Today’s Legal Updates

Tuesday, 25th October 2022





Article – 169   Abolition or creation of Legislative Councils in States.

  1. Notwithstanding anything in article 168, Parliament may by law provide for the abolition of the Legislative Council of a State having such a Council or for the creation of such a Council in a State having no such Council, if the Legislative Assembly of the State passes a resolution to that effect by a majority of the total membership of the Assembly and by a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members of the Assembly present and voting.
  2. Any law referred to in clause (1) shall contain such provisions for the amendment of this Constitution as may be necessary to give effect to the provisions of the law and may also contain such supplemental, incidental and consequential provisions as Parliament may deem necessary.
  3. No such law as aforesaid shall be deemed to be an amendment of this Constitution for the purposes of article 368.

Today’s Legal Updates :-

  1. On Tuesday the Meghalaya High Court held that even the slightest penetration of male sexual organ inside vagina will constitute the offence of aggravated penetrative sexual assault under Section 5(m) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act). (Swill Lhuid vs State of Meghalaya & Ors)
    • the Court held, Penetrative sexual assault, for the purpose of the relevant provision, does not require deep or complete penetration. The slightest amount of penetration would suffice for the purpose. The medical examination report revealed penetration.
    • the bench stated, Even though the hymen may have been intact so as to indicate that the extent of penetration may not have been to any great length, the factum of penetration was medically established. There is no basis to the appellant’s assertion that the examination was conducted on the survivor long after the time of the alleged incident, particularly since the young witness claimed the incident to have taken place at or after 5 pm on March 2, 2018 and the survivor was examined at or about 4:30 pm on March 3, 2018.
    • the Court stated, It is true that the appellant ought to have been medically examined to ascertain whether he was capable of maintaining an erection, given the age attributed to the appellant at the time of the commission of the offence. However, merely because the investigating agency may not have been alert would not otherwise require the case made out against the appellant to be thrown out on such score.
    • the Court observed, The trial court was justified in arriving at the conclusion that it was established beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant had sexually assaulted the minor survivor…There is no merit in the appeal and no cause for interference with either the judgment of conviction or the consequent sentence awarded to the appellant.
  2. On Tuesday the Uttarakhand High Court created a dedicated email id which would be personally monitored by the High Court’s Registrar (Judicial), in order to enable citizens to lodge their complaints regarding problems arising out of solid waste management by authorities.  (Jitender Yadav vs Union of India)
    • the bench ordered, Along with the complaint, the complainant should also upload the photographs to show the collection or non-disposal of solid waste, clearly identifying its location. The complainant should clearly provide his/her identity and contact details. The complaints, which are received shall be perused by the Registrar (Judicial) after 05:00 P.M. every day. These complaints shall be printed out, provided they relate to issues regarding solid waste in the State, and not otherwise.
    • the bench said, What we find from the various affidavits filed before us is that the various authorities, including the State Level Monitoring Committee, have been issuing paper directions to authorities subordinate to them, particularly to the Urban Local Bodies, and the District Magistrates. However, there is no monitoring of the directions being issued, let to find out whether they are being implemented.
    • the bench observed, It is necessary that the higher authorities monitor the implementation of the directions issued by them, by calling for actual reports, and by undertaking site visits and ground surveys. However, that does not appear to have been resorted to at all. The issues we are confronted with cannot be resolved merely by sitting in a closed office room.
      • email id –
  3. On Tuesday the Bombay High Court held that a woman raising allegations against her husband in court by terming him a ‘womaniser’ or an ‘alcoholic’ without substantiating the allegations, would amount to cruelty entitling him to divorce.  (Nalini Nagnath Uphalkar vs Nagnath Mahadev Uphalkar)
    • the Court noted, We find that the petitioner has repeatedly made allegations assassinating the character of the respondent, in both the rounds of litigation. The conduct of the Petitioner in continuing to make unwarranted, false and baseless allegations pertaining to the respondent’ character labelling him as an alcoholic and womaniser has resulted in shredding his reputation in the society.
    • Pertinently, the petitioner’s own sister has not corroborated the case of the Petitioner and has merely deposed that the respondent used to consume liquor, but there is no assertion of being alcoholic which has distinct connotation. The petitioner has alleged that the respondent used to visit her sister on one pretext or other, yet the evidence of the petitioner’s sister does not give any details. The evidence on record produced by the petitioner fails to prove the allegations made by her in pleadings.
    • We find that the petitioner has repeatedly made allegations assassinating the character of the respondent, in both the rounds of litigation. The conduct of the petitioner in continuing to make unwarranted, false and baseless allegations pertaining to the respondent’ character labelling him as an alcoholic and womaniser has resulted in shredding his reputation in the society.
  4. On Tuesday the Competition Commission of India (Commission/CCI) imposed a penalty of ₹936.44 crore on Google for abusing its dominant position in relation to its Play Store policies. (XYZ v Alphabet Inc & Ors)
    • the CCI said a press release issued by the Commission imposed a penalty @ 7% of its average relevant turnover amounting to Rs. 936.44 crore upon Google on provisional basis, for violating Section 4 of the Act. Google has been given a time of 30 days to provide the requisite financial details and supporting documents.
    • the press release by CCI explained, Making access to the Play Store dependent on mandatory usage of GPBS for paid apps and in-app purchases is one sided and arbitrary and devoid of any legitimate business interest. The app developers are left bereft of the inherent choice to use payment processor of their liking from the open market.
    • It was noted that, the intent flow technology is superior and user friendly than collect flow technology, with intent flow offering significant advantages to both customers and merchants and the success rate with the intent flow methodology being higher due to lower latency.
    • However, for in-app digital goods to be distributed to purchasing users, developers must configure their apps so that all purchases of the digital goods go through Google’s payment system, which processes the transactions.
  5. On Friday the Allahabad High Court denied bail to a 15-year-old boy accused of sexually assaulting a 6-year-old girl, while observing that a juvenile’s bail plea can be denied if his release is likely to defeat the ends of justice. (X v. State of UP)
    • the Court held, The law does not say that once a person is found a juvenile, he should be released on bail notwithstanding other facts and circumstances of the matter. It may be noted that the bail can also be denied if juvenile’s release, in the opinion of the Court, would defeat the ends of justice.
    • At the same time, there may be other facts and circumstances which cannot simply be passed over by the court concerned…It can safely be remarked that the scheme of the Act takes into consideration the nature of the offence as well.
    • the Court observed, When viewing the case from this angle, the nature of the crime, the methodology adopted, the manner of commission and the evidence available may assume ample significance.
    • Justice Sharma said that the phrase “ends of justice” meant that the matter of bail had to be seen through a prism of three angles –
      • Firstly, the angle of welfare and betterment of the child itself that is the best interest of the child.
      • Secondly, the demands of justice to the victim and her family.
      • Thirdly, the concerns of society at large.
  6. On Tuesday the Delhi High Court refused to grant bail to a woman’s mother and grandmother accused of abducting and attacking the woman and her newly wed husband and chopping off his private parts.
    • the Court said, The conduct of the concerned police officials in this regard is deprecable and needs to be looked into and necessary action taken. Any such lapse cannot be accepted on behalf of the police.
    • the Court observed that questions of faith have no bearing on an individual’s freedom to choose a life partner and that this freedom is an intrinsic part of right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
  7. On Tuesday the Bombay High Court ruled that in motor accident claims cases, there is no bar on Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) or courts awarding compensation which is higher than the amount claimed by the accident survivor/ victim.  (Yogesh Subhash Panchal v. Mohd. Hussain Malik & connected appeal)
  8. On Tuesday the Delhi High Court issued notice to the Central government and Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) on judoka and Arjuna awardee Akram Shah’s plea seeking out-of-turn promotion to the rank of Deputy Commandant for having won bronze medal in 2014 Asian Games as head coach.  (Akram Shah vs. Union of India & Ors)
  9. On Tuesday the Delhi High Court directed the special court to decide bail plea of a man booked under Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), within 75 days. (Manzar Imam v NIA)
  10. On Tuesday the Madras High Court said that the emergence of digital media, and unrestrained, unverified posts on social media were degrading India’s credibility, and diminishing the respect that other countries around the globe have for “mother India.”
  11. Last Week a Mumbai court convicted a 25-year-old businessman for sexually harassing a minor girl by calling her an “item”.  (State v. Abrar Noor Mohd Khan)
  12. On Monday the Kerala High Court held that the letter issued Kerala Governor Arif Mohammed Khan, directing the Vice Chancellors (VC) of nine universities in Kerala to resign, was no longer valid since the Governor himself later issued show cause notices asking the VCs for their response.
  13. The Pune District Court issued a bizarre notice on October 20 asked women lawyers not to “arrange” their hair in open court since the same disturbs the functioning of the Court.
  14. Last Week the Bombay High Court refused to stay the release of the Hindi film ‘Thank God’ starring Ajay Devgan, Sidharth Malhotra and Rakul Preet.
  15. On Tuesday the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh upheld the amendments to the Jammu and Kashmir Reservation Rules, 2005, by which 4 percent reservation was provided to ‘Pahari Speaking People’ in respect of each service, class, category and grade in services and posts under the Union Territory. (Mohammad Anwar Chowdhary and others V/s UT of Jammu and Kashmir and others)
  16. On Tuesday two courts have taken contradictory views as regards the evidentiary weight of statements made by dismissed cop Sachin Waze with regard to the corruption and money laundering cases against Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) leader Anil Deshmukh.

Legal Prudent Fraternity