Daily Legal News Update
- The apex court sets aside a plea filed to revoke fees charged for class 10th and 12th CBSE compartmental exams.
The bench constituting of Justice AM Khanwilkar, Justice Dinesh Maheshwari, and Justice Sanjiv Khanna dismissed the aforementioned plea. The term compartment exam is assigned to the exams conducted by the CBSE board for the students who have failed to pass one or two exams. The board gives them a total of three attempts to clear the compartment exam. Therefore, the bench dismissed the plea, seeking cancelation of such exam during the time of a pandemic, due to absence of “substantive petition” regarding this pertinent issue.
- A contempt proceeding advanced by Advocate Amit Panchal against Yatin Oza has been rejected by the high court of Gujarat.
The intervention plea filed has been dismissed by the high court of Gujarat which has been moved against Yatin Oza, who is the president of GHAA President. The bench constituting of Justice Sonia Gokani and Justice NV Anjaria heard the plea which urged the court to hold Yatin Oza liable for certain contemptuous comments made thereby, accusing Oza of circulating the certain crucial details regarding a telephonic conversation between the chief justice and the members of High Court Advocates WhatsApp group. The advocates, while citing the judgement in Vijay Kurle and Ors. along with the constitutional provisions pertaining to the contempt jurisdiction of High Courts stated that a material can be considered from any “any corner”. However, the court rejected an intervention of any form asserting that “No one has any statutory right to claim to be an intervener or to participate as the complainant in the proceedings of contempt which is between the court and the contemnor. It is exclusively the court’s discretion to take into account even the material which comes from a reliable source termed to be the material to initiate action of contempt whether to initiate the action on the basis of such material or not, even if it is found to be prima facie the material of contempt. No one can compel the court to initiate any action of contempt.”
Nonetheless, the court allowed for admission of the material placed by observing that “Any material which is authentic and is derived from any source which is not questionable, the court can make use of it without permitting anyone to implead itself as an intervener. It being a material which is related, it is required to be taken on record.”
- Karnataka HC allows withdrawal of plea
The Karnataka HC on Thursday allowed to withdraw a plea on conducting of isntermediate semester exams in October. The petition is filed by Chakraborty, a student of KSLU challenging the guidelines of UGC passed on July 9. The petitioner appeared in court as a party of persons.
- Bombay HC says Wadhawan brothers get default bail
A case has been filed against Kapil and Dheeraj wadhawan where the brothers were arrested and remanded before magistrate on May 14. Under sec 167 of Cr.P.C they needed be in jail for 60 days for investigation before granting a default bail. On July 13 they applied for a default bail but the lower court dismissed as the 60 days remand has not been completed by excluding first day of remand. Later they filed in HC of Bombay where it made clear that the remand date will start from the first day itself pointing out the case Deepak Satyavan Kudalkar vs. state of Maharashtra, the decision was not good in the eyes of law as there are many objections in the case in which SC earlier ruling used to be for similar cases. In these terms the Wadhawan brothers were granted default bail in ED case. But they will still remain in jail as CBI lodged a case against them.
- Three courtrooms to be made ready for the physical hearing on the next seven days:
The Seven judge committe consisting of Justice NV Ramana, Justice Arun Mishra, Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman, Justice UU Lalit, Justice AM Khanwilkar, Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice Nageshwara Rao asked the official of the court for the physical hearing and proceedings. They had asked for the preparation of the three courtrooms to be ready within this coming week.
They also communicated that the matters should be listed in the courts 10 days after the courtroom will get ready for the operation of the hearing. Again it is also stated that all the matters from the Monday to Friday including all the simple or complicated would be continued though the virtual process via video conferencing.
- Delhi High Court gave remarks about the reduction of COVID-19 cases in Delhi:
Delhi High Court said that it cannot be said that that the pandemic situation is coming in control in the national capital of India. Divisional bench of Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Subramonium Prasad deal with the petition about the rate and status of the corona virus testing in Delhi. It is found that the number of COVID-19 positive cases rose to 1300 cases per day there.
- “Take 2-3 days’ time to Reconsider and Modify your statement”- SC to Prashant Bhushan in Contempt Case.
Yesterday, Prashant Bhushan had filed an application before the Apex court requesting deferment of his quantum of sentence hearing today. The court rejected his plea and the hearing took place, after 2 hours of submissions and mentions the three judge bench of Justice Arun Mishra, Justice B.R.Gavai and Justice Krishan Murari assured Bhushan that his sentencing will not take place till the review petition order is delivered.
Activist Bhushan submitted that he regrets some part of his tweets but also considers that his tweets regarding the indian Judiciary were his highest duty which he had to perform, as criticism works best in case of democracy. Bhushan also stated that he is pained because he is grossly misunderstood. The court further quote that everything has a Laksham Rekha which shouldn’t be crossed.
Bhushan then stated that he was just discharging his duty and he is not asking for mercy and he is ready to cheerfully accept any kind of sentence which would be awarded to him, to this the Court urged Bhushan that he should take 2-3 days’ time to reconsider and modify his statement and file an unconditional apology till August 24 if he wishes so, to this Bhushan submitted that there won’t be any substantial change, but later convinced the bench that he shall rethink on his statement. Bhushan also requested that his quantum hearing be heard by another bench to which the bench remarked “You are asking us to commit an act of impropriety that arguments on sentencing should be heard by other bench”.
Thus today the bench asked Bhushan to rethink a about his statement and file an apology, explaining that conviction is not so easy in contempt cases.
- Additional Advocate General Appointed by Tamil Nadu Government
A notification dated August 12 which was issued by the government of Tamil Nadu bearing the names of two additional Advocate General for Madras High Court.
The Government of Tamil Nadu has issued a notification in the official Gazette which bears the names of -Advocate M. Sricharan Rangarajan as the new additional advocate general for Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, he served as a special government pleader for the Chennai Bench. – Advocate K.Kumaresh Babu as the new additional advocate general for the Chennai Bench of Madras High Court.