17-year-old’s consensual sex with accused prior to the incident of alleged rape: Allahabad High Court grants bail to rape accused
Earlier this week, on Thursday, Allahabad High Court granted bail to a 22-year-old rape accused, observing that the 17-year-old prosecutrix/ survivor had consensual sexual activity with the accused before the alleged incident of rape
The Court held that the age of the prosecutrix is about 17 years and having regard to the fact that she was studying in D.N.M. Institute of Engineering, it could not be ruled out that she was possessing sufficient knowledge and was in a position to fully understand the nature and consequences of sexual activity," the Court observed.
The counsel for the applicant further contended that his client was falsely implicated in the case and had not committed any offence. In addition to this he submitted that, the applicant was a young boy who had no prior criminal history, and was in jail since September 12 last year. Based on the above mentioned facts of the case, the Court granted bail.
Balance sheets can amount to acknowledgment of debts under Section 18 of Limitation Act
This week, on Thursday, the Apex Court ruled that balance sheets can amount to acknowledgment of debt under Section 18 of the Limitation Act [Asset Reconstruction Company (India Limited v. Bishal Jaiswal]. The plea was allowed by the Apex Court on February 19, 2021.
In this case, the Apex Court, set aside the five-member Bench judgment of National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) in V Padmakumar v. Stressed Assets Stabilization Fund which had by a 4:1 majority ruled that balance sheet could not be considered as an acknowledgment of debt under Section 18.
All Religious Places Should Remain Closed - Maharashtra Govt. Tells Bombay High Court in Jain Trust's Petition
This week, after the Bombay High Court refused a city mosque to open up for Ramadan prayers, the Maharashtra Government further opposed a petition by two Jain trusts that were seeking permission for devotees to collect "pious boiled food" from the trust's premises during the nine-day-long Ayambil fast.
On this matter the case stated that, "Yesterday the Court refused the mosque to open. There should not be bias alleged on the part of the State. Our stand is clear, all religious places should remain closed." The argument given by the petitioners were that, "Last year we were allowed to serve food in the 4,000 sq feet dining hall, however this year we are only seeking permission for takeaways," In addition to this the petitioner further stated that, "Unfortunately, restaurants and bars are allowed, but religious trusts are not allowed."
Bombay High Court states that “Just Because Wife Died in Matrimonial House within Two Months of Marriage, Entire Family Cannot Be Stigmatized for Serious Offence of Murder"
Recently, the Bombay HC acquitted an entire family that was charged under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for murder. The Bench comprising of Justice NR Borkar and Justice Sadhana S Jadhav set aside a Sessions Court judgment dated 29th June, 2012 convicting husband and other family members for offences punishable under sec. 498-A, 302, 304-B r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code and section 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
In this case the Bench viewed that the marriage was hurriedly effected by the parents of deceased wife since they found a suitable match for their daughter thereby going against her wishes and will of continuing her education. The Bombay High Court also viewed that the suicide was committed in a "state of stress". The Court finally held that these facts speak for themselves and the appellants/accused deserve to be acquitted.
COVID-19 Cases Not Matching With Actual Positive Cases: Gujarat High Court
Recently on Thursday, Gujarat High Court observed that had the Gujarat Government taken pre-emptive steps earlier, the present grim situation of COVID-19 pandemic could have been averted. "If the state had taken steps, not that the State was sleeping, but if there was a push, if all of this had been done earlier, before the PIL was registered, situation would have been better", Chief Justice Vikram Nath told Advocate General Kamal Trivedi.
Pertaining to this the Chief Justice Nath pointed out that there seemed to be a divergence between the numbers of those tested, as provided by the state, and the actual numbers of those tested, as provided by the state, and the actual numbers of those infected. In addition to this, the Chief Justice also declared that the High Court's academy and auditorium halls can be used to house lawyers and Court staff who were COVID-19 positive and did not have the space to isolate in their homes.