Legal Update as on 09.05.2023

legal-updates
Legal Update
  1. 202 CRPC IS MANDATORY EVEN IF THE GOVERNMENT IS THE COMPLAINANT, CONCLUDES JHARKHAND HC – The Jharkhand High Court has ruled that even if the government is the complainant, there is no exception to Section 202 of the Criminal Procedure Code and that the judge must delay issuing the process before taking cognizance when the accused is located outside of the court’s geographical jurisdiction.
    K.N. SHASTRI AND ORS. VS. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND, THROUGH INSPECTOR OF DRUGS, DEOGHAR
  1. KER HC: STATE DISABILITY COMMISSIONER UNABLE TO RULLE ON SERVICE MATTER – The Kerala High Court has decided that, notwithstanding the fact that the State Disability Commissioner is only authorised to advise and make recommendations to the proper authorities, it is not authorised to make decisions regarding service matters or to make direct appointments of individuals to civil service.
    KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION V. STATE DISABILITY COMMISSIONER & ORS.
  1. HC CAN ACQUIT CONVICT EVEN WITHOUT AN APPEAL TO PREVENT INJUSTICE, SAID ORISSA HC – According to the Orissa High Court, the High Court has the authority to acquit the guilty based on the facts at hand even if the convict chooses not to challenge his conviction. This is done to ensure that apparent injustice is not sustained simply because the co-defendant did not file an appeal.
    SHIVA @ GURUCHARAN SINGH V. STATE OF ODISHA
  1. Take action against solicitors issuing fake marriage certificates, MAD. HC advises the SBC. – After giving them an opportunity within three months, the Madras High Court has requested that the State Bar Council (SBC) take disciplinary action against the solicitors who are performing marriage ceremonies in Tamil Nadu by issuing bogus certificates.
    ILAVARSAN V THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE AND OTHERS
  1. HC: Child custody orders can be tailored to the child’s needs. – The Bombay High Court has ruled that, despite its observation that child custody decisions cannot be rigid or final, they can be modified to take into account the requirements and welfare of the child at different stages of development, as well as the circumstances of the parents inasmuch as these are related to the welfare of the kid.
    KOUSHIK JAGATHALAPRATHABAN V KARISHMA ASHOKKUMAR UPADHYA
  1. MADRAS HC’S ORDER IS UPHOLDED BY SC REVERSING THE STATE’S DECISION TO FORM AN ANTI-LAND GRABBER CELL – The Supreme Court has upheld the Madras High Court’s ruling that the Tamil Nadu government’s 2011 directive to establish special cells to combat land grabbing without defining such situations is invalid.
    GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU & OTHERS APPELLANTS VERSUS R. THAMARAISELVAM ETC. ETC
  1. SC GIVES DIVERSE VERDICT ON SETTLEMENT COMMISSION’S COMPETENCY U/S 123 of the Customs Act, WRT Goods – With regard to the question of whether the Settlement Commission’s authority under Section 127B of the Customs Act of 1962 can be used in connection to commodities to which Section 123 applies, a division bench of the Supreme Court composed of Justices Krishna Murari and Sanjay Karol reached a split decision.
    YAMAL MANOJBHAI V. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
  1. SC: Without the consent of the magistrate or a higher court, the police chief cannot order additional investigations. – The Supreme Court has ruled that the authority to order a further inquiry resides with either the concerned magistrate or a higher court and not with the investigative agency, while noting that an order from the District Police Chief is not the same as an order issued by a concerned magistrate.
    PEETHAMBARAN V. STATE OF KERALA & ANR.
  1. State authorities need to reconsider their casual attitude when passing detention orders, according to the judge. – The Gujarat High Court has observed that State Authorities should reflect on their activities because many of the decisions they have made do not hold up to the test of established legal propositions of law while also remarking that State Authorities are passing orders in a careless manner.
    FARHAN VS. STATE OF GUJARAT R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6670 OF 2023
  1. ASSURE STRICT COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW AGAINST UNAUTHORISED ALTERATION, DEL. HC TO CENTRE – According to the Motor Vehicles Act of 1988, the Delhi High Court has ordered the Central government to strictly enforce the legislation against the unauthorised modification or installation of crash guards or bull bars in vehicles.
    AARSHI R KAPOOR & ANR v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR
  1. SC: The validity of the sale deed executed by the co-defendants cannot be decided in the plaintiff’s possession lawsuit – According to the Supreme Court, the validity of the sale deed between the defendants cannot be taken into account in the plaintiff’s possession lawsuit since doing so would amount to one defendant ruling on another defendant’s right or claim, which is not permissible.
    DAMODHAR NARAYAN SAWALE (D) THROUGH LRS VS SHRI TEJRAO BAJIRAO MHASKE & ORS.

Legal Disclaimer: The information contained in this blog post is for general information and educational purposes only. Nothing contained in this blog post should be construed as legal advice from The Aran Law Firm or the individual author, nor is it intended to be a substitute for legal counsel on any subject matter.

Tags :

Share This:

Legal Updates