The B&B Causelist #173: Sikh jokes, Lodha on BCCI, Lawyer strikes, PACL, CARA guidelines & more (Evening Updates)

A summary of important cases from the causelists of the Supreme Court of India, the Delhi High Court and the Bombay High Court. We will also be tracking the cases of IP Firm Anand & Anand in the Delhi High Court today..LIST OF CASES.Supreme Court of India.Harvinder Chowdhury v. Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Telecommunication and Information TechnologySwami Achyutanand Tirth & Ors. v. Union Of India & Ors.Board of Control for Cricket v. Cricket Association of Bihar & Ors.Center For Integrity, Governance And Training In Vigilance Administratiion And Anr v. Union Of India And Ors.Common Cause v. Abhijat & OrsRahul Gandhi v. Rajesh Mahadev Kunte and Anr.Nestle India Ltd v. Union of IndiaGaurav Kumar Bansal v. Union of India and Ors.Anupam Tripathi v. Union of India & Ors.Prasar Bharti v. Board of Control for Cricket in India & Ors.State of Karnataka v. Selvi J Jayalalitha & Ors.Cellular Operators Association of India And Ors. v. Telecom Regulatory Authority of India And Ors.PACL Employees and Customers Protection Forum v. Union of India And Ors..Delhi High Court.Virbhadra Singh & Anr v Central Bureau of Investigation & Ors.Sam Pitroda alias Satyanarayan Gangaram Pitroda v Dr. Subramanian Swamy & Anr. [Batch of 3 cases]Cairn India Ltd & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors.Cairn India Ltd & Ors Vs Directorate General of Foreign Trade & Ors.Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Vs Union of India, Rajendra Prashad Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi, MA Usmani Vs Union of India & Ors, Naresh Kumar Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors..IPR Cases [Anand & Anand].TEKLA Corpn & Anr v Mr. Ganga EswaranMerck Sharp and Dohme Corp & Anr v Mr. Sunil Sharma & Ors.F.Hoffman La Roche Ltd & Anr v Fresenius Kabi Oncology Ltd & Anr..Bombay High Court.The Association of Hospitals Mumbai v. State of MaharashtraShivaji Hariba Bhosale v. State of MaharashtraM/S Bramhos Aerospace Pvt Ltd. & Anr v. State of Maharashtra & OrsMr. Santosh Digambar Honkarape & Anr v. Central Adoption Resources Agency & OrsRamprasad Gupta S/o Vishwanath Gupta v. State of Maharashtra.SUMMARY OF CASES.Supreme Court of India.1. Harvinder Chowdhury v. Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Telecommunication and Information Technology.[Item 2 in court 1 – Writ Petition (Crl.) 160/2015].Bench: Chief Justice TS Thakur, UU Lalit J..A petition praying for a ban on websites spreading jokes on Sikh community and portraying them as persons of low intellect. The Court on October 30, had agreed to hear the petitioner and directed that it be listed after 6 weeks. Read the full report here..Today in court: This case was adjourned for two months at the request of the petitioner..2. Swami Achyutanand Tirth & Ors. v. Union Of India & Ors..[Item 15 in Court 1 – Writ Petition (Civil) 159/2012].Bench: Chief Justice TS Thakur, UU Lalit J..A petition concerning adulteration of milk. Check evening updates..Today in court: This case could not be tracked. Any update/ information would be appreciated..3. Board of Control for Cricket v. Cricket Association of Bihar & Ors..[Item 301 in court 1 at 2 pm – Civil Appeal 4235/2014].Bench: Chief Justice TS Thakur, FML Kalifulla J..The hearing pertaining to the implementation of the Lodha Panel Committee report. When the matter was last heard, Senior Advocate KK Venugopal appeared for the BCCI, arguing that the Court should permit the BCCI to give its response to the Lodha Committee on certain recommendations. The hearing lasted for two hours during which the Court posed many questions to the BCCI. The Court also took strong objection to the opposition by the BCCI in having a nominee of the Comptroller and Auditor General in its governing council. “So you want a free hand in dealing with crores of money”‘ queried CJI Thakur. KK Venugopal replied that BCCI would prefer someone in an advisory role..Today in court: The Court came down upon the BCCI for failing to develop cricket in the country. The Court also slammed the cricketing body for the manner of distributing funds among the States citing the fact that 11 States have received little or no money at all..Senior Advocate KK Venugopal, appearing for BCCI, submitted that some of the recommendations of the Lodha committee have already been implemented. The BCCI wanted some of the issues raised by it to be considered by the Lodha committee..The Bench was, however, not keen on sending the issues raised by the BCCI back to the Lodha committee. It said that it will hear the issues and send it to the Lodha committee only if it feels that the same is required..4. Center For Integrity, Governance And Training In Vigilance Administratiion And Anr v. Union Of India And Ors..[Item 26 in court 3 – Writ Petition (Civil) 683/2014].Bench: JS Khehar, C Nagappan JJ..Petition challenging appointment of KV Chowdary as chief vigilance commissioner and TM Bhasin as vigilance commissioner. Check evening updates to know more about the case..Today in court: This case could not be tracked. Any update/ information would be appreciated..5. Common Cause v. Abhijat & Ors..[Item 6 in court 10 – Conmt. Pet. (C) 550/2015 in WP (C) 821/1990].Bench: Kurian Joseph, Rohinton Fali Nariman JJ..A contempt petition filed against the Delhi High Court Bar Association and District Bar Associations The petitioner has contended that the Bar bodies resorting to strike recently was in violation of the Supreme Court judgment in Harish Uppal’s case..When the matter was last heard, Senior Advocate Ram Jethmalani told the Court that he was planning to convene a meeting of the Bar Associations whereupon the Court proceeded to adjourn the case..Today in court: This matter was mentioned by the petitioner and will retain its position in the list for the next date of hearing..6. Rahul Gandhi v. Rajesh Mahadev Kunte and Anr..[Item 5 in court 4 – SLP (Crl.) 3749/2015].Bench: Dipak Misra, Shiva Kirti Singh JJ..A petition filed by Rahul Gandhi to quash defamation proceedings pending against him in a Maharashtra court based on a complaint filed by RSS activist Rajesh Kunte. Gandhi’ plea for quashing was rejected by the Bombay High Court whereupon he had approached the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court had stayed the trial proceedings until Gandhi’s appeal was disposed..Today in court: This case was adjourned since the judgment on the Constitutionality of criminal defamation provisions has been reserved by the Supreme Court. The case will now be taken up in the second week of May..7. Nestle India Ltd v. Union of India.[Item 6 in court 4 – Civil Appeal 14539/2015].Bench: Dipak Misra, Shiva Kirti Singh JJ..The appeal against the order of National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC) directing further tests on Maggi noodles. The Court had issued notice to the Central government and stayed the proceedings in NCDRC. It had also directed that samples of Maggi be sent to laboratory in Mysore for testing..The test results will produced before the Supreme Court today. The case has been listed for hearing along with the appeal filed by the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India challenging the verdict of Bombay High Court lifting the ban imposed on Maggi noodles..Today in court: The result of the test of Maggi samples held at CSIR lab in Mysore was submitted before the Court today in sealed cover. The court has now listed the case for hearing on July 19..8. Gaurav Kumar Bansal v. Union of India and Ors..[Item 11 in court 4 – Writ Petition (Civil) 444/2013].Bench: Dipak Misra, Shiva Kirti Singh JJ..Check evening updates..Today in court: This case pertains to formulation of Disaster management policies at the national, State and district levels. The Court today directed the Central government to frame the national plan under Section 11 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005. It also directed the National Disaster Management Authority to ensure that a district plan is drawn up by every district in the country as mandated by Section 31 of the Disaster Management Act. The court also issued notice in a petition praying for a national plan to deal with post -disaster problems of social and economic nature..9. Anupam Tripathi v. Union of India & Ors..[Item 15 in court 4 at 2 pm – I.A. 4/2015 in Writ Petition (Civil) 599/2015].Bench: Dipak Misra, Shiva Kirti Singh JJ..An interim application in the dog culling case. The application has been filed by victims of dog bites seeking compensation from the Kerala government..Today in court: The Court today appointed a 3-member committee headed by retired High Court judge, Justice Sirijagan to submit a report on stray dog menace in Kerala..The court also directed the State government to provide Rs. 40,000 as compensation to a man whose wife had died due to stray dog bite..10. Prasar Bharti v. Board of Control for Cricket in India & Ors..[Item 20 in court 7 – SLP(C) 4572-4573/2015].Bench: Ranjan Gogoi, PC Pant JJ..An appeal against the Delhi High Court judgment barring Doordarshan from sharing a live feed of World Cup Cricket matches with private cable operators. You can read more about the case here. .Today in court: This case could not be tracked. Any update/ information would be appreciated..11. State of Karnataka v. Selvi J Jayalalitha & Ors..[Item 4 in court 9 – SLP (Crl.) 6117-6120/2015].Bench: Pinaki Chandra Ghose, Amitava Roy JJ..The appeal against the judgment of the Karnataka High Court acquitting Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalithaa in the disproportionate assets case. Senior Advocate BV Acharya and petitioner- in-person Subramanian Swamy completed their arguments yesterday. Senior Advocate TR Andhyarujina will commence his arguments today for K Anbhazagan. TR Andhyarujina completed his submissions and L Nageswara Rao began his arguments for Jayalalithaa..Today in court: Senior Advocate L Nageswara Rao is making his submissions and will resume his arguments tomorrow..12. Cellular Operators Association of India And Ors. v. Telecom Regulatory Authority of India And Ors..[Item 4 in court 10 – SLP(C) 6521/2016].Bench: Kurian Joseph, Rohinton Fali Nariman JJ..Plea by cellular operators in the call drops matter. The Supreme Court has issued notice to the Central government and Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), among others but refused to stay the judgment of the Delhi High Court. At the last hearing, the court had asked the TRAI to consider the technical aspects of call drops and inform the court on whether it could consider amending the regulations imposing penalty on telecom companies..Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal is appearing for the Cellular Operators Association of India while TRAI is being represented by ASG PS Narasimha. Read more here..Today in court: The Centre told the court today that it will try to resolve the issue pertaining to the call drop regulations. The matter will now be heard on April 12..13. PACL Employees and Customers Protection Forum v. Union of India And Ors..[Item 32 in court 2 – WP (Civil) 500/2015].Bench: Anil R Dave, AK Goel JJ..A petition filed by PACL employees and investors based out of Kerala in the alleged ponzi scheme where PACL collected Rs. 45,000 crore from about 6 crore investors. The petitioners are seeking refund of their money. Read more about the PACL case here..Today in court: The court today allowed the application filed by employees, investors and customers in Kerala to authorise Justice Lodha committee to look into the assets of the PACL outside India. Read more here..Delhi High Court.1. Virbhadra Singh & Anr v Central Bureau of Investigation & Ors..[Item 114, Court 29- W.P.(CRL) 2757/2015].Bench: Pratibha Rani J..Petition filed by the Himachal Pradesh Chief Minister Virbhadra Singh seeking quashing of the FIR against him and others in the DA case. On the last date of hearing, the CBI had moved a petition seeking vacation of the Himachal Pradesh High Court’s interim order that had restrained the agency from arresting, interrogating or filing a charge sheet against Virbhadra Singh in the disproportionate assets case..Today in Court: This case will continue to be heard tomorrow. You can read the detailed report here. .2. Sam Pitroda alias Satyanarayan Gangaram Pitroda v Dr. Subramanian Swamy & Anr. [Batch of 3 cases].[Item 62-64, Court 32- CRL.M.C. 1317/2016].Bench: PS Teji J..Check evening updates..Today in Court: This case is now posted to be heard tomorrow at 2.30 pm..3. Cairn India Ltd & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors. .[Item 18, Court 10- WP (C) 11599/2015].Bench: RS Endlaw J. .A petition filed by Cairn India seeking an extension of its contract for the Barmer oil and gas block in Rajasthan and also a better price for crude oil produced from the block..On the last date of hearing, the Bench had granted a time of 3 months to the government to decide on Cairn’s request for extension of its product sharing contract..Today in court: This case could not be tracked. Any update/ information would be appreciated..4. Cairn India Ltd & Ors Vs Directorate General of Foreign Trade & Ors..[Item 40, Court 10 – W.P.(C) 11600/2015].Bench- Manmohan J..Petition seeking permission to export surplus crude oil from Barmer oil field in Rajasthan. The company had argued that due to the delay in requisite permissions from the Government, it was incurring heavy losses by selling crude to domestic players..On the last date of hearing, Senior Advocate CA Sundaram appeared for Cairn and argued that the foreign trade policy did not prohibit Cairn from exporting oil and therefore, the Union Govt cannot exercise such prohibition either. The case is listed to be heard at the end of the board..Today in Court- This case was mentioned to be adjourned..5. Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Vs Union of India, Rajendra Prashad Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi, MA Usmani Vs Union of India & Ors, Naresh Kumar Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors..[Item 22-32, Court 1].Bench: Chief Justice G Rohini, Jayant Nath J..A batch of petitions questioning the apportionment of powers between the Chief Minister and Lt-Governor..Today in Court: After a hearing that went on for nearly two hours, the Bench will continue to hear this case tomorrow when the Delhi Govt and other respondents are expected to make their submissions..IPR Cases [Anand & Anand].6. TEKLA Corpn & Anr v Mr. Ganga Eswaran.[Item 15, Court 21- CS(COMM) 72/2016].Bench- VK Rao J..Check evening updates..Today in Court- This case could not be tracked..7. Merck Sharp and Dohme Corp & Anr v Mr. Sunil Sharma & Ors..[Item 15, Court 22- CS(COMM) 218/2016].Bench- Valmiki Mehta J..Check evening updates..Today in Court- This case could not be tracked..8. F.Hoffman La Roche Ltd & Anr v Fresenius Kabi Oncology Ltd & Anr..[Item 6, Court 22- CS(OS) 2633/2012].Bench- Valmiki Mehta J..Check evening updates..Today in Court- This case could not be tracked..Bombay High Court.1. The Association of Hospitals Mumbai v. State of Maharashtra.[Item 7 Court 13- APPI(Cri)/22/2014].Bench: AS Oka and PD Naik JJ.This application is in relation to CRPIL/42/2014 which was filed after a patient was detained by the Seven Hills Hospital authorities for non-payment of dues. For more details in the previous report..Today in court: The major issues raised by the petitioner’s lawyer Diwakar Dwivedi is whether hospitals can detain patients for non-payment of bills and also possible solution for patient’s in case of false billing by the hospitals..State’s counsel, MM Deshmukh informed the court that the Maharashtra Clinical Establishments Act 2014 has been notified for inviting suggestions by the public..Rui A Rodrigues appearing for the intervenors (Association of Medical Consultants) submitted that a balance has to be struck as far as the law is concerned because if bills are unpaid then all of the smaller hospitals will end up going out of business. He argued that it will not effect the “five-star hospitals” in any way because they claim deposits in advance..Section 39 onwards IPC will be applicable as far detention of patient for non-payment of bill is concerned- Oka J said..The State PP, SK Shinde has been directed to appear in the next hearing on April 13. An affidavit clarifying their stand on specific issues raised in the PIL will be filed by the intervenors..2. Shivaji Hariba Bhosale v. State of Maharashtra.[Item 909 Court 52- PIL(C)/40/2016].Bench: CJ DH Waghela, MS Sonak J.Check evening updates..Today in court: This matter could not be tracked..3. M/S Bramhos Aerospace Pvt Ltd. & Anr v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.[Item 7 Court 31- W.P(C)/11393/2015].Bench: SC Dharmadhikari,GS Kulkarni JJ.A sales tax dispute over the manufacture of the Bramhos missile..Today in court: This matter was not taken up due to paucity of time..4. Mr. Santosh Digambar Honkarape & Anr v. Central Adoption Resources Agency & Ors.[Item 29 Court 13- PIL(C)/162/2015].Bench: AS Oka, PD Naik JJ.The petitioners are challenging the 2015 guidelines on adoption issued by Central Adoption Resources Agency (CARA)..Petitioners as well as the intervenor have been directed to file a reply to the Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh’s affidavit stating that the CARA guidelines are in consonance with the new Juvenile Justice Act, 2016..Today in court: Amicus Mihir Desai submitted that although the procedure has been laid down in the CARA guidelines 2015, regulations will have to be in place. To which ASG Anil Singh (appearing for the union) said that these guidelines will be converted into regulations soon..Oka J told Singh that,.Although the union has stated that these guidelines are in consonance with the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of children) Act. You have to categorically state that the 2015 guidelines do not override the separate chapter in the said act (on adoption) so that your stand is clear..The next date of hearing is April 12..5. Ramprasad Gupta S/o Vishwanath Gupta v. State of Maharashtra.[Item 60 Court 54- W.P.(Cri)/4845/2015].Bench: Naresh H. Patil, A.M. Badar JJ.The petition filed by Ramnarayan Gupta alias Lakhan Bhaiyya’s brother challenged the state government’s decision to suspend the sentence of 11 policemen convicted of Gupta’s murder. The High Court had granted an interim stay on the suspension of sentence..On the orders of the High Court, the Metropolitan Magistrate had submitted a finding that that Gupta had been murdered. An SIT appointed by the High Court found that it was case of contract killing done by the police at the behest of Gupta’s arch rival..Today in court: This matter could not be taken up due to paucity of time.