Vasantam Associates

14/08/2024

30/07/2024

The Supreme Court on Tuesday (July 30) held that the enrolment fee cannot exceed Rs.750 for advocates belonging to the general category and Rs.125 for advocates belonging to SC/ST categories.

The Court categorically held that State Bar Councils cannot charge any amount over the above-specified amounts under the head of "miscellaneous fee" or other charges. The State Bar Councils and the Bar Council of India cannot charge any amount to admit advocates to the roll above the amount specified under Section 24(1)(f) of the Advocates Act.

Case Details : Gaurav Kumar v. Union of India W.P.(C) No. 352/2023 and connected cases.

23/07/2024

For population explosion, government servants are not the only class to be held responsible, the Court said.

The Delhi High Court recently urged the Central government to reconsider Rule 43 of the Central Civil Services (CCS) (Leave) Rules, which denies maternity leave to female government servants with more than two children.

A Bench of Justices Suresh Kumar Kait and Girish Kathpalia observed,

"For population explosion, the government servants are not the only class to be held responsible. Nothing has been placed before us to show the steps taken by the government addressed to the citizens other than government servants for population control.

25/06/2024

https://thevasantam.com/limitation-act-1963-s-17-suit-for-recovery-of-earnest-money

Limitation for recovering earnest money starts from contract non - performance or fraud discovery, not payment. Plaintiff proved fraud as the defendent had already sold the shops in question.

24/06/2024

The Kerala High Court held that when the registered deed of gift of immovable property mentions that the property was delivered to the donee, it is sufficient to establish acceptance.

The Court also observed that the Transfer of Property Act does not mention any one mode of acceptance.

Justice K. Babu observed:

“It is trite that no particular mode is prescribed under the law as to the requirement needed to prove acceptance. There may be various means to prove acceptance of a gift.”

20/06/2024

The Patna High Court on Thursday set aside the amendments passed by the Bihar legislature in 2023 to increase the reservation for Backward Classes, Extremely Backward Classes, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (SC/STs) from 50 percent to 65 percent.

A division bench of Chief Justice K Vinod Chandran and Justice Harish Kumar passed the ruling on a batch of petitions that had challenged the enactments as violative of equal opportunity for citizens in matters of employment and education.

The Court set aside the Bihar Reservation of Vacancies in Posts and Services (Amendment) Act, 2023 and The Bihar (In admission in Educational Institutions) Reservation (Amendment) Act, 2023 as ultra vires the constitution and violative of equality clause under Articles 14, 15 and 16 of the Constitution.

12/06/2024

The Allahabad High Court has ruled that the restrictions on the grant of bail under Section 37 of the Narcotic Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) do not apply to constitutional courts (High Courts and the Supreme Court of India) [Vimal Rajput v. State of Uttar Pradesh Through Additional Chief Secretary].

In a June 5 ruling, Justice Subhash Vidyarthi concluded that these bail restrictions only apply to the special courts dealing with NDPS cases (trial courts).

"I am of the considered view that the restrictions contained in Section 37 of the NDPS Act were meant to be applicable to Courts other than the Constitutional Courts and in view of the provision contained in Section 36-A (3) of NDPS Act, those restrictions do not apply to the Constitutional Courts," the Court held.

06/06/2024

"Inconsistent judicial orders can lead to discrimination among accused persons, especially when the facts and circumstances are similar or identical," the Court said.

The Allahabad High Court recently remarked that when courts grant bail to one accused and deny it to another under similar circumstances without any clear justification, it undermines public confidence in the judicial process [Abhishek Yadav @ Laloo vs State of UP] .

Justice Krishan Pahal, while stressing on the importance of consistency in judicial proceedings, said inconsistent orders are frequently being passed and that the High Court is obliged to address and rectify such practices.

“Once the liberty of an individual is protected by Article 21 of the Constitution, it is neces

01/06/2024

सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने माना है कि किसी वाहन को जब्त करने के लिए नारकोटिक ड्रग्स एंड साइकोट्रोपिक सब्सटेंस एक्ट 1985 (एनडीपीएस एक्ट) के तहत पारित आदेश अवैध होगा यदि इसे वाहन के मालिक की बात सुने बिना पारित किया गया हो।
हाल ही में एक मामले में, जिसमें एमएसएमईडी अधिनियम के तहत ठाणे, मुंबई में सुविधा परिषद द्वारा ग्राहक के पक्ष में पारित एक पुरस्कार को बिहार राज्य खाद्य आपूर्ति निगम (बीएसएफसी) द्वारा माननीय उच्च न्यायालय, पटना के समक्ष एक रिट याचिका में चुनौती दी गई थी और ग्राहक को नोटिस जारी करते हुए पुरस्कार के निष्पादन के खिलाफ स्थगन दिया गया था।

मुख्य रूप से यह तर्क दिया गया था कि उच्च न्यायालय के पास सुविधा परिषद द्वारा दिए गए पुरस्कार को चुनौती देने के लिए अधिकार क्षेत्र नहीं था और याचिकाकर्ता के लिए उचित उपाय मध्यस्थता और सुलह अधिनियम, 1996 की धारा 34 के तहत इसे चुनौती देना था। इसके अलावा, पटना उच्च न्यायालय के पास इस मामले में रिट याचिका पर विचार करने के लिए क्षेत्रीय अधिकार क्षेत्र भी नहीं था।

अंत में, माननीय उच्च न्यायालय ने मेरे तर्क को स्वीकार कर लिया और रिट आवेदन को खारिज कर दिया।

29/05/2024

The Allahabad High Court has imposed a cost of Rs. 1 Lakh on District Magistrate for blacklisting petitioner for an indefinite period without giving an opportunity of hearing. The Court held that blacklisting/ debarment cannot be done for an indefinite period. Such period must be proportional to the offence committed by the party, held the Court.

The bench comprising of Justice Anjani Kumar Mishra and Justice Jayant Banerji held,

Case Title: Ramraja Constructions Through Its Proprietor Jauhar Singh Having Its Office At Village Kolwa Barusagar District Jhansi v. State Of Up And 4 Others [WRIT - C No. - 6629 of 2024]

28/05/2024

The Jharkhand High Court today sought the response of the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in a petition filed by former state Chief Minister Hemant Soren seeking regular bail in connection to a money laundering case related to a land scam.

Soren, in his petition, urged for an immediate hearing on the matter, which was scheduled before the bench of Justice Rongon Mukhopadhyay today.

He pleaded before the court that his name does not figure in any of the documents related to the 8.5 acres of land in the Bargain circle and argued that no offence under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act is made out against him.


Adv Anand Vardhan Adv Shubhangi Pandey Shubhankar Mishra

28/05/2024

Recently, the Supreme Court reiterated that a Judicial Magistrate cannot be said to have taken cogniznance of an offence by directing an investigation by the police under Section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Reversing the findings of the High Court, the bench comprising Justices Bela M Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal while referring to the case of Devarapalli Lakshminarayana Reddy And Others Versus V. Narayana Reddy And Others (1976) 3 SCC 252, stated that when the Magistrate in exercise of his judicial discretion directs investigation under Section 156(3) of Cr. P.C., he cannot be said to have taken cognizance of any offence. It is only when the Magistrate after applying his mind prefers to follow the procedure under Chapter XV of Cr.P.C. by resorting to Sections 200, he can be said to have taken cognizance of the offence.