Legal Updates as on 28.02.2023

legal-updates
  1. HC: AFTER PROSECUTION EVIDENCE, ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS MAY BE PRODUCED IF OMISSION WAS GENUINE ERROR – According to the Kerala High Court, there is no restriction on the presentation of extra documents during a trial if they are necessary for reaching the right conclusion. The trial judge might authorise such production in accordance with the rules of fair play and common sense.
    Thachanalil Shyju V State of Kerala
  1. WRIT OF CERTIORARI MAY BE ISSUED EVEN IN THE EVENT OF A DISPUTE BETWEEN TWO PRIVATE PARTIES. – The Calcutta High Court has issued a writ of certiorari against a private entity (Bajaj Housing Finance Limited) on the grounds that it has violated the petitioner’s right to a fair hearing, while keeping in mind that the principle of natural justice requires that parties have a sufficient and equal opportunity of representation.
    Rajeev Jhunjhunwala v. State of West Bengal & Ors.
  1. SC: NON-DISCLOSURE IS THE SAME AS COMMUNICATING ACR TO AN EMPLOYEE WITHOUT ENOUGH TIME TO CHALLENGE IT – According to the Supreme Court, failing to give an employee enough time to contest the evaluation of their work for a certain year in an Annual Confidential Report (ACR) before a departmental promotion committee is called would be regarded as failing to disclose the evaluation report.
    R.K. Jibanlata Devi v. High Court of Manipur through its Registrar General & Ors.
  1. CONDITIONS UNDER SECTION 45 OF THE PMLA THAT APPLY TO APPLICATIONS FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL – According to the Supreme Court, anticipatory bail applications made pursuant to Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are also subject to the restrictions set forth in Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) for bail grants.
    The Directorate of Enforcement vs M. Gopal Reddy and another
  1. SC – MERE FRAMING OF CHARGES NO BAR TO ORDER FURTHER INVESTIGATION – The Supreme Court has concluded that the mere filing of the charges does not satisfy the victim’s fundamental right to a fair investigation and trial. If the evidence warrants it, ordering additional inquiry, a re-investigation, or a brand-new investigation cannot be a hindrance.
    Anant Thanur Karmuse vs State of Maharashtra
  1. SC RETAINS MPHC ORDER REQUESTING THE TRIAL COURT TO EXPLAIN THE REASON FOR AWARDING BAIL – The Madhya Pradesh High Court’s ruling directing a trial court judge to justify granting bail to an accused was overturned by the Supreme Court, which noted that such directives of the High Court adversely impact the independence of the district courts in deciding on bail applications.
    Totaram v. State of Madhya Pradesh
  1. Allahabad High Court has held that the time limit outlined in Section 149(1)(b) of the Income-Tax Act (as amended beginning April 1, 2021) cannot be extended by the department after March 30, 2020. The court made this ruling while observing that Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020.
    Rajeev Bansal Versus Union Of India
  1. HC: SARPANCH WILL NOT BE DISQUALIFIED AUTOMATICALLY FOR FAILURE TO PERFORM STATUTE DUTIES – According to the Bombay High Court, a village’s sarpanch cannot be removed from his position just because he failed to fulfil his mandated obligations.
    Manohar Dnyaneshwar Pote vs The Collector Jalna

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