Daily Legal Update
- A big step by Supreme Court to address gender injustice.
The Apex Court in the case of Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh granted women equal right in Hindu joint family property with retrospective effect, the court has removed the last vestige of gender discrimination in coparcenary rights that had lingered on despite a change in law. Now, the amendment Act will be applicable retrospectively, clock has been set back and addresses a historical injustice to women.
- The Bar Council is set to make Mediation with conciliation to be a compulsory subject in law colleges from Academic Year 2020-21.
The Bar council of India (BCI) has mandated that Mediation to be taught as regular and compulsory subject in 3 year and 5 year LLB degree courses with effect from 2020-21 Academic sessions. The aim of the introduction of this subject is to provide training in practical skills apart from theory.
- Well known academician and advocate Navroz Seervai said the Hon’ble Supreme Court judgement on Prashant Bhushan case is clearly erroneous in its reasoning, analysis and interpretation of contempt jurisdiction.
The judgement stated that “…magnanimity cannot be stretched to such an extent, which may amount to weakness in dealing with a malicious, scurrilous, calculated attack on the very foundation of the institution of the judiciary.”
- Dishonour of cheque not an “offence against society”, mitigating circumstances can be considered in sentencing: P&H HC
In the case of Rakesh Kumar v. Jasbir Singh and another, the Punjab and Haryana High Court recently ruled that the offence of dishonour of a cheque is not an offence against society and that an accused is entitled to have mitigating factors considered in sentencing.
- The Supreme Court seemed unhappy as centre has not released stress funds.
The Apex Court seemed unhappy with Union Government for not releasing money from the real estate stress funds created by them, towards completion of Amarpalli projects despite being asked to do so repeatedly over the last 3 months.
- The Supreme Court said, can’t have roving inquiry into centre’s “Covid19” mismanagement.
The bench observed that there is a worldwide view that the judiciary should not interfere in an executive decision in an emergency situation like the pandemic. On Friday, the Supreme Court said that it is not in favour of appointing a commission to inquire into the alleged mismanagement of the COVID-19 pandemic in the country.