- SC TO HCS: RESPOND TO AMICUS’S SUGGESTIONS ON SPEEDING UP TRIALS IN CASES CONCERNING MPS/MLAS – In order to expedite the trial in the proceedings against current and former MPs/MLAs, the Supreme Court has ordered High Courts to react to suggestions provided by amicus curiae Senior Advocate Vijay Hansaria.
Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. UoI And Anr. WP(C) No. 699/2016 PIL
- SC: STATE BOARD WORKERS CAN’T BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT STATE GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES The Supreme Court has held that employees of a body corporate established by a State Government cannot be treated equally with the employees of the State Government while observing that Orissa Khadi and Village Industries Board employees are not entitled to pension on par with Government employees.
State of Orissa v Orissa Khadi and Village Industries Board Karmachari Sangh.
- SC: UNDER RULE 4(2) OF THE DECLARATION OF WILD LIFE STOCK RULES, TIME LIMIT CANNOT BE RELEASED – According to the 2003 Wild Life Stock Regulations, the deadline for declaring ownership of any wild animal or animal-related item cannot be extended, according to the Supreme Court.
Vishalakshi Amma vs State of Kerala
- SC INQUIRIES REMANDING ACCUSED WHEN THEY APPEAR IN RESPONSE TO SUMMONS IS A TRIAL COURT PRACTICE – When questioning the practise of remanding suspects to custody the moment they appear in response to a summons, the Supreme Court noted that this results in suspects anticipating arrest even in situations where investigating authorities are not asking for their detention.
Mahdoom Bava v. Central Bureau of Investigation
- SC TO JUDGES: BE CAUTIOUS WHEN POSITIVE COMPLAINTS ARE MADE DURING LIVE STREAMING – The Supreme Court has urged judges against passing disparaging words against parties concerned and has stated that such remarks must be made with due justification, in the appropriate forum, and only if necessary to achieve the goals of justice. The court also noted that remarks made during live-streaming have far-reaching repercussions.
Seemant Kumar Singh v. Mahesh PS & Ors.
- SC: DEATH PENALTY REQUIRED ONLY IF NO CHANCE OF REFORMATION IN RAREEST OF RARE CASE – The Supreme Court has noted that the “rarest of rare” theory requires that the death penalty not only be imposed by taking into account the seriousness of the act, but also only if there is no chance of a criminal reforming.
Sundar @ Sundarrajan v. State by Inspector of Police
- KERALA HC TO SUPERVISE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT RULES’ IMPLEMENTATION – The Kerala High Court ruled that it will oversee the state’s adoption of the 2016 Solid Waste Management and Handling Rules.
Suo Motu v. State of Kerala
- ADVOCATE ACCUSED OF SENDING OBNOXIOUS MESSAGES TO LADY JUDGE. ALL. HC CANCELS BAIL GRANTED. – The Allahabad High Court has revoked the bail given by a lower court to an attorney who was accused of sending a female judge obscene message. The court ruled that the sessions judge should have taken into account the fact that the accused’s actions would negatively impact the operation of the legal system.
Isha Agrawal vs. State of U.P. and Another
- Fees to the director are not exempt from payment under Schedule III’s Clause 4 of the SEBI Stock Broker Regulations. – In affirming SEBI’s decision to deny corporate entities an exemption from paying director fees under Schedule III’s Clause 4, the Supreme Court noted that no exemption could be requested on the grounds that the director had already paid the fees.
GPSK Capital Private Limited (Formerly Known as Mantri Finance Limited) v The Securities and Exchange Board of India.
- SC: MERE AFFIXATION OF MRP DOESN’T MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR GOODS TO BE EXEMPT FROM CENTRAL EXCISE DUTY. – The Supreme Court has ruled that a mandate from the legislation directing the seller to attach such MRP is necessary in addition to the affixation since it does not suffice to qualify goods for central excise duty exemption.
Commissioner Of Central Excise & Service Versus M/S. A.R. Polymers Pvt. Ltd. Etc.
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.
