Delayed Filing of Charge-Sheet In Heinous Crimes Does Not Reflect Well On Investigating Agency: Calcutta High Court Takes Suo Moto Cognizance
The Calcutta High Court Bench of Hon’ble Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice Arijit Banerjee took suo moto cognizance of delay in filing charge-sheet and completing investigation in serious criminal cases. The Hon’ble Court made note of the information received from the State’s Criminal Investigation Department where such a delay was visible and around 999 cases where the charge-sheet had not been filed within the given time.
Advocate General Kishore Datta has been directed to go through the data tabled by the CID and inform the court if there are any other cases where there is such a pendency. The Registrar General has also been directed to collect information from all the Courts in the State of West Bengal in the cases where the charge sheet has not been filed. The information is required before 28th June 2021, the date of the next hearing.
What do you think of this case?
Rejection of Candidature Only On Ground of Delay in Submitting OBC Certificate Violative of Article 14, 16: Kerala High Court
The Indian Institute of Science Education and Research filed a petition in the High Court challenging the order of a single judge bench. The Single Judge Bench rejected the contentions of the Institute and directed it to accept the respondent-woman’s certificate and treat her eligible under the OBC-NCL reservation in two weeks.
In the case of Indian Institute of Science Education and Research V/s Dr.Smitha VS the Kerala High Bench of Hon’ble Justices Alexander Thomas and K. Babu held that rejection of candidature on the ground that there was a delay in submitting the OBC-NCL Certificate is violative of Article 14 and 16. The Court issued directions to the IISER to reconsider the candidature of the person who had applied for the post of Technical Assistant of Chemistry under the OBC category.
What do you think of this case?
Madras High Court Issues Notice in a plea by T.M. Krishna Challenging I.T. Rules, 2021
Carnatic musician, author, and activist T. M. Krishna challenged the validity of the I.T. Rules 2021 in the Madras High Court. The Bench of Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice SenthilkumarRamamoorthy issued a notice in the plea filed by T. M. Krishna and ordered the Centre to file a reply in 3 weeks.
The petition filed by T. M. Krishna was drafted by the Internet Freedom Foundation of India. The petition challenges the Rules for being violative of the petitioner’s fundamental rights and for being ultra vires of the parent provisions – freedom of speech and right to privacy.
What do you think of this case?
Live-in Relationship Between A Married & Unmarried Person Not Permissible: Rajasthan High Court
In RasikaKhandal and Anr. v/s State of Rajasthan, the petitioners were a 29-year-old woman and a 31-year-old man, in a live-in relationship, who sought the protection of life and liberty from the Hon’ble Court. The petitioner no. 2, the man, was already married. The Bench referred to the prerequisites by the Supreme Court for a live-in relationship laid down in D. Velusamy v/s Patchaiammal and held that a live-in relationship between a married and unmarried person is not permissible.
What do you think of this case?
GST on Intermediaries: Bombay High Court Delivers Split Verdict on Constitutionality of Section 13(8)(b) IGST Act
Section 13(8) (b) of the IGST Act was held unconstitutional by Bombay High Judge Ujjal Bhuyan. It was his view that the impugned provision runs contrary to the GST Act is also contrary to the principle of GST being a destination-based tax. The impugned section imposes liability on service provided by the intermediaries to persons settled abroad. The Division Bench Judge, Abhay Ahuja, who heard the challenge petition filed in 2018 will deliver his dissenting verdict on June 16.
What do you think of this case?
Asaram Bapu Rape Case: Victim’s father moved to Supreme Court opposing Godman’s plea for bail; says the victim and her family may be killed
The father of the rape victim in the Asaram Bapu rape case moved to the Supreme Court opposing his plea for bail on the ground that the victim and her family may get killed by Bapu’s followers. The victim’s father submitted that during the trial, he and his family were constantly threatened with dire consequences. The plea states that Asaram Bapu is a highly influential and politically connected person. The plea also stated that he had hired a killer to kill and attack the eyewitnesses and confessed to the police about the order been given by Asaram Bapu.
What do you think of this case?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"
