Updates - 29 June to 3 July 2022
- Krishnapriya Sreekumar
- Jul 3, 2022
- 8 min read
Updated: Jul 4, 2022
Image Credits: Google Images
29 June 2022
KK Venugopal to continue as Attorney General of India for an additional 3 months.
KK Venugopal was appointed as Attorney General of India in 2017 for a three-year term which was extended twice [by one year each]. His tenure has now been extended once again for a three-month period.
KK Venugopal, a Senior Advocate in the Supreme Court of India, was appointed as Attorney General under the Modi Government in 2017.
29 June 2022
Kerala HC seeks explanation from Magistrate for violation of Arnesh Kumar Guidelines
The Kerala High Court recently sought an explanation from a Magistrate for the remand of two accused persons whose arrest was made without satisfying the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar
The Bench comprising of Justices Alexander Thomas and Shoba Eapen additionally issued a contempt of court notice to the arresting officer observing that Arnesh Kumar guidelines are 'violated by police officers more often than they are complied with'. The Court additionally cited D.K Basu v. State of West Bengal and Joginder Kumar v. State of U.P & Ors.
"It is by now, well established as an elementary proposition of criminal jurisprudence as can be seen from a reading of [Arnesh Kumar], [D.K.Basu] [Joginder Kumar]...that no arrest can be made merely because it is lawful for the Police Officer to do so and the existence of the power to arrest is one thing and justification of the exercise of it is quite another and no arrest shall be made without reasonable satisfaction reached after some investigation about the genuineness and bonafides of a complaint and a reasonable belief that both as per the person's complicity and even as to the necessity to arrest that person and denial of liberty is a serious matter, etc."
[Gopika Jayan & Anr. v Faisal MA]
30 June 2022
Kanhaiya Murder Case: Accused remanded to 14-day Judicial Custody
The two prime accused, Mohammed Riyaz Akhtar and Mohammed Gaus, in the gruesome murder of Udaipur-based tailor Kanhaiya Lal Teli, have been remanded to 14-days of judicial custody [till 13 July] by the Udaipur District & Sessions Court.
Brief Background
Kanhaiya Lal Teli was murdered by the two accused in broad daylight on 28 June 2022. The victim suffered multiple injuries caused by sharp weapons. It is alleged that such a drastic step was taken by the two accused owing to a social media post made by the tailor in support of BJP Spokesperson Nupur Sharma's controversial remarks about Prophet Muhammed.
Following initial investigations, the National Investigation Agency [NIA] took over the matter and subsequently registered a case against the two.
“The accused persons had also circulated a video of the criminal act in the social media claiming responsibility for the murder in order to trigger panic and strike terror among the masses across the country,” the NIA said [Source: The Hindu]
30 June 2022
The Killing of Kashmiri Pandits: J&K,L HC initiates case based on letter petition
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh recently initiated a case based on a letter petition which sought the intervention of the Court in the killings of Kashmiri Pandits. The letter also sought intervention in the relocation of Kashmiri Pandits outside the Kashmir Valley.
The plea alleged that the administration is 'playing with the lives of religious minorities for some vested interest which needs to be investigated' as recorded by Bar and Bench.
[Kashmiri Pandit Sangarsh Samiti v. Union Territory of Jammu and Kashir]
30 June 2022
Karnataka HC: Treating wife like a cash cow, with no emotional attachment is cruelty
The Karnataka High Court, whilst granting divorce to a woman, opined a husband treating his wife as a cash cow, and using her for monetary purposes without any emotional attachment towards her would amount to mental cruelty.
The Bench comprising of Justices Alok Aradhe and JM Khazi presided over the matter wherein the wife had sought an appeal against a Family Court order denying her divorce from the respondent on the grounds of cruelty.
In the present case, the wife had spent over INR 60 Lakhs on her husband's failed business ventures and loan repayments. The appellant claimed that she faced emotional and mental agony at the hands of the respondent and was severely ill-treated.
The Court, whilst citing Samar Ghosh v. Jaya Ghosh and Dastane v. Dastane reiterated that matters of marital dispute and cruelty allegations should be evaluated on the merits of each case.
[Leena Monteiro vs Alwyn D'Cruz].
30 June 2022
Centre notifies appointment of Justice Alok Aradhe as acting Chief Justice of Karnataka High Court
The order is effective from 3 July 2022. This follows the retirement of present Chief Justice Ritu Awasthi on Saturday.
Justice Alok Aradhe became a permanent judge in 2011 after serving as an Additional Judge of the Madhya Pradesh High Court from 2009 onwards. After his transfer to the Jammu and Kashmir High Court in 2016, he was appointed as the acting Chief Justice of the J&K HC from May 2018-August 2018.
He is presently the senior-most judge in the Karnataka High Court.
30 June 2022
Bombay HC: BCCI engaged in commercial activities, covered under ESI Act
The Bombay High Court recently observed that the Board of Control for Cricket in India [BCCI], although claims to be a non-profit making autonomous body, is engaged in commercial activities [through Indian Premier League, international cricket tours, selling of television rights, and so on] through which it earns profits, therefore, it is covered under Employees State Insurance Act [ESI] Act.
Hence, in light of the same, the Court observed that they are liable to pay their employees appropriate contribution under the said Act.
[Board of Control for Cricket in India v. Regional Director Employees State Insurance Corporation & Anr.]
1 July 2022
Kerala HC dismisses plea to establish Supreme Court benches in all HCs, increase the retirement age of judges.
The Kerala High Court dismissed a plea that sought:
Establishment of a two-judge bench of the Supreme Court in all High Courts of the country to hear matters of the 'poor and destitute.'
Direction to the Centre to enhance the retirement age of all judges and judicial offers to 75 years
Direction to the Centre to ensure judicial officers do not accept any government post after retirement.
The petition was dismissed by a division bench of Chief Justice S Manikumar and Justice Shaji P Chandy.
The plea made severe allegations about judicial corruption and prayed to implement specific steps to ensure true judicial independence. The Bench observed:
"Though the petitioner – party-in-person has alleged that some of the judges were hand in glove with the criminals and obtained post-retirement postings, which allegations are very serious, having regard to the reliefs sought for, we are not inclined to advert to the same and no direction in the nature of mandamus as prayed for, can be granted"
[Abdul Jaleel v. State of Kerala, W.P.(C) No.20159 of 2022]
1 July 2022
SEBI imposes INR 1.6Cr penalty on Kotak Mahindra's MD and Others
The Securities Exchange Board of India [SEBI] imposed a penalty of INR 1.6 Crores on the Kotak Mahindra Trustee Company and Managing Director of Kotak Asset Management Company [AMC], Nilesh Shah, and others, including Kotak Mahindra's fund managers, Compliance Officer and Director. The penalty was imposed for disregarding rules relating to mutual funds whilst investing in the Essel Group Companies.
Kotak AMC and the officials mentioned above violated mutual fund rules and regulations by failing to make investment decisions exclusively in the interest of unit holders, apart from not rendering a high standard of service, not exercising due diligence, and not ensuring proper care at the time of investment, among others.
1 July 2022
CCI approves Google's proposed acquisition of 1.28% Stake in Bharati Airtel
Competition Commission of India [CCI] approves Google's proposed acquisition of 1.28% stake in Bharati Airtel. This opens the doorway to a USD 1 Billion investment by Google as a part of their India Digitization Fund.
Apart from said investment, the Delaware-based tech company will acquire a minority and non-controlling stake in Bharati Airtel. The two companies have also entered into specific commercial deals, per CCI's press release.
1 July 2022
Delhi HC takes suo motu cognizance of improper monsoon water harvest and traffic jams during monsoons.
The Delhi High Court recently took suo motu cognizance of a lack of rainwater harvesting in Delhi and traffic jams due to waterlogging on roads during monsoon. This was motivated by a Times of India article that observed the Capital's lack of proper rainwater harvesting efforts.
The Court, whilst taking cognizance of the issue, observed that it is a matter of 'public importance.'
A Division Bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh and Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma issued directions to the Centre, the Delhi Government, Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Public Works Department, and the Delhi Police, among other authorities, to file a status report on the matter.
The status report must inter alia include:
1. Measures adopted by them to harvest and store rainwater
2. Steps taken to mitigate traffic jams/snarls in Delhi during monsoon and other periods.
The report is to be filed by 4 July 2022, after which the matter will be listed before the Hon'ble Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court, Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma.
[Court on its own motion v. GNCTD & Ors.]
2 July 2022
Kerala HC appoints Amicus Curiae to determine whether a S.164 Statement is a 'Public Document'
The Kerala High Court appointed an Amicus Curiae to aid the Court in determining whether a statement recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is a 'Public Document'.
Justice Kauser Edappagath appointed the Amicus in a plea moved by Saritha S. Nair, the prime accused in the 2014 Solar Panel Scam Case in Kerala, seeking copies of the S.164 Statement given by Swapna Suresh, an accused in the 2020 Diplomatic Gold Smuggling Case. The Counsel for the Petitioner argued that the aforesaid statement is a public document and therefore, the petitioner is entitled to receive a copy of the same.
Advocate K.K Dheerendrakrishnan has been appointed as the Amicus Curiae.
The matter has been adjourned to July 11.
[Saritha S. Nair v. Union of India & Anr.]
2 July 2022
Kerala HC: Can only refer to Arbitration when there is a clear, unequivocal denial of a right
The Kerala High Court's Justice P.B Suresh Kumar and Justice C.S Sudha observed that the right to refer a matter to arbitration only arises when there is a clear and unequivocal denial of the right of one party by another.
"Since a dispute entails a positive element, a mere inaction to pay does not lead to the inference that a dispute exists and there is no right to apply for reference of a dispute to arbitration until there is a clear and unequivocal denial of the right asserted by one party by the other."
[Sourthern Railway v. M/s Cherian Varkey Construction CO. Pvt. Ltd.]
3 July 2022
Delhi HC grants protection to Sony Entertainment Network against illegal telecast of International Cricket Series 2022 by rogue websites
The Delhi High Court has granted an injunction in favour of Sony Entertainment Network [Sony] against rogue websites' unlawful telecast of the International Cricket Series 2022. Justice Sanjeev Narula passed the order whilst hearing a matter filed by Sony against the pirated and unlicensed telecast of the forthcoming India-England International Cricket Series 2022 [India Tour of England 2022] by rogue websites.
The petitioners herein submitted that they received an exclusive license from the England and Wales Cricket Board Limited to broadcast the said sporting event to certain public territories of India, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka, among others.
[Culver Max Entertainment Private Limited formerly known as Sony Pictures Network India Private Limited v. F1.MYLIVECRICKET.LIVE & Ors.]
3 July 2022
Madras HC: Can apply for further investigation even after commencement of trial
The Madras High Court recently observed that an application for further investigation can be made even after the commencement of trial. Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy opined that Section 173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure does not bar the Police from conducting further investigation after the commencement of trial.
"Section 173(8) of Cr.P.C., does not place any fetter on the Police to conduct further investigation in the case after commencement of trial and whenever they come across any additional information it is just and necessary that the same be brought to the notice of the Court".
Citing Vinubhai v. State of Gujarat, the Court observed that the purpose of further investigation is that "any person who has wrongly been prosecuted cannot suffer the same and any person, who [has] actually committed the offence, should not escape punishment."
[Ganesan v. SHO & Anr.]
Comments