Recently Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana barred 140 lawyers from practicing/appearing in any court after they were found guilty of "possession of fake and fabricated enrollment certificates". All these people were practicing in the same district of Punjab (Ludhiana) and were appearing in the court. The Bar has termed the case of practicing on the basis of fake Enrollment Certificate (Advocate's License) as a scam and a classic case. The Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana, which included CM Munjal, Chairman Harish Rai Dhanda, member and co-opted member Vikas Bishnoi, has sent a list of such advocates to the Commissioner of Police, Ludhiana for immediate action, leading to the conviction of the culprits. to be prosecuted. The Bar's disciplinary committee was disposing of a complaint filed by a Ludhiana-based lawyer David Gill against Parminder Singh, who was enrolled as an advocate, alleging that he did not hold a valid licence. During the hearing, the Disciplinary Committee constituted a three-member internal committee to examine the licenses of all the members of the District Bar Association. The committee comprising Rajesh Kumar, Rahul Grover and Pradeep Sharma presented its report by displaying a chart made by comparing voter lists provided by Bar Association Ludhiana and Bar Council records. After scrutiny of records from 2000 to 2021, it was revealed that a total of 140 advocates of Ludhiana were practicing on non-existent enrollment numbers.

Case Title: Mrs. Sarita Vs Gauravi Bench: Justices Vivek Russo and Amar Nath (Kesharwani) Citation: 2016 First Appeal No. 417 Recently, the Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled that minor differences cannot be termed as cruelty between husband and wife. A bench of Justice Vivek Russo and Justice Amar Nath was hearing the appeal filed by the wife. Section 19 of the Family Court Act challenges the judgment passed by the Family Court in which the marriage between husband and wife was dissolved on the ground of cruelty. In this case, the appellant (wife), respondent (husband) and their family met and solemnized their marriage. After marriage, the husband came to know that some wrong information like date of birth and qualification has been given in the wife's resume. The wife created the scene and misbehaved with the respondent's mother over trivial matters. The wife left her in-laws' house with all her jewelery and threatened to implicate all the family members in a criminal case. The Respondent approached the Family Court, Indore, 13(1) (i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for the mother to dissolve the marriage on the ground of cruelty. The Family Court Judge has found that the conduct of the wife accused by the husband has been proved which constitutes mental cruelty to her. Since he has suffered mental cruelty, he is entitled to a decree of divorce and, accordingly, the solemnized marriage is dissolved. The issue of consideration before the bench was: Was the decision passed by the family judge in accordance with the law or not? The bench said that since the husband has agreed to the marriage, the husband cannot be allowed to spoil the life of the wife without any fault without any reason. Minor differences cannot be termed as cruelty between husband and wife. One should not expect overnight change in husband and wife. Both should give time to each other to transfer into married life as wife and husband. The High Court held that after the marriage, the appellant/wife lived with the respondent/husband for hardly six months and thereafter she left him and the law does not permit it. Neither mental cruelty nor physical cruelty has been established in the present case. In view of the above, the bench allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned judgment.

May 26, 2023 10:04 PM नेशनल इंवेस्टिगेशन एजेंसी (एनआईए) ने हत्या और टेरर फंडिंग के मामले में दोषी करार दिए गए यासिन मलिक को फांसी की सजा की मांग के लिए दिल्ली हाई कोर्ट में याचिका दायर की है। जस्टिस सिद्धार्थ मृदुल की अध्यक्षता वाली बेंच इस याचिका पर 29 मई को सुनवाई करेगा।एनआईए ने कहा है कि यासिन मलिक ने अपना गुनाह कबूला है इस आधार पर उसे फांसी की सजा नहीं देने का फैसला सजा देने की नीति पर सवाल खड़े करता है। ऐसे आतंकवादी जिसने देश के खिलाफ युद्ध छेड़ा है, उसने फांसी से बचने के लिए गुनाह कबूल करने का रास्ता चुना है। 25 मई 2022 को पटियाला हाउस कोर्ट ने हत्या और टेरर फंडिंग के मामले में दोषी करार दिए गए यासिन मलिक को उम्रकैद की सजा सुनाई थी । पटियाला हाउस कोर्ट ने यासिन मलिक पर यूएपीए की धारा 17 के तहत उम्रकैद और दस लाख रुपये का जुर्माना, धारा 18 के तहत दस साल की कैद और दस हजार रुपये का जुर्माना, धारा 20 के तहत दस वर्ष की सजा और 10 हजार रुपये का जुर्माना, धारा 38 और 39 के तहत पांच साल की सजा और पांच हजार रुपये का जुर्माना लगाया था। कोर्ट ने यासिन मलिक पर भारतीय दंड संहिता की धारा 120बी के तहत दस वर्ष की सजा और दस हजार रुपये का जुर्माना, धारा 121ए के तहत दस साल की सजा और दस हजार रुपये का जुर्माना लगाया था। कोर्ट ने कहा था कि यासिन मलिक को मिली ये सभी सजाएं साथ-साथ चलेंगी। इसका मतलब की अधिकतम उम्रकैद की सजा और दस लाख रुपये की सजा प्रभावी होगी। 10 मई 2022 को यासिन मलिक ने अपना गुनाह कबूल कर लिया था। 16 मार्च 2022 को कोर्ट ने हाफिज सईद , सैयद सलाहुद्दीन, यासिन मलिक, शब्बीर शाह और मसरत आलम, राशिद इंजीनियर, जहूर अहमद वताली, बिट्टा कराटे, आफताफ अहमद शाह, अवतार अहम शाह, नईम खान, बशीर अहमद बट्ट ऊर्फ पीर सैफुल्ला समेत दूसरे आरोपियों के खिलाफ आरोप तय करने का आदेश दिया था।  एनआईए के मुताबिक पाकिस्तान की खूफिया एजेंसी आईएसआई के सहयोग से लश्कर-ए-तोयबा, हिजबुल मुजाहिद्दीन, जेकेएलएफ, जैश-ए-मोहम्मद जैसे संगठनों ने जम्मू-कश्मीर में आम नागरिकों और सुरक्षा बलों पर हमले और हिंसा को अंजाम दिया। 1993 में अलगववादी गतिविधियों को अंजाम देने के लिए आल पार्टी हुर्रियत कांफ्रेंस की स्थापना की गई। एनआईए के मुताबिक हाफिद सईद ने हुर्रियत कांफ्रेंस के नेताओं के साथ मिलकर हवाला और दूसरे चैनलों के जरिये आतंकी गतिविधियों को अंजाम देने के लिए धन का लेन-देन किया। इस धन का उपयोग वे घाटी में अशांति फैलाने , सुरक्षा बलों पर हमला करने, स्कूलों को जलाने और सार्वजनिक संपत्ति को नुकसान पहुंचाने का काम किया। इसकी सूचना गृह मंत्रालय को मिलने के बाद एनआईए ने भारतीय दंड संहिता की धारा 120बी, 121, 121ए और यूएपीए की धारा 13, 16, 17, 18, 20, 38, 39 और 40 के तहत केस दर्ज किया था।

The Bar Council of India (BCI) submitted before the Supreme Court on Tuesday that law graduates working in other professions do not need to resign from their jobs in order to be enrolled as lawyers, adding that such people will be given a six-month window to quit their jobs after passing the enrolment examination. The BCI’s general council made the decision on July 8 and conveyed it to the court in an affidavit filed last week, in a case where the Supreme Court is considering a slew of reforms to the enrolment process. The Supreme Court was hearing an appeal filed by BCI against a Gujarat high court decision in November 2020 that allowed a single mother to take the All India Bar Examination (AIBE) while continuing to work. According to the BCI rules, anyone who wishes to take the AIBE must first resign from their job and fill out the enrolment form. The Supreme Court, too, criticised the BCI’s regulations, suggesting on April 21 that a person taking the exam be allowed to resign within a certain time period after passing the AIBE. The BCI stated in its most recent affidavit, filed through advocate Durga Dutt, that “the Council has accepted the suggestions made by this Court and has resolved that every State Bar Council shall have three registers – A, B, and C.” It went on to say that ‘Register B’ will contain the names of candidates who are already employed somewhere and will be allowed to take the AIBE if they promise to leave their job within six months of passing the exam. The Certificate of Practice, which is required for any legal practitioner, will be issued only after such individuals have left their employment, according to the BCI. The other two categories in Register A and C did not concern the court because the first contained names of people who were not employed elsewhere; the third category will include people who were enrolled but later had their licence suspended in order to pursue other jobs or professions. Concerning the third category, the BCI stated that such individuals who have been in some other employment for five years or more since the announcement of the AIBE results will be required to retake the enrolment test if they decide to rejoin the legal profession. This rule, however, does not apply to people who stop practising but work in jobs related to the legal profession, such as public prosecutors, assistant public prosecutors, judicial service, or as law officers in corporate or government offices. The suggestion to provide separate categorisation of persons in employment who take the AIBE was made to the Supreme Court by amicus curiae and senior advocate KV Vishwanathan, who realised that the bar on taking up any other profession should apply only when practising law and not when taking the test. Vishwanathan told the Supreme Court that the BCI affidavit is largely acceptable, with minor changes suggested. The bench of justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, S Ravindra Bhat, and MM Sundresh took the affidavit on record and scheduled the matter for further consideration on September 27 to look into other aspects of the AIBE examination pattern and the conduct of surprise inspections of law colleges to ensure education standards are maintained. In this regard, the BCI stated in its affidavit that an agency to conduct the examination will be chosen by a committee led by a former Supreme Court judge. This committee will also look into the best way to assess the skill and knowledge of law graduates taking AIBE, focusing on their analytical thinking process rather than rote ability. This year’s AIBE cycle will take place in September and October.

Title: Sadat Hussain Vs State of Jammu and Kashmir Case No. OWP No. 934/2022 The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court recently said that the police should not act like the super boss of public administration. According to a division bench of Justice Rahul Bharti, if a public servant has been subjected to surveillance by an officer of a rank on the pretext of receiving a complaint against him, then without first putting the complaint into the formal process, the public servant must act in confidence and perform his duty. I will be subject to paralysis. The bench made the observation while hearing a petition in which the petitioner, who was working as a junior engineer in the PHE department, had questioned the action of the Doda Superintendent of Police and an anonymous complaint filed against him and the action of the SHO. But the question was raised. Before the court, the petitioner submitted that the anonymous letter was written against him due to vested political interests. He further said that the police had no legal basis to entertain it and the police seized the case without registering an FIR. Initially, the court said that the police had not put on record anything about how they came to know about the tip or why they chose to take action, instead of going to the petitioner's head of department. The court also noted that the police had initiated action against the petitioner even without registering an FIR. Therefore, the Bench allowed the petition of the petitioner and quashed the communication issued by the concerned police officer to the Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Doda.

Bench: Justice R. Raghunandan Rao Citation: Writ Petition No.19480 of 2022 Recently, the Andhra Pradesh High Court ruled that the court can direct the police to issue a clearance certificate. Justice R. Raghunandan Rao was considering the petition filed for issuance of police clearance certificate and complaining that the inaction of the second respondent was high-handed, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. In this case, the petitioner is working in Angola on the basis of his passport which is valid till 28.06.2028. The petitioner needs a police clearance certificate to renew his visa in Angola. Due to this requirement, the petitioner filed an application before the second respondent, which is the Regional Passport Officer, Visakhapatnam. Police NOC is not being given to the petitioner. The petitioner's wife had already filed a criminal complaint against him under sections 498-A, 323, 506 of the IPC read with section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that a police clearance certificate can always be issued by incorporating the details of the above offense. Non-presentation of such a clearance certificate will result in the authorities in Angola not renewing his visa and consequently, he will lose his employment in Angola. Counsel for the Respondent submitted that the service of issuing of Police Clearance Certificate is a voluntary service rendered for the benefit of Indian citizens and there is no inherent duty on the other Respondent by virtue of any provision of law or judgment. Court, to issue such Police Clearance Certificate. The issue of consideration before the bench was: Whether Police Clearance Certificate can be issued to the petitioner or not? The bench observed that while the second respondent is issuing such certificates to the citizens residing abroad, the second respondent cannot take the stand that since it is a voluntary service, the second respondent is required to issue such certificates or There can be no instructions for non-issuance. In view of the above, the High Court directed the second respondent to issue police clearance certificate to the petitioner.

AIBE XVIII (18) 2023: The Bar Council of India has once again revised the whole AIBE 18 Schedule 2023. Updated on Nov 9, 2023 AIBE XVIII (18) 2023: The Bar Council of India has once again revised the whole AIBE 18 Schedule 2023. Candidates can now submit the AIBE 18 Application Form 2023 until November 16, 2023. Earlier, AIBE 18 (XVIII) Registration 2024 date was November 10. Candidates can now fill out their AIBE 18 Application Form 2023 until the last date. Candidates must check the AIBE 18 eligibility criteria before filling out the AIBE 18 2023 exam application form. The BCI released the revised AIBE 18 Exam Schedule 2023-24 on its official website. As per the new AIBE 18 (XVIII) Exam 2023 official notification, AIBE XVIII (18) 2023-24 Exam Date is December 10, 2023. Earlier, the AIBE 18 Exam Date was December 3, 2023. AIBE 18 (XVIII) Exam will be held in pen-and-paper mode.

The Bar Council of India has informed the Supreme Court that law graduates who have been out of practise for more than five years and wish to return to advocacy must pass the All India Bar Examination. The bar body stated in an affidavit filed in the Supreme Court that if a person takes up a job that has nothing to do with legal or judicial matters, that person will have to reappear for the AIBE exam. “If a person remains in service with no connection/relationship with legal or judicial matters,” the affidavit stated, “then such candidate shall be required to clear the AIBE again if he/she decides to get his/her licence to practise revived after remaining in the job for more than five years from the date of publication of his/her AIBE result.” The Supreme Court was hearing an appeal filed by the BCI challenging a decision of the Gujarat High Court allowing people with other jobs to enroll as advocates without resigning.

AIBE XVIII (18) 2023-24 - The Bar Council of India (BCI) has opened the AIBE 18 registration 2023 on August 16, 2023 at 5 PM on its official website - allindiabarexamination.com. Interested applicants can appply for AIBE XVIII till September 30, 2023. The AIBE XVIII (18) 2023-24 will be conducted in offline mode, across the country. Law graduates who have enrolled at any state bar council and have not cleared the Bar exam yet can appear for the exam. The application form of AIBE XVIII (18) 2023-24 will open today in online mode. The AIBE XVIII (18) 2023-24 will be held on October 29, 2023. AIBE is conducted to test the basic legal knowledge and aptitude of law graduates. The AIBE syllabus 2023-24 will have questions from various legal principles, concepts of law and jurisprudence.

Title: Mandar Deepak Pawar versus the State of Maharashtra Case No.: CrA 442/2022 While quashing a rape case, the Top Court recently observed that there is a difference between a false promise of marriage and a breach of the promise made in good faith but was not subsequently fulfilled. At the outset, the court noted that the parties were in a consensual relationship from 2009-2011 and even though the victim submitted that the relationship was started on a promise to marry, the complaint was only lodged after three years. It is pertinent to note that the Bombay High Court had dismissed the accused’s petition after observing that rape is an offence against society. As per the Apex Court Bench of Justices SK Kaul and MM Sundresh, the registration of FIR, in this case, is an abuse of the criminal process. The court opined that allowing further proceeding in the case would amount to harassment as the parties chose to get into a physical relationship for considerable and for some reason the relationship did not work out, and the same could have happened even after marriage. While referring to Pramod Suryabhan Pawar versus the State of Maharashtra, the court observed that there is a difference between a false promise of marriage given by the maker and a breach of promise which is made in good faith but is not fulfilled. Therefore, the Bench allowed the petition and quashed the rape case filed against the petitioner-accused.

Twelve people have become HIV infected due to tattooing in Varanasi. According to the information, all these people have got tattoos recently. It is being said that these people have been infected with HIV due to the use of infected needles. A sensational case of 12 people getting HIV infected by getting tattoos has come to light in Varanasi. According to the information, 12 people in whom HIV has been confirmed include ten boys and two girls. There has been a sensation in the entire area as soon as the news of getting HIV infected by getting tattooed. All the infected were examined at Pandit Deen Dayal Upadhyay Hospital, out of which 12 people have been confirmed to have HIV. According to doctors, HIV infection has spread in all of them due to tattooing with the same needle. This information has been given by the doctors of Anti Retro Viral Treatment Center. According to doctors, all these people have got tattoos recently. All these people were feeling fever and weakness after getting the tattoo done. These people took medicine but did not get relief. After this, these people also felt that their weight was decreasing rapidly. When all these people got their blood tested in the hospital, it was confirmed that they were infected with HIV. It is learned that all these people got tattoos done from some fair. Some people often start getting tattoos done without understanding at the fair or street. Many times the tattoo makers do not change the needle due to the cost of the needle and make tattoos of many people with the same needle. If any one of them is infected with HIV, then everyone else will be infected with HIV using the same needle. These days the fashion of getting tattoos is going on among the youth. If you also want to get a tattoo or are thinking of getting a tattoo, then you should read this news carefully. Always keep in mind that whenever you go to get a tattoo, keep in mind that the tattooist should use a new needle.

MUMBAI: Observing that a qualified woman doctor was not entitled to maintenance from her husband, a magistrate court has refused to grant interim maintenance to a city-based dentist. The woman had told the court that she had been a housewife since 2018 and her estranged husband, son of a two-time MLA who died last year, was in the construction business. The court, though, said, "The applicant (woman) is a doctor. She resides in a metropolitan city. She is expected to do medical profession as a dentist and very easily she can get opportunity to do such a job in Mumbai. The court noted that the absence of efforts on her part to cohabit with her husband "goes against her", so did her intention to live in the city when her matrimonial home was in another state. The woman had sought over Rs 1 lakh as monthly maintenance and Rs 40,000 towards rent. She said the man lived in a seven-bedroom home with five bathrooms and a garden. The family owned four cars and a motorcycle. She said that her brother had also "gifted" her in-laws a car they demanded. The woman had filed a domestic violence complaint last year against her husband and mother-in-law. The husband denied the allegations of violence and cruelty. He said the woman left their matrimonial home on her own, without any reason and without giving information to his family. The husband claimed that she did not return home despite efforts made by them and wanted to settle down in Mumbai. The husband said this was not possible for him.

Case Title: Sanjeet Kumar and another v. Manjeet Kumar Bench: Justices Ritu Bahri and Ashok Kumar Verma Citation: FAO-3546-2021 (O&M) Punjab and Haryana HC Recently, the Punjab and Haryana HC ruled that one biological parent can give adoption to the step-parents out of which one of them can be a biological father or biological mother. The bench of Justices Ritu Bahri and Ashok Kumar Verma stated that “application for adoption of a child cannot be dismissed merely on the ground that a biological mother cannot become a mother in dual status i.e., a biological mother as well as an adoptive mother.” In this case, Manjeet Kumar (Respondent) was married to Renu (appellant No. 2) and a child was born. Later on, Manjeet Kumar and Renu got a divorce. Thereafter, Renu, solemnized her second marriage with Sanjeet Kumar (appellant No. 1). Both Sanjeet Kumar and Renu, filed an application under Section 56 of the Act read with Regulations 52(4) and 55(2) of the Adoption Regulations, for the adoption of a child, aged about 7 years daughter of Manjeet Kumar. High Court looked into the guidelines framed for the adoption of a child by the Ministry of Women and Child Development. As per, as per sub-clause (1) of Regulation 52, the couple which includes step-parents and one of the biological parents shall register in Child Adoption Resource Information and Guidance System with the required documents as mentioned in Schedule VI. High Court stated that “for all intents and purposes one biological parent can give adoption to the stepparents out of which one of them can be a biological father or biological mother. In the present case, all the required documents as per Schedule XX have been attached with the application and their application cannot be dismissed merely, on the ground that a biological mother cannot become a mother in dual status i.e., a biological mother as well as an adoptive mother.” High Court observed that as per Regulation 55, the definition of an adoptive parent has clearly been given in sub-clause (2) and Regulation 52 (1) includes the biological parent to be an adoptive parent. In view of the above, High Court allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order.

Supreme Court On Wednesday, the Supreme Court upheld the provisions of PMLA (Prevention of Money Laundering Act) that relate to the power to arrest/attachment/and seizure which are conferred on the Enforcement Directorate. The Apex Court upheld the Constitutional validity of provisions of Section 5,8,15,17 and 19 of PMLA that deal with the EDs power of arrest, attachment, search and seizure. The court also upheld the reverse burden of proof u.s 24 of the Act after opining that the provision has a reasonable nexus with the objectives of the Act. The Court also affirmed the twin conditions of bail in Section 45 of the PMLA Act and observed that the Parliament is competent to amend the provisions in 2018 even though the Top Court had struck down the twin conditions in Nikesh Tarachand judgement. The twin conditions for bail were: (i) the Public Prosecutor has been given an opportunity to oppose the application for such release; and (ii) where the Public Prosecutor opposes the application, the court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. Join LAW TREND WhatsAPP Group for Legal News Updates-Click to Join The court also upheld that ED officials are not police officials and therefore any statements recorded by them u.s 50 of the Act will not be hit by Article 20(3) of the Indian Constitution that gives a right against self-incrimination. As per the Court, Section 50 procedure is an inquiry and not an investigation. As per the court, ECIR (Enforcement Case Information Report) cannot be equated to an FIR and so CrPC provisions related to FIR will not apply to ECIR. the court also opined that supplying ECIR is not mandatory and the disclosure for the grounds of arrest is sufficient. The court clarified that when a person is before the court it can ask for records. Arguments of the petitioner that the offence of money laundering u.s 3 of the Act will only apply if the projected property is untainted, were also rejected by the court and it opined that Section 3 has a wider reach and observed that mere possession of proceeds of crime can be considered money laundering. Significantly, the Bench of Justices AM Khanwilkar, Dinesh Maheshwari and CT Ravikumar directed the Central Government to fill up vacancies in the PMLA Appellate Court. The court has also left open the issue of whether amendments made to PMLA in 2018 could have been done through the Finance Act? This issue will be decided by a seven-judge bench.

The AllahabadS. 18 (3) JJ Act | Magistrate has No Power to Retain the File After Declaring the Accused as Juvenile: Allahabad HC HC on Wednesday stated that the magistrate has no power to retain the file after declaring the accused as juvenile. The bench of Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav was dealing with the application filed to quash the impugned order passed by ACJM, Khurja, District Bulandshahar in connection with Criminal Case registered under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC. In this case, the opposite party no.2 lodged the FIR against unknown persons alleging that on false promise of obtaining NOC from Pollution Board, U.P. to run his cold storage, the informant/opposite party no.2 was duped of Rs.40 lakh by unknown person, who asked him to make deposit the said amount into some bank account, where after the OSD of Chief Minister was promised to help him.  The informant/opposite party no.2 issued three cheques. Total Rs. 40 lakh has been deposited by the informant/opposite party no.2. When the informant/opposite party no.2 has inquired about the said account, it was found that the said account is opened in the name of Narendra Singh s/o Anil Singh. Since then the informant/opposite party no.2 has contacted several times but the accused person has not responded. High Court looked into Sections 18 (3) and 19 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and observed that as per terms of Section 18 (3) of the Act, 2015, the Magistrate has no power to retain the file after declaring the applicant-accused as juvenile and the trial of any accused/delinquent juvenile, who is assessed to be tried as an adult, can only be held before the Children’s Court/ POCSO Court in terms of Section 18 (3) of the Act, 2015. The bench stated that the accused-applicant was 16 years 9 months and 7 days at the time of the commission of 5 of 7 alleged offence, hence, the accused-applicant was declared juvenile vide order dated 18.05.2022 passed by Juvenile Justice Board. After declaring the accused applicant a juvenile, the Principal Magistrate has rightly requested the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate to pass appropriate order for sending the matter to the Juvenile Justice Board/Children’s court, but the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate without giving any heed, rejected the same observing that as the file of the instant case has been transferred to his court, therefore, he will continue to hold the trial proceeding.

Recently the Chief Justice of India N V Ramana stated that the “increasing number of media trials” are proving to be impediments to justice, and that “Kangaroo Courts” run by the media are harming the democracy’s health. “I urge the media, particularly the electronic and social media, to behave responsibly,” he said at the inaugural lecture in Ranchi in honour of Justice Satya Brata Sinha. Similarly, Justice Krishan Pahal of Allahabad High Court while rejecting bail to the prime accused in Lakhimpur Kheri violence case observed in his order: “Now the problem has been multiplied by the electronic and social media especially with the use of tool kits. At various stages and forums, it has been seen that ill-informed and agenda driven debates are being undertaken by media running Kangaroo Courts.“ What exactly is a Kangaroo Court? The Oxford Dictionary defines it as “an unofficial court held by a group of people to try someone suspected of a crime or misdemeanour, especially without good evidence.” As per Merriam Webster’s Dictionary: Kangaroo Court is a mock court in which the principles of law and justice are disregarded or perverted ORa court characterized by irresponsible, unauthorized, or irregular status or procedures In a less literal sense, it refers to proceedings or activities in which a decision is made in an unfair, biassed, and unjust manner. It is said that the kangaroo courts gained their name from their early quick and unpredictable movement from one location to another, or that they were somehow related with “jumping” (i.e., unlawfully occupying) mining claims. Kangaroo courts first appeared in the United States at the time of the 1849 California Gold Rush, and the term was first used in the southwestern United States. It first appeared in print in 1853 in a Texas book. In a Sydney Morning Herald article, Roly Sussex, Emeritus Professor of Applied Language Studies at the University of Queensland, stated, “The term first appeared in California, around 1849-1850.” At the time, there were approximately 800-1,000 Australian prospectors digging for gold. Locals quickly learned that (our forefathers) would occasionally make unofficial decisions.” Sussex contends that these people may have devised their own, fair or unfair, systems for deciding on claims to land where deposits were discovered. Another theory relates to the animal’s unusual hopping movement as well as the historical aspect. The phrase could have been used to describe proceedings in the same era, “often held by mutineers or prisoners,” including “dodgy practises by itinerant judges hopping from one jurisdiction to another,” according to Steven Poole, a journalist who writes about language and its usage over time, in The Guardian. Why the term “Kangaroo Court” is used in India? The usage of term “Kangaroo Court” in India is related to rising impact of Social and Online Media, which is not regulated very effectively. The Twitter, Facebook and other Social Media platforms are being used to judge people and create a opinion on any issue. Similarly it is being used to give Judgments/verdicts in those cases which are before the Court of Law and such verdict of “Kangaroo Courts” are usually based on ethinicity, religion and gender of the person who is being tried by such courts.

1. The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POSCO ACT) was formed in 2012 to protect children below the age of 18 years from serious crimes like sexual abuse, sexual harassment, and pornography. 2. This Act also intends to provide a child-friendly system for the trial of these offenses. 3. Under the POSCO Act it is the duty of the Police to report any offenses related to a child to the Child Welfare Committee inside 24 hours so that the Child Welfare Community can take necessary steps for the security and safety of the concerned minor. 4. There is a provision for medical examination of the child under this act. Doctors should conduct these medical examinations under the guidance of the concerned minor parents or guardians or anyone the child trusts in such a way that it inflicts the minor as minimum pain as possible. If the victim is a girl child, then only a female doctor should do the medical examination. 5. The Court must do the hearing of the cases that comes under the POSCO Act in a closed room and it is also important to keep the concerned child’s identity secret. 6. A Special Court determines the amount of compensation to be paid to the child. 7. POSCO Act makes Provisions of the following punishment; 1. Punishment for raping a girl below the age of 12 years is death. 2. Punishment for raping a girl below 16 years of age is imprisonment for a minimum of 10 years and a maximum of 20 years. 8. Any kind of sexual behaviour towards a child of 18 years of age or below comes under the purview of this law. This law provides equal security to male and female children. 9. If a person uses his private part against a body part of a child, then under Section 3 this is considered a serious crime. POSCO Act specifies punishment for this crime under Section 4 which ranges from 7 years to life imprisonment. 10. If a criminal commits a crime that comes under any other law than the POSCO Act, then the culprit will be under the law that is more severe. 11. If a person touches the private part of a minor or forces a minor to touch their private part, then this will be considered a serious crime under Section 8 and they will be imprisoned for 3–5 years. 12. If a person does any kind of sexual act in front of a minor or forces a minor into doing any kind of sexual act or forces the minor to watch pornography, then they could be punished with a minimum of three years of imprisonment to a maximum of life imprisonment. 13. There is also a provision under the POSCO act that specifies if an adult knows of the sexual abuse suffered by a minor then they have to report it to the nearest Police Station and if they do not do so they can be imprisoned up to 6 months.

Title: Pundalik Yewatkar Vs Shubhangi Yewatkar Case No.: Family Court Appeal No.: 75/201 Recently, the Bombay High Court considered the question whether a woman's decision to terminate a pregnancy without the consent of her husband can be termed as cruelty under the Hindu Marriage Act? According to a bench of Justices Atul Chandurkar and Urmila Joshi-Phalke, a woman cannot be compelled to give birth to a child. In view of this, the appeal filed by the husband against the order of the Family Court is dismissed, allowing the petition of his wife for restoration of conjugal rights and the husband seeking divorce under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act. dismissed the petition. In this case, the couple are teachers and the husband alleged that since their marriage in 2001, the wife insisted on working and also terminated her second pregnancy for the same, making her a victim of cruelty. He further claimed that the wife left her in-laws' house in 2004 and left him. The wife, on the other hand, claimed that she accepted motherhood as she had given birth to the first child. She further said that the second pregnancy was terminated as she was not well. She further claimed that the husband never tried to get her back nor did he pay any money for the child and his maintenance. Initially, the court claimed that neither party had added any evidence to support the claim regarding termination of the second pregnancy. Significantly, the court observed that even if the claims of the husband are taken at face value, the wife cannot be accused of being cruel merely because of her reproductive choice. According to the court, the allegations of the husband torturing him for a job by the wife are also vague. Considering thus, the bench dismissed the urgent appeal filed by the husband.

Prithvirajsinh Bhagirathsinh Jadeja v State of Gujarat and two others C/SCA/1672/2022 is the case no. The Gujarat High Court has reiterated that an advocate who does not appear and practice before the courts even when enrolled in the Bar Council cannot call himself an "advocate". As per the Advocates Act and the Bar Council Rules, if the conditions of employment do not require an advocate to plead and appear before the courts, a person cannot be referred to as an 'advocate' during this period of employment. as he is not practicing as a lawyer. The remarks were made during the hearing of two petitions in which petitioners desirous of the post of Joint Charitable Commissioner in the General State Service were declared ineligible due to lack of experience required as an advocate under the Recruitment Rules. The rules state that at least ten years of experience is required. The primary contention of the petitioners was that as per the rules the candidate should be enrolled under the Advocates Act 1961 for at least ten years, which the petitioners did. He didn't lose his nomination just because he was employed. His nomination continues even if he is employed as his name is not removed from the list but only suspended. The GPSC, on the other hand, relied heavily on the judgment of Deepak Agarwal v Keshav Kaushik et al. 2013 (5) SCC 277 to argue that an advocate essentially means someone who practices before the courts. If they are employed but not acting or practicing as per this definition, they are no longer 'advocates' as defined by the Advocates Act. As a result, the High Court concluded that "the continuance of his name in the list of the Bar Council has no bearing on his right to practice, and such person cannot nominate himself as an advocate." Taking these precedents into account, the High Court dismissed the petitions and refused to find fault with the GPSC's order.

India is known for its rich culture, traditions, and social values. However, in recent times, the country has witnessed a growing demand for same-sex marriage. While some people see it as a progressive step towards equal rights, others believe that it could erode India’s social and cultural systems. In this article, we will explore the various ways in which same-sex marriage in India can have an impact on its social and cultural systems. India’s social and cultural systems are deeply rooted in traditional family structures, and marriage between a man and a woman is viewed as the ideal family unit. The family is viewed as the basic unit of society and provides emotional and financial support to its members. In Indian culture, family members are expected to prioritize the interests of the family over their own interests. What is Same-Sex Marriage: Same-sex marriage is also known as gay marriage. It is the marriage between two people of the same biological sex and/or gender identity. What is Marriage: Marriage is a socially and ritually recognised institution, traditionally between a man and a woman. Marriage is an integral part of every person’s life. It is through marriage that humans have propagated future generations. Marriage is the most important institution of human society. It is a universal phenomenon and has been the backbone of human civilisation.  We can say that the Marriage is as old as the institution of the family. Both these institutions are vital for the society. Family depends upon the Marriage. Marriage regulates sex life of human beings, thereby giving them a chance to procreate, thus aiding the survival of human race. Marriage creates new social relationships and reciprocal rights between the spouses. It establishes the rights and the status of the children when they are born. Each society recognises certain procedures for creating such relationship and rights.The society prescribes rules for prohibitions, preferences, and prescriptions in deciding marriage. It is this institution through which a man sustains the continuity of his race and attains satisfaction in a socially recognised manner. Sociologists and anthropologists have given definitions of marriage.  Some of the important definitions are given below. Right ToMarry: Right of all members of family like Right to Respect for private and family life, right to marry and found family, is foundation of justice, freedom, and peace.The right to marry is a component of right to life under art 21 of Constitution of India which says, “No person shall be deprived of his life and personal liberty except according to procedure established by law”. What is marriage in Indian Society: In Indian society, marriage has been considered a sacramental union and forms the basis of the family structure. Although variously defined, in its archaic form, marriage looks as the social union between a male and a female (by birth) forming a social institution for the establishment and regulation of a proper relationship between the sexes.  What IndianCulture says: According to the Hindu Law, Marriage is a body for the performance of religious duties. It is deemed as a holy union in Hindu Law and also considered to be a union of flesh to flesh and blood to blood. It is a religious sacrament and not a civil contract. The Hindu Marriage Act 1955, Sec.5 provides right to marry under statutory condition. Hinduism is against Homosexuality and is unacceptable to most Hindus. Hinduism teaches that the ‘natural’ thing is for men and women to marry and have children. On the contrary, those who go against this natural relationship are violating their own dharma. In Sikhism, The Guru Granth Sahib only mentions marriage in relation to a man and a woman forming a spiritual union. According to the Muslim law, the Quran states “every person must marry.” Quran asserts that marriage is the only way to satisfy one’s desire. Marriage (nikah) is defined to be a contract which has for its object the procreation and the legalizing of children. The Quran mentions sex between men several times, in the context of the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, in which some city inhabitants demand sexual access to the messengers sent by God to the prophet Lot. God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah for their sin and perversions; hence it is ‘Haram,’ Islam has for centuries been much more tolerant than Christianity. The biblical emphasis upon the loving union of male and female, as an integral part of God’s creation ordinance, establishing family only by a man and woman. Government’s view: The Centre in the Supreme Court frowned upon same-sex marriage while invoking the “accepted view” that a marriage between a biological man and woman is a “holy union, a sacrament and a Sanskar” in India. The Union government has opposed same-sex marriage and said that judicial interference would cause “complete havoc with the delicate balance of personal laws.” It also submitted that the SC had only decriminalised sexual intercourse between same-sex persons in its 2018 judgment, but had not legitimised this “conduct”. The court, while decriminalising homosexuality, had never accepted same-sex marriage as part of the fundamental right to life and dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution. “The institution of marriage has a sanctity attached to it and in major parts of the country, it is regarded as a sacrament, a holy union, and a Sanskar. In our country, despite statutory recognition of the relationship of marriage between a biological man and a biological woman, marriage necessarily depends upon age-old customs, rituals, practices, cultural ethos, and societal values,” the Centre said in a 56-page affidavit filed on March 12. The government submitted that statutory recognition of marriage as a union between a ‘man’ and a ‘woman’ is inextricably tied to acceptance of the heterogeneous institution of marriage and acceptance of Indian society based on its own cultural and sociological norms acknowledged by the competent legislatureThe affidavit came in response to the Court’s decision to examine petitions to allow solemnisation of same-sex marriage under the Special Marriage Act. Stating that same-sex relationships and heterosexual relationships are clearly distinct classes which cannot be treated identically, the Centre said that living together as partners by same-sex individuals was not comparable with the Indian family unit concept of husband, wife and children. It said that western decisions sans any basis in Indian constitutional law jurisprudence could not be imported in this context. The government also argued that statutory recognition of heterosexual marriage was the norm throughout history and were “foundational to both the existence and continuance of the state”. There was a “compelling interest” for the society and the state to limit recognition to heterosexual marriages only.  Centre says: There can be no fundamental right to recognise a particular form of social relationship. Statutory recognition of marriage as a union between a “man” and a “woman” is intrinsically linked to the recognition of heterogeneous institution of marriage and the acceptance of the Indian society based on its cultural and societal values, which are recognised by the competent legislature. Considerations of societal morality are relevant in considering the validity of the legislature. Further, it is for the legislature to judge and enforce such societal morality and public acceptance based upon Indian ethos. Considering its social value, the State has a compelling interest in granting recognition to heterosexual marriage, only to the exclusion of other forms of marriage/unions. Statutory recognition of marriage limited to heterosexual marriage is the norm throughout history and are foundational to both the existence and continuance of the State. While there may be various other forms of marriage or unions or personal understandings of relationships between individuals in a society, the State limits recognition to the heterosexual form. The State DOES NOT recognise these other forms of marriages or unions or personal understandings of relationships between individuals in a society, but the same are not unlawful. While other forms of union may exist in society, which would not be unlawful, it is open for a society to give legal recognition to the form of union, which a society considers to be the “quintessential building block” of its existence. On not granting legal recognition to same-sex marriage – In terms of Article 14, same-sex relationships and heterosexual relationships are clearly distinct classes, which cannot be treated identically. Hence, there is an intelligible differentia (normative basis) that distinguishes those within the classification (heterosexual couples) from those left out (same-sex couples). Citizens have a right to association under Article 19, but there is no concomitant right that such associations must necessarily be granted legal recognition by the State. The right to life and liberty under Article 21 cannot be read to include within it any implicit approval of same-sex marriage. The SC’s judgment decriminalising same-sex relationships cannot be treated as conferring a fundamental right to be recognised in a marriage under Indian personal laws, whether codified or otherwise. Even if such a right is claimed under Article 21, it can be curtailed by “a competent legislature on permissible constitutional grounds”, including “legitimate State interest”. The government’s affidavit states that the issue of same-sex marriage is a matter of “legislative policy” and that any decision on the matter should be made by the parliament, not the courts. The affidavit also argues that legalizing same-sex marriage could have “far-reaching consequences” for Indian society, and that any change in the law should be made only after “wide-ranging” consultations with all stakeholders. State’s view: The UP government has opposed recognition of same-sex marriage in the Allahabad HC on the ground that such “marriages are against Indian culture, traditions, customs and values and be invalid as per the Indian Laws. What is that the Supreme Court looking at? A five-judge Constitution bench, presided by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, said that it would “steer clear of personal laws” and can examine if the right can be conferred under the Special Marriage Act (SMA), 1954. The bench, also comprising Justices S K Kaul, Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli and P S Narasimha, indicated that it may only confine to the interpretation of the Special Marriage Act (SMA) to include the term “person” instead of man and woman. “We are not willing to go into personal law issues. Remit will thus have to be restricted only to the extent we are willing to consider the issue,” it told the counsels appearing for petitioners and respondents, which include the Centre, religious bodies, and individuals. While the government, through Special Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, questioned the maintainability of petitions, the CJI said that the hearing’s scope would be limited to developing a notion of a “civil union” that finds legal recognition under the Special Marriage Act. Views of Bar Council of India: Various Laws that Regulate Marriages in India: These laws govern the various aspects of marriages in India, including the conditions of a valid marriage, registration of marriages, grounds for divorce, and other related matters. What is Special Marriage Act 1955: Impact of the Same-Sex Marriage on Indian Social and Cultural Systems: Individual Impact: Some individuals may feel uncomfortable with the idea of same-sex marriage due to cultural or religious beliefs. Legalizing same-sex marriage may also create conflicts between individuals who hold different beliefs on the matter, leading to increased tension and division. Family Impact: Legalizing same-sex marriage could lead to family conflicts and estrangement, particularly if families are not accepting of LGBTQ+ relationships. This could result in a breakdown of family units and cause emotional harm to family members. Community Impact: Legalizing same-sex marriage may lead to social tension and division within communities, particularly in conservative or religious communities. This could result in discrimination and marginalization of the LGBTQ+ community, leading to negative mental health impacts and decreased quality of life. Society Impact: Legalizing same-sex marriage could lead to a breakdown of traditional family structures, which could have negative implications for society as a whole. This could include decreased birth rates, changes in cultural norms, and a shift in societal values. National Impact: Legalizing same-sex marriage could lead to a backlash from conservative or religious groups, resulting in increased polarization and division within the nation. This could lead to a decrease in national unity and cohesion, potentially affecting economic and social development. Former Judges Views:  Leads to Erosion of Social and Cultural Values: Religious beliefs: India is a religiously diverse country, and religion plays a significant role in the lives of its people. Same-sex marriage could be seen as a challenge to traditional religious beliefs, which could lead to social unrest. Many religious leaders in India have already expressed their opposition to same-sex marriage, arguing that it goes against the teachings of their respective religions. This could lead to a conflict between those who support same-sex marriage and those who oppose it, which could further divide Indian society. Traditional family structures: Family is the bedrock of our society. As India climbs up the world ladder, it will be the safety net of the family that will help our children take the country to greater heights and help achieve its destiny as the economic and cultural superpower of the world. Marriage is an important institution in Indian society, and it is viewed as a sacred bond between a man and a woman. Same-sex marriage, however, challenges this traditional notion of marriage, which could lead to the erosion of traditional family structures. In Indian society, the family is the basic unit of society, and it is viewed as the cornerstone of Indian culture. The family provides emotional and financial support to its members and helps maintain social order. Same-sex marriage could disrupt this traditional family structure, which could have a negative impact on Indian society. Impact on children: One of the main arguments against same-sex marriage is that it could have a negative impact on children. Traditional family structures are seen as the ideal environment for raising children, and same-sex marriage could disrupt this ideal. Some people argue that children raised by same-sex couples could be subjected to confusion and may not receive the same level of emotional and social support as children raised by opposite-sex couples. This argument is often used to justify the ban on same-sex marriage, and it could further erode Indian society’s social and cultural systems. Legal and constitutional implications: The legalization of same-sex marriage could have legal and constitutional implications in India. The Indian constitution recognizes marriage as a union between a man and a woman, and any attempt to change this definition could be seen as a violation of the constitution. Moreover, India’s legal system is based on British common law, which does not recognize same-sex marriage. The legalization of same-sex marriage would require a significant overhaul of India’s legal system, which could have a negative impact on Indian society’s social and cultural systems. Impact on population growth: Another argument against same-sex marriage is that it could have a negative impact on population growth. In Indian society, marriage is viewed to procreate and carry on the family lineage. Same-sex marriage, however, does not have the same procreative potential as opposite-sex marriage. Some people argue that the legalization of same-sex marriage could lead to a decline in population growth, which could have long-term implications for Indian society. Views of Sociologists: First things first, the state has a legitimate interest in maintaining a societal equilibrium and in ensuring that new practices do not lead to the breakdown of our cultural ethos and societal values. The judiciary, or more precisely two judges, however, learned, and respected, cannot usurp this role. Any policy intervention that impacts the direction of our social institutions needs a thorough debate in Parliament and the society at large. Marriages are, after all, the most personal public institution and clearly straddle the divide between the individual and the state. Citing the fundamental rights enshrined under Article 21 of our Constitution to allow same-sex marriage is a deeply-flawed argument because marital relations are more than personal: Humans are social beings whose humanity is expressed through their relationships with others. Entering a marriage, therefore, is to enter a relationship that has public significance as well. To attempt to infer that a marriage between “two persons” in the Special Marriages Act, includes couples of the same sex is fallacious because the same Act states that males should have attained the age of 21 years and females 18 years for marriage. As per the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and various family laws and penal statutes, marriage is clearly defined as the union of a “man” and a “woman”. These laws without ambiguity refer to opposite sexes as “husband” and “wife” — a biological man marrying a biological woman. Muslim Personal Law also clearly defines mahr or other properties of a Muslim “woman” to be given to her at the time of divorce. Many statutory enactments will become unworkable and legislative intention will be defeated if we were to ignore this fundamental fact. Sections of the Indian Penal Code provide special rights to women who are part of the legally-recognised relationship of marriage. The Dowry Prohibition Act refers to dowry as being for the benefit of the “wife” while the Indian Evidence Act concerns itself with the abetment of suicide by a married “woman.” The Code of Criminal Procedure talks about the maintenance of “wives,” and the Domestic Violence Act defines the aggrieved person as any “woman”. There are numerous other issues related to the institution of marriage such as those for adoption, divorce, succession, the wife’s right to stay in a marital home, etc., that will go awry if the definition of husband and wife is anything other than a biological man and a biological woman. Even in the oft-cited judgment of Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018), which led to the decriminalisation of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, the Supreme Court has clarified that an individual also has a right to a union under Article 21 of the Constitution. It has also been clarified that the reference to “union” does not mean the union of marriage. Therefore, while there exists no statutory bar to the cohabitation of same-sex couples, there cannot exist any fundamental right to claim a statutory recognition of relationships such as same-sex marriage under Indian laws. The social order in our Country is religion based which views procreation as an obligation for the execution of various religious ceremonies. Additionally, our society is very community oriented and individualism is not encouraged in the least, any expression of homosexuality is seen as an attempt to renounce tradition and promote individualism, thereby posing a threat to the order in Indian society. It is opined that if homosexual marriages are legalized it will destroy the concept of a traditional family and the sanctity of marriage will be lost. Views of National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) on adoption by same-sex couples: Growing up in same-sex families stressful for children: The NCPCR has referred to studies that have found that children raised by heterosexual couples are emotionally more stable, and has argued that allowing same sex-couples to adopt is akin to “endangering the children,” the Live Law report said. Sources in the Commission had earlier that it has submitted “international studies and articles’’ showing that children “growing up in same-sex families have higher probability of suffering from mental and psychological issues, which could affect their growth and development.” Child cannot be a subject in an experiment: According to the Live Law report, the NCPCR has submitted that “Giving children to be raised by persons having issues would be like exposing children to struggle just for experimentation and the same is not in the interest of children as every individual has same human rights and it applies to children for being raised safely.” Therefore, the NCPCR has asked that “children may be saved by this Hon’ble Court from being subjected to experimentation or being treated as ‘subject.” Understanding of ‘gender roles’ will be affected: According to the NCPCR, children raised by same-sex parents will have limited exposure to “traditional gender roles,” and this will impact their understanding of “gender roles and gender identity,” the Live Law report said.This, the NCPCR has said, will limit the overall growth of their personality. Conclusion: In conclusion, the debate over same-sex marriage in India is complex and multifaceted, it could erode India’s social and cultural systems. The impact of same-sex marriage on Indian society’s social and cultural systems could be far-reaching, and it is important to carefully consider all the implications before deciding. Ultimately, any decision regarding same-sex marriage in India should be made after careful consideration of its impact on Indian society’s social and cultural systems. The legalization of same-sex marriage in India could have significant implications for Indian society’s social and cultural systems. It could challenge the traditional family structures and religious beliefs that have formed the basisof Indian culture for centuries. It could also have an impact on population growth, as marriage is viewed as a means of procreation and carrying on the family lineage. Of late, there is a movement towards disturbing the most fundamental element of our families — marriage. Through a flurry of judicial pleas, many are seeking to sanctify same-sex marriage under the garb of equality and freedom. This needs to be addressed head-on and urgently, not by the judiciary but by the legislature. Marriage is one of the universal social institutions established by the human society to control and regulate the life of man. It is a cornerstone of a society. It is in the family that children learn to become citizens; it is in the family that children learn about relationships; it is in the family that children learn about what is expected of them in society, how to act and how to be. Central to the nuclear family is the traditional idea of marriage, consisting of one man and one woman in a monogamous and permanent relationship. We need to promote and protect marriage to secure a healthier society. Marriage has legitimate recognition to get united. Society accepts union of two souls because primary object of marriage is to beget and bear offspring, and to them until they are able to take care of themselves. If same-sex marriage were to be accepted in India, there could be various conflicts in different domains, including: In addition, the acceptance of same-sex marriage may also challenge gender roles and norms in India, which could lead to further conflicts. For example, traditional gender roles dictate that men and women have specific roles in a marriage, and the idea of same-sex marriages may challenge these gender norms.Overall, the acceptance of same-sex marriage in India may challenge deeply ingrained social norms and values, leading to social and cultural conflicts. Author DR .B. RAMASWAMY LLM, MPhil, PGCL, PGIPR, PGAN, PhD.Central Govt Sr Standing Counsel :Income Tax, Madras High Court.Ministry of Education EdCIL – Supreme Court.AIU- Supreme Court.AGP -Puducherry for Madras High court .Panel Member – Arbitrator , Delhi High court 

What is the meaning of a Monopoly under competition law ? Monopoly refers to a market structure or market situation where a single seller dominates the sales of a unique product or commodity in the market . In a monopoly market , because the seller is the sole dominant of the goods of which there are no close substitutes to such product , the seller faces no competition . The single producer of the goods may either be an individual owner , a single partnership or a joint stock company . Because the monopolist has full control over the supply of a commodity being the sole seller of it , he possesses the power to set the price and becomes the market controller . What are Pure Monopolies ? A pure monopoly is said to exist when there is only one producer of a good / product and there are no other competitors to it . A company is said to have a pure monopoly in the market when such a company is the sole seller in the market of a product with no other close substitute . What are Natural Monopolies and the power of Patent ? When a company becomes a monopoly due to high fixed or start - up costs in an industry , is said to develop a natural monopoly . Natural monopolies also develop when an industry is a specialised industry where only one company can meet the needs of the demand or industries that require some unique raw materials or technologies . When companies manage to acquire patents on their products , such products become patented products that prevent competitors from developing the same product in a specific field , there can have a natural monopoly . After patenting a product , the patent enables the company to earn profits of the product for several years without the fear of any competition to such a product .

For SC Advocates Below 45 years of Age Can be Designated as Senior Advocate Only in Exceptional Circumstances On Friday, the Supreme Court passed a detailed judgment on improving the system of designation of Senior Advocates in the Supreme Court and High Courts. A Bench of Justices SK Kaul, Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Aravind Kumar delivered the Judgment in the case of Ms Indira Jai Singh vs Supreme Court of India (M.A. Nos. 709/2022, 1502/2020) The Supreme Court has covered various aspects of the designation such as voting by secret ballot, Cut Off Marks, Points for publication, reported and unreported judgments, pro bono work, the domain expertise of an applicant under various branches of law, age, personal interview and other general aspects. Background ​​The designation of Senior Advocates in India is a prestigious title awarded to exceptional advocates who have made a significant contribution to the legal profession. This title is granted in recognition of an advocate’s standing and achievements in the field, which sets them apart as someone who can offer exceptional service to clients, the judiciary, and the public. The Advocates Act, 1961, provides for the designation of Senior Advocates in India through Section 16, which categorizes advocates into two groups: advocates and Senior Advocates. Under Section 16(2), the Supreme Court and the High Court are authorized to designate an advocate as Senior Advocate, with their consent. In the case of the Supreme Court, this power is provided in Rule 2 of Order IV of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013. The system for designating Senior Advocates was challenged when Ms. Indira Jaising, a Senior Advocate herself, filed a writ petition in 2015. She claimed that the existing system was flawed and not transparent or objective, meaning merit and ability were not always taken into account. She called for a permanent selection committee to be established, which would replace the current voting system. In response to this challenge, a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court issued an elaborate judgment on October 12, 2017. The judgment put forth a series of guidelines to improve the designation process’s transparency and objectivity while still retaining the Court’s designation power. The guidelines provide for the creation of a Permanent Committee to be chaired by the Chief Justice and two of the most senior judges. The committee would also include the Attorney General/Advocate General of the State in question, with the fifth member being nominated from the Bar by the other members. Age of Advocates for Designation On the issue of age for designation, the Court said:We must also say that the Supreme Court rests on a different footing as the highest court of the land. Although designations in the Supreme Court in comparison to High Courts have usually taken place at the age of 45 plus, younger advocates have also been designated. While we would not like to restrict applications only to advocates who are above 45 years of age, only exceptional advocates should be designated below this age. We say no more and leave this aspect to the wisdom of the Permanent Committee and the Full Court. With respect to younger advocates the Court said: “Young Lawyers are naturally not precluded from applying for designation, particularly as the 2018 Guidelines do not require anything more than ten years of practice. However, we believe that such advocates would have to display that extra bit of ability to be designated.”

A sessions court in Mumbai has ordered a 52-year-old businessman from Ghatkopar to pay Rs 16,000 in monthly maintenance to his 47-year-old wife, who is an entrepreneur and earns Rs 30,000 every month, observing that the maintenance A woman cannot be denied a claim, simply because she is employed and her husband earns less than her. In this case the annual income of the husband is Rs 2.90 lakhs, while the annual income of the wife is around Rs 3.50 lakhs. After a magistrate's court ruled in favor of the wife, the husband filed a petition in the sessions court. The court ruled that the magistrate's observations in the order were reasonable and legal. “From above, the income of the husband appears to be less than that of the wife. A wife, on the other hand, is the responsibility of her husband. He is obliged to support her regardless of his earnings. As a result, the order does not require any interference” as per the Court of Session. The man claimed that the woman and her adult sons lived in a "posh" apartment for which he had paid rent of Rs 26,000 per month, living in a transit camp and using a public toilet. He also told the court that both his sons had done more than him. According to his lawyer, “The economic condition of the wife is stronger than that of the husband. In 2015, the wife abruptly left her husband for no apparent reason." On the other hand, the woman claimed that her husband earns at least Rs 1 lakh per month. The sessions court referred to a Supreme Court judgment which held that even if the wife is earning, she is entitled to maintenance determination. "Consequently, it is argued on behalf of the husband that his wife is a breadwinner and she is not entitled to maintenance," the court said. It was also noted that the husband currently had no liabilities other than his own expenses. “He also owns a business and other properties. Consequently, he is unquestionably entitled to the maintenance and payment of rent to the wife while the domestic violence application is pending” the court held. The woman had gone to the magistrate's court to file a complaint of domestic violence. In 2015, she divorced the accused and accused him of adultery. The husband denied the allegations. She claimed that he had sent her a notice requesting that he come back and have sex with her, but she refused. After that, the man filed for divorce. He rejected the woman's claims of maintenance.

The difference between Section / Rule / Article / Act has been listed below: - Section A section refers to a distinct portion or provision of a legal code or set of laws, often establishing a particular legal requirement. For example- Section 5 of the Indian Contract Act. Article When any fundamentally critical document is framed or drafted which might be a grundnorm (a fundamental norm to support all other legal norms according to Kelsian pure theory of law) of that system at political, national or international level, then for the most part, it is separated from the customary municipal laws by referring to its provisos as articles rather than sections. For example - United Nations Charter,International Conventions, Constitution of a country, and so on, from where different laws or rules originate. Otherwise, municipal laws normally contain sections. Rule A Rule is a subsidiary enactment that helps in governing law. They are secondary in nature, meaning thereby that they don’t have an independent existence of their own.They are made to make the parent Act function. The rules provide for the details that have not been provided for in the Act, however, Rules by no means can go beyond the power conferred by the ACT, or extend the same. Act An Act is a law that is passed by the legislature. It is also known as a statute. However,most laws are not complete code in themselves, i.e. certain provisions as to their application or enforcement, etc. are deliberately left out by the legislature due to which rules come into the picture. For example- Companies Act 2013 is an Act. It has several rules governing its operations such as Companies (Incorporation) Rules 2014. Sections comes under the Act whereas it makes us enable us to understand underwhich act it comes from. Likewise, articles and rules are also different but makes it easy to know under which article we have to make an application. An act is a bill which has passed through the various legislative steps required for it and which has become law. So, simply put, an act is the formally codiedresult of deliberation by a legislative body. An article is a separate and distinct part of a written instrument, such as a contract, statute, or constitution, that is often divided into sections. A written instrument, containing a series of rules and stipulations that are each designated as an article. A section is the distinct and numbered subdivisions in legal codes, statutes, and textbooks.The basic difference between an act, an article and a section would thus be that one is the sub-division of the other. It goes as Act (the biggest) which has articles that are divided into sections. In general, terms, when a Bill is proposed to be enacted, it shall be presented before the respected legislatures (law making bodies) for approval. After it is approved, the bill is presented before the president. The bill, with the consent of the president, shall come into force as an Act, a Law, or a Statute. An Article or a section which are numbered are meant to indicate or reflect a specific provision of an Act or a Law

Allahabad HC Refuses to Quash Attempt to Murder Case Based on Compromise Between Victim and Accused The Allahabad High Court recently made a crucial decision, refusing to dismiss an attempted murder case based on a compromise between the victim and the accused. In doing so, the bench of Justice JJ Munir recognized the vital role the state plays in prosecuting offenses against society and refused to permit a compromise that could abdicate this responsibility. The evidence in the case is stark. A medico-legal report reveals that the victim sustained a gunshot wound to their neck, a vital part of the body. The report also revealed blackening in a 12cm x 12 cm area and evidence of metallic material lodged in the temporomandibular joint from the gunshots. Thus, the court observed, there is no doubt that the accused intended to kill. The accused had sought to dismiss the case, arguing that the matter had been compromised between the parties and there was no possibility of conviction. The court, however, noted that the injuries sustained were severe and that the weapons used were lethal. The court referred to Narinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another, (2014) 6 SCC 466, that stated that a court should not accept settlements where there was a strong possibility of proving the charge under Section 307 IPC. In light of this, the application was rejected. The decision underscores the significance of the state’s role in protecting society and prosecuting offenses, even in circumstances where there is a desire for settlement between parties.

Oligopoly is that kind of market structure where at market is dominated by few sellers selling homogeneous or differentiated products . What are homogeneous products ? Homogeneous products are those that cannot be distinguished from the products sold by other sellers . Homogeneous products are similar in quality but differ on other attributes such as style , price of the product or brand image . To a buyer , the products appear similar and cannot make out a difference between a product on display except their price or brand image and therefore as a buyer , you make your selection of the almost identical products based on their price or brand image . For example : While buying a bag of strawberries you aren't aware who grew them and you probably don't care but you make your selection of the vendor who sells them at the best quality and the cheapest price as compared to the other vendor . How does Oligopoly differ from Monopoly and Duopoly ? A monopoly market is ruled by one firm whereas , a duopoly market is ruled by two firms and an Oligopoly market there is no particular upper limit to the number of firms , however , the number must be low enough where the actions of one firm influence the other . An Oligopoly market structure is one where competition exists among a few sellers and where the behaviour of every seller influences and impacts the other seller and the other seller too is influenced .

Title: Akella Lalita versus Sri Konda Hanumantha Rao Case No.: CA 6325-6326/2015 The Supreme Court recently ruled that a relief for which no pleading or prayer has been made, should not be granted. As per the Bench of Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Krishna Murari: it is a fact that absolutely no relief was ever sought by them for the change of surname of the child to that of first husband/ son of respondents. It is settled law that relief not found on pleadings should not be granted. If a Court considers or grants a relief for which no prayer or pleading was made depriving the respondent of an opportunity to oppose or resist such relief, it would lead to miscarriage of justice. This observation was made by the court while setting aside an Andhra Pradesh High Court judgement directing a mother to change the surname of her child and to reflect the new husband’s name as a stepfather. In the appeal before the Supreme Court, the main issue raised was whether the High Court was empowered to direct the appellant to change the surname of her child even though the respondent had sought no such relief before the trial court. At the outset, the Apex Court noted that it is well settled that if no reliefs are sought in the pleadings then it cannot be granted and if a court considers or grants such a relief for which no pleading or prayer was made depriving the respondent of the opportunity to resist the same then it would lead to miscarriage of justice. As per the bench, the High Court traversed beyond the pleadings by directing the change of surname of the child and therefore it set aside the impugned order thereby partly allowing the appeal. The court also reiterated that the mother, being the natural guardian of the child, has the right to decide the child’s surname and she also has the right to give up the child for adoption.

Case Title : Raj Kumar Tulsyan Vs Savior Builders Pvt. Ltd. Noida Thr. its director Bench: Justice Abdul Moini Citation: RERA Appeal No. – 29 of 2022 The Allahabad High Court, Lucknow on Friday allowed the appeal filed against the decision of the RERA Tribunal and framed three important questions of law. A bench of Justice Abdul Moin was dealing with a case where the appellant had booked an apartment with the respondent promoter. As per the agreement reached between the appellant and the respondent, possession of the apartment was to be given by December 2015. When the respondent failed to deliver the possession, a complaint was lodged before the Authority in March 2018 praying for a refund of the amount paid by him to the appellant. The refund was claimed in view of Section 18 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, which provides for a refund of the amount and compensation. The Authority, while disposing of the complaint of the appellant by the impugned order, directed the respondent to give physical possession of the apartment by a particular date and pay the fine as per rules. The Real Estate Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed against the order of the RERA Authority on the grounds of maintainability of the complaint under section 31 and appeal under section 44 of the RERA Act 2016 against the unregistered project. The appellant submitted that the Tribunal had misinterpreted the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and held that unregistered projects do not come under the purview of the 2016 Act and that complaints and appeals against unregistered projects are considered non-maintainable. Against the decision and order of the Tribunal, RERA appeal was filed before the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court sitting at Lucknow, whereby the Hon'ble Court allowed the appeal and framed 3 important questions of law and stayed the order of the Tribunal. There were three important questions: Whether the finding of the learned Tribunal on appeal before the Appellate Authority against the non-maintenance and unregistered projects of the RERA Authority is based on misinterpretation of the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in M/s Newtech Promoters & Developers Pvt Ltd Vs State of U.P. ? Whether the finding of the learned Tribunal on appeal before the Appellate Authority against the non-maintenance and unregistered projects of the RERA Authority, is against the provisions contained in the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 and thus, is perverse and law Not sustainable? Whether the learned Tribunal erred in finding that neither the complaint before the RERA Authority nor the appeal before the Appellate Authority would be maintainable against the unregistered projects, as the real estate developers/promoters would be liable to a penalty for not getting their projects registered. Will use it as tool.? In view of the above, the High Court stayed the order of the Tribunal till the next date of hearing.

In pursuance of the assurance given before the Supreme Court, the Bar Council of India today published its syllabus for the upcoming All India Bar Examination. The updated syllabus can be read on the website of Bar Council of India (http://www.barcouncilofindia.org/syllabus-for-all-india-bar-exam-xvii/). It may be noted that the syllabus for AIBE 17 remains unchanged when compared with the syllabus for AIBE 16.