Ad

Tag: Bombay High Court

Arnab Gets Clean Chit From Bombay High Court

(Mumbai)Bombay High Court suspends two FIRs against Arnab Goswami
The Bombay High Court on Tuesday suspended two FIRs lodged against Republic TV Editor-in-Chief Arnab Goswami for his alleged provocative and inflammatory comments on the Palghar mob lynching and gathering of migrant workers outside Bandra railway station amid lockdown.
In an interim order, a division bench of Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and Riyaz Chagla noted that prima facie, no offence was disclosed against Goswami and he had not intended to cause public disharmony or incite violence.
Goswamis counsel Harish Salve argued that the Congress party orchestrated multiple FIRs against Goswami across the country and told the court that such cases require balancing of free speech and criminal law.
Senior counsel Kapil Sibal and Raja Thakare, appearing for the Maharashtra government, had opposed the petition and said a journalist has the right to freedom of expression, but does not have the right to declare that a person was killed only because he was of a particular religion.
Sibal and Thakare had read out transcripts of the two news shows and said there was a clear attempt to incite communal violence.

Air India Unions File Writ in HC Against Pay Cut: Pandemic

(Mumbai)Air India Unions Challenge in HC: Pay Cut due to Pandemic
Air India employee unions have moved the Bombay High Court against the airline’s decision to slash allowances, which form a major part of salary, by ten per cent because of the impact of the coronavirus pandemic.
Air India Aircraft Engineers Association, All India Service Engineers Association and Indian Pilots Guild filed a writ petition in the high court earlier this week against the national carrier and its subsidiary Air India Engineering Services Ltd.
The petition, filed through advocates Jane Cox and Karishma Rao, said that on March 20, Air India announced 10 per cent deduction for three months from the allowance package of all employees except the cabin crew on account of the impact of coronavirus outbreak.
The plea pointed out that on the same day the Union government issued an advisory asking all private and public firms not to reduce salaries or sack employees due to the pandemic.
The petitioners had also written to the Ministry of Civil Aviation protesting against the deduction but they were to receive any response, the plea said.
The court is likely to hear the matter next week.

HC Refuses Bail Saying Accused Is Safe in Jail

(Mumbai)HC Refuses Bail Saying Accused Is Safe in Jail
The Bombay High Court on Thursday refused to grant temporary bail to an accused, saying it can not allow him to be released and put him at the risk of contracting coronavirus.
The situation in jail was much better than that in the city of Mumbai, Justice G S Patel observed while hearing a bail plea filed by Jitendra Mishra, a murder accused who is lodged in Taloja prison in Navi Mumbai for the last 18 months.
Mishra, a resident of suburban Ghatkopar, had sought temporary bail citing the pandemic.
“You (applicant) have no idea what is happening in the city. The jail authorities are better equipped than the municipal authorities outside, especially in Worli Naka (central Mumbai).
“Worli Naka is in a mess,” the judge said.
The high court further said that it was aware of the direction given by the Supreme Court that wherever possible prisoners should be released, but it also needed to consider the situation in the city.
Refusing to grant bail to Mishra, the court said the application be listed for hearing before a regular court which will resume after lockdown is over.
As of Wednesday, Mumbai had reported over 700 coronavirus cases

29 Tree Lovers Arrested : Aarey Colony

(Mumbai) 29 arrested in connection with Aarey Colony protest
Twenty-nine people, including six women, were arrested on Saturday in connection with the protest against the cutting of trees in Aarey Colony
Those arrested are among the 60 people earlier detained by police.
The MMRCL had started hacking trees from Friday to make way for a car shed, hours after the Bombay High Court dismissed four petitions filed by NGOs and activists challenging the decision to allow felling of trees in the prime green lung of the city.
However, hundreds of environmental activists gathered in Aarey Colony and protested. They tried to stop the authorities from chopping down the trees.
Congress leader Sanjay Nirupam on Saturday condemned felling of trees at Aarey Colony here which began in the night, and arrest of protesting activists.
Milind Deora, his party colleague, called the tree cutting “stabbing yourself in the lungs”.

Uber,Ola Cab Fares: HC Directs Maha Govt to Decide in 8 Weeks

[Mumbai]Uber,Ola Fares: HC Directs Maha Govt to Decide in 8 Weeks
The Bombay High Court directed the Maharashtra government to take a decision within eight weeks on a 2017 report submitted by a state-appointed committee to fix fares for app-based cab aggregators Ola and Uber.
In October 2016, the state government had constituted a committee under the chairmanship of retired IAS officer B C Khatua to decide on the minimum and maximum fare structure for companies like Ola and Uber.
The committee had in September 2017 submitted an exhaustive report to the government. But, till date, the government has not taken a final decision on the committee’s report and recommendations.

HC Hammers PIL Seeking Repeal of State Act For MNREGA

[Mumbai] HC Hammers PIL Seeking Repeal of State Act : MNREGA
The Bombay High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) which sought to discontinue or repeal Maharashtra Employment Guarantee Act of 1977 on the ground that a Central Act with same benefits for rural population has come into the effect from 2005.
The PIL prayed that the Central law i.e Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act of 2005 be allowed to continue in place of the State law i.e Maharashtra Employment Guarantee Act, 1977.
The petitioner — Aam Aadmi Lokmanch — also prayed that collection of funds under the State law — Maharashtra Employment Guarantee Act — be discontinued till the petition is disposed of.
However, the court refused to entertain the PIL saying the allegations were general in nature and not specific.
A division bench of Chief Justice Dr Manjula Chellur and Justice M S Sonak, dismissed the petition while observing that both the enactments, State as well as Central, are welfare legislation in the light of Directive Principles of the State Policy enshrined in the Constitution.

Manjula Chellur Is Chief Justice of Bombay High Court:2nd Woman CJ

[Mumbai] Manjula Chellur sworn-in as Chief Justice of Bombay High Court
Justice Manjula Chellur today took oath as the Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court, the second woman to occupy the post.
Chelluar, who was the Chief Justice of Calcutta High Court, was transferred following the retirement of D H Waghela as Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court on August 10.
Waghela held the post for six months.
Maharashtra Governor Ch Vidyasagar Rao administered the oath of office to Justice Chellur at a brief swearing-in ceremony held at Raj Bhavan, Mumbai.
Chellur is the second woman Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court, after Sujata Manohar in 1994.
Chellur, born in 1955 in Karnataka, got her law degree and started practising as a lawyer in Karnataka after which she became a district judge in 1988.
In 2000, she became a permanent judge of the Karnataka High Court. In 2012, she was appointed Chief Justice of Kerala High Court and in 2014 she was transferred to Calcutta.She is scheduled to retire in 2017.

Maha+TN+WB States Desire To Change The Name Of Their High Court

[New Delhi]Maha+TN+WB States Desire To Rename Their High Court
The State Governments of [1]Maharashtra[2]Tamil Nadu [3] West Bengal
have sent the proposals for changing the name of
‘Bombay High Court’ as ‘Mumbai High Court’,
‘Madras High Court’ as ‘Chennai High Court’ and
‘Calcutta High Court’ as ‘Kolkata High Court’ respectively.
As per Union Minister of Ministry of Law & Justice, D. V. Sadananda Gowda , A suitable legislation to consider such requests is under consideration of the Government.
This information was given by the minister in a written reply in Lok Sabha today.

मुंबई में बंद कीगई”विक्टोरिया”क्या शादी विवाह में भी नहीं चलेगी ?

[मुंबई]मुंबई में बंद कीगई”विक्टोरिया”क्या शादी विवाह में भी नहीं चलेगी ?
विक्टोरिया[घोड़ा गाड़ी] से रोजी रोटी कमाने वाले और इसकी सवारी के शौकीनों के लिए बुरी खबर है |एक एनजीओ[Animals and Birds Charitable Trust] की पीआईएल को संज्ञान में लेते हुए हाई कोर्ट ने घोड़ों द्वारा खींचे जाने वाले विक्टोरिया[Horse-Drawn Carriages] चलाने पर प्रतिबन्ध लगा दिया है|अब शाम को समुद्र के किनारे विक्टोरिया की सवारी का आनंद नहीं लिया जा सकेगा | इस प्रतिबन्ध के लिए एक वर्ष का समय दिया गया है |अदालत ने घोडा गाड़ी को गैरकानूनी और पशुओं पर क्रूरता माना है |इसके साथ ही घोड़ों के लिए चल रहे अस्तबलों[Stables] को भी बंद किये जाने को कहा गया है |प्राप्त जानकारी के अनुसार लगभग ७०० परिवार इस व्यवसाय से जुड़े हैं इनके पुनर्वास के लिए भी आदेश हुए हैं| गौरतलब है कि शादी विवाहों में भी घोडा गाड़ी का चलन है इसके अलावा छावनी छेत्रों में सेना की आरवीसी टुकड़ी में भी घोडा गाड़ी का पुराना चलन है यहाँ तक विवाह में भी इसे चलाया जाता है लेकिन न्यायिक आदेश इनपर लागू होगा या नही इस पर श्पष्टीकरण आना शेष है

Bombay High Court Directs CDR IntelligenceTo Pay,Time Bound,Rewards To Informers

[Mumbai] Bombay High Court Directs CDR Intelligence To Pay,Time Bound,Rewards To Its Informers
Observing that use of discretionary power to deprive informers from getting rewards will frustrate government policy, the Bombay High Court has asked the Centre,Customs and Directorate of Revenue Intelligence to pay reward amount to an informer within three months.Court Verdicts “An informer cannot be left to the whims and caprices or mercy of the respondents or the members of the Reward Committee.”
“The informers provide information with a legitimate expectation of reward to be received in time. Non-payment of reward amount within a stipulated time will have frustrating effect on the reward policy framed by the government which may perhaps result in not getting information of unscrupulous and anti-social elements thereby causing loss to the exchequer,” observed a bench recently on a petition filed by an informer.
Hammering GovernmeJustices A S Gadkari and B R Gavai. Observed
“We are of the opinion that the guidelines enunciated in the reward policy of April 16, 2004, are to be adhered to by all the concerned and the discretion given in the policy to the Reward Committee, cannot be treated as an unfettered power with the authority competent to grant rewards as this may frustrate the basic intention of the government behind framing the policy,”
The judges opined that the Customs officers cannot be allowed to take a spacious plea that they were already in receipt of the information since January 2010 and therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for further reward amount.
The court noted that on the basis of specific information provided by petitioner, the authorities were able to recover Rs 2.65 crore by auctioning the confiscated goods.
The judges further observed that the stand taken by the authorities appears to be clearly an afterthought, taken only with a view to deprive the informer/petitioner from his legitimate dues towards his reward as per the official policy.
The affidavit dated March 15, 2014 filed by Deputy Commissioner of Customs is “vague” and appears as if he is either suppressing certain vital information from this court or has filed the affidavit without perusing the entire original record available with his office, the judges noted.
The petitioner, an informer of Customs, had sought a direction to the government to release the reward due to him and a declaration that the government action of not disbursing the reward to him was gross abuse of powers and was therefore illegal, without justification and null and void.