Education

Department constituted a seven member committee in 2013 to prescribe the minimum land area for

giving recognition to those schools not fulfilling the norms. “However, the said report has not seen the

light of the day. While so, the school education department has now proceeded to give temporary

continual recognition till May 31, 2016 to as many as 746 matriculation schools, which have not

fulfilled the conditions,” the petitioner said. Admitting the PIL, the First Bench of Chief Justice S.K Kaul

and Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana ordered notice to the State government returnable in two weeks

and posted the matter March 7 for further hearing. (The Hindu 15/1/16)

8. Sabarimala Entry: Sorry, You Cannot Withdraw the PIL, SC Tells Litigant (19)

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday said it will hear on Monday a lawyer’s plea that he was

getting threats for filing a PIL seeking entry of women in the Sabarimala temple. “Let people know this

that once a public interest litigation (PIL) is filed and entertained, you cannot withdraw it,” a Bench of

Justice Dipak Misra and Justice N V Ramana said. The observation came when Naushad Ahmed

Khan, president of Indian Young Lawyers Association (IYLA) which filed the PIL on the Sabarimala

issue, sought urgent hearing of the matter saying he has received 500 threatening phone calls and

wanted to take back the PIL. For now, Khan has been given security by a guard in the Delhi Police

and on Monday it will decide as to which type of security will be given in future. The Bench said it may

think of appointing an amicus curiae to assist the court in the case. The question of the right of

women would be decided constitutionally. The PIL has sought entry for all women and girls in the

temple. The apex court, on January 11, had questioned the age-old tradition of banning entry of

women of menstrual age group in the temple saying this cannot be done under the Constitution. “The

temple cannot prohibit entry of women except on the basis of religion. Unless you have a

constitutional right, you cannot prohibit entry. Anyway, we will examine it on February 8,” the Bench

had said. It had asked the government whether it was sure that women have not entered the temple

premises in the last 1,500 years. On this, the Devaswom Board said the prohibition was based on

custom followed for the past half century. The Bench also observed that it was a public temple and

everyone needed to have “the right to access”. There can be religious restrictions and not a general

restriction, it said. Senior advocate K K Venugopal, appearing for the Kerala Government, had said

women, who have not attained menopause, cannot preserve the purity during the religious journey to

the temple. .. (New Indian Express 16/1/16)

9. Supreme Court Refuses To Re-Examine Its Judgement On Jallikattu (19)

New Delhi: The Supreme Court today refused to re-examine its 2014 judgement banning use of bulls

for Jallikattu events or bullock-cart races across the country. A bench of Justices Gopala Gowda and

PC Ghose, during in-chamber proceedings, dismissed the review petitions filed by some residents of

Tamil Nadu seeking reconsideration of the ban order on the controversial bull-taming sport. The

review petition filed by Tamil Nadu government is still pending in the court. On January 8, the Centre

had issued a notification lifting ban on Jallikattu in poll-bound Tamil Nadu with certain restrictions,

which was challenged in the apex court by Animal Welfare Board of India, People for Ethical

Treatment of Animals (PETA) India, a Bangalore-based NGO and others. The top court had stayed

the notification. Jallikattu, also known Eruthazhuvuthal, is a bull-taming sport played in Tamil Nadu as

a part of the Pongal harvest festival. The court in its 2014 judgement had said that bulls cannot be

used as performing animals, either for Jallikattu events or bullock-cart races in the states of Tamil

Nadu, Maharashtra or elsewhere in the country and banned their use across the country. The top

court had declared Tamil Nadu Regulation of Jallikattu Act, 2009 as constitutionally void, being

violative or Article 254(1) of the Constitution. (NDTV 21/1/16)

10. Maharashtra government moves Supreme Court, challenges Salman Khan's acquittal by

Bombay High Court (19)

NEW DELHI: Maharashtra government moved the Supreme Court on Friday challenging the Bombay

High Court's verdict acquitting Bollywood superstar Salman Khan in the 2002 hit-and-run case in

which one person was killed and four others were injured. The petition was filed in the apex court

against the high court's judgement acquitting Salman of "all charges", overturning trial court's order

sentencing him for five years. "The Bombay High Court has erred in not appreciating the prosecution

evidence. The trial court's order convicting Salman Khan was correct and should be upheld," Sandeep

Shinde, the public prosecutor who has been associated with the case, said about the contents of the

Special Leave Petition (SLP). The high court, in its verdict passed on December 10 last year, had

held that prosecution had failed to prove "beyond reasonable doubt" that the actor was driving the

vehicle at the time of the accident and was drunk. The judgement by the high court had come on an

appeal filed by the superstar, seven months after he was pronounced guilty by trial court of running

over five people sleeping on a pavement outside a laundry in suburban Bandra, with his Toyota Land

Cruiser on October 28, 2002. The high court had rejected as "wholly unreliable" the statement of

eyewitness Ravindra Patil, former police bodyguard of Salman, recorded by a magistrate in which he

had accused the actor of driving under the influence of liquor.The judge had said that Patil was a

"wholly unreliable" witness because he had subsequently made "improvements" in his statement to

the magistrate. Patil, the first informant in the case, in the FIR filed soon after the accident had not

accused Salman of having consumed liquor but only said he was "speeding" against his advice.The

prosecution's case during the trial had firmly rested on the statement of Patil, who died in 2007, much

before the case was tried afresh under more serious charge of culpable homicide not amounting to

murder. The magistrate's court had conducted the trial for a much lesser offence of causing death by

rash and negligent driving. On May 6 last year, a sessions court had convicted Salman in the case.

(Times of India 22/1/16)

11. Muslim Personal Law cannot override IPC in cases of rape and POSC O Act, court (19)

Bareilly: Muslim Personal Law cannot override Indian Penal Code(IPC)in cases of Rape and POCSO

Act, ruled the court of Special Judge, POCSO Act, as it turned down the bail application of a man

charged with illegally confining and raping a minor girl whom he claimed to be his legally wedded wife.

The counsel of the accused pleaded in court that as per MuslimPersonal Law, a girl has the right to

go with the person of her choice after completing her first menstrual cycle. But the court observed that

since she is a minor the case would be dealt as per the provisions of IPC and establishing physical

relations with her amounts to rape. Father of the minor girl and resident, Bhoorey Khan Ki Gautiya

locality had lodged a complaint at Faridpur police station on Oct 8, 2015 alleging that his daughter

was kidnapped by some persons including Nanhey, Munti, Salim, Bundan Beg, Afsana and sold her

to a man named Jabbar for a heavy sum. He also expressed apprehension that his daughter might

have been killed. Acting swiftly, cops recovered the girl within few days and arrested the main

accused Jabbar. The statement of the girl was recorded before the magistrate under Section 164 of

Indian Penal Code(IPC).In her statement the girl had said that she married Jabbar with her own

consent and wants to stay with him. On Thursday, the bail application of the accused Jabbar was filed

in the court of Special Judge, POCSO Act. His counsel argued that as per Muslim Persal Law a

Muslim girl is entitled to marry a person of her choice without seeking the permission of her parents

after completing the first menstrual cycle. Right Now she is staying with her husband as his legally

wedded wife and her husband Jabbar should be released on bail. This was opposed by the

government counsel, Rajpal Singh who pleaded that as per records date of birth of the girl is Aug 18,

2001 which means that she is a minor. After hearing the arguments from both the sides, Special

Judge, POCSO Act, Syed Sarwar Hussain Rizvi while turning down the bail application of the

accused Jabbar observed that "In cases coming under the purview of Indian Penal Code(IPC) and

POCSO Act, Muslim Personal Law has no relevance. It cannot override IPC and POCSO Act.

Establishing physical relations with a minor amounts to committing an offence coming under the

category of rape". (Times of India 22/1/16)

12. HC to hear fresh contempt plea against Roy later (19)

Nagpur: A fresh intervention was filed against author Arundhati Roy by five lawyers on Monday

alleging that she had taken assistance from elite personalities to create hatred towards higher

echelons of judiciary. Quoting a press meet held at Delhi Press Club on December 24, the lawyers —

Kishor Lambat, Shailendra Harode, Pankaj Tidke, Badal Lonare, and Tejas Patil — contended that

Justice Arun Chaudhari's orders of rejecting bail of alleged Maoist supporter GN Saibaba on

December 23 last year was termed as "smacks of vendetta and vengeance" that "lacked knowledge

in criminal law", and "tainted with complete insensitivity towards human rights" by her supporters. The

speakers in the meeting included senior counsel Prashant Bhushan, Prof Manoranjan Mohanti,

Sanjay Kak, Manish Sethi, and Moushami Basu among others. A division bench comprising Justice

Bhushan Gavai and Justice Pradeep Deshmukh, however, refused to allow their intervention in the

suo motu contempt plea against the author, making it clear it would be considered during next hearing

scheduled after four weeks. After the hearing, Lambat and other lawyers presented a bouquet to Roy.

They termed it as "Gandhigiri" against her defence in the Supreme Court that she should be granted

exemption from personal appearance in the Nagpur bench citing burning of her effigy, according to

interveners' counsel Shrirang Bhandarkar. Earlier, Bhandarkar claimed that Bhushan and others

during the meet organized by 'Committee for Defence and Release of Saibaba'had referred to the

judge who passed orders against Saibaba as a "so-called judge" who was "trying to prove his

patriotism"."Various participants in the meet made scandalous and scurrilous allegations against the

judge. Such demeaning and insulting remarks not only amounted to an aggravated contempt, but also

appeared to be a conspiracy to impose public pressure on the judicial proceedings," the interveners

contended. Citing an audio clip of the press meet, they argued that such unwanted comments made

on the judiciary were not only vitriolic and intemperate, but also deplorable. They pointed out that the

author was earlier convicted for contempt by the Supreme Court in March 2002. "It appears that the

respondent is habituated with confronting the judiciary for no valid cause or justifiable reason. The

court should deal sternly with such cudgels against the judiciary who wanted to show the respondent

as the torchbearer of human rights," they said. (Times of India 26/1/16)

13. Odd-even: HC asks govt to treat PIL as representation (19)

New Delhi: Delhi High Court on Wednesday directed the AAP government to treat a plea seeking re-

introduction of odd-even vehicular scheme through proper awareness campaign as a representation,

saying it had very good suggestions. "The present petition has some good suggestions, look into it," a

bench of Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice Jaynat Nath said while disposing of the petition. "Treat

this petition as a representation," the court told the Delhi government. The court's direction came on a

public interest litigation filed by a Uttar Pradesh resident, Jeetender Gupta, who sought direction to

the Delhi Government to "perform their legal and statutory obligations".The petitioner said the

scheme, which was done on trial basis from January 1 to 15, needed to be "re-introduced through

awareness campaigns and with different tariff for parking lots, toll barriers, so as to reduce the air

pollution and traffic congestion".The unprecedented restrictive measures, aimed at curbing pollution,

was rolled out in the national capital and led to a major cut in the number of cars on city roads. While

highlighting the poor quality of air which improved during the odd-even scheme, the petitioner said,

"the Delhi government has failed to ensure good quality of air in the city, which is threatening the

health, well being of those residing, working or visiting the national capital".It said the additional

revenue, generated through differential parking and toll charges can be utilised for funding the

awareness campaigns. (The Statesman 28/1/15)

14. Woman can be ‘karta’of a family: Delhi high court (19)

NEW DELHI: The eldest female member of a family can be its "Karta", the Delhi high court has ruled

in a landmark verdict. A unique position carved out by Hindu customs and ancient texts, "Karta"

denotes managership of a joint family and is traditionally inherited by men. "If a male member of a

Hindu Undivided Family (HUF), by virtue of his being the first born eldest, can be a Karta, so can a

female member. The court finds no restriction in law preventing the eldest female co-parcenor of an

HUF, from being its Karta," Justice Najmi Waziri said in a judgment made public earlier this week. The

Karta occupies a position superior to that of other members and has full authority to manage property,

rituals or other crucial affairs of the family. These include taking decisions on sale and purchase of

family assets, mutation of property etc. The ruling came on a suit filed by the eldest daughter of a

business family in north Delhi staking claim to be its Karta on the passing of her father and three

uncles. She was challenging her cousin brother. The family consisted of four brothers, with the

surviving eldest shouldering the responsibility of Karta. Trouble began when the brothers passed

away. The eldest son of a younger brother declared himself to be the next Karta, but was challenged

by the daughter of the eldest brother who is also the seniormost member of the family. The term co-

parcenor refers to rights derived in Hindu law to be the joint legal heir of assets in a family. Traditional

Hindu view, based on treatises such as Dharmshastra and Mitakshara school of law, recognises only

male inheritors to ancestral property. Amendments to the Hindu Succession Act in 2005 introduced

section 6 that levelled the playing field for women. The court termed it "rather odd" that following the

amendments, "while females would have equal rights of inheritance in an HUF property, this right

could nonetheless be curtailed when it comes to the management of the same". Section 6 of Hindu

Succession Act, it pointed out, did not place any restriction on women becoming the Karta. The HC

ruling is important because it takes the 2005 reform in the Act to its logical conclusion. While the

amendment restricted itself to providing women equal inheritance rights, the verdict now allows them

to manage property and rituals of a joint family. .. (Times of India 1/2/16)

15. ‘Woman having child through surrogacy entitled to maternity leave’ (19)

Mumbai: The Bombay High Court on Monday directed the Central Railway (CR) to grant three

months’ maternity leave to its employee who became a mother by using a surrogate. A Division

Bench of Justice Anoop Mohta and Justice G.S. Kulkarni gave this verdict while hearing a petition

filed by a nurse working at the Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar Railway Hospital in Byculla East. She moved

court after the CR refused to grant her leave on the ground that the Railways had no rule that allowed

leave. The court ruled that a mother enjoys the same benefits of maternity leave as any other working

woman under the Child Adoption Leave and Rules. “There is nothing in the rules that disentitles

maternity leave to a woman who has attained motherhood through surrogacy procedure,” the court

added. While challenging the CR for disallowing her leave, the woman’s lawyers argued that if the

maternity leave was refused, it would certainly violate the right of a child to develop a bond with the

mother. The petitioner got married in 2004 and underwent IVF in 2007 on two occasions but lost her

baby. In 2012, she was advised to have a child through surrogacy. When the surrogate mother

completed 33 weeks, the petitioner applied for maternity leave in January 2014 as the baby was

expected to be delivered in the first week of February. In its reply, the CR asked her if she had sought

permission before opting for surrogacy. She wrote back saying that she can claim maternity leave for

surrogacy under the Indian Railway Establishment Board that provides for a Child Adoptive Leave.

However, she was not granted the leave. On January 29, 2014, the surrogate mother delivered twins

and again the petitioner wrote a letter to the medical officer seeking leave under Child Care Leave.

The officer forwarded it to the CR. The High Court Bench on Monday directed the Central Railway to

grant her maternity leave of 180 days. The petitioner’s lawyers referred to an earlier judgment of a

Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court which, in a similar case, said: “a woman cannot be

discriminated as far as the maternity benefits are concerned, only on the ground that she has

obtained the baby through surrogacy. “Though the petitioner did not give birth to the child, the child

was placed in the secure hands of the petitioner as soon as it (child) was born. A newly-born child

cannot be left at the mercy of others,” the judgment said. (The Hindu 2/2/16)

16. Supreme Court seeks A-G’s help on Muslim women’s equality (19)

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday sought the assistance of Attorney-General Mukul Rohatgi to

examine the rights of Muslim women to claim equality in issues concerning marriage, divorce and

maintenance under the Muslim Personal law. A three-judge bench of Chief Justice T.S. Thakur and

Justices A.K. Sikri and R. Banumathi asked the Attorney-General to render assistance in the matter

and posted the matter for further hearing after six seeks. The apex court in October 2015, in a suo

motu writ petition, decided to examine various issues on the ground that Muslim Personal law is

discriminatory to Muslim women and whether current practices under Muslim Personal Law regarding

marriage, divorce and maintenance are violative of fundamental rights of the Constitution. A two-judge

bench had referred the issue to the CJI for posting before a larger bench. Accordingly, the matter

came before a three-judge bench on Friday. Meanwhile Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, an organisation working

for the welfare of Muslims, in an impleadment application stating that since the present matter

involves a question of Muslim Personal Laws, the view of the Muslim community must also be

considered. It pointed out that the apex court on earlier occasions had considered the issues —

whether Muslim Personal Law, which allows Polygamy, is void as offending Articles 14 and 15 of the

Constitution; whether Muslim Personal Law, which enables a Muslim male to give unilateral talaq to

his wife without her consent and without resort to judicial process of courts, is void as it offends

Articles 13, 14 and 15 of the Constitution and whether the mere fact that a Muslim husband takes

more than one wife is an act of cruelty — and declined to entertain these issues stating that these

were matters wholly involving issues of state policies with which the court will not ordinarily have any

concern. The apex court had also held that these issues are matters which are to be dealt with by the

legislature. The applicant said Mohammedan law is founded essentially on the Quran and thus cannot

fall within the purview of the expression “laws in force” as mentioned in Article 13 of the Constitution,

and hence its validity cannot be tested on a challenge based on Part III of the Constitution. In view of

such clear provisions, if this Court frames fresh provisions, it will amount to judicial legislation and will

be violative of the doctrine of separation of powers, it said. (Asian Age 6/2/16)

17. SC no to PIL on suicides by farmers (19)

New Delhi: The Supreme Court today declined to entertain a PIL raising the issue of farmers’ suicide

in the country and seeking direction for the Centre to implement the recommendation of an expert

body to fix minimum support price (MSP) for all agricultural products. “We are not suppose to go into

the policy matters. It is for the government to see and take decision,” a bench of Chief Justice T S

Thakur and Justices A K Sikri and R Banumathi said. The bench said the PIL petitioner has to go

before an appropriate authority and make representation. “These are matters which are between

people and the government,” the bench observed while wondering at the outset as to “what are we

suppose to do for farmers’ suicide. ...What is government suppose to do?” Realising that the bench

was not inclined to issue any direction, advocate P V Yogeshwaram, appearing for scientist S

Sunderesan, preferred to withdraw the PIL in which directions were sought for implementation of

recommendations of National Commission of Farmers (NCF). The Commission headed by noted

agricultural scientist M S Swaminathan had in 2006 come out with a report dealing with several issues

including that of farmers’ suicide and had proposed slew of measures to check it. The Commission

had suggested that there was a need to improve implementation of Minimum Support Price(MSP) and

arrangements to be put in place for crops, other than paddy and wheat. (The Tribune 9/2/16)

18. Second wife not entitled to dead man’s pension: HC (19)

Mumbai: A second wife, who the man has married while his first wife is living, is not entitled to his

pension after his death, the Bombay high court has ruled. Justice Mridula Bhatkar dismissed the claim

of Sangli resident Seema Patil, who said she was the second wife of Manoj Patil, a government

servant, who died in 2003. The claim was contested by Manoj's first wife Lata and their five children.

Manoj had married Lata in 1979 and then subsequently married Seema in 1981. Referring to earlier

judgments on the issue, the HC said in the case of Hindus and Christians, a man's second marriage,

during the subsistence of his first marriage and when his wife is living, is not valid. "The Indian legal

system has adopted monogamy as a legal structure of the marriage institution and, therefore,

occasional fractures of second marriage in subsistence of first marriage are held void in law. The

second woman cannot be given the status of a legally wedded wife and she is not a widow in true and

legal sense," said Justice Bhatkar. Seema's lawyers sought to invoke the "gender protection" view

and urged for the pension saying that she was deceived by her deceased husband and had a

daughter from the relationship. The HC, however, did not agree. "This argument is one-sided and may

appear convincing superficially, but it does not stand to reason after close scrutiny. The courts have

empathy for a woman who is deceived by a man. However, she may take recourse under the other

enactments for redressal," said the judge and pointed to earlier judgments on the issue that showing

sympathy to the second wife would mean depriving a legitimate wife of her rights. "This is the gender-

positive view towards the legally wedded wife. The case of second wife may be unfortunate but I am

of the view that the court cannot pass a verdict in her favour. While doing justice, injustice should not

be caused to a person having a rightful claim," the judge said. (Names changed to protect identities)

(Times of India 10/2/16)

19. ‘Headley testimony unlikely to impact Ishrat encounter case’ (19)

Mumbai: Any euphoria, as displayed on Wednesday, connected with David Headley naming Ishrat

Jahan as a Lashkar-e-Taiba operative may be short-lived for the accused in her fake encounter case

as his testimony here can't be used as evidence in that case. Home ministry sources and criminal law

practitioners said Headley's deposition regarding Ishrat won't have much impact on the trial faced by

the Gujarat police, including its former DIG (anti-terror squad) D G Vanzara, who had immediately

held a press conference to highlight it as an important legal development. Headley, a Pakistan-born

American terror operative, is an accused-turned-approver only in the 26/11 Mumbai case being heard

by special judge G A Sanap. He was an accomplice and even in this case, his deposition, although

admissible as evidence, requires corroboration on facts for it to be accepted as clinching proof. This

will mean that he will be subject to cross-examination in this case. Testimony relating to Ishrat is

irrelevant in the 26/11 case. Nevertheless, before any reliance can be placed on it, it has to be

corroborated from other independent facts. And for the accused in the Ishrat Jahan fake encounter

case, his deposition as an approver in the 26/11 case will not be available as evidence. If they want to

use it, they would have to depose him as a defence witness. Vanzara told TOI his lawyers would

decide if Headley would be made a defence witness. His plea bargain agreement with the US

authorities in connection with 12 terror and murder charges against him for the Mumbai attacks and

Denmark plans, require him to cooperate "when directed by the US attorney's office, fully and

truthfully in any foreign judicial proceedings in the US by way of deposition, video-conferencing or

letters rogatory''. But would he be directed to depose in other cases too is the question. Headley's

statement as a pardon witness must be cross-examined by the advocate of relatives of Ishrat, who

claim that she was not associated with any terrorist group and was killed in a fake encounter by the

Gujarat police. The SC had in a 2000 judgement held that although the Indian Evidence Act that lays

down what can be evidence states that "conviction is not illegal merely because it proceeds on

uncorroborated testimony of the accomplice, yet the courts, will as a matter of practice not accept the

evidence of such witness without corroboration in material particulars'. The court, while granting bail

to Vanzara, also an accused in the Sohrabuddin Shaikh fake encounter case, had in November 2014

done so as he had already spent over seven years, which it said was a long time in jail, with a trial

nowhere in sight, not on merits of his case. Advocate Susan Abraham said on Monday that Headley's

deposition regarding Ishrat would have no bearing on the encounter case trial. Activist Feroze

Mithiborewala questioned the necessity of questioning Headley on Ishrat in the 26/11 case. He also

questioned the timing of his arrest in the US when he said "India was hard on its heels behind him''.

He added, "The fact that he has chosen to once again target Ishrat Jahan and thus help the accused

in her encounter killing is part of the quid pro quo with the Indian ruling elite and intelligence

establishment." (Times of India 15/2/16)

20. Tougher laws enacted to give justice to women: Raman Singh (19)

Raipur: Chhattisgarh Chief Minister Raman Singh on Sunday said tougher laws have been enacted

by the State government to give justice to women in cases of domestic violence, sexual harassment,

and other cases. relating to ‘Tonhi’ (witchcraft atrocities), domestic violence and sexual harassment.

Tougher laws have been enacted to deal with these, he said in his sixth radio address ‘Raman Ke

Goth’ “I assure mothers, sisters, and daughters the State (government) will protect their interests at

any cost,” he added. He said the government launched ‘Sakhi-One-Stop Centre’ last year where

counselling, medical aid, legal advice, police help and others assistance are being provided to them.

Complaints related to domestic violence, molestation, dowry, acid attack, foeticide, sati, cheating,

witchcraft, pension disputes, workplace harassment, property dispute, sexual exploitation and others

can be filed there, he said. The CM called upon people’s representatives, social and women’s

organisations, sarpanches and media to spread awareness about the ‘One-Stop Centre’He advised

students to study hard and write the coming annual examination with confidence. “Board

examinations will begin on 23 February, and internal exams also in most of the schools. The results of

Board examinations decide the fate of students,” he added. He urged the youth to take advantage of

the Skills Development programmes being run in the State.-PTI (The Hindu 15/2/16)

21. Modi wants to subjugate judiciary, media: AAP (19)

NEW DELHI: The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) on Wednesday termed as "a direct attack on judiciary" the

assault on journalists and JNU Students' Union president Kanhaiya Kumar by a group of lawyers in

Patiala House court complex here and accused Prime Minister Narendra Modi of subjugating the

judiciary and media. The party also attacked Delhi Police and the Centre, alleging that the law

enforcing agency cannot openly "defy" the orders of the Supreme Court unless it had a support from

the government. Hitting out at Delhi Police Commissioner B S Bassi, senior AAP leader Ashutosh

said, he was "only serving his master"."Police cannot be inactive after the Supreme Court's

instructions unless there are orders from the top of the government. "Modi wants to subjugate the

judiciary and the media. Whatever is happening in Patiala House court premises is direct attack on

judiciary. This is not possible without support of Modi government. Do you still want B S Bassi to

continue as police chief? But he is only serving his master," Ashutosh said. The party said it is difficult

to imagine that on what basis police ignored the directions of the top court to provide adequate

security to journalists covering the court hearing. "Not only were the journalists beaten up for the

second time in three days in full public view by BJP goons but they also targeted senior Supreme

Court lawyers, who were asked by the apex court to assess the situation at the Patiala House Court

Complex. "Delhi Police continued to remain a mute spectator when all this was going on. These

goons again entered the court rooms and attacked innocent people again. Such scenes are unheard

of in the national capital and the attitude of Delhi Police makes the citizens hang their heads in

shame," the party said. (Times of India 17/2/16)

22. Supreme Court agrees to hear plea against lawyers who bragged they beat up JNU's

Kanhaiya Kumar (19)

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a plea against the lawyers who claimed in a

sting video that they thrashed Jawaharlal Nehru University student leader Kanhaiya Kumar so badly

when he was in police custody that he wet his pants.The apex court said it will take cognisance of the

sting video if a plea is filed seeking contempt proceedings against these lawyers who bragged about

the beating. In a video broadcast on a news channel on Monday evening, the lawyers can be seen

claiming they thrashed Kanhaiya for around three hours while he was in police custody . They can

also be seen claiming to have spared Kanhaiya further beatings after he listened to their instructions

to a raise a specific slogan praising India. One of the lawyers can even be seen claiming that he

would not sign a bail bond so he can stay in jail sand beat up the JNU student again. He further said

they had the full support of the police during the scuffle at the court premises. Senior police officials

have so far refused to comment on the video. Police had issued notices to lawyers Vikram Singh

Chauhan, Yashpal Singh and Om Sharma to join investigation, following which Om Sharma

presented himself before police and was arrested. The other two others are yet to appear. (Times of

India 23/2/16)

23. Second wife can claim benefits of deceased husband: HC (19)

Mumbai: The Bombay High Court on Tuesday held that the second wife of a Union government

employee can claim retirement benefits of the deceased husband. A Division Bench of Chief Justice

GH Waghela and Justice VK Tahilaramani was hearing the petition filed by the first wife of the

deceased, working at the Ammunition Factory in Pune. He had nominated his second wife to receive

all retirement benefits in January 2010, after he cancelled the nomination of his first wife after giving

her a divorce. On being aggrieved by the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal in

September 2013, that held that the second wife would receive all the benefits, the first wife moved the

High Court. The court said, “We also have to go by the fact that the first nomination in favour of the

first wife was duly cancelled and a fresh nomination was filed separately by the deceased for Death-

Cum-Retirement Pension, Provident Fund and Group Insurance benefits in favour of the second wife.”

The court noted that it was not possible to ignore the nomination made by the deceased in favour of

the second wife. The court also observed that approximately six months prior to his death, the

deceased had promptly informed his office about his second marriage and about his divorce. He had

also told his office about the nomination filed in favour of the second wife relating to retirement

benefits, the Bench said. (The Hindu 24/2/16)

24. SC judge in Afzal case slams critics of the judgement (19)

NEW DELHI: Former Supreme Court judge P V Reddi, who headed a two-judge bench which upheld

Parliament attack convict Afzal Guru's death sentence in 2005, said fair criticism of SC judgements

was welcome, but to say that the execution was a "judicial killing" amounted to "crossing the

limit".Justices Reddi and P P Naolekar had upheld a Delhi HC verdict imposing death penalty on

Afzal. However, the bench had reversed Shaukat Hussain Guru's death penalty to 10 years'

imprisonment. It upheld the HC order to acquit SAR Geelani even though it found his role suspicious,

and endorsed the acquittal of Afsan Guru aka Navjot Sandhu. Trial judge S N Dhingra, who later

became an HC judge, had awarded death penalty to Afzal, Shaukat and Geelani.Some JNU students

recently termed Afzal's hanging, under the UPA government, a judicial killing and alleged that the

terrorist did not get a fair trial. It was followed by exhome minister P Chidambaram's statement that

there were "grave doubts" about the extent of Afzal's involvement in the terror attack. Talking to TOI

from Hyderabad, Justice Reddi said, "The judgment speaks for itself. Those who celebrate Afzal

martyrdom day must pick up the judgment and read it thoroughly before making comments or

criticism. Fair criticism of Supreme Court judgments is the hallmark of our democratic system that

zealously guards the right to free speech. But to term it a judicial hanging is crossing the limit. The

criticism must be decent and in public interest. If not, then it could hit at the root of democracy, of

which Supreme Court is an important pillar." (Times of India 27/2/16)

25. SC admits PIL seeking national court of appeals (19)

New Delhi: The Supreme Court decided on Friday to examine a plea for setting up a national court of

appeal with regional benches to enable the top court to exclusively deal with constitutional

matters.The benches at Chennai, Mumbai and Calcutta should be the last court for appeals – above

the high courts -- and their decisions undisputable unless questions of law remain unanswered,

Puducherry-based advocate Vasanta Kumar said in a public interest litigation. There are nearly

60,000-odd cases pending in the top court due to appeals arising out of litigations in the high courts. A

bench headed by chief justice TS Thakur issued notice to the Centre and sought attorney general

Mukul Rohatgi’s assistance on the petition. The top court also asked two senior counsels – KK

Venugopal and Salman Khursheed – to give their suggestions on the possibility of creating such

benches and fixed March 16 for hearing the public interest litigation. Kumar challenged the Union

government’s December 3, 2014 order rejecting his representation to set up the national court of

appeal. The Centre had rejected the appeal saying it would alter the structure of the Supreme Court.

Kumar said people go through difficulties, both physical and financial, because they have to travel to

New Delhi to file appeals in the SC, stay in the national capital indefinitely, consult senior lawyers and

pay for hotel bills. “The geographical proximity and financial status of citizens in the society are vital

factors for every citizen to have access to this court,” he said, citing reports to point out that the

highest number of cases filed in the SC is from northern states. Delhi tops the list with 12% of the

cases followed by Punjab and Haryana (7%) and Uttarakhand (7%). Southern states stand much

below in the list with Kerala accounting for 2.5% and Andhra Pradesh 2.8%.The SC is the court of

appeal for all the 24 HCs in the country. The Constitution permits litigants to approach the top court

directly for relief and empowers the SC to exercise its jurisdiction on all matters arising from any

judicial forum or tribunal. Kumar said people move the top court for small issues such as a trial court

order permitting a party to amend its application in a civil case or if a bail application is rejected.

(Hindustan Times 27/2/16)

26. Centre files review petition in SC over 2014 transgender judgement (19)

New Delhi, March.3 : The Centre on Thursday filed a review petition in the Supreme Court seeking

clarity on issues arising out of a 2014 judgement pertaining to the rights and status of transgenders.

The matter is posted for hearing tomorrow. The apex court, in its April 2014 judgement, had said

transgenders should be recognised as the 'third gender' but, along with that, it had also acknowledged

their right to declare themselves either male or female. Social Justice and Empowerment Minister,

Thawar Chand Gehlot today said this is creating difficulty in making their identity cards. "The Supreme

Court in its ruling said that transgenders should be recognised as 'third gender. Along with that, it had

also acknowledged their right to declare themselves either male or female. This is creating difficulty in

making their identity cards. We have filed a review petition saying that it should be made clear so that

no problem arises while issuing their ID cards," Gehlot told the media. "Some of the transgenders

have told us that they belong to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes but have been put in the

OBC category. They are saying that they should be put in the SC or ST categories so that they are

able to access the benefits of the SCs and STs," he added. He said that government, therefore, filed a

review petition in the court seeking clarity on the issue. He informed that ministry is close to finalise

the Draft Rights of Transgender Persons Bill, 2015. (New Kerala 3/3/16)

27. COAI to appeal to SC against call drop judgement (19)

NEW DELHI: The Cellular Operators' Association of India (COAI) on Thursday decided to file an

special leave petition (SLP) in the Supreme Court challenging the regulation issued by the telecom

regulator on call drop penalty on October 16, 2015 and against the ruling of the Delhi High Court in

the matter. GSM body COAI said that it recognizes the inconvenience to customers due to call drops

and is committed making the necessary investment and improvements to its networks, including

working with the government to obtain required cell sites on government land and buildings. The Delhi

High Court on February 29 upheld the order of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (Trai)

making it mandatory for cellular operators to compensate subscribers for call drops. A division bench

of chief justice G Rohini and justice Jayant Nath ordered that telecom operators would have to

compensate subscribers for first three call drops. There's a big catch in Trai's call drop compensation

plan. The court dismissed the plea of telecom operators for a stay on Trai's compensation policy,

announced on October 16, 2015, for call drops under which a rupee will be credited to the mobile

users' account for every call drop (restricted to three per day) starting January 1, 2016. "COAI is

requesting the Honorable Supreme Court to consider its prayer that the Trai Regulation on Call Drops

is ultra vires the Trai Act in that the act does not give Trai adjudicatory powers and hence Trai cannot

grant compensation," said COAI in a statement. "Further, the Trai regulation is also ultra vires the

Telegraph Act of 1885 under which mobile companies are licensed wherein 100 percent coverage of

the licensed geography is not required. Hence call drops emanating from these areas should not be

subject to compensation. Finally COAI represents that it is impossible to identify all the reasons for

call drops and hence implementation of TRAI order is not feasible," it added. (Times of India 3/3/16)

28. Why can't Muslim women have 4 spouses if men can? Kerala high court judge asks (19)

KOZHIKODE: If a Muslim man can have four wives, why can't a Muslim woman have four husbands?

This was the rhetorical but loaded question, B Kemal Pasha, a Kerala high court judge posed on

Sunday at a seminar organized by a Muslim women's forum. Judge Pasha also said that to lead a

proper life a man or woman needed just one partner. According to the judge, Muslim Personal Law

discriminated against women on matters related to dowry, divorce and inheritance, and this

contradicted the Koran's position on these issues. "It is discrimination and the religious leaders who

have created such a situation cannot shy away from addressing it. They should introspect whether

they are qualified for pronouncing judgments. The persons who receive the judgements should also

think about that," the judge said. The Kerala judge was speaking at a seminar organized by Nisa and

the Punarjani Charitable Trust here. While the Koran actually granted women the right to extrajudicial

divorce by way of Fasakh, Muslim personal law didn't grant that right to women even as it allowed

men the right to pronounce talaq, Judge Pasha added. The Constitution guaranteed equality to both

man and woman, Judge Pasha said, adding that all laws of the country come under the purview of

Article 14 and Article 21 which guaranteed right to equality and right to life respectively. Judge Pasha

said several shortcomings of Muslim personal law stemmed from the fact that it was not properly

codified. "Currently the courts are rendering justice on the basis of precedence and on the basis of the

Mohammedan Law as compiled by legal expert D F Mulla. What is being implemented is not fully as

per Koranic verses. Let the personal law be codified as per the principles of Koran which had

expounded equality for man and woman," the judge said. Judge Pasha further said that Muslim

personal law had drawbacks related to the Hanafi law of intestate succession as it didn't allow a father

who had only daughters to ensure that his property is inherited by his daughters and wife alone as his

brothers and sisters will have right over the property. (Times of India 7/3/16)

29. 10 Rights every Indian woman should know (19)

Below are the 10 rights every Indian woman should know...

Free legal aid: Under the Legal Services Authorities Act 1987, all female rape victims have the right

to free legal aid. "Whenever a rape victim is unable to hire a lawyer, it's mandatory for the station

house officer to inform the city's legal services authority to arrange a lawyer for her," says citybased

criminal lawyer Arnab Dutta. Right to protect one's identity: According to Section 228A IPC, all

victims of sexual assault have the right to anonymity . Neither the media nor the police can force them

to reveal their identity in public. Unpermitted publication of the identity can even lead to imprisonment

for the publisher. Moreover, the victim can record her statement with a magistrate either alone or in

presence of a lady police officer. Women witnesses can't be called to police stations: Indian

women witnesses have the right to record a statement at home. Section 160 CrPC states that women

cannot be called over to police stations for interrogation. "If a woman is a witness, she can choose to

record her statement at her own residence in presence of a lady police officer," says criminal lawyer

Kaushik Dey. No arrests at night: According to Supreme Court ruling, a woman cannot be arrested

between sunset and sunrise. This was the result of a rising number of police harassment complaints

by women.However, if the woman in question is wanted for a serious crime, police can make an

arrest with a special permission from a magistrate. Right to maternity leave: The Maternity Benefit

Act 1961 ensures 12 weeks of paid leave for a mother, taken before or after the delivery . However, it

allows a maximum six weeks of leave before delivery. Right to equal wage: The principle, equal pay

for equal work, holds good for any working women.According to the Equal Remuneration Act 1976, no

organization can discriminate between men and women doing similar work or having same

designation visa-vis recruitment or pay. Safety at the workplace: Any workplace with more than 10

employees is duty-bound to create a Sexual Harassment Complaints Committee. According to

Supreme Court's Vishakha Guidelines, the presence of such committee is mandatory and it must be

headed by a woman. Right to property: Daughters of a family have a valid right to claim the

inheritance. "In 2005, amendments in the Hindu Succession Act grant sons and daughters equal

rights to ancestral property," says civil lawyer Parama Ganguly. Live-in relationships are legal:

Women who are in a live-in relationship can seek protection against domestic violence under the

Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005. Such victims can also seek financial or other

relief under the provisions of the Act.If a woman is unable to visit a police station to lodge a complaint,

she has the privilege of doing so by sending an email or registered letter to a senior officer. "The

concerned officer then instructs the station house officer to verify it with the complainant and lodge an

FIR," Kaushik tells us. (Times of India 8/1/16)

30. Real Estate Bill passed; Venkaiah Naidu expects houses to be cheaper (19)

NEW DELHI: With the Lok Sabha giving its nod, Parliament on Tuesday passed the Real Estate Bill

which, Urban development minister M Venkaiah Naidu said, will help bring down property prices and

give more credibility to functioning of the real estate sector. The Real Estate (Regulation &

Development) Bill, 2016, was passed by the Rajya Sabha on March 10. "It is a historic moment for the

country as we are fulfilling the aspirations of the people who wish to own a house, giving them the

needed protection. The bill will be giving credibility to real estate sector also," said Naidu in his reply

to the discussion on the bill in the Lok Sabha. "I say you will get more investment, you will get early

clearances and the property prices will come down," the minister said, asserting the speedy land

clearances for the real estate projects will help in bringing down the prices of the houses. "The

builders will have to do their duty. Parliament is not interested in interfering with their activity. What

you (builders) are committing, what you are promising, fulfill that. This is the only purpose of this real

estate bill," Naidu said. He stressed the bill would help to fill in the loopholes in the existing system

that help builders to escape from the ambit of law without fulfilling all the claims they make in their

advertisements. "Earlier, the rate of interest payable by consumer and builders used to vary. We

found it was not correct. So from here on, the interest payable by either party, be it the consumer or

builder, will be the same," the minister said. Naidu also said that he is open to discuss it with the

builders if they have any issue with bill that may hamper the sector's functioning."We are not against

builders. If there are problem with the builders, I am ready to discuss it with them anytime. We want

builder to be partner in building a strong India," he said. "Since land is a state issue, we seek

cooperation from state's side. All approvals are to be given in 30 days," he said, insisting the central

government has done its duty in providing inexpensive houses.The minister said that he will write to

all the chief ministers requesting them to give speedy clearances to the real estate projects in their

states. (Times of India 15/3/16)

31. Criminalizing marital rape will hurt family, says parliamentary panel (19)

NEW DELHI: A parliamentary panel has observed that if the issue of marital rape is brought under

law, the entire family system will be under great stress. Minister of state for home Haribhai Chaudhury

said in the Lok Sabha that the department-related parliamentary standing committee on home affairs

presented its 167th report on the Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill, 2012 in the Rajya Sabha on March

1, 2013. While giving its report, the Committee considered both the 172nd report on review of rape

laws given by the Law Commission of India and the report of the Justice J S Verma Committee. "The

committee deliberated the amendments to section 375 of IPC, including the issue of marital rape, and

observed that if marital rape is brought under the law, the entire family system will be under great

stress and the Committee may perhaps be doing more injustice," he said replying to a written

question on Tuesday. The law commission, while making its 172nd report on 'Review of Rape Laws'

in March 2000, did not recommend criminalization of marital rape. However, the Justice J S Verma

Committee, while giving its report on 'Amendments to Criminal Law' in January 2013, recommended

that law ought to be amended to delete the marital rape exception. "This (home) ministry has

requested the law commission to deliberate upon the matter during the course of its comprehensive

review of Criminal Justice System," Chaudhary said. (Times of India 15/3/16)

32. 5 changes RS wanted in Aadhaar Bill, legal challenge next (19)

New Delhi: On a day the authenticity of information on the Lok Sabha website came under a cloud,

the Opposition on Wednesday embarrassed the government in the Rajya Sabha by recommending to

the Lok Sabha as many as five amendments to the Aadhaar Bill. The Lok Sabha sat till late in the

evening to discuss the Bill and rejected the amendments after a walkout by several Opposition

parties. The Lok Sabha passed the Bill in its original form. It is rare in the history of Parliament for the

Upper House to have recommended amendments to a money Bill. The Aadhaar Bill was certified as a

money Bill by the Lok Sabha Speaker, which meant that the Upper House could only ‘recommend’

amendments, which are not binding on the Lok Sabha. According to the Constitution, the Speaker’s

veto on the issue cannot be challenged. But, the Communist Party of India (Marxist) chief Sitaram

Yechury said in the Upper House that legal avenues would be explored on the issue of the Speaker’s

discretion. Echoing similar views, Congress spokesperson Abhishek Manu Singhvi told reporters that

the party could challenge the Speaker’s ruling in a court of law since “by no stretch of imagination, is

the Aadhaar Bill a money Bill”. In the discussion on the Bill, Congress member of Parliament Jairam

Ramesh suggested nine amendments that primarily related to ensuring that Aadhaar is not made

mandatory for seeking government entitlements, that it should not be used for any other purpose

other than for identifying beneficiaries for government subsidies, and that the government should look

into the recommendations by the A P Shah committee on privacy of Aadhaar data. He also suggested

the clause relating to sharing of biometric information in cases of ‘national security’ be amended

considering the possibility of its misuse.The Opposition — the Congress, the Left parties, Janata Dal

(United) and other regional parties – pushed for a division of votes on five of these nine amendments.

But, such is the lack of numbers of the government in the Rajya Sabha that despite the All India Anna

Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam members supporting the government on the issue and parties such as

Trinamool Congress, Biju Janata Dal, Bahujan Samaj Party and Samajwadi Party staging a walkout,

the government lost 76 to 64 of the 140 members voting on the amendments. Ramesh, the former

union minister for rural development, criticised the government for pushing it as a money Bill. He said

the government, by trying to bypass the scrutiny of the Upper House, was “knocking a nail in the

coffin of the Rajya Sabha”. ….. (Business Standard 17/3/16)

33. Father must maintain son only till he's 18: Gujarat HC (19)

AHMEDABAD: Gujarat high court on Friday ruled that a parent is liable to maintain a son till he turns

18 and starts earning. The HC made it clear that a parent is liable to maintain an unmarried daughter

even after she attains an majority and is also liable to spend for her wedding. However, the same

provision does not apply for a son. According to provisions of Section 125 of CrPC, a father or mother

is not responsible to pay maintenance to a son once he turns 18 if he is not mentally or physically

unfit. The case in question is a divorce petition involving a doctor, Dinesh Oza, who practices in

Visnagar and his wife Nita. The wife was driven out of the home in 2006 and she lodged an FIR with

Satellite police in 2006. On the other hand, the doctor filed a divorce petition in Mehsana. The woman

filed for maintenance in Ahmedabad's family court. The court ordered the doctor to pay his wife and

son. In the second round of litigation, the court enhanced the amount and asked the doctor to

continue to pay his son till he turned 18 years. The father stopped payments to his son when he

turned 18 in October 2013. The wife moved the family court against this. The family court asked her to

move the HC for clarification on whether the father should continue to pay after the boy turned 18.

The court also asked the doctor to deposit arrears of Rs 78,000 with the court.The woman moved the

high court again, where her lawyer argued that the father is liable to maintain his son till he starts

earning. The doctor's lawyer Dakshesh Mehta argued that the law is clear on this aspect that a son

must be maintained only till he turns 18. After hearing the case, Justice JB Pardiwala concluded that

he cannot accept the provisions made to maintain daughters for maintenance of a son. He cited an

order passed by Karnataka high court, which said that it would be a moral and social obligation of

every father to bring up his children by giving proper education, culture etc not only as his children,

but also as the future citizens of the nation. But, there is no law that mandates a parent to give

maintenance to a son once he turns 18. And hence the father can stop paying maintenance amount

to the son. (Times of India 19/3/16)

34. HC to decide if ED court can try IAS officer (19)

Hyderabad: Justice Raja Elango of the Hyderabad High Court has said that the court would soon

determine whether the Enforcement Directorate's special court which tries cases under prevention of

money laundering Act (PMLA) is bound by the rejection of permission by the state to prosecute an

IAS officer. The judge was dealing with a petition filed by IAS officer B P Acharya who was made an

accused in the Hetero and Aurobindo pharmacies episode of YS Jaganmohan Reddy assets case.

CBI which filed its charge sheet in the case charged Acharya with undue price fixation for 150 acres

allotted to the pharma companies and urged the court to punish him under IPC provisions like

cheating and criminal conspiracy and also under the provisions of the prevention of corruption (PC)

Act.Acharya claimed that the state had rejected permission to prosecute him under PC Act and hence

the ED court too should exempt him from the case. ED's counsel PSP Suresh Kumar opposed this

and said that ED court need not be bound by the proceedings before CBI court which is dealing with

the PC Act. ED deals with the case from PMLA angle and has no link with PC Act. We do not need

any one's sanction for proceeding further, he said. The judge however said that this aspect needs to

be examined and directed the ED to file its counter and posted the case to April 26. The judge stayed

the trial proceedings in respect of Acharya till then. (Times of India 25/3/16)

35. Judiciary goes solar, ready to share power with states (19)

New Delhi: Independence-sensitive judiciary never shares power with other organs of governance but

when it came to electricity, the judiciary has taken a decision to become self-sufficient by generating

power using solar panels and even started sharing power with state electricity boards. Leading the

march for self-sufficiency in power generation are two states - Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh. Justice

Madan Lokur, heading the Supreme Court-mentored eCourts Project, told TOI that the district court

complex in Khunti in Jharkhand met its entire demand for electricity, including running of air

conditioners, from solar energy generated within the premises. "In fact, there is some surplus

electricity, which is being given to the state electricity boards. The district court expects to recover the

cost of setting up the solar panels in the next 8 to 10 years," he said. Success of the Khunti

experiment made the Jharkhand high court repeat the project in three more district court complexes

where demand for electricity is completely met through solar energy. Chhattisgarh HC at Bilaspur has

replicated the exercise of meeting power demands through clean energy. The electricity demand of

the HC, excluding the running of air conditioners, is met through solar energy. The HC has informed

the eCommittee that it expects to recover the cost of installation of solar panels in the next 10

years.Justice Lokur said: "Phase-II of the eCourts Project requires that 5% of the court complexes

under the jurisdiction of each HC should generate electricity through solar energy. The target seems

easily achievable given the experience in Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh." He appeared hopeful of 10%

of the court complexes switching over completely to solar energy by the end of this year. The SC's

eCommittee has requested chief justices of every HC to identify 10% of the court complexes under

their jurisdiction for achieving power self-sufficiency through solar energy. (Times of India 26/3/16)

36. Calling of names can form a ground for divorce: HC (19)

NEW DELHI: Calling of names and taunting a partner in a marriage can be treated as mental cruelty

and form a ground for divorce, the Delhi high court said in a recent verdict. Upholding a trial court

order granting divorce to a man, HC enumerated several incidents of cruelty by his estranged wife

including hurling of abuses such as 'Hathi', 'Mota Hathi' and 'Mota Elephant' for failing to satisfy her

sexually blaming his heavy weight for it.Justice Vipin Sanghi said such abusive behaviour directed at

the husband "even if he was overweight, is bound to strike at his self-respect" and noted that the wife

also physically injured his private parts, repeatedly slapped him, prohibited him from meeting their

minor child and misbehaved with the husband's family. "It has come on record that she taunted the

respondent for not being able to satiate her sexual desire on account of his being heavy weight. It has

also come on record that she not only slapped the respondent but asked him to leave the house. She

also caught hold of kerosene can and opened its lid threatening the respondent that she would

immolate herself and implicate the respondent and his family in a dowry case," HC observed, finding

merit in the decision of trial court to grant divorce to the husband. While the wife claimed the

allegations made by her husband are vague, the HC dismissed her appeal and said her behaviour

"naturally gives rise to a bonafide and genuine belief and apprehension in the mind of the husband it

is not safe for him to peacefully and mentally continue the relationship" as these constitute mental

cruelty in law. New Delhi: Calling of names and taunts to a partner in a marriage can be treated as

mental cruelty and form a ground for divorce, the Delhi High Court has said in a recent verdict.

Upholding a trial court order granting divorce to a man, HC enumerated ten acts/incidents of cruelty

by his estranged wife including hurling of abuses such as 'Hathi', 'Mota Hathi' and 'Mota Elephant' for

failing to satisfy her sexually blaming his heavy weight for it. Justice Vipin Sanghi said such abusive

behaviour directed at the husband "even if he was overweight, is bound to strike at his self respect

and self esteem" and noted that the wife also physically injured his private parts, threatened to commit

suicide, repeatedly slapped him, prohibited him from meeting their minor child and misbehaved with

the husband's family. "It has come on record that she taunted the respondent for not being able to

satiate her sexual desire on account of his being heavy weight. It has also come on record that she

not only slapped the respondent but asked him to leave the house. She also caught hold of kerosene

can and opened its lid threatening the respondent that she would immolate herself and implicate the

respondent and his family in a dowry case," HC observed, finding merit in the decision of trial court to

grant divorce to the husband. While the wife claimed allegations made by the estranged husband are

vague, HC factored in another serious incident to conclude the husband suffered mental cruelty at her

hands. It recorded that in 2006 the wife's parents and other people from Ghaziabad came and fought

with him. They also abused and assaulted him, HC noted, adding that each of these acts "are grave

and weighty matrimonial offences/misconducts by the wife, clearly destructive of the matrimonial

bond." Dismissing the wife's appeal HC said her behaviour " naturally gives rise to a bonafide and

genuine belief and apprehension in the mind of the husband it is not safe for him to peacefully and

mentally continue the relationship" as these constitute mental cruelty in law. (Times of India 27/3/16)

37. Bihar to Provide for Death Penalty to Enforce Liquor Ban (19)

PATNA: Ahead of phased ban on manufacture and sale of liquor in the state, the Bihar government

has decided to bring an amendment bill in the assembly on Wednesday to provide for death penalty

for people found violating it. "The state government will bring an amendment bill to include provision

of death penalty for manufacturing illicit country liquor after ban comes into effect in the state from

April 1," Bihar Excise and Prohibition Minister Abdul Jalil Mastan told media here on Tuesday. Chief

Minister Nitish Kumar last week announced the government in the ongoing budget session of the

assembly would amend law to include provision of death penalty for manufacturing and sale of illegal

liquor. Mastan said in the first phase, manufacture and sale of country and spiced liquor would be

banned followed by Indian-made foreign liquor later this year. Last year, during campaigning for the

2015 Bihar assembly elections, Nitish Kumar announced an alcohol ban to be implemented from April

1. The state minister said the poorest of the poor were consuming liquor, leading to family problems,

domestic violence and affecting their children's education. "Women are suffering more than anyone

else due to increasing liquor consumption." According to officials, the ban decision was expected to

impact the state government's financial health. Bihar earns an annual revenue of around Rs.3,650

crore from liquor sale. To provide the livelihood of those involved in the liquor business, the

government has offered them to sell products of the state-run Bihar State Milk Cooperative Federation

Ltd. under the brand name "Sudha Dairy". (New Indian Express 29/3/16)

38. Man to pay Rs 35,000 as monthly maintenance to estranged wife (19)

New Delhi, Apr 3 () A man, accused in a domestic violence case, has been directed to pay as monthly

maintenance Rs 35,000 to his estranged wife, with a Delhi court dismissing his appeal saying the

woman is entitled to live the status she was enjoying before parting ways. Additional Sessions Judge

Lokesh Kumar Sharma upheld a magisterial court order while considering the socio-economic status

of the parties and said the interim maintenance awarded to the woman was not on higher side.

"Keeping in view the mandate of the superior courts, the purpose behind awarding interim

maintenance is not only to save the wife from starvation and destitution, but also she is entitled to live

of the status which she was enjoying before parting with the company of her spouse. "In my

considered opinion, considering the socio-economic status of the parties, the interim maintenance as

awarded by the trial court does not seem to be on a higher side," the judge said. The court also noted

that both the parties were yet to adduce their respective evidences on record in support of their rival

claims. The man had filed an appeal against the magisterial court contending that his estranged wife,

who had sought maintenance from him in the case, was financially secure and had hidden her actual

income. The court, however, said, "If the appellant is able to adduce cogent evidence in support of his

allegations, then, trial court shall definitely take the same into consideration while deciding the case

finally and may even direct the woman to return the amount so received by her as an interim measure

if the case is finally decided against her." "As on date, there appears to be no illegality or infirmity in

the impugned order passed by the trial court warranting any kind of interference of this court in the

exercise of its appellate powers and jurisdiction," it said. In his appeal, the man had contended he had

aged parents to take care of and the court was not justified in awarding monetary relief to his

estranged wife. The court, however, rejected his contention saying they are retired government

servants, "hence, they cannot be considered as dependent on their son." AG ZMN DIP (Times of

India 3/4/16)

39. PIL challenges Bihar’s total ban on alcohol (19)

Patna: A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed today in the Patna High Court challenging the Bihar

government’s decision to clamp total ban on sale and consumption of alcohol in the state. An ex-

serviceman A. N. Singh filed the PIL in the Patna High Court, a day after the Nitish Kumar ministry

declared Bihar a total dry state. The petition contended that the state government’s decision violated

human rights of a citizen about what to eat and drink. The writ described the penal provision in the

Amended Excise Act of Bihar, which was passed in the state Legislative Assembly on March 31 last,

as “draconian, arbitrary and malafide” as it violated Article 14, 19, 21 and 22 of the Constitution. The

date for hearing the petition has not yet been fixed. The petition came a day after Chief Minister Nitish

Kumar announced the state cabinet’s decision to impose total ban on sale and consumption of liquor

including Indian Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL) in the state with immediate effect. (The Hindu 6/4/16)

40. SC to Centre: Provide relief to drought-hit states immediately (19)

New Delhi: The Supreme Court Wednesday urged the Centre to immediately provide relief to drought-

hit states, pointing out that soaring temperature this summer would worsen the situation. A bench

headed by Justice M B Lokur also expressed its displeasure over not releasing adequate funds to the

states under rural employment scheme (MGNREGA) and asked the Centre to furnish expenditure

details of drought-hit states. “If you are not releasing the funds, then no one will like to work. States

will say they have no funds, so they can’t pay anyone for MGNREGA work. No state will make any

commitment to the people… Relief has to be given immediately and not after one year. Temperature

is soaring at 45 degree celsius, there is no drinking water, nothing is there. You have to do some thing

and provide relief on time,” the bench said.The court underlined that as per government’s own figures,

average workdays under MGNREGA is 48 days whereas the statute says it should be 100 days. “The

argument holds substance that since you (Centre) are not releasing the funds, states are not willing to

allocate works to people under MGNREGA and hence the average workdays will fall,” it observed

while noting that 10 states have now been declared as drought-affected. (Indian Express 7/4/16)

41. Supreme Court judges plan court break with Madhya Pradesh retreat (19)

NEW DELHI: Retreats are generally popular with the corporate world. Of late, the practice has picked

up in the top bureaucracy where senior officials, particularly from the finance ministry, take all-

expenses paid holidays at some of the best resorts around Delhi after presentation of the Union

Budget. But this time, all the Supreme Court judges have decided to take a three-day retreat in

Madhya Pradesh, a break from mundane court procedures and "reflect on issues that directly or

indirectly come during the delivery of justice". This is the fourth retreat of SC judges, the last one

being in 2009, according to a source. Starting April 14, the judges' retreat, divided into eight sessions,

is being organised at the National Judicial Academy spread across 63 acres in the outskirts of Bhopal

where attendance of all the 25 apex court judges has been made compulsory. The campus boasts of

recreational facilities including a fully-equipped gymnasium, swimming pool, sauna, tennis, billiards

besides a 280-seater state- of-the-art auditorium and conference and seminar rooms. Reserve Bank

of India (RBI) governor Raghuram Rajan, national security adviser (NSA) Ajit Doval and experts from

the fields of business and education are some of the speakers who will give the judges an overview of

the world outside the judiciary. President Pranab Mukherjee is scheduled to address the concluding

session on April 16.The top judiciary will have a closed-door session with NSA Doval on April 15 on

national security and the threats of global terrorism, followed the next day by a session with

Raghuram Rajan who will address economic growth and globalisation. There is a session also

dedicated to climate change and key environmental challenges. Interestingly, the programme

schedule has not been shared with all the brother judges of the SC. Chief Justice of India T S Thakur

is believed to have formed a committee of four seniors - Justices J S Khehar, Madan B Lokur, Kurien

Joseph and A K Sikri-to oversee the retreat programme. The court is on vacation during this period…

(Times of India 8/4/16)

42. Can atheists swear in the name of Constitution: PIL filed in Bombay HC (19)

Mumbai: The question came to the discussion table in Bombay high court on Thursday when two

petitions were filed seeking liberty to people who are “atheists”to take oath in the name of Constitution

in the courts, instead of swearing in the name of God. Currently, as per Oath Act, 1969, a witness or

any person who deposes in the court, can swear in the name of God or by placing hands on a

religious book. In a PIL, a Pune-based couple, Sunil Mane and his wife Laxmikanta, cited a couple of

cases in Maharashtra at Bhivandi magistrate court and Pune district court wherein senior government

officials have told the court that they do not believe in God and expressed their willingness to take

oath in the name of Constitution but unfortunately they have not been permitted, the PIL said. In

another petition, an officer of Bhiwandi Municipal Corporation has made a similar plea. Both the

petitions are slated to come up for hearing in due course, high court sources said. “The Oaths Act,

1969, needs to be declared as violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution,” the Pune-based

couple said in the PIL. They urged the court to issue directions to the Union and state governments

that persons who are not willing to take oath in the name of God or by putting their hands on any

religious book should be allowed to take oath in the name of Indian Constitution. “People who are not

believers of God but have full faith in the Indian Constitution are getting denial during judicial

proceedings at various levels in Maharashtra when they request that they be administered oath in the

name of Indian Constitution,” the PIL said. “It is high time to make the oath system suitable to

democracy and in accordance with the spirit of Indian Constitution,” the PIL states. Advocate Asim

Sarode, through whom the PIL has been filed, said, “People, who are non-believers of God, are not

allowed to swear in the name of Indian Constitution or placing hands on the rule book.” He said that a

person of any religion would not have objection to taking oath in the name of Constitution as it is his

or her duty to abide by the Constitution. “This will help avoid flaring of communal thoughts and

feelings and it will also not create problems for people who are atheists,” Sarode added. (Hindustan

Times 14/4/16)

43. High Court upholds legal provision against foreign tax havens (19)

Madurai: In a major boost to the Centre’s efforts to prevent infusion of black money through shell

companies in foreign tax havens, the Madras High Court has upheld the Constitutional validity of

Section 94A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which empowers the government to declare any country,

with which it lacks effective exchange of information, a ‘notified jurisdictional area.’ Dismissing a batch

of writ petitions challenging the legal provision, inserted in the Act through an amendment in 2011, a

Division Bench of Justices V. Ramasubramanian and T. Mathivanan held that the insertion of Section

94A(1) did not amount to disrespecting international bilateral treaties to avoid double taxation. The

judges also refused to quash a notification issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes on November 1,

2013 declaring Cyprus a notified jurisdictional area irrespective of having entered into an ‘Agreement

for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with respect to Taxes on

Income and on Capital,’ with the Republic of Cyprus on December 21, 1994. Stating that the 1994

agreement contained a specific provision for exchange of information about investments made by

Cyprus-based companies in India and the source of investments, the judges said that a breach of that

obligation had forced the Centre to declare Cyprus a notified jurisdictional area and demand tax from

assesses transacting with individuals or companies in that country. Authoring the judgement, Mr.

Justice Ramasubramanian said that defensive measures such as insertion of Section 94A were

aimed at enforcing transparency in cross border remittances and preventing abuse of benefits

conferred by treaties. He recalled that the leaders of G20 nations had adopted certain resolutions in

the London summit on April 2, 2009 and issued a statement which read: “We agree to take action

against non-cooperative jurisdictions including tax havens. We stand ready to deploy sanctions to

protect our public finances and financial systems. The era of banking secrecy is over.” Observing that

the resolution passed by the G20 was what was sought to be given effect to by the insertion of

Section 94A in the Income Tax Act, the judge said that 15 other countries, including Australia, France,

Germany and the UK, had taken both legislative and non-legislative measures to deal with non-

cooperative jurisdictions such as British Virgin Islands, Jersey and Bermuda. (The Hindu 14/4/16)

44. Cops can't be used to pressurise others under DV act: Court (19)

New Delhi, Apr 18 () The Domestic Violence Act cannot be made a tool for using cops to pressurise

others, a Delhi court has said while dismissing a woman's plea seeking police protection to attend her

daughter's wedding. The court dismissed the woman's appeal seeking presence of two policemen to

pressurise her husband and in-laws to let her attend the marriage peacefully, saying there were no

specific allegations of threat in her domestic violence complaint, hence the relief could not be granted.

"The protection order under the Domestic Violence(DV) Act is aimed at protecting a vulnerable victim.

DV Act cannot be used for using the police force to pressurize others. In these circumstances, the

court does not find any ground to grant relief to the appellant. Appeal is, therefore, dismissed,"

Additional Sessions Judge Vrinda Kumari said. The woman, who had earlier secured monthly interim

alimony from her husband in the domestic violence case lodged against him, argued that presence of

two police constables with her would pressurize her husband and his family members and she would

be able to attend the marriage ceremony of her daughter, who lives with her father, in peace. The

court noted that there is no protection order in favour of the woman and also in her complaint she had

not alleged that she was not being allowed to see her children but had merely stated that her kids

were brainwashed against her. "In the entire complaint before the trial court as well as in the rejoinder,

there is no allegation that the appellant (woman) is not being allowed to see her children. "In the

rejoinder filed before the court, the woman has merely stated that her children have been brain-

washed by the husband and are not being imparted any religious training. There is no specific

allegation that the husband had ever restrained her from visiting her children," it said. A magisterial

court had on January 19, 2016 granted the woman interim maintenance from her estranged husband

in which the court did not consider her prayer for police protection. Earlier this month, the woman

moved two applications- one for release of the cheque deposited by her husband pursuant to

maintenance order and the second seeking police protection to attend the wedding of her daughter,

who lives with her father. (Times of India 18/4/16)

45. Triple talaq: Muslim Law Board to contest Shayara Bano case in Supreme Court (19)

LUCKNOW: With the All India Muslim Personal Law Board deciding to oppose any move to scrap

triple talaq and contest the Shayara Bano case that has called it unconstitutional in the Supreme

Court, the stage is set for another Shah Bano-like confrontation that had turned into a hot-button issue

in the 1980s. In 1985, Shah Bano, a 62-year-old Muslim mother of five from Indore, who was divorced

by her husband, had won the right to alimony in the SC. But the then Congress government of Rajiv

Gandhi, under pressure of Islamic orthodoxy, passed the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on

Divorce) Act, 1986, which diluted the SC judgement, and denied even destitute Muslim divorcees the

right to alimony. The AIMPLB on Saturday also decided to thwart any attempt at intervention by the

Centre, or "any authority", in the Muslim personal law. Last month, the SC had admitted the petition of

Shayara Bano from Uttarakhand seeking triple talaq to be declared unconstitutional. The apex court

had also initiated suo motu proceedings to examine the need for protecting the rights of all Muslim

women. AIMPLB is all set to become a party to the case. "The SC has accepted the board as a party

in the case. Now, the board will seek a similar intervention in the Shayara Bano case," said lawyer

Zafaryab Jilani. Hyderabad MP Asaduddin Owaisi, who was also present, said AIMPLB must hire best

lawyers to put up a strong case before the Supreme Court. (Times of India 18/4/16)

46. MP: Order reserved on PIL challenging gag order on Urdu literature (19)

Indore: The Indore bench of Madhya Pradesh high court reserved its order on a public interest

litigation (PIL) challenging the decision of National Council for Promotion of Urdu Language (NCPUL)

that asks writers to declare that their books will not be against India and nation. The division bench

comprising justices PK Jaiswal and Vivek Rusia heard the petition on Thursday. The PIL alleged that

the decision by NCPUL, run under the human resources development ministry, is violation of basic

features of the Constitution of India. City-based social activist Tapan Bhattacharya challenged the

decision holding it as violation of fundamental rights under Article 19 (Freedom of speech and

expression) and Article 351 of the Constitution. Petitioner’s counsel senior advocate Anand Mohan

Mathur said, “The Government of India has selected Urdu because it is a language of Muslim

minority. This is clear discrimination violating Article 14 because no such conditions have been

imposed on literature published in 21 other languages enshrined under the Eighth Schedule of the

Constitution.” Article 351 says that the forms, style and expression of Hindustani and other languages

of India specified in Eighth Schedule shall not be interfered. Hindustani is a mixture of Urdu, Hindi and

other languages. The counsel said, “The decision violates Article 15 which says that the state shall

not discriminate against any citizen on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of

them.” He said the BJP-led central government had gagged the freedom of writing in Urdu. “This has

not happened even during the British Raj. This is nothing but saffronising and politicisation against

Urdu literature and language,” he said. The form introduced by the NCPUL requires Urdu authors to

provide signatures of two witnesses. The council provides monetary assistance to books and

magazines, which are approved for bulk purchase. “The circular is nothing but a carrot-stick approach

to suppress the freedom of speech and expression of Urdu writers, which is condemnable and

deserves to be quashed,” said Mathur. (Hindustan Times 22/4/16)

47. How can 18,000 judges tackle 3 crore cases, CJI TS Thakur asks PM Modi (19)

NEW DELHI: Chief Justice of India T S Thakur almost broke down on Sunday as he lamented that the

judiciary had been made the scapegoat for the mounting pendency of cases, leading PM Narendra

Modi to offer a closed-door meeting with the judiciary to sort out the problem. "It is not only in the

name of a litigant or people languishing in jails but also in the name of development of the country, its

progress, that I beseech you to rise to the occasion and realise that it is not enough to criticise. You

cannot shift the entire burden on the judiciary," an emotional CJI said at the conference of chief

ministers and chief justices, his voice choking.The CJI said the Law Commission had recommended

in 1987 that the judge-population ratio be increased to at least 50 judges per million population.

However, three decades later, the ratio remained an abysmal 15 judges per million people in a

country which had added 25 crore in population since then, he added, looking towards the prime

minister. If in 1987, the Law Commission had recommended the judge strength to be 40,000 (at 50

judges per million population), how do you think the judiciary's present strength of 18,000 can dispose

of case pendency of three crore?" the CJI asked, looking towards Modi. His outburst caught the Prime

Minister's attention. Modi, who was not scheduled to speak at the event, said, "Jab jaago tab savera

(better late than never). I can understand his pain as a lot of time has lapsed since 1987. Whatever

has been the compulsions... We will do better in the future. Let us see how to move forward by

reducing the burden of the past."The Prime Minister invited the CJI and his senior colleagues for a

closed-door meeting with him and his top Cabinet ministers to discuss all issues pertaining to judicial

reforms and manpower constraints. On a lighter note, Modi recalled that as Gujarat CM, during one

such CMs and CJs conference, he had suggested reducing the vacation period of courts and

increasing the daily working hours. He said during the lunch break, he was in trouble as some judges

questioned the idea. He added that he remained in awe of the judiciary ever since.Though the CJI

suggested that the problem had historical roots, this comes in the backdrop of the confrontation

between the government and the judiciary over who should have primacy in the appointment of

judges to the SC and the high courts - a dispute which has delayed filling up of vacancies. ……

(Times of India 25/4/16)

48. Government asked to reply on PIL against Shiv Vadapav (19)

Mumbai: The Bombay high court on Tuesday directed the BMC and the government of Maharashtra

to file a reply on the public interest litigation seeking removal of all illegal ‘Shiv Vadapav’ stalls and

carts from roads of Mumbai. The petition has also sought investigation into the launch of the Shiv

Vadapav scheme alleging politicians were providing protection to such stalls after taking money from

the stall owners. Janseva Mandal, an NGO, had filed this petition last year and it came up for hearing

before the division bench of Justice V.M. Kanade and Justice Makrand Subhash Karnik which asked

the respondents to file their reply and posted the matter for hearing after summer vacation. According

advocate Umesh Mohite, the petitioner had seen a news report based on details received by

municipal corporator Dhananjay Pisal which said that there were more than 250 Shiv Vadapav stalls

across the city, however, the none of the licensing authorities have issued any licence to run them.

The petitioner then collected these documents from the corporator and filed the petition. The

petitioner also alleged that Shiv Vadapav is nothing but re-introduction of ‘Zunka Bhakar Centre’,

which was scrapped on the court’s order. “Zunka Bhakar Centres had BMC and state licence but still

the high court and later Supreme Court directed that they be shut down,” said Mr Mohite adding that

BMC’s health and licensing departments have clearly stated in their replies to the RTI that they did not

issue any licence to Shiv Vadapav scheme. It is alleged in the petition that as per information

gathered by petitioner permission to run Shiv Vadapav business is given at the local level by the ward

office on the recommendation of local politicians. The petitioner has claimed that the permission mean

the civic body does not take action against these stalls but to get this permission to run the business

one has to shell out one-time amount of around Rs 80,000 and monthly share of Rs 5,000. “However,

who collects the money and who keeps the same, what happens to the money collected is not

accounted for and thus it is seen that the entire scheme is illegal and a big scam,” read the petition.

(Asian Age 27/4/16)

49. Supreme Court extends central rule in Uttarakhand; no floor test on Friday (19)

NEW DELHI: There will be no floor test for the dismissed Harish Rawat government on April 29 as the

Supreme Court on Wednesday continued the central rule in Uttarakhand and promised a swift verdict

on the constitutional validity of the Centre's recourse to Article 356. A bench of Justices Dipak Misra

and Shiva Kirti Singh said it was a matter of immense constitutional importance and would be decided

expeditiously, thus ruling out the traditional reference of such petitions to a five-judge constitution

bench, which normally take months to pass an order. Importantly, the court got the Centre to commit

afresh that it would not lift central rule till pronouncement of the verdict, something which should calm

the opposition's fears that the BJP will manage a majority in the state assembly and approach the

governor to revoke central rule and invite it to form the government. Before adjourning the hearing,

the bench asked attorney general Mukul Rohatgi to take instructions on whether it was acceptable for

the Centre to allow trust vote in the House and submit its result in a sealed cover to the SC. The AG

said it was not acceptable and the government would prefer a final verdict. Still, the SC asked the AG

to take instructions and inform it on Tuesday. It fixed a three-day schedule for the completion of the

hearing and gave itself a week to pen the judgment. The Supreme Court asked Rohatgi to commence

arguments on May 3 and conclude by May 4 afternoon. Counsel for Rawat and the assembly

Speaker, senior advocates A M Singhvi and Kapil Sibal, were told to complete their submissions by

May 5. "We will give the judgment before the court closes for summer vacation on May 13," the bench

said. If it actually happens, then this case will go down in judicial history as the swiftest decision in a

case involving scrutiny of constitutional validity of use of Article 356. Terming the issues raised in the

Centre's appeal and Rawat's petition before the HC as matters of immense constitutional importance,

the bench put forward seven questions outlining the parameter for testing the validity of the imposition

of central rule. The HC had quashed the central rule on April 21 as unconstitutional and restored the

Rawat government. Rohatgi, assisted by additional solicitors general Maninder Singh and Tushar

Mehta, justified the central rule on three grounds-Rawat government's failure to pass the

appropriation bill on March 18, the Speaker's "unconstitutional" action in declaring the bill passed

when it had failed, and the sting operation which showed Rawat purportedly indulging in horse-

trading. Singhvi and Sibal said if horse-trading was a ground, then central rule should have been

imposed when BJP lured away nine Congress MLAs. "The Union government cannot indulge in

selective morality. And, if corruption is a ground for imposition of central rule, then not a single

government in the states can survive for five minutes," they said, admitting the deep roots corruption

has struck in the country. … (Times of India 28/4/16)