A summary of important cases from the causelists of the Supreme Court of India and the Bombay High Court..LIST OF CASES .Supreme Court of India.Pt. Parmanand Katara Senior Advocate v. Union of India & Ors.Lok Prahari through its General Secretary, S.N. Shukla v. Union of India & Ors.Jhuggie Jhopri Ekta Manch and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.Social Evil Fighters v. Union of India & Ors.Centre for Public Interest Litigation v. Union of India & Ors.Madras Bar Association v. Union of India & Ors.Goa Foundation v. State of GoaIndian Young Lawyers Association & Ors. v. State of Kerala & Ors.ND Jayaprakash v. Union of India and Anr.Kamini Jaiswal v. Union of India and Ors.The Punjab & Haryana High Court Bar Association (Regd) v. Registrar (Recruitment), Punjab & Haryana High Court & Anr.Board of Control for Cricket v. Cricket Association of Bihar & Ors.U/A 143(1) Of The Constitution Of India [Reg: The Punjab Termination Of Agreement Act, 2004].Bombay High Court.Manoranjan Santosh Roy v. International Monetary Fund & 5 Ors.Madhav Sakharam Rane & 2 Ors v. State of Maharashtra & 7 Ors.Leonard Xavier Valdaris & Ors. v. Office-in-charge & Ors.Mahesh Vaijnathrao Doijode v. Yashraj Films Private Ltd. & 4 Ors.Mastsya Va Realti Vyavasai K Sevabhavi Sanstha v. The Collector, Raigad & Ors.Jayashree Ramakant Khadilkar-Pande v. Union of India & Ors.SUMMARY OF CASES.Supreme Court of India.1. Pt. Parmanand Katara Senior Advocate v. Union of India & Ors..[Item 7 in Court 1 – Writ Petition (Crl.) 48/2016].Bench: Chief Justice TS Thakur, R Banumathi, UU Lalit JJ..Check evening updates to know more..Today in court: This matter pertaining to Salman Khan’s hit and run case was tagged along with the appeal filed by the Maharashtra government, which is being heard by a different Bench..2. Lok Prahari thru. its General Secretary, S.N. Shukla v. Union of India & Ors.[Item 8 in Court 1 – Writ Petition (Civil) 143/2016].Bench: Chief Justice TS Thakur, R Banumathi, UU Lalit JJ..Check evening updates..Today in court: This case was withdrawn..3. Jhuggie Jhopri Ekta Manch and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors..[Item 11 in Court 1 – Writ Petition (Civil) 202/2016].Bench: Chief Justice TS Thakur, R Banumathi, UU Lalit JJ..A fresh PIL. Check evening updates..Today in court: This case was withdrawn..4. Social Evil Fighters v. Union of India & Ors.[Item 12 in Court 1 – Writ Petition (Civil) 204/2016].Bench: Chief Justice TS Thakur, R Banumathi, UU Lalit JJ..A fresh PIL. Check evening updates..Today in court: This case was withdrawn..5. Centre for Public Interest Litigation v. Union of India & Ors.[Item 20 in Court 1 – Writ Petition (Civil) 355/2011].Bench: Chief Justice TS Thakur, R Banumathi, UU Lalit JJ..A petition seeking investigation into allegations of administrative and financial irregularities in IFCI..Today in court: This case was adjourned for a week..6. Madras Bar Association v. Union of India & Ors..[Item 501 in court 2 – Writ Petition (Civil) 267/2012].Bench: Anil R Dave, PC Ghose, Shiva Kirti Singh, Adarsh Kumar Goel, Amitava Roy JJ..Case pertaining to implementation of the Supreme Court’s directions in the judgment in Union of India v. R Gandhi, President, Madras Bar Association reported in (2010) 11 SCC 1. When the matter was last heard, the Court had asked the Centre to consider the suggestions made by the Court in R Gandhi’s case concerning a common nodal ministry for all tribunals. Read the full story here..Today in court: This case was adjourned and will now be taken up in July..7. Goa Foundation v. State of Goa.[Item 51 in court 3 – Writ Petition (Civil) 711/2015].Bench: JS Khehar, C Nagappan JJ..A petition challenging the renewal of 88 iron ore mining leases; a CBI inquiry has also been sought..Today in court: This case could not be tracked. Any update/ information would be appreciated..8. Indian Young Lawyers Association & Ors. v. State of Kerala & Ors..[Item 302 in court 4 at 2 pm – Writ Petition (Civil) 373/2006].Bench: Dipak Misra, V Gopala Gowda, Kurian Joseph JJ..Case pertaining to the entry of women in the Sabarimala temple. The State government has filed its response, changing its stand and saying that women cannot be permitted in the temple since the practice flows from the temple deity’s celibacy vows..The affidavit states that the practice is,. “an essential and integral part of the right of practice of religion of a devotee and comes under the protective guarantee of the Constitution under Articles 25 and 26 which have been held to contain guarantee for rituals, observances, ceremonies and modes of worship which are an integral part of religion.”.Today in court: The petitioners have commenced their arguments. While Justice Dipak Misra asked the State and Devaswom Board, whether they can override “Constitutional fundamentalism to deny ladies entry to temple, Justice Kurian Joseph quizzed the petitioners about filing a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution when the High Court had already finally heard and disposed of a matter on the same issue in an Article 226 petition..The hearing in the case will continue on April 13, ie. Wednesday this week..9. ND Jayaprakash v. Union of India and Anr..[Item 42 in court 5 – Writ Petition (Crl.) 25/2016].Bench: Jasti Chelameswar, AM Sapre JJ..A PIL filed in the Supreme Court by social activist and JNU alumni ND Jayaprakash after the violence in Patiala house court last month. Read more here..Today in court: Senior Advocate KTS Tulsi began his arguments in the matter but Justice Chelameswar was of the opinion that nothing remained in this petition whereupon Tulsi said that the court could then hear the contempt case. The status of this case is, therefore, unclear..10. Kamini Jaiswal v. Union of India and Ors..[Item 43 in court 5 – Writ Petition (Crl.) 32/2016].Bench: Jasti Chelameswar, AM Sapre JJ..PIL filed by advocate Kamini Jaiswal seeking SIT investigation into violence by lawyers at Patiala House and initiation of contempt action against 3 lawyers involved in the incident..The Court had issued a notice to the three lawyers – Yashpal Singh, Vikram Chauhan and Om Sharma. .Today in court: Advocate Prashant Bhushan appeared and argued for Kamini Jaiswal while Senior Advocate Ajit Kumar Sinha represented Delhi police. The Court perused the report submitted by the team of advocates which had visited the patiala house court..It was prima facie convinced that Delhi police did not carry out its responsibility earnestly. “You allowed someone to enter the court. They seem justified in asking for another body to investigate”, remarked Justice Chelameswar to Ajit Kumar Sinha..The hearing will continue on April 22..11. The Punjab & Haryana High Court Bar Association (Regd) v. Registrar (Recruitment), Punjab & Haryana High Court & Anr..[Item 51 in court 9 – Writ Petition (Civil) 579/2015].Bench: PC Ghose, Amitava Roy JJ..This case has challenged a pre-condition mandated by the Punjab & Haryana High Court for appointment of practising advocates to the Haryana Superior Judicial Service. The impugned condition lays down that an applicant must be an income tax assessee for at least three assessment years preceding the application with a gross professional income of not less than Rs. 5 lakhs per annum..Today in court: This case could not be tracked. Any update/ information would be appreciated..12. 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. The Committee had suggested among other things, a bar on ministers occupying positions in BCCI and legalising betting in cricket..When the matter was last heard, the Court had chided the BCCI today for what it considered as ‘resisting to reform itself’. As per this report, The BCCI also submitted that it has complete autonomy over the money earned by way of ticket sales, ads etc. and the same cannot be questioned. The BCCI also submitted that it was not open to having a CAG nominee on its board, one of the major recommendations of the Lodha Panel..Today in court: The court observed today that there is need for structural reforms in BCCI to make it more transparent and credible. The hearing will continue on April 13..13. U/A 143(1) Of The Constitution Of India [Reg: The Punjab Termination Of Agreement Act, 2004].[Item 502 in court 2 – Spl.Ref. 1/2004].Bench: Anil R Dave, PC Ghose, Shiva Kirti Singh, AK Goel, Amitava Roy JJ..A 2014 special reference to the Supreme Court under Article 143 concerning water sharing between Punjab and other States. The Court had ordered status quo to be maintained with respect to the canal land. Read more here..Today in court: This case could not be tracked. Any update/ information would be appreciated..Bombay High Court.1. Manoranjan Santosh Roy v. International Monetary Fund & 5 Ors..[Item 10 Court 13- PIL(OS)/85/2015].Bench: AS Oka and PD Naik JJ.The petitioner has claimed that the RBI’s procedure in printing certain category of notes leads to duplication of these notes, thereby harming the economy. The IMF, RBI and ministry of finance are respondents in the matter..Today in court: Reserve Bank of India has been directed to file a reply on the issues raised in the petition..2. Madhav Sakharam Rane & 2 Ors v. State of Maharashtra & 7 Ors..[Item 20 Court 13- PIL(OS)/74/2007].Bench: AS Oka and PD Naik JJ.Check for evening updates..Today in court: This matter could not be tracked..3. Leonard Xavier Valdaris & Ors. v. Office-in-charge & Ors..[Item 31 Court 13- W.P.(Cri)/2110/2014].Bench: AS Oka and PD Naik JJ.In April 2014, Agnelo Valdaris and three others were arrested by the Railway Police on allegations of chain snatching. The police claim that Valdaris was run over by a train while trying to escape police custody on his way to a medical checkup. The petitioner, Agnelo’s father, says that his son was illegally kept in custody for forty-eight hours and died due to police torture. Read our detailed report here..Today in court: The state has been directed to file a reply regarding the committee that was constituted to find a remedy for such large number of custodial deaths in the state. The committee was supposed to submit a report within three months which they failed to do..The matter was adjourned till next Monday. State will now report all compliances till now..4. Mahesh Vaijnathrao Doijode v. Yashraj Films Private Ltd. & 4 Ors..[Item 907 Court 37- NMSL(OS)/1153/2016].Bench: GS Patel J.An ad-interim application seeking a stay on the release of the Yashraj movie ‘FAN’..Today in court: The applicant alleges copyright infringement by Yashraj Films as his copyright on a similar script is registered under the name ‘Abhineta’. He was seeking a stay on the release of the film today..Justice GS Patel refused to grant interim relief, adjourning the matter to June 8. He questioned the timing of this application since the trailer of the movie was released in February. He also recorded the fact that although the applicant claims to have narrated the same script to Aditya Chopra (Yashraj Films), he failed to give an exact date for the same..5. Mastsya Va Realti Vyavasai K Sevabhavi Sanstha v. The Collector, Raigad & Ors..[Item 27 Court 43- PIL(C)/202/2013].Bench: VM Kanade and MS Karnik JJ.A PIL seeking directions to end illegal sand mining and dredging in the state..Today in court: This matter could not be taken up due to paucity of time..6. Jayashree Ramakant Khadilkar-Pande v. Union of India & Ors.[Item 33 Court 13, PIL(OS) 26/2015].Bench: AS Oka and PD Naik JJ.A PIL challenging loan recoveries initiated by various banks after lending money to farmers for emu farms. Senior counsel Mihir Desai had appeared for the petitioner, arguing that initially the Central government had painted “a rosy picture” when it came to the financial rewards of emu farming. However this did not turn out to be true..The High Court, in 2015, had not stayed the recovery proceedings but had directed that no possession of mortgaged properties would be taken..The High court of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh in the same matter had given the centre time to take a decision regarding loan waiver to these farmers till January 31, 2016 which they have not.The union is expected to file its reply today..Today in court: The Union filed the same affidavit that was submitted before the High court of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh and stated that there is no policy in place for the state of Maharashtra with regard to loan waivers for emu farmers..The court has now asked the petitioners whether they wish to challenge the order passed in December last year.
A summary of important cases from the causelists of the Supreme Court of India and the Bombay High Court..LIST OF CASES .Supreme Court of India.Pt. Parmanand Katara Senior Advocate v. Union of India & Ors.Lok Prahari through its General Secretary, S.N. Shukla v. Union of India & Ors.Jhuggie Jhopri Ekta Manch and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.Social Evil Fighters v. Union of India & Ors.Centre for Public Interest Litigation v. Union of India & Ors.Madras Bar Association v. Union of India & Ors.Goa Foundation v. State of GoaIndian Young Lawyers Association & Ors. v. State of Kerala & Ors.ND Jayaprakash v. Union of India and Anr.Kamini Jaiswal v. Union of India and Ors.The Punjab & Haryana High Court Bar Association (Regd) v. Registrar (Recruitment), Punjab & Haryana High Court & Anr.Board of Control for Cricket v. Cricket Association of Bihar & Ors.U/A 143(1) Of The Constitution Of India [Reg: The Punjab Termination Of Agreement Act, 2004].Bombay High Court.Manoranjan Santosh Roy v. International Monetary Fund & 5 Ors.Madhav Sakharam Rane & 2 Ors v. State of Maharashtra & 7 Ors.Leonard Xavier Valdaris & Ors. v. Office-in-charge & Ors.Mahesh Vaijnathrao Doijode v. Yashraj Films Private Ltd. & 4 Ors.Mastsya Va Realti Vyavasai K Sevabhavi Sanstha v. The Collector, Raigad & Ors.Jayashree Ramakant Khadilkar-Pande v. Union of India & Ors.SUMMARY OF CASES.Supreme Court of India.1. Pt. Parmanand Katara Senior Advocate v. Union of India & Ors..[Item 7 in Court 1 – Writ Petition (Crl.) 48/2016].Bench: Chief Justice TS Thakur, R Banumathi, UU Lalit JJ..Check evening updates to know more..Today in court: This matter pertaining to Salman Khan’s hit and run case was tagged along with the appeal filed by the Maharashtra government, which is being heard by a different Bench..2. Lok Prahari thru. its General Secretary, S.N. Shukla v. Union of India & Ors.[Item 8 in Court 1 – Writ Petition (Civil) 143/2016].Bench: Chief Justice TS Thakur, R Banumathi, UU Lalit JJ..Check evening updates..Today in court: This case was withdrawn..3. Jhuggie Jhopri Ekta Manch and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors..[Item 11 in Court 1 – Writ Petition (Civil) 202/2016].Bench: Chief Justice TS Thakur, R Banumathi, UU Lalit JJ..A fresh PIL. Check evening updates..Today in court: This case was withdrawn..4. Social Evil Fighters v. Union of India & Ors.[Item 12 in Court 1 – Writ Petition (Civil) 204/2016].Bench: Chief Justice TS Thakur, R Banumathi, UU Lalit JJ..A fresh PIL. Check evening updates..Today in court: This case was withdrawn..5. Centre for Public Interest Litigation v. Union of India & Ors.[Item 20 in Court 1 – Writ Petition (Civil) 355/2011].Bench: Chief Justice TS Thakur, R Banumathi, UU Lalit JJ..A petition seeking investigation into allegations of administrative and financial irregularities in IFCI..Today in court: This case was adjourned for a week..6. Madras Bar Association v. Union of India & Ors..[Item 501 in court 2 – Writ Petition (Civil) 267/2012].Bench: Anil R Dave, PC Ghose, Shiva Kirti Singh, Adarsh Kumar Goel, Amitava Roy JJ..Case pertaining to implementation of the Supreme Court’s directions in the judgment in Union of India v. R Gandhi, President, Madras Bar Association reported in (2010) 11 SCC 1. When the matter was last heard, the Court had asked the Centre to consider the suggestions made by the Court in R Gandhi’s case concerning a common nodal ministry for all tribunals. Read the full story here..Today in court: This case was adjourned and will now be taken up in July..7. Goa Foundation v. State of Goa.[Item 51 in court 3 – Writ Petition (Civil) 711/2015].Bench: JS Khehar, C Nagappan JJ..A petition challenging the renewal of 88 iron ore mining leases; a CBI inquiry has also been sought..Today in court: This case could not be tracked. Any update/ information would be appreciated..8. Indian Young Lawyers Association & Ors. v. State of Kerala & Ors..[Item 302 in court 4 at 2 pm – Writ Petition (Civil) 373/2006].Bench: Dipak Misra, V Gopala Gowda, Kurian Joseph JJ..Case pertaining to the entry of women in the Sabarimala temple. The State government has filed its response, changing its stand and saying that women cannot be permitted in the temple since the practice flows from the temple deity’s celibacy vows..The affidavit states that the practice is,. “an essential and integral part of the right of practice of religion of a devotee and comes under the protective guarantee of the Constitution under Articles 25 and 26 which have been held to contain guarantee for rituals, observances, ceremonies and modes of worship which are an integral part of religion.”.Today in court: The petitioners have commenced their arguments. While Justice Dipak Misra asked the State and Devaswom Board, whether they can override “Constitutional fundamentalism to deny ladies entry to temple, Justice Kurian Joseph quizzed the petitioners about filing a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution when the High Court had already finally heard and disposed of a matter on the same issue in an Article 226 petition..The hearing in the case will continue on April 13, ie. Wednesday this week..9. ND Jayaprakash v. Union of India and Anr..[Item 42 in court 5 – Writ Petition (Crl.) 25/2016].Bench: Jasti Chelameswar, AM Sapre JJ..A PIL filed in the Supreme Court by social activist and JNU alumni ND Jayaprakash after the violence in Patiala house court last month. Read more here..Today in court: Senior Advocate KTS Tulsi began his arguments in the matter but Justice Chelameswar was of the opinion that nothing remained in this petition whereupon Tulsi said that the court could then hear the contempt case. The status of this case is, therefore, unclear..10. Kamini Jaiswal v. Union of India and Ors..[Item 43 in court 5 – Writ Petition (Crl.) 32/2016].Bench: Jasti Chelameswar, AM Sapre JJ..PIL filed by advocate Kamini Jaiswal seeking SIT investigation into violence by lawyers at Patiala House and initiation of contempt action against 3 lawyers involved in the incident..The Court had issued a notice to the three lawyers – Yashpal Singh, Vikram Chauhan and Om Sharma. .Today in court: Advocate Prashant Bhushan appeared and argued for Kamini Jaiswal while Senior Advocate Ajit Kumar Sinha represented Delhi police. The Court perused the report submitted by the team of advocates which had visited the patiala house court..It was prima facie convinced that Delhi police did not carry out its responsibility earnestly. “You allowed someone to enter the court. They seem justified in asking for another body to investigate”, remarked Justice Chelameswar to Ajit Kumar Sinha..The hearing will continue on April 22..11. The Punjab & Haryana High Court Bar Association (Regd) v. Registrar (Recruitment), Punjab & Haryana High Court & Anr..[Item 51 in court 9 – Writ Petition (Civil) 579/2015].Bench: PC Ghose, Amitava Roy JJ..This case has challenged a pre-condition mandated by the Punjab & Haryana High Court for appointment of practising advocates to the Haryana Superior Judicial Service. The impugned condition lays down that an applicant must be an income tax assessee for at least three assessment years preceding the application with a gross professional income of not less than Rs. 5 lakhs per annum..Today in court: This case could not be tracked. Any update/ information would be appreciated..12. 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. The Committee had suggested among other things, a bar on ministers occupying positions in BCCI and legalising betting in cricket..When the matter was last heard, the Court had chided the BCCI today for what it considered as ‘resisting to reform itself’. As per this report, The BCCI also submitted that it has complete autonomy over the money earned by way of ticket sales, ads etc. and the same cannot be questioned. The BCCI also submitted that it was not open to having a CAG nominee on its board, one of the major recommendations of the Lodha Panel..Today in court: The court observed today that there is need for structural reforms in BCCI to make it more transparent and credible. The hearing will continue on April 13..13. U/A 143(1) Of The Constitution Of India [Reg: The Punjab Termination Of Agreement Act, 2004].[Item 502 in court 2 – Spl.Ref. 1/2004].Bench: Anil R Dave, PC Ghose, Shiva Kirti Singh, AK Goel, Amitava Roy JJ..A 2014 special reference to the Supreme Court under Article 143 concerning water sharing between Punjab and other States. The Court had ordered status quo to be maintained with respect to the canal land. Read more here..Today in court: This case could not be tracked. Any update/ information would be appreciated..Bombay High Court.1. Manoranjan Santosh Roy v. International Monetary Fund & 5 Ors..[Item 10 Court 13- PIL(OS)/85/2015].Bench: AS Oka and PD Naik JJ.The petitioner has claimed that the RBI’s procedure in printing certain category of notes leads to duplication of these notes, thereby harming the economy. The IMF, RBI and ministry of finance are respondents in the matter..Today in court: Reserve Bank of India has been directed to file a reply on the issues raised in the petition..2. Madhav Sakharam Rane & 2 Ors v. State of Maharashtra & 7 Ors..[Item 20 Court 13- PIL(OS)/74/2007].Bench: AS Oka and PD Naik JJ.Check for evening updates..Today in court: This matter could not be tracked..3. Leonard Xavier Valdaris & Ors. v. Office-in-charge & Ors..[Item 31 Court 13- W.P.(Cri)/2110/2014].Bench: AS Oka and PD Naik JJ.In April 2014, Agnelo Valdaris and three others were arrested by the Railway Police on allegations of chain snatching. The police claim that Valdaris was run over by a train while trying to escape police custody on his way to a medical checkup. The petitioner, Agnelo’s father, says that his son was illegally kept in custody for forty-eight hours and died due to police torture. Read our detailed report here..Today in court: The state has been directed to file a reply regarding the committee that was constituted to find a remedy for such large number of custodial deaths in the state. The committee was supposed to submit a report within three months which they failed to do..The matter was adjourned till next Monday. State will now report all compliances till now..4. Mahesh Vaijnathrao Doijode v. Yashraj Films Private Ltd. & 4 Ors..[Item 907 Court 37- NMSL(OS)/1153/2016].Bench: GS Patel J.An ad-interim application seeking a stay on the release of the Yashraj movie ‘FAN’..Today in court: The applicant alleges copyright infringement by Yashraj Films as his copyright on a similar script is registered under the name ‘Abhineta’. He was seeking a stay on the release of the film today..Justice GS Patel refused to grant interim relief, adjourning the matter to June 8. He questioned the timing of this application since the trailer of the movie was released in February. He also recorded the fact that although the applicant claims to have narrated the same script to Aditya Chopra (Yashraj Films), he failed to give an exact date for the same..5. Mastsya Va Realti Vyavasai K Sevabhavi Sanstha v. The Collector, Raigad & Ors..[Item 27 Court 43- PIL(C)/202/2013].Bench: VM Kanade and MS Karnik JJ.A PIL seeking directions to end illegal sand mining and dredging in the state..Today in court: This matter could not be taken up due to paucity of time..6. Jayashree Ramakant Khadilkar-Pande v. Union of India & Ors.[Item 33 Court 13, PIL(OS) 26/2015].Bench: AS Oka and PD Naik JJ.A PIL challenging loan recoveries initiated by various banks after lending money to farmers for emu farms. Senior counsel Mihir Desai had appeared for the petitioner, arguing that initially the Central government had painted “a rosy picture” when it came to the financial rewards of emu farming. However this did not turn out to be true..The High Court, in 2015, had not stayed the recovery proceedings but had directed that no possession of mortgaged properties would be taken..The High court of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh in the same matter had given the centre time to take a decision regarding loan waiver to these farmers till January 31, 2016 which they have not.The union is expected to file its reply today..Today in court: The Union filed the same affidavit that was submitted before the High court of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh and stated that there is no policy in place for the state of Maharashtra with regard to loan waivers for emu farmers..The court has now asked the petitioners whether they wish to challenge the order passed in December last year.