Tuesday, September 22, 2020

Sushant Singh Rajput case: Judicial custody of Rhea Chakraborty, Showik, Dipesh, Samuel Miranda extended till Oct 6

Rhea Chakraborty’s 14-day judicial custody ended today, after she was arrested by the Narcotics Control Bureau on (NCB) September 9, but her custody has been extended by the sessions court. Rhea was presented before the judge via video conference and after hearing both the sides, the custody was extended till October 6. Since it was just a remand production.  Apart from Rhea, her brother Showik Chakraborty and Sushant Singh Rajput’s personal staff members - Dipesh Sawant and Samuel Miranda have also been sent to judicial custody till October 6.

CBSE Compartment Exams: "Academic career of 2 lakh students cannot be hampered", SC directs UGC to not release academic calendar till Sep 24

In the plea seeking an extension of college admission deadlines in the wake of the delayed Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) compartment exams, the Supreme Court today directed the University Grants Commission (UGC) to not release the academic calendar till September 24.

UGC will inform the Court about the declaration of the compartment exam results by then.The matter was heard today by a Bench of Justices AM Khanwilkar and Sanjiv Khanna.

Monday, September 21, 2020

No reason for NLSIU to declare zero year, home-based online test could not have ensured transparency: The Supreme Court's NLAT verdict

“The respondent No.2 had categorically taken the stand on behalf of the CLAT that online test at home with technological measures cannot ensure transparency and the test will be completely compromised and may even be manipulated by participants and coaching centres. There was no reason for change of mind by respondent No.2 within a week…when home based online test could not have been permitted for CLAT-2020, the same test can also not be permitted for NLAT-2020.”

Supreme Court


As reported earlier, several students highlighted the potential of mass cheating when NLAT was first held on September 12, and again when the re-test took place two days later. The question paper was leaked midway through the latter exam, raising questions surrounding the integrity of the process. However, the Bench did not see it fit to delve into whether the exam should be set aside on account of the alleged malpractices that took place. It held,

“…we are of the view that for the present case, it is not necessary for this court to enter into various materials referred to by the petitioners and the reports and to decide as to whether malpractices were actually adopted in the examination or not. Respondent No.1 being premier University, we have no doubt that it must have taken all necessary precautions to avoid any malpractices and cheating in the examination…We need not express any opinion in this proceeding under Article 32 with regard to the aspect of malpractices in the test conducted on 12.09.2020 and 14.09.2020 which is essentially a matter of scrutiny of facts and evidence.”

On these grounds, among others, the Court set aside the admission notification announcing the holding of NLAT and directed NLSIU to admit students this year on the basis of CLAT. The Court has also directed for the reinstatement of NLSIU into the NLU Consortium.


Read Full Judgment

Wednesday, September 9, 2020

Supreme Court refuses to interfere in fresh pleas seeking to postpone NEET 2020 amid COVID-19

A three-judge Bench of the Supreme Court today dismissed fresh pleas urging the Court to reconsider the conduct of the medical entrance exam, NEET on September 13, 2020 in view of the rising cases of COVID-19 and constraints faced by students amid lockdown restrictions.


Supreme Court refuses to interfere in fresh pleas seeking to postpone NEET 2020 amid COVID-19

Supreme Court refers Maratha Reservation matter to larger bench, no Maratha quota in jobs and admissions

The Supreme Court today referred to a larger Bench a batch of petitions challenging the Maharashtra State Reservation for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) Act, which provides for reservation in employment and education to the Maratha community.

The Bench of Justices L Nageswara Rao, Hemant Gupta and S Ravindra Bhat has held that in the meanwhile, there will be no such reservation in jobs and admissions.

The Court has further ruled that admissions to postgraduate courses will not be altered. The matter will now be placed for Chief Justice of India, SA Bobde, who will constitute a larger bench.

The Bench had heard the parties on the question of reference of the matter to an 11-Judge Constitution Bench on the issue of 50% cap on reservations.

Senior Advocates Mukul Rohatgi, representing the State of Maharashtra, and Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing an applicant, urged the Court to refer the issue of the 50% ceiling on reservation to a larger Bench.

The SEBC Act provides for reservation for the Maratha community in the State of Maharashtra. The decision of the Bombay High Court upholding the law with modifications was challenged before the Supreme Court. One of primary grounds for challenge was that this law, if implemented, would breach the 50% upper ceiling put in place for reservations.

Friday, September 4, 2020

Sex with no clear ‘yes’ is rape, Danes decide

DENMARK is changing the law so that sex without explicit consent can be prosecuted as rape. The reform — approved by MPs and expected to take effect this year — is an important milestone for gender equality, justice minister Nick Haekkerup said. The new law says sexual consent must be given voluntarily and as an expression of free will through words or action. Britain, Sweden, Germany and Belgium already have similar legislation.

Thursday, September 3, 2020

The Supreme Court today refused to entertain a petition filed by Netflix - 'Bad Boy Billionaires'

The Supreme Court was directly moved to challenge the order of a court in Araria, Bihar, which had granted an interim stay on the airing of Netflix’s 'Bad Boy Billionaires'.


The Supreme Court today refused to entertain a petition filed by Netflix challenging an order of a lower court in Bihar, which had restrained the OTT platform from releasing, transmitting, distributing, and exhibiting the upcoming web series 'Bad Boy Billionaires' or its trailer using Subrata Roy's name.

The Lower Court's order was challenged before the Supreme Court which led to the question being raised from the Bench as regards the propriety of moving the Supreme Court against an order passed by a Court of first instance. Netflix's petition had assailed the order of a Sub Judge in Bihar's Araria.

A Bench of Chief Justice of India SA Bobde and Justices Arun MishraAS Bopanna and Justice V Ramasubramanian questioned the online streaming platform as to why it approached the Supreme Court directly.

This is not the proper forum to come to after the order is passed by a lower court. You have deliberately come here, you should not have come here."
CJI Bobde.



Wednesday, September 2, 2020

The Delhi High Court today refused to grant an order of interim injunction against the online streaming of Gunjan Saxena

The Delhi High Court today refused to grant an order of interim injunction against the online streaming of Gunjan Saxena - The Kargil Girl in the suit moved by Central Government and Indian Air Force.


Injunction cannot be granted because the movie is already out..not being shown in cinema theatre is not good enough.. You should have come at the first instance.
Delhi High Court said.

The Court noted that the movie had been streaming on Netflix for days and remarked that the Centre should have moved the Court sooner.

While assuring that the concerns raised by the Centre would be looked into, the Court granted the Defendants 10 days time to respond to the suit.

In its plaint before High Court, Centre has asserted that Dharma Productions has projected its commercial film as a historical biopic and distorted the true and correct facts purely for sensationalization.

The portrayal in the movie is contrary to the ethos, work culture and work ethic of the Indian Air Force, it is said.

Tuesday, September 1, 2020

Dr Kafeel Khan's speech calls for national integrity and unity, does not instigate violence or hatred: Allahabad HC

"A complete reading of the speech prima facia does not disclose any effort to promote hatred or violence. also nowhere threatens peace and tranquility of the city of Aligarh. The address gives a call for national integrity and unity among the citizens. The speech also deprecates any kind of violence. It appears that the District Magistrate had selective reading and selective mention for few phrases from the speech ignoring its true intent."
Allahabad High Court

Thursday, August 27, 2020

Cannot prevent use of 'Coronil' because of a "pesticide registered in its name", SC refuses to entertain trademark case against Patanjali

The order was passed in an appeal moved by Patanjali and the Divya Yog Mandir Trust.

The August 6 order under challenge was passed by Justice CV Karthikeyan, who allowed a trademark infringement suit by Arudra. Arudra had registered the trademark for 'CORONIL-92 B' as an acid inhibitor product for industrial cleaning and chemical preparations for industrial use in June 1993.

While ruling in favour of Arudra in the trademark suit, the Single Judge had also slapped a Rs 10 lakh fine on Patanjali and the Divya Yog Mandir Trust for "exploiting the fear and panic among the general public by projecting a cure for the Coronavirus."

Monday, August 24, 2020

Housing Society is not an industry - Employee cannot be treated as a workman -DELHI HIGH COURT


READ FULL JUDGMENT


Housing Society is not an industry - Employee cannot be treated as a workman - Services rendered by the workman as security guard was for the members of housing society - Cannot calim wages and overtime allowances.

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 2 (j) Dismissal of claim for wages - Petitioner as security guard worked diligently for a period of 13 years - Housing Society is not an industry - Workman raised an industrial dispute demanding overtime for his working 12 hours a day whereas he was paid only for 8 hours - Claim rejected on the ground that Housing Society cannot be treated as 'industry' under the Act - Employee cannot be treated as a workman - Services rendered by the workman was for the members of housing society - As per Supreme Court, housing society cannot be an 'industry' - No interference - Petition dismissed.