SUPREME COURT

• CIVIL

Lalit Kishore Vs. Meeru Sharma (Decided on 04.08.2009) MANU/SC/1376/2009

Matrimonial dispute - Rejection of appeal for medical examination - Justification - Whether in the absence of express provision under the Hindu Marriage Act or any other law governing the field, Court is empowered the to issue directions upon a party in a matrimonial proceeding to compel to submit himself / herself to medical examination - Whether the Court has inherent power under section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to pass all orders for doing complete justice to the parties to the suit.

The Court is always empowered to satisfy itself as to whether a party before it suffers from mental illness or not either for the purpose of taking evidence on the ground for which the matrimonial proceeding was started. It is well settled that the primary duty of the court is to see that the truth comes out. Therefore, although the medical examination for a party is not provided in the Act, even then, the court has complete inherent power in an appropriate case under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure to pass all orders for doing complete justice to the parties to the suit.

Renuka Das Vs. Maya Ganguly (Decided on 04.08.2009) MANU / SC / 1355 / 2009

Revisional jurisdiction of the High Court - Ex parte decree for eviction passed against the Appellant in respect of the suit premises which was filed, inter alia, on the ground of default in payment of rent - Can the High Court in its revisional jurisdiction interfere in the findings of fact arrived at by the Appellate court as per an application filed under Order 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

It is well settled that the High Court, in revision, is not entitled to interfere with the findings of the appellate court, until and unless it is found that such findings are perverse and arbitrary. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside. The trial court is directed to dispose of the suit as early as possible preferably within six months from the date of supply of a copy of this order to it without granting any unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties.

• SERVICE

Rampal Vs. State of Haryana (Decided on 04.08.2009) MANU /SC/1358/2009

Order of cancellation of Scheduled Caste Certificate allegedly procured wrongly - Setting aside thereof sought on the ground of not granting an opportunity for a proper hearing - Whether act amounts to violation of natural rights

The appeal is liable to be allowed and the impugned order should also be set aside on a very short point. It is an admitted position that before cancellation of the caste certificate of the Appellant, the authorities ought to have given an opportunity of hearing to the Appellant and also to con end that the Certificate issued to him was a "Scheduled Caste Certificate" and, therefore, it cannot be quashed. In view of the fact that the principles of natural justice was admittedly violated in this case, the impugned order must be set aside and the concerned Tehsildar must be directed to decide the dispute regarding the caste certificate of the Appellant after giving hearing to the parties and after passing a reasoned order, preferably within three months from the date of supply of a copy of this order to him.

HIGH COURTS

• CRIMINAL

DELHI HIGH COURT

State Vs. Sharafta Sheikh (Decided on 31.07.2009) MANU/DE/1294/2009

Exercise of power by Special Court to attach properties and bank accounts of the accused person from the money allegedly acquired by being involved in organized crime or by helping other accused persons in conducting illegal transactions - Whether order of attachment sustainable

A reading of Section 20 of the MCOCA goes to show that the powers vested under the Special Court entitles the said Court to attach the properties belonging to the accused persons which would also include properties belonging to their near relations which had been purchased/acquired by the accused persons out of their own funds. The respondents have not been able to show as to what is the source of income. It leaves no room for doubt that those payments have been made out of the illegal begotten money and therefore, the policies are also liable to be attached/ forfeited to the State.

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

Hori Lal Vs. State of UP (Decided on 31.7.2009) MANU/UP/0206/2009

Consent- Whether the girls, below 18 years, may be deemed aware of all the consequences of her sexual intercourse during such age, which may adversely effect her person (which includes her body, mind and reputation) - Whether the girls below 18 years, are deemed capable of taking care of her person (which includes body, mind and reputation) - Whether the consent of a "minor" or "child" (below 18 years of age) is a valid consent 

A person below eighteen year of age is not deemed to have a matured understanding, hence, a person below eighteen year of age is defined either as a "child" or as a "minor". The provisions contained in Sections 361 and 375 I.P.C. (regarding victim's age of 16 years) tend to adversely effect the health of the children and tend to promote the abuse of the children of tender age. Such provisions regarding age of 16 years create an hindrance in the development of the children, tend to injure their dignity and pollute their morality. It encourages their exploitation. Hence, these provisions are rival to the directive principles of State Policy, contained in Article 39 of the Constitution of India. Hence, it is the constitutional duty of the State to enhance the age of these victims from 16 years to 18 years in the relevant provisions of Section 361 and 375 I.P.C.

• SERVICE

MADRAS HIGH COURT

Jayalakshmi Vs. The District Collector, The Special Tahsildar, Adi Dravidar Welfare and Government of Tamil Nadu, rep. by its Secretary,Backward Classes and Most Backward Classes Welfare Dept. (Decided on 29.07.2009) MANU/TN/1599/2009

Legality of the Notification - Draft Notification made under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 challenged on grounds that it has been issued against a dead person and therefore liable to be set aside - Whether there is illegality in the passing of the Notification under the above said Act.

The husband of the Appellant-writ petitioner was alive at the date when the proposal for acquisition of land(s) was submitted and the same was rightly made in his name. But, in the meantime when the proposal got approved the husband of the Appellant-writ petitioner died The Appellant-writ petitioner having not intimated the fact relating to the death of her husband, and/or having not mutated her name in the records by that time, there is no illegality in the Notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and there was no occasion for the State Government to rectify the Notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Act, in the absence of any such mistake.

• CUSTOMS

KERALA HIGH COURT

Pakeer Muhammed Firoskhan Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Customs and State of Kerala Decided On: 25.05.2009

Customs – Appellant was convicted under Section 135(1)(i), the gold seized was impure and impugned goods were undervalued – Purity of gold was checked by touchstone method which is not a foolproof method to establish the purity of gold - Whether sentence awarded to petitioner in the circumstances is sustainable and whether conviction ought to have been under Section 135(1)(ii)

Held, when there is no reliable evidence regarding the purity of gold and any convincing evidence regarding its value, the conviction of the Petitioner under Section 135(1)(i) of the Customs Act is unsustainable - He can be convicted only under Section 135(1)(ii) – Also it is not the case that petitioner is a habitual offender engaged in such illegal import of gold - Sentence of imprisonment set aside - Conviction of the petitioner under Section 135(1)(i) altered to one under Section 135(1)(ii).