Prolawctor Daily Legal Updates |2 August, 2020

  1. Prashant Bhushan approach Supreme Court against its Secretary General in contempt

    Senior Advocate Prashant Bhushan has filed a challenge against the action Secretary General to list the contempt petition filed against him on judicial side without the consent of the Attorney General, in the Supreme Court.
    The petition has been filed in the wake of the Supreme Court issuing notice to Bhushan in contempt of court proceedings initiated against him, based on a plea moved by one Mahek Maheshwari. Maheshwari’s petition was defective to the extent that it was lacking consent from the Attorney General or Solicitor General, as is required under the law for initiating contempt of court proceedings.

  2. The Apex Court of India has asked the Jharkhand to find out the possibility of limited
    entry in religious places by keeping in mind the Covid19 restrictions.
    The Supreme Court has modified the order of High Court of Jharkhand with regards to its order denying permission for holding Shravani Mela amid Covid19 by asking the Jharkhand Government to find out possibility limited entry in religious places keeping the social distancing norms.
    The bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra observed that, in all religious places, entry of limited number of persons/devotees should have been allowed as is being done throughout India. It is said High Court ought not to have directed that no entry should be permitted in the months of Shravan and Bhado as it fot the State Government to take a call on this.
  3. ‘The Hindu’ former editor N Ram, Prashant Bhushan and Arun Shourie (Former
    Union Minister) has moved to the Supreme Court challenging the constitutionality
    Sec. 2(c)(i) of the Courts Act 1971.
    “Offence of scandalizing the Courts rooted in colonial assumptions”, says N Ram and two others challenging the Constitutionality Section 2(c)(i) of Courts Act 1971. Section 2(c)(i) deals with the offence of criminal contempt on the ground of scandalizing the courts or lowering the dignity of the court.

  4. The Madras High Court has warned Private Schools to not to deny collection of fees
    in instalments.
    The Madras High Court has warned private schools of contempt action against them for flouting order to accept fee payment in instalment amid CoronaVirus Pandemic. Justice N Anand Venkatesh was informed today by the State that there were several complaints received from parents that Educational Institutions were insisting on the payment of the entire fees, despite the Court’s July 17 order to the contrary. On July 17, the Judge had passed an interim order directing that educational institutions can only collect 40% of tuition fees from students for the time being, while schools remain closed.

  5. Hospitals which provide free services to some patients but charge a bulk of others fall
    under consumer protection act: Supreme Court
    The Supreme Court has observed that it is only where a hospital provides medical services free of charge to all the patient irrespective of their financial condition would stand outside the purview of Consumer Act, other hospitals charging some patient and providing free services to some would still come under the Act.

Leave a Reply

error: Content is protected !!
%d bloggers like this: