0

QUASHING OF NOTICES AND THE ISSUE OF UGC RECOGNITION: BOMBAY HIGH COURT

Blog ,

INTRODUCTION:

The High Court of Bombay- passed a judgement on 14 June 2023. In the case of MADHAV RAJESH VED Vs THE REGISTRAR GENERAL IN WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 13667 OF 2023 which was passed by a single bench comprising of HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE G.S. PATEL, HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE DR. NEELA KEDAR GOKHALE, a law student has approached the court seeking a writ of certiorari to quash three notices related to the selection process for law clerks in the Bombay High Court. The petitioner, who recently graduated with an LLB degree from the Pravin Gandhi College of Law, challenges the rejection of his application based on the requirement of UGC recognition for his college. This blog post aims to analyse the legal aspects of the case and shed light on the significance of UGC recognition in the context of affiliated colleges.

FACTS OF THE CASE:

The petitioner’s application was rejected based on an advertisement issued by the Bombay High Court, inviting applications for the position of law clerks. The rejection was primarily due to the petitioner’s college, Pravin Gandhi College of Law, not being listed among the institutions whose recommendation was sought in the advertisement. The college, although affiliated to the University of Mumbai, did not have separate UGC recognition, according to the respondent’s interpretation.

THE ROLE OF UGC RECOGNITION:

The requirement of UGC recognition has emerged as a key factor in the selection process for law clerks. However, the court’s examination of the case reveals significant inconsistencies and misinterpretations surrounding the role of UGC recognition in this context.

INCONGRUITIES AND MISINTERPRETATIONS:

Firstly, the advertisement and guidelines pertaining to the selection process contained conflicting provisions regarding the requirement of UGC recognition. Guideline 3 of the advertisement specified that colleges recognized by the UGC, subject to approval by the Chief Justice, could recommend candidates. However, it failed to distinguish between universities or deemed universities and affiliated colleges. Consequently, the respondent’s insistence on UGC recognition for an affiliated college, such as Pravin Gandhi College of Law, is deemed legally untenable.

Secondly, the respondent’s argument that the UGC’s response to an email query confirmed the non-inclusion of Pravin Gandhi College of Law under Section 2(f) of the UGC Act only adds to the confusion. While the college may not have independent UGC recognition, it is undoubtedly affiliated to the University of Mumbai, which itself is recognized by the UGC. The rejection of the petitioner’s application based on UGC recognition, in this case, appears unjustified and inconsistent.

Thirdly, the alternative provision in the guidelines, allowing recommendations from Presidents of Bar Associations for candidates from unrecognized colleges, raises concerns. This provision implies that a recommendation from a Bar Association President can supersede the qualification of a law degree, thus highlighting the arbitrary nature of the selection process.

COURT’S RULING AND IMPLICATIONS:

The court carefully analysed the inconsistencies and misinterpretations surrounding the requirement of UGC recognition for affiliated colleges. It held that UGC recognition is applicable to universities or deemed universities, not to affiliated colleges. The court concluded that the rejection of the petitioner’s application based on UGC recognition was unwarranted. Consequently, the court ordered the inclusion of the petitioner’s name in the list of eligible candidates, subject to meeting all other eligibility criteria.

CONCLUSION:
This case sheds light on the significance of UGC recognition in the selection process for law clerks in the Bombay High Court. It emphasizes the need for clarity and precision in the formulation of guidelines and advertisements to avoid confusion and ensure fair treatment for all applicants. The court’s ruling in favour of the petitioner highlights the importance of upholding the principles of natural justice and ensuring that eligibility criteria are applied consistently and in accordance with the law.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY VETHIKA D PORWAL, BMS COLLEGE OF LAW

Click here to view judgement

0

“ANALYSIS OF A JUDGMENT: CHALLENGING THE CONVICTION BASED ON CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE – BOMBAY HIGH COURT

Blog ,

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 549 OF 2016

INTRODUCTION

The High Court of Bombay- passed a judgement on 14 June 2023. In the case of RAJESHWAR MAROTRAO BIRADAR Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 549 OF 2016 which was passed by a single bench comprising of HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE V. V. KANKANWADI, HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, an appellant convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) is challenging the decision of the trial court. The appellant asserts that the judgment is illegal, perverse, and unsustainable in the eyes of the law. The case revolves around the death of Ujwala, the appellant’s wife, and the prosecution’s reliance on circumstantial evidence to establish the appellant’s guilt. This blog post examines the key arguments presented by both the appellant and the state, evaluates the strength of the circumstantial evidence, and analyses the relevant laws in the case.

FACTS OF THE CASE

The case originated from an incident where Ujwala was initially admitted to a hospital due to convulsions following a reported fall from a bed. However, her condition worsened, and she eventually passed away. Upon receiving the autopsy report, which indicated death due to smothering and manual strangulation, the police registered a case against the appellant and conducted an investigation. The trial court subsequently found the appellant guilty of Ujwala’s murder under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment. Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) states that whoever commits murder shall be punished with either death penalty or imprisonment for life, along with the possibility of a fine.

APPELLANT’S SUBMISSIONS

The appellant’s counsel argued that the prosecution’s case was based solely on circumstantial evidence, as there were no direct eyewitnesses. The counsel contended that the prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that Ujwala’s death was homicidal, as the medical evidence presented conflicting opinions on the cause of death. The appellant’s counsel further claimed that the prosecution did not provide any evidence to establish a motive for the alleged murder. The counsel also criticized the trial court for relying on Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act to hold the appellant solely responsible for Ujwala’s death without adequately establishing the primary burden of proving homicidal death.

STATE’S SUBMISSIONS

On behalf of the state, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor defended the trial court’s judgment. The prosecutor emphasized that the appellant was the only person present with Ujwala when she died, making him the prime suspect. The prosecutor argued that it was the appellant’s responsibility to provide a plausible explanation for his wife’s death while she was under his custody. The state maintained that the appellant’s failure to discharge this burden further strengthened the case against him.

ANALYSIS OF THE JUDGMENT

As the first appellate court, the task at hand is to re-evaluate the evidence presented in the trial court and determine whether the prosecution’s reliance on circumstantial evidence was sufficient to establish the appellant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The court referred to various landmark cases and relevant laws to establish the principles that should guide the evaluation of circumstantial evidence.

Regarding the cause of death, the court examined the medical evidence provided by the treating doctors and the autopsy report. The court noted that there were conflicting opinions among the medical experts, with some indicating smothering and others pointing to manual strangulation. The court highlighted the absence of ligature marks on the deceased’s neck and the difficulty in reconciling the simultaneous occurrence of smothering and manual strangulation. These inconsistencies raised doubts about the accuracy of the medical conclusions.

Furthermore, the court emphasized that the prosecution failed to establish a clear motive for the alleged murder. In a circumstantial evidence-based case, it is crucial for the prosecution to establish a motive to strengthen the chain of circumstances. Without a motive, the court found it difficult to draw conclusive inferences against the appellant.

CONCLUSION

Upon careful examination of the evidence and arguments presented, the court found that the prosecution’s case was weak and the circumstantial evidence did not firmly establish the appellant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The court observed significant inconsistencies in the medical evidence and noted the absence of a motive. In light of these factors, the court concluded that the trial court’s judgment was unsustainable in the eyes of the law. The appellant’s conviction was overturned, and he was acquitted of all charges.

In summary, this case demonstrates the importance of scrutinizing circumstantial evidence and evaluating it in accordance with the established legal principles. The burden of proof rests with the prosecution, and a conviction cannot be solely based on conjecture or assumptions. The judgment serves as a reminder of the fundamental principles of justice and the need for a fair and robust legal process.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY VETHIKA D PORWAL, BMS COLLEGE OF LAW

Click here to view judgement

0

TITLE: ANALYSIS OF A MURDER CASE: EVALUATING DYING DECLARATIONS AND EVIDENTIARY VALUE-BOMBAY HIGH COURT

Blog , ,

INTRODUCTION:

The High Court of Bombay-Nagpur Bench passed a judgement on 14 June 2023. In the case of SHAHRUKH SALIM PATHAN AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 355 OF 2016 which was passed by a single bench comprising of HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE V. V. KANKANWADI, HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE ABHAY S. WAGHWASE cases involving murder often present complex challenges for the courts in determining the guilt or innocence of the accused. One critical aspect of such cases is the evaluation of dying declarations, which can serve as crucial evidence in establishing the circumstances surrounding the crime. In this blog post, we delve into a fictional murder case and analyse the evidentiary value of the dying declarations, the laws involved, and the final judgment.

FACTS OF THE CASE

The case under scrutiny revolves around the alleged murder of a woman, the deceased, who suffered severe burn injuries and subsequently succumbed to them. The prosecution has charged three individuals, the deceased’s husband, mother-in-law, and sister-in-law, with the offense of murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The prosecution’s version:

According to the prosecution’s case, the deceased was subjected to continuous harassment and abuse by her husband and in-laws. It is alleged that on the fateful day, a heated argument erupted between the deceased and her husband, which escalated into a physical altercation. The prosecution claims that the husband, in a fit of rage, poured kerosene on the deceased and set her ablaze. The mother-in-law and sister-in-law are accused of aiding and abetting the crime.

Two dying declarations form a significant part of the prosecution’s evidence. The first dying declaration was recorded approximately 12 hours after the incident by a doctor at the Civil Hospital. It is a brief account of the events, presented in a question-and-answer format. The second dying declaration was recorded two days later by a police official and provides a more detailed narrative of the events leading to the burns suffered by the deceased.

LAWS INVOLVED

In cases involving dying declarations, certain legal principles guide their assessment. As established by various judgments, a dying declaration can be the sole basis for conviction if it is found to be reliable, consistent, and devoid of any suspicion of tutoring or influence. Factors such as the opportunity of the dying person to observe the incident, their capacity to remember and narrate the facts, the consistency of the statement, and whether it was made without external influence are crucial in determining the reliability of a dying declaration.

ANALYSIS

Upon analyzing the two dying declarations in this case, several discrepancies and doubts come to light. The first dying declaration was recorded after a significant delay, lacks authentication, and raises concerns regarding its authenticity and voluntariness. In contrast, the second dying declaration, recorded by a police official, provides a detailed account of the alleged abuse and violence suffered by the deceased.

The court’s evaluation:

The court must carefully assess the veracity and reliability of the dying declarations, considering the inconsistencies and doubts surrounding them. Additionally, the court must evaluate the other evidence presented by the prosecution, such as medical testimony and corroborative evidence, to determine the guilt or innocence of the accused.

CONCLUSION:

The judgment and order of conviction in the murder case involve a complex analysis of dying declarations and other pieces of evidence. The conflicting nature of the dying declarations, along with the discrepancies in their recording, raise doubts about their reliability. However, the prosecution has presented medical evidence and witness testimonies that support the allegations made in the dying declarations. The court’s decision emphasizes the importance of evaluating all available evidence to arrive at a just and fair conclusion in criminal cases.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY VETHIKA D PORWAL, BMS COLLEGE OF LAW

click here to view judgement

0

AN ANALYSIS OF A JUDGMENT: ENSURING FAIRNESS IN THE SELECTION PROCESS FOR LAW CLERKS-BOMBAY HIGH COURT

Blog , ,

INTRODUCTION

The High Court of Bombay-Nagpur Bench passed a judgement on 14 June 2023. In the case of MADHAV RAJESH VED Vs THE REGISTRAR GENERAL IN WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 13667 OF 2023 which was passed by a single bench comprising of HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE G.S. PATEL, HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE DR. NEELA KEDAR GOKHALE, the case brought by a law student seeking redress for the rejection of his application for the position of law clerk in the Bombay High Court. The judgment sheds light on the flaws in the selection process and highlights the importance of fairness and adherence to guidelines in such procedures. In this blog post, we will delve into the key points of the judgment and analyse its implications.

FACTS OF THE CASE:

The petitioner, a recent law graduate from the Pravin Gandhi College of Law, filed a writ petition seeking a writ of certiorari to quash three notices related to the rejection of his application for the law clerk position. The primary issue was the requirement of a recommendation from specific institutions or bar association presidents, which excluded the petitioner’s college from the list.

LAWS INVOLVED:

Legal Analysis:

  1. University Grants Commission Act: The court examined the provisions of the UGC Act and emphasized that the requirement of UGC recognition applies to universities and deemed universities, not affiliated colleges. The Act does not mandate separate recognition for every college affiliated with a recognized university.
  2. Constitutional Authority: The court questioned the provision in the guidelines that required approval from the “Hon’ble the Chief Justice” for colleges seeking inclusion, despite having UGC recognition. It deemed this requirement unnecessary, as UGC recognition itself should suffice for affiliated colleges.
  3. Right to Equality: The judgment emphasized the principle of equality and fair treatment under Article 14 of the Indian Constitution. It held that the petitioner should not suffer due to an incorrect interpretation and application of the guidelines. The rejection of the petitioner’s application solely based on the lack of UGC recognition for the college was deemed unjust.

ANALYSIS

  1. The Procedure for Submitting Applications

The guidelines for submitting applications for the law clerk position stipulated that recommendations must come from specific institutions or bar association presidents. However, the petitioner’s college, although affiliated with the University of Mumbai, was not included in the list. This raised questions about the necessity of University Grants Commission (UGC) recognition for affiliated colleges.

  1. UGC Recognition and Affiliated Colleges

The judgment clarified that UGC recognition is only required for universities or deemed universities that explicitly need it. Affiliated colleges, such as the Pravin Gandhi College of Law, do not need separate recognition by the UGC. The rejection of the petitioner’s application solely based on the lack of UGC recognition for his college was deemed unlawful.

  1. Inconsistencies and Flawed Requirements

The judgment highlighted several inconsistencies in the selection process. Firstly, it questioned the requirement for UGC recognition if the college was affiliated with a recognized university. Secondly, the judgment criticized the provision that allowed recommendations from bar association presidents as an alternative to UGC recognition, as it undermined the significance of a qualifying law course.

  1. Fairness and Adherence to Guidelines

The court emphasized that executive actions should adhere to guidelines and that misinterpretation and misapplication of guidelines should not be imposed on the petitioner. The petitioner’s case was considered on its merits, and the rejection solely based on the UGC recognition requirement was deemed unfair.

CONCLUSION

The judgment in this case highlights the importance of fairness and adherence to guidelines in the selection processes for positions in the legal system. It clarifies that affiliated colleges do not require separate UGC recognition and emphasizes the need to evaluate applicants based on their qualifications and eligibility criteria rather than arbitrary and inconsistent requirements.

This judgment serves as a reminder that transparency, consistency, and fairness should be the cornerstones of any selection process, particularly in the legal field. It also demonstrates the significance of individuals standing up for their rights and seeking legal remedies when faced with unjust treatment.

Overall, this judgment contributes to strengthening the principles of equality and fairness in the legal system, ensuring that aspiring law professionals are evaluated based on their merit rather than arbitrary requirements or procedural flaws.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY VETHIKA D PORWAL, BMS COLLEGE OF LAW

click here to view judgement

0

“BOMBAY HIGH COURT: CHALLENGING THE EXONERATION – A CASE OF FRAUDULENT LOAN DISBURSEMENT IN A CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY”

Blog , ,

INTRODUCTION

The High Court of Bombay passed a judgement on 14 June 2023. In the case of BRIHANMUMBAI POLICE KARMACHARI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE SECRETARY, CO-OP. DEPT. AND ORS. IN WRIT PETITION NO.1475 OF 2017which was passed by a single bench comprising of HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND N. JADHAV, the court examined a petition challenging the legality and validity of an order passed by the state minister in a revision application. The case involved a co-operative society registered under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. The petitioner alleged fraudulent practices in the disbursement of loans by the society’s managing committee, resulting in a significant financial loss. The court was tasked with determining whether the respondent, who was a member of the managing committee, should be held responsible for the financial loss and liable for repayment.

FACTS OF THE CASE

The petitioner, a co-operative society, primarily provided loans to employees of the Police Department in Maharashtra. The loan repayment process involved deducting equated monthly instalments (EMIs) from the borrowers’ salaries. To obtain a loan, applicants were required to submit a certificate issued by the Head of the Department, verifying their employment status.

During an inquiry initiated by the petitioner, it was discovered that several loan applicants were not actual employees of the Police Department. Criminal complaints were filed against these individuals, and a case was pending. Additionally, an Enquiry Report conducted under Section 88 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act revealed serious discrepancies in the loan recommendation and disbursement process. The report implicated six members of the managing committee, including the respondent, for not adhering to the prescribed procedures.

The Enquiry Report held the respondent responsible for disbursing loans to four alleged members, even though they were not genuine employees. The report also accused the respondent of erasing the crossing on loan disbursement cheques to make them appear as bearer cheques, which is a violation of protocol. The petitioner, along with three other members, was held liable for the financial loss caused to the society.

  1. Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960: This act governs the functioning and administration of co-operative societies in the state of Maharashtra. It provides guidelines on the formation, registration, management, and dissolution of co-operative societies.
  2. Section 88 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act: This section empowers the Registrar of Co-operative Societies to conduct an inquiry into the affairs of a co-operative society if there are allegations of misconduct, mismanagement, or any other irregularities. The inquiry report plays a crucial role in determining the responsibility of the members involved and the subsequent action to be taken.
  3. Indian Penal Code (IPC): The IPC contains provisions related to criminal offenses in India. In the case of fraudulent loan disbursement, specific sections of the IPC may be relevant, such as:
    • Section 420: This section deals with offenses involving cheating and dishonesty, which may be applicable if there is evidence of fraudulent practices in the loan disbursement process.
    • Section 468: This section pertains to forgery for the purpose of cheating, which could be relevant if the respondent tampered with cheques to deceive the co-operative society.
  4. Banking Regulations Act, 1949: This act regulates the banking sector in India and provides guidelines for various banking operations. While co-operative societies may not fall directly under the purview of this act, certain provisions related to banking practices and cheque issuance could be considered while examining the legality of converting crossed cheques into bearer cheques.

LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

Following the Enquiry Report, the respondent filed an appeal challenging the findings. However, the Divisional Joint Registrar dismissed the appeal and upheld the Enquiry Report. Subsequently, the respondent filed a revision application before the State Minister of Co-operation, who, after hearing the parties, allowed the revision and exonerated the respondent from liability.

The petitioner, dissatisfied with the revisional order, approached the court seeking to quash the impugned order and uphold the Enquiry Report and the appellate order.

ARGUMENTS

The petitioner contended that the respondent, as a member of the managing committee, had played a significant role in the fraudulent loan disbursement. The petitioner argued that the respondent’s act of tampering with the cheques and converting them from crossed cheques to bearer cheques was illegal and beyond their authority. The petitioner emphasized that the Enquiry Report and the Divisional Joint Registrar’s order had found the respondent guilty of serious misconduct, resulting in a financial loss to the society.

On the other hand, the respondent argued that all members of the managing committee shared responsibility for the loan disbursement process. They claimed that the verification of loan applications was the committee’s duty, and the loans were sanctioned after due consideration by the managing committee. The respondent contended that their actions were in accordance with the committee’s resolution, which authorized individual members, including themselves, to sign the loan disbursement cheques.

COURT’S DECISION

After considering the arguments presented by both parties and examining the facts of the case, the court rendered its decision. The court acknowledged that the fraudulent loan disbursement had indeed caused a significant financial loss to the society. It noted that the respondent, as a member of the managing committee, was responsible for signing the cheques and had tampered with them, converting them into bearer cheques.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY VETHIKA D PORWAL, BMS COLLEGE OF LAW

click here to view judgement

1 … 3 4 5 6 7 … 11