Apex Court rules that CDs are documents & can be considered as evidence under law.
Apex Court allowed compact discs (CDs) to be treated as a document under the law and said that litigants should be allowed to prove or disprove such electronic proof in judicial proceedings. The apex court, permitted accused to bring on record the taped telephonic conversations to prove his innocence in a child s*xual abuse case.
Apex Court: Claim of Stridhan maintainable even after separation from husband
Apex Court rules that a woman has inalienable rights over stridhan and she can claim it even after separation from her husband. The Apex Court further said that denying it would amount to domestic violence making the husband and in-laws liable to face criminal prosecution.
As per Hindu law, stridhan is whatever a woman receives during her lifetime including all movable, immovable property, gifts etc received prior to marriage, at the time of marriage and during child birth.
The bench clarified that separation under court order is different from divorce and the couple remains as husband and wife, although living separately. It said under judicial separation a couple can keep their status as wife and husband till their lifetime and a wife is entitled to invoke the Act during that period if her rights are violated.
“It is quite clear that there is a distinction between a decree for divorce and decree of judicial separation; in the former, there is a severance of status and the parties do not remain as husband and wife, whereas in the later, the relationship between husband and wife continues and the legal relationship continues as it has not been snapped,” the bench said.
Apex Court held that Lawyers should not go on strike
The Supreme Court on Friday said lawyers should not go on strike or give calls to boycott courts adding that it’s like “Brahmastra” (weapon created by Brahma) one should use it in a difficult situation, but now-a-days this is being used frequently.
The bench said that court also observed that there is a constitution bench judgment of the Supreme Court prohibiting strike by lawyers. “This is a very serious problem, it needs to worked out,”
Meanwhile, senior advocate Ram Jethmalani, appearing for the Bar, said “not to work is also a constitutional right…” He, however, said that we can sit down in the family of lawyers and decide the issue.
Apex Court slaps fine on govt for no reply in case forcing women to become devadasis
Apex Court has slapped a fine of Rs. 25,000 on the Centre for failing to file on time an affidavit on women being forced to become ‘devadasis’ and the possibility of abolition of the age-old tradition.
In September, the Centre had agreed to file a composite affidavit with regard to the system of women being allegedly forced to become devadasis. A ‘devadasi’ is a woman dedicated to worship and service of a deity or a temple all her life.
The court had also then directed Karnataka’s Chief Secretary to take all preventive measures in respect of a programme, wherein Dalit girl children were to be dedicated as ‘devadasis’
The Bench had also sought Karnataka government’s reply and asked it to file a response on the PIL seeking framing of guidelines to stop the tradition of ‘devadasis’, saying it is a national shame.
HC takes up PIL fled by Law Students on RTI
After making representation to the Delhi High Court, a group of law students raised the issue of discrepancies in the High Court’s RTI rules with the Umbrella Legislation, the Right to Information Act, 2005, through public interest litigation.
The PIL has sought harmonisation of fee charged under the RTI rules.
The Bench issued notice to the High Court’s Registry, seeking its response by January 20, when the case will come up for further hearing. It has sought quashing of Rule 3 of Delhi High Court RTI Rules, 2006, under which separate applications have to be made to access unrelated information
While the RTI prescribes Rs. 10 as application fee and Rs. 2 per page for providing physical or photo copies, the High Court’s rules have laid down the application fee of Rs. 50 and Rs. 5 per page for copies.
There is no provision in the RTI for filing of separate applications in case of unrelated information, but Rule 3 of the High Court’s rules states that for each information sought, a separate application should be made. Besides, there is no provision in the High Court’s rules for supply of information free of cost to the citizens falling under the below poverty line (BPL) category, which is depriving an important part of the society from accessing information.
