Anjana Gopinath
Content Writer
1.Apex Court Stays Orissa HC’s Ban on Bird/Animal Sacrifice During ‘Chatar Yatra’
The Supreme Court bench comprising of CJI SA Bobde, Justices AS Bopanna and V. Ramasubramaniam has stayed a High Court judgement which banned animal or bird sacrifice during ‘Chatar Yatra’ festival. The High Court of Orissa had banned the animal or bird sacrifice while allowing a PIL filed by a social activist against the large number of animal sacrifices that take pace during the festival.
2.Mumbai Court Acquits 20 Foreign Nationals Accused of Spreading Coronavirus; States There is No Iota of Evidence Against Them
A Metropolitan Magistrate Court in Andheri, Mumbai, acquitted 20 foreign nationals accused of spreading coronavirus and violating the orders of lockdown by two police officers. The Metropolitan Magistrate noted that the prosecution witnesses themselves admitted that they have not seen the accused persons violating any orders issued by the authority, and therefore there is no iota of evidence to show any contravention of orders. The accused belonged to two different countries, and hence, the Court passed two separate orders.
3.Court Hearing First Appeal in Criminal Matters Required to Form Its Own Opinion: Reiterates SC
The Supreme Court bench comprising of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Dinesh Maheshwari and Hrishikesh Roy reiterated that the Court hearing first appeal in criminal matters is required to form its opinion on the basis of the evidence on record and the opinion of the Trial Court. This was reiterated in the case titled as Chandrabhan Singh v. State of Rajasthan.
4.Allahabad HC Demands Production of Gang-Rape Victim Allegedly Detained in Police Station
The Allahabad HC took cognizance of the detention of a gang-rape victim in a police station, from a day after the court pulled up the police for lodging the FIR only after 3 months of the alleged incident, and directed the police to produce the girl before the court.
5.Maharashtra Government Withdraws General Consent Granted to CBI to Probe Cases in the State
The Government of Maharashtra has withdrawn the general consent granted by it to the CBI in 1989. Earlier this year, the Rajasthan Government had withdrawn its general consent rendered to the CBI.
6.Proposer Has Duty to Disclose Pre-existing Ailments to the Insurer in Life Insurance Cases: SC
The Supreme Court Bench comprising of Justices DY Chandrachud, Indu Malhotra and Indira Banerjee observed that a proposer who seeks to obtain a life insurance policy is duty bound to disclose pre-existing medical condition to the insurer. This was noted in the case of Branch Manager, Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Company Ltd. v. Dalbir Kaur.
7.No Further Extension of Interim Orders in Civil Cases and Interim Bails Granted to Undertrials In Heinous Crimes: states Delhi HC
The High Court of Delhi stated that there shall be no further extension of interim orders passed in civil cases and that there shall be no extension of interim bails granted to undertrials in heinous crimes. This decision was made in the case In Re Extension of interim orders by a bench comprising of Chief Justice DN Patel, Justice Siddharth Mridul and Justice Talwant Singh.
8.Karnataka HC Restrains Franklin Templeton Investments from Proceeding with Winding Up of Schemes Without Obtaining Consent from Unit Investors
The Karnataka High Court Division Bench comprising of Chief Justice AS Oka and Justice Ashok S Kinagi, restrained Franklin Templeton Investments from proceeding with the winding up of debt fund schemes without obtaining the consent of unit investors.
9.No Blanket Order Should Be Passed u/s 438 of CrPC to Prevent Arrest of Accused When No Crime is Registered Against Him: Kerala HC
The High Court of Kerala held that it is not permissible to grant a person anticipatory bail when no crime is registered against him, on the reason that it would act as a blanket against all sorts of accusations which may arise against him in the future.
10.Spousal Postings in Indian Army Not A Mandatory Rule; It is Subject to Vacancies: Delhi HC
A Division Bench of the High Court of Delhi has held that the Indian Army’s rule on Spousal Postings is not mandatory and is subject to the availability of vacancies for both spouses at the same station. The observation was made by Justices Rajiv Sahai Endlaw and Asha Menon in the case titled as Col. Amit Kumar v. Union of India & Ors.
