1. Persons with Disabilities have Right to Reservation in Promotions: SC
The Supreme Court bench comprising of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and R Subhash Reddy, in the matter titled as the State of Kerala and Ors v. Leesamma Joseph, held that persons with physical disabilities have the right to reservation in promotions. The 2-judge bench followed the judgment laid down in the 2020 case of Siddaraju v. State of Karnataka, which held that the rule of no reservation in promotions has no application to Persons with Disability.
2. Necessary to Prove Threat to Cause Death or Harm for Conviction u/s 364A IPC in Case of Kidnapping for Ransom: SC
A bench comprising of Justices Ashok Bhushan and R Subhash Reddy held that mere proof of kidnap of person is not sufficient for a conviction for the offence of “kidnapping for ransom” under section 364A of IPC. It was held that threat to cause death or harm must also be proved. This was held in the case of Shaik Ahmed v. State of Telangana.
3. States Must Implement ‘One Nation, One Ration Card’ Scheme by July 31st: SC
The Apex Court directed that all states must implement the ‘one nation, one ration card’ scheme by July 31st. The States/ Union Territories were also directed to run community kitchens at prominent places. These directions were passed in the suo moto case ‘In Re Problems and Miseries of Migrants Labourers’, after observing that the fundamental right to life enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution may be interpreted to include the right to food and other necessities.
4. Trend of Lawyers Giving Dishonest Advice Needs to be Deprecated; Must Impose Costs, Strictures: SC
The Supreme Court bench comprising of Justices DY Chandrachud, R Subhash Reddy and Ravindra Bhat observed that the trend of lawyers giving dishonest advice to clients needs to be curbed. The observation was made while hearing a Special Leave Petition arising out of a March decision of a division bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
5. Death due to COVID or Related Complications Should be Specifically Mentioned in Death Certificate: SC
The Supreme Court has stated that a death certificate issued in relation to a COVID fatality must specify the same as the cause of death. Also, if the cause of death was due to any other complications related to COVID, then the same should also be specifically mentioned as the cause of death in the death certificate. The clarification was made by Justices Ashok Bhushan and MR Shah in the case titled Reepak Kansal v. Union of India; and Gaurav Bansal v. Union of India.
6. Bar Under Order XXIII Rule 3A Attracted if Compromise on the Basis of Which Decree was Passes was Void or Voidable: SC
The Supreme Court bench comprising of Justices Ashok Bhushan and R Subhash Reddy held that bar under Rule 3A should be attracted if a compromise on the basis of which decree was passed was void or voidable. This was held in the case of R Janakiammal v. SK Kumaraswamy.
7. Hindu Joint Family Can Revert and Reunite to Continue Joint Family Status Even after Partition: SC
The Supreme Court bench comprising of Justices Ashok Bhushan and R Subhash Reddy noted that the acts of the parties involved might lead to the inference that they reunited after the previous partition.
8. Advocates with 10 Years’ Experience can be Appointed as Judicial Members: Amended Tribunal Rules
The Central Government amended the Tribunal, Appellate Tribunal and other Authorities (Qualifications, Experience and other Conditions of Service of Members) Rules, 2020. According to the amended rules, Advocates with ten years’ experience can be appointed as Judicial Members of various tribunals.
9. Anticipatory Bail Application by Juvenile u/s 438 CrPC in Writ Petition Not Maintainable: Telangana HC
The Telangana High Court bench of Justice K Lakshman ruled that filing of an anticipatory bail application by a juvenile under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is not maintainable and that the juvenile has to avail the remedy under section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015.
10. Homeless Persons should Work for the Country. Everything cannot be provided by the State: Bombay HC
A division bench of the High Court of Bombay, while disposing of a PIL seeking relief measures for homeless and poor persons, observe that the said persons should also work for the country and that the State cannot provide everything. The said observation was made by Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Girish S Kulkarni.