Mridul Thakur Law

Mridul Thakur Law a solan based legal company with office at solan, shimla and hamirpur. we have a team of passionate and dedicated professional advocates.

"timely justice" is our sole motive.

Coming back with 432 hz..
28/01/2026

Coming back with 432 hz..

Passion drives crazy...
24/05/2023

Passion drives crazy...

21/12/2021

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday while rejecting a plea seeking removal of Prime Minister Narendra Modi's photograph from Covid-19 vaccination certificates observed that citizens are duty-bound to respect the Prime Minister.

While dismissing the petition with a hefty cost of one lakh rupees, Justice P.V Kunhikrishnan remarked:

"The people elect the eligible persons among them and send them to the Parliament and the majority party will select their leader and he will be our Honourable Prime Minister for five years. Till the next general election, he will be the Prime Minister of India...Therefore, according to me, it is the duty of the citizens to respect the Prime Minister of India, and of course, they can differ on the policies of the Government and even the political stand of the Prime Minister.
The Court was adjudicating upon a plea filed by a senior citizen and an RTI activist who was aggrieved by his vaccination certificate bearing the photograph of the Prime Minister.

Accordingly, the petitioner moved the Court and sought a declaration that the photograph of the Prime Minister on his COVID-19 Vaccination Certificate is a violation of his fundamental rights.

The petitioner had argued that the photograph of the Prime Minister in his vaccination certificate is an intrusion to his privacy. To this, the Court responded:

"What a fantastic argument! Is he not living in this country? The Prime Minister of India is not a person who entered the parliament house by breaking the roof of the parliament building. He came to power because of the mandate of the people. The Indian democracy is being praised by the world. The Prime Minister is elected because he has got people's mandate."
The bench further added that once the election is over and the majority of people gave a mandate to a political party which leads to the election of Prime Minister, he is not the leader of that political party but a leader of the country.

"In the next general election, they can make use of it and remove him with people's mandate. But once a Prime Minister is elected as per the constitution, he is the Hon'ble Prime Minister of our country and that post should be the pride of every citizen, whether the Prime Minister is "X" or "Y""
Finding no merit in his contentions, the Court ruled that the petitioner may be influenced by the widespread notion that all political leaders are corrupt:

"There is a general trend to a section of the citizens of our country that the political leaders are all corrupt people and they cannot be believed. I think, from this concept, these types of arguments are coming into the mind of the petitioner. But can anyone generalise like that? What is wrong with politicians? Since there is a small percentage of politicians are having a bad history, the entire politicians need not be ignored."

The Bench further pointed out that there are excellent political leaders who have made great initiatives for the welfare of the country, calling them 'builders of our nation with innovative ideas'.

As such, the writ petition was dismissed imposing a cost of Rs.1,00,000 (Rupees One Lakh only) to be paid by the petitioner to the Kerala State Legal Services Authority within six weeks.

Case Title: Peter Myaliparampil v. Union of India & Anr.

21/12/2021

The Union Minister for Women and Child Development Smriti Irani introduced in the Lok Sabha today the" Prohibition of Child Marriage (Amendment) Bill, 2021", which seeks to increase the age of marriage for women to 21 years across all religions.

The Minister said that the bill will amend the provisions of the Indian Christian Marriage Act 1872, the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act 1936, Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act 1937, Special Marriage Act 1954, Hindu Marriage Act 1955, Foreign Marriage Act 1969 in relation to the age of parties to the marriage.

The Bill seeks to uniformly raise the age of marriage by way of a single provision by amending the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 and reinforces its application overriding all other existing laws, customs, and practices governing marriage in India. The Bill inserts the following words - "notwithstanding anything contrary or inconsistent therewith contained in the Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872; the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936; the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937; the Special Marriage Act, 1954; the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955; and the Foreign Marriage Act, 1969, or any other custom or usage or practice in relation to marriage, under any other law for the time being in force" -in Section 1 of the Act.

If the Bill is assented to by the Parliament, Section 1 of the Child Marriage Act would read as follows:

"It extends to the whole of India except the State of Jammu and Kashmir; and it applies also to all citizens of India without and beyond India notwithstanding anything contrary or inconsistent therewith contained in the Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872; the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936; the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937; the Special Marriage Act, 1954; the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955; and the Foreign Marriage Act, 1969, or any other custom or usage or practice in relation to marriage, under any other law for the time being in force."

By way of this amendment, the Child Marriage (Prohibition) Act would have an overriding effect over other laws, customs, and usages governing citizens in India. The Amendment seeks to further clarify its overriding effect by adding in Section 14A which reads as:

"14A. The provisions of this Act shall have effect, notwithstanding anything contrary or inconsistent therewith contained in any other law for the time being in force, including any custom or usage or practice governing the parties."

Further, the Bill provides that a child will be "a male or female who has not completed twenty-one years of age." Earlier S.2 (a) of the Act provided that "child" means a person who, if a male, has not completed twenty-one years of age, and if a female, has not completed eighteen years of age.

The Amendment Bill also contains a Schedule of amendments to make consequential amendments to 7 other laws- Indian Christian Marriage Act, Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, Special Marriage Act, Hindu Marriage Act, Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, Foreign Marriage Act- to introduce uniform age of marriage for women and men.

The Bill also raises the time limit within which a party can file a petition to seek an annulment of a voidable marriage. Currently, S.3 of the Act prescribed a time limit of 2 years from attaining majority as the period during which a party that was a minor at the time of marriage can file a petition for a decree of nullity. The Amendment Bill seeks to raise this time limit to 5 years.

The Amendment Bill would come into force two years from the date on which the Bill receives the assent of the President "so as to provide sufficient opportunity to make effective the provisions."

The Lok Sabha today allowed the introduction of the Bill in a voice vote. Minister Irani requested that the Bill be referred to a Standing Committee.

20/12/2021

During the introduction and passing of the Electoral Laws(Amendment) Bill, 2021 in Lok Sabha today, Union Law Minister Mr. Kiren Rijiju explained that there were some disparities in the existing laws hence the need for the introduction of the Bill.

The Law Minister explained that there were some "lacunae in existing law" that needed to be corrected. He explained that under existing law there was only one qualifying date 1st January, despite the Constitutional guarantee that anyone above the age of 18 years can vote. In this regard, he explained, 4 qualifying dates were being introduced to enable people to vote. Law Minister further explained that under the Representation of People Act, 1951 only "wives" of service voters were allowed to vote. This created an anomaly where the husbands of serving women officers could not vote. To remedy this, Law Minister explained that "wife" would be replaced with "spouse" to make laws gender-neutral.

On the contentious issue of Aadhaar-Voter ID linkage, Mr. Rijiju explained that there was a need to w**d out bogus voters from electoral rolls. He further explained that the provision for linkage of Aadhaar card with Voter ID would "not be compulsory only voluntary" in nature.

Members of the Parliament expressed their opposition to the content of the Bill and the manner in which it was being introduced.

MP Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury questioned the manner in which the Bill was being pushed through the Parliament. "The Bill is being introduced today, taken up for consideration and passing today. What is the hurry? We have requested that it be referred to Standing Committee."

MP Supriya Sule also questioned the "tearing hurry" to pass the Bill.

It may be noted that the Bill was introduced in Lok Sabha today morning. Only by way of a supplementary notice was the Bill taken up for consideration and passing today afternoon.
MP Sule asked why the government was rushing through with the Bill in Parliament without allowing for detailed deliberation. Further she asked "If the Minister wants electoral reforms let him introduce a comprehensive bill talking about women's reservation, electoral bonds."

MP N K Premchandran also raised objection to the way in which parliamentary procedures are not being followed. "I oppose not only on constitutional grounds but also by the way it is being passed. It is introduced only today. members are not getting the opportunity to move amendments."

Earlier in the day, MP Manish Tewari had opposed the introduction of the Bill and stated that the Puttuswamy judgement and the Aadhaar Act do not allow the linkage of Aadhaar card to the Electoral right. "Voting is a legal right. Therefore this Bill is beyond the legislative competence of the Aadhaar Act," he added.

MP Owaisi too had expressed his opposition to the Bill stating that the Bill will allow the government to profile and disenfranchise voters and "end up violating principles of secret ballot and universal adult franchise."

MP Lavu Devarayalu, while expressing his opposition to the Bill, pointed out that a similar seeding exercise carried out in Andhra Pradesh had resulted in the disenfranchisement of 30 lakh voters. He further pointed out that it may become a tool in the hands of the government to look into the voting habits of citizens.

MP Shashi Tharoor also pointed out that Aadhaar was only meant to be a proof of residence and not of citizenship. Further, he asked, when only citizens are allowed to vote then how the linkage of Aadhaar and electoral rolls would serve the purpose of w**ding our bogus voters.

Union Law Minister countered the objection by bringing to the House' notice that a Parliamentary Standing Committee had already "unanimously recommended" these provisions. He further stated that linking Aadhaar with the electoral rolls would "reduce electoral malpractices".

Countering the specific argument of the opposition members that the linkage of Aadhaar and Electoral Rolls would violate the Puttuswamy judgement, the Law Minister explained that all the conditions given in the judgement- permissible law, legitimate state interests, test of proportionality-are satisfied in this case.

"There is a permissible law…Legitimate state interest is there because S.17 of RPA says that no person shall be entitled to be registered for more than one constituency… On the test of proportionality...this provision is in the interest of voter, the country and the interest of free and fair elections," he stated.

The House took the Bill up for consideration at 2:45 PM and by 3:15 PM the House passed the Bill by voice vote.

Address

Solan
173212

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Mridul Thakur Law posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Practice

Send a message to Mridul Thakur Law:

Shortcuts

Share

Category