Daily Legal News Update
- Judgement of the Supreme Court of India regarding the Cancellation of the examinations:
Due to the corona pandemic, the examination of various departments are either suspended or postponed. Earlier already the Supreme Court of India, declared that the students of all other semester except the final year’s students shall be promoted to the next academic year. Because of this decision to conduction of the final year examination, students as well the teachers showed their disagreement towards it.
Various strikes were done by the students to cancel the examination. They referred the court for the conduction of the online or virtual examination rather than the direct examination. Because according to this would definitely risk the life of the students due to the corona virus.
However, the UGC (University Grants commission) gave its revised guidelines, in which it clearly mentioned that the conduct of the final year examination is mandatory for all. But due this situation various state government of India cancelled their state’s final year examination and choosing any alternate procedure.
On this point, Abhisek Manu Singhvi gave this view on the favour of the students. He supported the state government decision of the cancellation of examination. So after all tomorrow on 28th August the Supreme Court of India will give its judgement on the guidelines provided by the UGC.
- Issuing of the confirm Tickets to the PWD(Person With Disabilities) students for the examination of the Delhi University’s open book examination :
Soon the Delhi Government is going to conduct the second round of the Delhi University’s open book examination for the students who were left out in the First round of this examination.
For the examination students (candidate) from the distant states have to come to Delhi. So for this reason the High court of Delhi have asked to the railway department To issue the confirm railway tickets at a very low or subsidized price to the PWD(Person With Disabilities) students. So that this students can travel to Delhi for the Delhi University’s open book examination.
The direction was given to the Union ministry and the Social Justice and empowerment by the Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Subramanian Prasad for the approach to the Railway Department for the arrangement of the tickets for the disabled students.
- “Not asking for anything more, Just show me the series before it is released” – Mehul Choksi on Bad Boy Billionaires.
Mehul Choksi an accused of PNB scam case has filed a writ petition in Delhi HC against Netflix Inc. for its show Bad Boys Billionaires where he has asked for pre-screening of the show before its release.
Justice Navin Chawla of Delhi HC is hearing this matter, where Choksi the petitioner has moved the delhi HC regarding his concern about the impact of the show which is has a background of India’s failed businessman and revolves around Nirav Modi nephew of Mehul Choksi also a co accused in the scam case; Choksi states that the release of the show would hamper the hearing of his case and also is against his fundamental right guaranteed by Article 21, where the senior counsel on behalf of Netflix Inc. has cleared that only 2 mins of the show are based on Choksi and also whatever has been shown is already disclosed in public domain.
The matter is further adjourned till August 28. Where Justice Navin Chawla would pass an order.
- FIR plea against Anurag Thakur and Parvesh Verma dismissed on grounds of lack of prior sanction.
Today Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Vishal Pahuja of Delhi Court has dismissed the plea filed by political leaders, Brinda Karat and KM Tiwari wherein they have urged to register an FIR against Anurag Thakur and Pravesh Verma the BJP leaders under section 156(3) of CrPC.
The court stated that there is no prior sanction given by the Central Government in this case which would permit the court to allow the petition and allow registeration of FIR. It was further argued that Anurag Thakur had used the statement “Desh ke gaddaro ko, goli maaro saalon ko” in his rally and Prevesh Verma in his interview with a media publication house gave provocating communal statement against Shaheen Bhagh. Court pointed out that there is no violation as such and the petition lacks prior sanction and on these grounds dismissed the petition.
- Standard Operating Procedure has been issued by the Delhi High Court which have to be followed for the physical hearings to take place from the 1st of September.
In order to recommence the physical hearings certain Standard Operating Procedure have been issued by the Delhi high court. The court also took the notice to state that the courts, despite hearing the cases in a physical hearing or video conferencing shall divide the cases as per the following directions
- Cases which need to be heard urgently.
- Matters that do not need to be heard urgently, these include cases that have been filed amidst the lockdown. However these need to be restricted to 3-5 cases.
- Other regular issues to be heard only after seeking consent from both the parties.
The number cases to be heard in a physical hearing should not exceed more than 25 cases and these hearings cannot take place after 3 PM, as after the specified time the building needs to be handed over to the house keeping staff, who will sanitise the building. During the time of e-filing the case, the advocate shall specify the mode (physical or virtual) in which the parties are willing to hear the case.
The following are allowed to enter into the court premises
- Enter shall be limited to “one advocate per party”
- The counsel engaged by that particular advocate
- For the task of delivering the heavy files, registered clerk shall be allowed for certain specified time period.
- The counsel who is nominated
- Party-in-person where such party is pursuing the case himself/herself without any legal assistance.
The guidelines further state that “Advocates, Party-in-person and registered clerks above the age of 65 years and those suffering from co-morbidities may refrain from appearing in courts. Persons displaying symptoms of flu, fever, cough etc. shall not be permitted entry inside the court complex.”
The SOP states other essential arrangements in order to be cautious such as,
- In order to ensure strict adherence to the norm of social distancing, seats in each court room have been limited to bare minimum.
- Entry in the court-room shall be permitted to those Advocates/party-in person whose matter is called out for hearing and also for the Advocates whose item is the immediate next ,subject to availability of space.
- Advocates shall be permitted entry for using video conferencing facility created at the ground floor of the Main Building (ABlock).
- Medical Facilities in the form of an additional Ambulance with complete infrastructure to tackle Covid-19 emergencies shall be stationed during working hours in the High Court.
- Bar Council of India argues before the high court of Karnataka stating “NLSIU is not a state enterprise, it is a model institution that we set up”.
While submitting its arguments, BCI states that National Law School of India University, Bangalore (NLSIU) is an institution which has been autonomously established by them with the “assurance that it would be an autonomous University”. Further arguing that such an amendment runs against the foundational principles of the parent act, which is the NLSIU Act. Fortifying the argument further, Vikramjit Banerjee states that “NLSIU is not a State Enterprise”, rather the state here is a meager facilitator. Banerjee clarifies that “There will be misunderstanding even among brothers. We are not against the state government. But this is not acceptable, and that is why we (BCI) are aggrieved.” Answering the questions raised by the court regarding the competence of the state to implement such reservations, Banerjee stated that “State does not have the competence….because of the unique nature of NLS. Any reservation in NLS will be against the objective of the NLSIU Act. State does not have power to dilute the provisions of the Act.” Taking into consideration all the arguments submitted the bench constituting of justice BV Nagarathna and Ravi Hosmani, concluded the hearing stating that before issuing any orders the bench will hear the government on 31st of August.
- Delhi HC stays IRP against Anil Ambani
The Delhi HC on Thursday hearing via video conference passed a stay i.e; to put on hold the Insolvency Resolution Process (IRP) proceedings against Anil Ambani.
In august 2016, SBI have given loan of an amount of rs.1200 crore for Anil Ambani in which he had personally guaranteed for the ₹565 crore and ₹635 crore SBI loans to RCom and Reliance Infratel Ltd (RITL), respectively. Bench on putting on hold also stated that no transferring or disposing of his assets till the next hearing and also mentioned that Ambani need to co-operate while proceedings for the examining him by the IPR. SBI urged court to allow the resolution professional appointed by NCLT to make a report which was rejected by the court. The court adjourned the next hearing to October 6.
- Human beings irrespective of gender identities are fully entitled to enjoy their own rights : says Odisha HC
A habeas corpus plea has been filed in Odisha HC by 24 year old transman. The petitioner who identified himself said unfortunately he was forcibly taken away from his partner. The petitioner stated in his plea that he need a complete protection from the either families on the grounds of the fundamental rights as he was opposed to live with same gender. The bench decided to support the petitioner as the duo has right to decide their sexual preferences and ordered the police authorities to get the partner back to the petitioner and provide protection to them.