0

The Meghalaya High Court has clarified that Section 23 of the POCSO Act holds individuals responsible for revealing a minor’s identity when reporting or contributing to news.

Title: Shri Eric Ranee & 2 Ors. Vs. State of Meghalaya & Anr

Decided on: 06.10.2023

Writ C No. – 79 of 2023

CORAM: Hon’ble Mr. B. Bhattacharjee, Judge.

INTRODUCTION

Three petitioners contested their participation as co-accused in a case involving the disclosure of a child victim’s identity in violation of the POCSO Act in the Meghalaya High Court’s case Crl. Petn. No. 79 of 2023. They contended that they were exempt from liability under Section 23(3) of the POCSO Act because they were social workers and media correspondents.

 After weighing their arguments, the court maintained their criminal liability, ruling that news reporters and contributors are covered by Section 23 of the POCSO Act. The case pertained to the construal and implementation of child protection statutes concerning the revelation of victims’ identities in the press.

FACTS OF THE CASE

The Meghalaya High Court decided in Crl. Petn. No. 79 of 2023 that three petitioners might face criminal charges under the POCSO Act for their roles in revealing a child victim’s identity to the media. Their claim that they were exempt from liability because they weren’t employed by the relevant newspapers was denied by the court. The case made clear how crucial it is to shield child abuse victims’ identities from the public eye.

 

COURTS ANALYSIS AND DECISION 

The court stressed how crucial it is to preserve the identity of minors who have been sexually abused by interpreting Section 23 of the POCSO Act to include news reporters and contributors. The need to protect the identities of child victims and the legal and moral obligations of news reporters are highlighted by this case.

“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. “

Written by- Kusuma R

Meghalaya Hc (4)

0

The Calcutta High Court has emphasized that maritime claims require supporting evidence and should not be characterized by harsh or oppressive measures.

Title: Hindustan Aegis LPG Ltd. vs. Owners of Vessel MT TSM Pollux.

Decided on:  19th October, 2023.

Writ C No. – 9266889

CORAM: Hon’ble Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya.

INTRODUCTION

Alleged carelessness and damage to marine loading arms at Haldia Oil Jetty Port I give rise to an admiralty jurisdiction dispute in the case of Hindustan Aegis LPG Ltd. vs. Owners of Vessel MT TSM Pollux. The plaintiff requests compensation, but the court challenges the claim’s validity and emphasizes the need for supporting documentation and just compensation. The case brings to light the intricacies of admiralty law, and an order is made for a joint survey to evaluate the harm.

FACTS OF THE CASE

In this instance, an incident happened in September 2023 at Haldia Oil Jetty Port I, where the ship MT TSM Pollux harmed Hindustan Aegis LPG Ltd.’s marine loading and unloading arms.

The plaintiff filed a claim under Section 73 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, alleging the owners of the vessel were negligent. As long as the loss is predictable and a direct result of the breach, Section 73 provides compensation for losses resulting from contract violations.

The plaintiff’s claim was examined by the court, which emphasized the need for supporting documentation and just compensation.

 To evaluate the damage, a cooperative survey was mandated. This case serves as a reminder of the intricacies involved in admiralty law and how Section 73 is applied to determine compensation.

COURTS ANALYSIS AND DECISIONThe court acknowledges the plaintiff’s claim for damages caused to marine equipment by the vessel MT TSM POLLUX. Due to the urgency of the matter, the court orders the arrest of the vessel to secure the plaintiff’s claims. The document specifies the conditions for the arrest order, including a deadline for the plaintiff to pay court fees and the possibility of the order being vacated if the defendant deposits a specified amount as security. Various authorities are instructed to assist in implementing the arrest order, and the document sets a returnable date for the application. It also warns that failure to pay the court fees will result in the dismissal of the suit. 

“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. “

Written by- Kusuma R

Calcutta Hc

 

0

The Punjab & Haryana High Court held that a prisoner’s potential to elude capture while on parole is insufficient grounds for denying them temporary release.

Title: Kapil v. State of Haryana and others.

Decided on: October 17, 2023

Writ C No. – 7247-2023(O&M)

CORAM: Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Lisa Gill and Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Ritu Tagore.

INTRODUCTION

In the Punjab & Haryana High Court case CRWP-7247-2023, Kapil, the petitioner, requested regular parole for a period of ten weeks. The Haryana Goods Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 2022 was cited by the Divisional Commissioner of Ambala as justification for rejecting the request. The petitioner won the case, with the court stating that there is insufficient reason to deny temporary release based only on the petitioner’s potential to abscond while out on parole.

FACTS OF THE CASE

 In this case Kapil, a prisoner serving life in prison under Section 302/34, ten years in prison under Section 364/34 IPC, and six months in prison under Section 120-B/34 IPC, requested regular parole in the case number CRWP-7247-2023 in order to visit his family. Based on information from the District Magistrate and the Police Commissioner of Ghaziabad, the Divisional Commissioner of Ambala rejected his request, expressing worries that Kapil might change his place of residence and abscond. In the High Court, Kapil contested this ruling on the grounds that it was arbitrary and unwarranted. The main questions were whether the Divisional Commissioner’s rejection reasons were reasonable and if there was sufficient proof to back them up.

COURTS ANALYSIS AND DECISION

The court decided that these worries weren’t enough to keep someone from getting parole. It overturned the refusal and granted Kapil a four-week parole sentence with suitable restrictions to maintain a just equilibrium between the prisoner’s rights and public safety. The ruling highlights the requirement for legitimate, fact-based justifications when denying parole.

“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. “

Written by- Kusuma R

Orissa Hc (1) PB and Hr Hc

0

Mob Lynching and Its place in legal system

Abstract

This article is based on the problem of mob lynching in India and what are the existing legal system on this issue, it further deals with the supreme court ruling and governmental steps on this problem and also gives a way forward to deal with this issue.

Article

“The Supreme Court on July 28 asked the Centre and at least six States to respond to a plea about lynchings and mob violence refusing to stop. the plea said gruesome incidents of mob fury and vigilantism continue to happen despite a five-year-old apex court judgment, which had made the government machinery squarely accountable for protecting the lives of victims, including minority community members.”[1]

The term “mob lynching” describes targeted violence committed by a sizable crowd, including crimes against people’s bodies or property, whether public or private. The mob takes the law into their own hands while disregarding legal guidelines and processes because they feel they are punishing the victim for some perceived violation, even if it is not necessarily criminal. The values of justice, human rights, and the rule of law are all transgressed by the horrific and unlawful act of mob lynching. It is a sort of vigilantism that violates the fundamental principles of a civilised society, according to which everyone should be presumed innocent until proven guilty and the judicial system should be in charge of delivering justice. Mob lynching instances have happened all throughout the world, and they are frequently motivated by ingrained societal problems, discrimination, and a lack of faith in the legal system. These actions not only cause fatalities but also spread fear and instability throughout communities.

Mark Twain, in an unpublished response to a racial lynching in Missouri in 1901, provided a poignant warning about the perils of mob violence. He foresaw the potential transformation of America into “The United States of Lyncherdom” Fast forward more than a century later, the secular republic of India finds itself grappling with a similar apprehension. The specter of mob violence looms over the nation, posing significant risks to its social fabric and values.

The rise of problem of mob lynching or mob violence is due to the various reasons as –

Factors contributing to the rise of mob lynching can be summarized as follows:

  • Prejudice: Hate crimes that result from biases and prejudices among various castes, classes, and religious groups drive mob lynching. These prejudices foster a hostile climate that encourages violent acts against certain people or communities.
  • Lack of Speedy Justice: One of the main causes of mob violence is the delayed and ineffective operation of the legal system. People may take matters into their own hands and seek immediate retaliation without concern for the repercussions when they lose trust in the judicial system and think that justice will not be delivered quickly.
  • Ineffectiveness of Police Administration: Another factor in the growth of mob lynchings is the inefficiency of police investigations and the public’s mistrust of the police. People may turn to vigilante measures to right perceived wrongs when they believe the authorities are either incapable or unwilling to do so.

These elements work together to produce a potentially dangerous climate where mob lynching episodes might happen. Combating biases and prejudices, bolstering the judicial system to ensure quick trials and just verdicts, enhancing the effectiveness and accountability of law enforcement, and fostering a climate of tolerance and respect for the rule of law are all necessary to solve this issue.

But one of the main reasons of increasing cases of mob lynching is because of increase in Cow vigilantism cases, Cows are revered and held in high regard in the Hindu religion. This attitude occasionally gives birth to “cow vigilantism,” in which certain people or organisations utilise the law to defend cows from fictitious dangers. This attitude frequently results in violence against those who are suspected of killing cows or eating animal products. In these situations, the majority commits violence against the minority groups. Along with cow vigilantism there is also increasing instances of religious vigilantism, where extremists from an intolerant religious group targets a person who raises or speaks against their religion.

Most infamous case of cow vigilantism was of Alwar, Rajasthan in the year 2017, when one Pehlu Khan, a 55-yearold Diary-Farmer was lynched in broad daylight by six men on the accusation of cow killing and beef consumption. On April 1, 2017, Khan, his two sons, and a few other people were moving livestock from Jaipur when they were stopped and beaten by cow vigilantes close to Behror in Alwar. And the Alwar court acquitted the six men giving them a benefit of doubt in august 2019 and after an appeal by the sons of the victim, Rajasthan High Court ordered Bailable warrants against the accused and the matter is still pending with no glimpse of justice.

As per a report by IndiaSpend, basing itself on the content analysis of news reports, concludes that “In the first six months of 2017, 20 cow-terror attacks were reported–more than 75 per cent of the 2016 figure, which was the worst year for such violence since 2010. The attacks include mob lynching, attacks by vigilantes, murder and attempt to murder, harassment, assault and gang-rape. In two attacks, the victims/survivors were chained, stripped and beaten, while in two others, the victims were hanged. Another analysis of mob violence and public disorder between January 2011 and June 2017 on Observer Research Analysis, shows that cow-related violence has spiked up dramatically from five per cent of the total incidents (of Lynching or Public Disorder) to over 20 per cent by the end of June 2017.”[2]

Suprisingly the National Crime Record Bureau stopped recording these crimes since 2017, as stating the data as unrealiable.

There are several many cases of mob violence where victims were killed by a mob and family still seeks justice for them.

One of the reasons for this delay is because of absence specific laws on mob lynching but section 223(a) of CrPC which held that –

“persons accused of the same offence committed in the course same transaction;”[3]

The Supreme Court established a number of preventative, corrective, and punitive procedures to deal with lynching and mob violence in the case of Tahseen s. Poonawala v. UOI in July 2017. In this case, the Supreme Court used the phrase “horrendous act of mobocracy” to describe mob lynching and it also insisted various states to take preventive actions on this issue.

But another problem arises of non-implementation as, “On December 22, 2018, the Manipur Assembly passed the Manipur Protection from Mob Violence Bill while the Rajasthan Assembly passed the Rajasthan Protection from Lynching Bill on August 5, 2019. Similarly, the West Bengal Assembly passed the West Bengal (Prevention of Lynching) Bill on August 30, 2019. The Uttar Pradesh law commission submitted a report on mob lynching and a draft bill in July 2019. In the same year, the Madhya Pradesh government led by the then chief minister Kamal Nath had proposed an amendment to the existing law against cow slaughter to deal with the cases of lynching. But there has been no headway in both these states.”[4]

Now what should be the way forward to this, firstly, we need dedicated fast track courts in this matter which can dispose these cases in short time setting precedents and fear in the mind of others who can fulfil their secret vendetta against a person with this act. Secondly, their should be proper victim compensation scheme implemented to support the victim’s family and free treatment should be provided to injured. Lastly, there should be a special task force established in each district to be the first response force to such act and where they can protect the victim thus not causing any casualty.

Lynchings are not appropriate in an Indian democracy. It is critical that mob violence be eliminated in a nation that takes pleasure in being democratic. unsettlingly, the police’s inactivity in times of mob violence is frequently met with popular approval of the officers’ extrajudicial penalties. Consequently, it’s crucial to increase public confidence in legal processes. States like Manipur, West Bengal, and Rajasthan have proposed comprehensive laws on the subject, and all states and the federal government should follow suit. It is necessary to take action to stop the spread of false information and hate speech.

“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.”

Written By – Shreyanshu Gupta

 

[1] https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/supreme-court-seeks-centre-states-response-on-nfiw-plea-sounding-the-alarm-on-lynchings-mob-fury/article67131163.ece

[2] https://www.newslaundry.com/2017/07/04/mob-lynchings-in-india-a-look-at-data-and-the-story-behind-the-numbers

[3] Section 223(a) of CrPC

[4] https://www.outlookindia.com/national/spectre-of-mob-lynchings-continues-to-haunt-india-amid-lacklustre-laws-news-193743

0

Delhi High Court dismissed the review petition on the grounds of inordinate delay with no grounds for condonation.

Title: MONIKA GUPTA Versus SANJAY BANSAL

Date of Decision: 19.07.2023

+ RFA(OS) 59/2019 & CM APPL. 19452/2022

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

     HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN

Introduction

Delhi High Court dismissed the review petition on as the petitioner was lackadaisical in filing the review and there is no ground of reason to back this Inordinate delay of more than 1600 days.

Facts of the case

The appellant filed the current application in an effort to excuse the existing appeal’s 1969-day filing delay. The petitioner has chosen the current internal court appeal in opposition to a decision made on August 27, 2014, known as “the impugned order,” the respondent’s claim for particular judgement was heard by the learned Single Judge, wherein It was mandated to perform. According to the contested order, the parties had signed a contract to sell a piece of land known as Plot. Number 68, 50.40 square metres, Pocket 11, Block G, Sector 11, ‘The suit property’ in Rohini, New Delhi-110085, is up for sale Consideration in the amount of Rs. 80 lakhs.

The plaintiff said that on May 7, 2012—the day the Agreement to Sell was signed—it had paid the appellant/defendant a payment totaling Rs. 50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakhs). At the time of the Sale Deed’s execution, the remaining amount of Rs. 30,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty Lakhs) was due to be paid on or by May 15, 2012. The learned Single Judge observed that the defendant/appellant had not filed a written statement and that it was not on record despite having had enough opportunity to do so. Additionally, the appellant did not show up in front of the relevant court on the dates when the case was heard.

As a result, the respondent/plaintiff’s request for particular execution of the Agreement to Sell dated 07.05.2012 was granted by the learned Single Judge, who also decreed the suit.

Analysis of the court

The appellant claims that the respondent failed to file the reply despite being given enough opportunity to do so, which contributed significantly to the delay in the processes surrounding the review petition.

The appellant supported his claim by citing the ruling in the case of DSR Steel (Private) Limited v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: (2012) 6 SCC 782, which held that the time spent by the party pursuing the review petition must not be taken into account when considering whether to excuse the delay in filing the appeal. He called this Court’s attention to paragraph 25.3 of the aforementioned ruling.

The appellant receives no benefit from the aforementioned ruling. Contrarily, the Court has mandated that the time spent by the party actively pursuing the remedy of review be excluded in suitable situations. In this instance, we determine that the appellant pursued its review petition in a careless manner, and we are unable to believe that the appellant did so conscientiously.

 It is obvious that the current appeal has been filed with excessive delay, and court finds no reason to excuse this.

 As a result, the appeal is denied.

“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.”

Written By Shreyanshu Gupta

click to view the judgement

1 2 3 25