Today’s Legal Updates

Friday, 11th February 2022




Article – 13  Laws inconsistent with or in derogation of the fundamental rights

(1) All laws in force in the territory of India immediately before the commencement of this Constitution, in so far as they are inconsistent with the provisions of this Part, shall, to the extent of such inconsistency, be void.
(2) The State shall not make any law which takes away or abridges the rights conferred by this Part and any law made in contravention of this clause shall, to the extent of the contravention, be void.
(3) In this article, unless the context otherwise requires,—
(a) “law” includes any Ordinance, order, bye-law, rule, regulation, notification, custom or usage having in the territory of India the force of law;
(b) “laws in force” includes laws passed or made by a Legislature or other competent authority in the territory of India before the commencement of this Constitution and not previously repealed, notwithstanding that any such law or any part thereof may not be then in operation either at all or in particular areas.

(4) Nothing in this article shall apply to any amendment of this Constitution made under article 368.

Today’s Legal Updates:-

  1. Today Students from over fifteen States across the country have moved the Supreme Court seeking an alternative assessment method for upcoming board exams for classes 10 and 12 instead of holding physical exam as proposed by various State boards, Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) and Indian Certificate of Secondary Education (ICSE).  (Anubha Shrivastava Sahai vs Union of India)
  2. Today a  public interest litigation (PIL) petition has been filed before the Bombay High Court seeking measures to protect Shivaji Park, located in Mumbai’s Dadar in light of the recent demands to build a memorial in the park for late singer Lata Mangeshkar.  (Prakash Tukaram Belwade vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Ors.)
  3. Today the Karnataka High Court dismissed an appeal by the Indian Institute of Management Bangalore (IIM-B) against an order granting relief to six students who were found cheating in an online exam. (Indian Institute of Management Bangalore v. Daivanti Thakare and Ors)
  4. Today the Bombay High Court rejected a plea filed by Bindu Kapoor, wife of Rana Kapoor seeking directions to keep in abeyance the hearing in the anticipatory bail plea filed in the corruption cases related to Dewan Housing Financial Limited (DHFL).
  5. The Allahabad High Court has directed that the body of 22-year-old Altaf who died inside police station, allegedly due to custodial torture, should be subject to a second post-mortem/ autopsy by a team of doctors from All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi.  (Chand Miyan v. State of Uttar Pradesh)
  6. Today the Delhi High Court has said that it will consider the batch of petitions dealing with the ongoing dispute between Amazon and Future Group on 24th February 2022.  (Future Coupons Private Limited and Ors v NV Investment Holdings LLC and Anr)
  7. Today the Supreme Court took exception to certain notices sent by the Uttar Pradesh government to those accused of destroying public properties during the anti-Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) agitations in Uttar Pradesh.
  8. Today the Madras High Court took a dim view of the honesty of the State’s police, and observed that it was time to sensitise officials and eradicate corrupt ones. (S Vasanthi v M Baggiyalakshmi)
  9. The Delhi High Court and District Courts in the national capital will revert to full physical hearings from March 2, 2022 after which hearings through virtual mode/ video conference will be permitted only in exceptional circumstances on a case-to-case basis.
  10. Today the Supreme Court issued notice on a plea by the Supreme Court Employees Welfare Association against a decision of the Central government rejecting a recommendation made by the Chief Justice of India (CJI) granting ‘court allowance’ to employees of the apex court. (Supreme Court Employees Welfare Association v. Union of India)
  11. Today A public interest litigation (PIL) petition has been filed in the Bombay High Court challenging the Maharashtra government’s decision to permit sale of wine in super markets, walk-in stores or stories providing self-purchase. (Sandip Kusalkar v. State of Maharashtra)
  12. Today Bhima Koregaon accused Anand Teltumbde has approached the Bombay High Court seeking interim bail to visit his mother and family, after the recent death of his brother Milind Teltumbde, also a wanted-accused in the 2018 case.
  13. On Tuesday the Bombay High Court quashed the demand notices issued by the Joint Director-General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) in light of the circular curtailing benefits granted to Essar Shipping Limited under the Served From India (SFI) Scheme of the Foreign Trade Policy (FTP) 2004-09.  (Essar Shipping Limited v. Union of India & Ors)
  14. The Karnataka High Court has ordered that students should not wear hijab, saffron shawls (bhagwa) or use any religious flags while attending classes in Karnataka colleges which have a prescribed uniform, till the Court decides the case relating to ban on hijab in certain government colleges.  (Smt. Resham v. State of Karnataka)
  15. Yesterday the Maharashtra government assured the Bombay High Court that it will reconsider the appointment to the post of the Director General of Police (DGP) post after taking into account the recommendations made by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC).  (Datta Mane v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.)
  16. Today the Supreme Court said that it would interfere in the Hijab ban controversy at the appropriate time, even as it asked the petitioners not to spread the issue at a larger level.  (Dr J Halli Federation of Masajids Madaaris and Wakf Institutions)
  17. Female Muslim students have approached the Supreme Court against Karnataka High Court’s proposed interim order to bar students from wearing religious garments to educational institutions in Karnataka. (Dr J Halli Federation of Masajids Madaaris and Wakf Institutions v. State of Karnataka)
    • the Chief Justice had said, “We will pass an order that let the institutions start, but till the matter is pending, these students and stakeholders will not insist on wearing any religious garment or head dress. We will restrain everyone. We want peace and tranquility….Till the disposal of the matter, you people should not insist for wearing all these religious things. We will restrain everyone (in the interim) from adopting all these practices,” 
    • the plea said, “The right to wear hijab falls under right to expression under Article 19(1)(a), right to privacy and freedom of conscience under Article 25. The same cannot be infringed upon without a valid law,” 
  18. Enlarging Virendra Tawade on bail is a threat to society, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) said in its reply filed before the Bombay High Court opposing the bail application of the prime accused in the murder case of rationalist Narendra Dabholkar.  (Dr. Virendrasinh Tawade v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.)
  19. Today the Supreme Court observed that merely because an employee stood superannuated, will not by itself absolve him from the misconduct committed at the time of discharge of his duties when he was in service.  (United Bank of India v. Bachan Prasad Lal)

Legal Prudent Fraternity