Legal Funda

Saturday, 12 January 2019

Great Thoughts About the Lawyers

January 12, 2019
If there were no bad people there would be no good lawyers.
CHARLES DICKENS, The Old Curiosity Shop
Lawyers are the foot soldiers of our Constitution.

RENNARD STRICKLAND & FRANK T. READ, The Lawyer Myth
It is the lawyers who run our civilization for us -- our governments, our business, our private lives. Most legislators are lawyers; they make our laws. Most presidents, governors, commissioners, along with their advisers and brain-trusters are lawyers; they administer our laws. All the judges are lawyers; they interpret and enforce our laws. There is no separation of powers where the lawyers are concerned. There is only a concentration of all government power -- in the lawyers.

FRED RODELL, Woe Unto You, Lawyers
There is a vague popular belief that lawyers are necessarily dishonest. I say vague, because when we consider to what extent confidence and honors are reposed in and conferred upon lawyers by the people, it appears improbable that their impression of dishonesty is very distinct and vivid. Yet the impression is common, almost universal. Let no young man choosing the law for a calling for a moment yield to the popular belief. Resolve to be honest at all events; and if in your own judgment you cannot be an honest lawyer, resolve to be honest without being a lawyer. Choose some other occupation, rather than one in the choosing of which you do, in advance, consent to be a knave.

ABRAHAM LINCOLN, memorandum for law lecture, 1850
Lawyers are men who will swear black is white--if they are paid for it.

EDWARD COUNSEL, Maxims
If lawyers were to undertake no causes till they were sure they were just, a man might be precluded altogether from a trial of his claim, though, were it judicially examined, it might be found a very just claim.
SAMUEL JOHNSON, Journal of a Tour of the Hebrides, Aug. 15, 1773

Why are scientists now using lawyers in laboratory experiments instead of rats? Three reasons: (1) lawyers are more plentiful than rats, (2) there is no danger the scientists will become attached to the lawyers, and (3) there are some things rats just won't do.
GERRY SPENCE, Bloodthirsty Bitches and Pious Pimps of Power

The only secret that the lawyer really possesses about the law is that no one can ever be certain of what the law is.... The lawyer is accustomed to the ways of bending and changing rules to suit his (or his client's) purposes, to dance in the shadows of the law's ambiguities. Rules hold no particular terror for the lawyer, just as the sight of blood holds no terror for the surgeon. Because he operates a system of rules, the lawyer becomes indifferent to them in the way that a doctor becomes indifferent to the humanity of the body that is lying on the operating table.
JETHRO LIEBERMAN, Crisis at the Bar

I realized the true function of a lawyer was to unite parties riven asunder. The lesson was so indelibly burnt into me that a large part of my time during the twenty years of my practice as a lawyer was occupied in bringing about private compromises of hundreds of cases. I lost nothing thereby -- not even money, certainly not my soul.

MAHATMA GANDHI, An Autobiography

True Facts about Public Interest Litigation (PIL)

January 12, 2019
True Facts about Public Interest Litigation (PIL)

A PIL is a power given to the public by the court on any issue. A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) can be filed in either any High Court or in the Supreme Court. A PIL can be filed for any matters of the public such as polluted environments, road safety or constructional hazards etc.

Any person can file a Public Interest Litigation not necessary he/she has to be a victim. PIL is litigation introduced in a court of law, not by the aggrieved party but by the court itself or by any other private party. Public Interest Litigation is the power given to protect the public interest by courts.

The court can itself take cognizance of the matter and anticipate suo motu or cases can commence on the petition of any public-spirited individual.

The name Public Interest Litigation has not been defined in the Constitution and is a more common name for a Writ issued by the Supreme Court in an exercise of its original jurisdiction under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. The following describes in detail about the procedure how to file a PIL in Supreme Court of India.

Check about the subject under which you are thinking to file the PIL and read all the details of the provisions of the law and the violations of the law if any being done by the State or any statutory body. Make a detailed representation regarding the violations being made by the department concerned or the concerned authorities to take the remedial steps in this regard. If possible a reminder to the same may also be given.

Check any arbitrary law, irregularity in the enforcement of law and the class of people being affected by such law or the inactivity of the department concerned. Collect all the relevant material, press reporting, documents etc in this regard and arrange them chronologically. Draft a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India citing the violations of the law, inactivity of the state and all other grounds. The format for PIL is given below which may be used. It is important to take the assistance or services of a trained legal hand for the purpose.

Prepare and file the PIL in Supreme Court of India before the Registry of the Supreme Court of India and get the matter listed before the court after due scrutiny. The matter is thereafter listed before the Court of hearing and orders accordingly.


Thursday, 29 November 2018

TOP 8 BEST LAW WEBSITES FOR LAWYERS AND LAW STUDENTS IN INDIA

November 29, 2018
Top 8 best useful websites for Law students and lawyers. These websites will surely help law students to build their career in the legal field. 
To 8 best law websites for lawyers and law students in india
legalfunda.org


LiveLaw.in

Live Law will provide legal news and Events. Live Law covers Latest Legal News, Supreme Court News, News on Law, Law School News, Legal Events, Columns on Law, Legal etc. This site is more focused on court reporting.

PathLegal.in

PathLegal is a prominent lawyers directory from India. It would also provide online legal advice, phone consulting, free legal advice in India, free LPO training, legal documents, free legal case management tool and many other legal software. PathLegal has published a detailed online LPO training material for free. Law students can grab the LPO knowledge along with their law curriculum. PathLegal WebAppenhances a lawyer/law firm to have digital interaction with clients and maintain them.

Lawctopus

For law students in India: internships, things to do, career advice, blogs, it is a very very resourceful site for law students.  t houses internship experiences, law student opportunities, career advice articles, blog posts, law school news etc.

IndianKanoon.org

It will give information about all the laws in India. This site is a Virtual Legal Assistant for law students and helps to manage your research in the law field.

Bar and Bench

Bar & Bench is India's best source for legal news. This site helps the students in reading the latest news, columns, and interviews on Indian law firms, law schools, senior counsels etc.

Manupatra

Manupatra, a legal database, has enormous legal material of Indian as well as overseas countries. Manupatra Law Products and Legal Products include Law Journal, Legal CD, Law CD, Legal CDs, Law CDs, Legal Ezine, Law Ezine, Legal Ezines, Law Ezines, Law Book, Legal Books, Law Books, Legal Books, Law Journal, Law Journals, Legal Journals, Online Database, Legal Journal, Print Products, Prints, etc.

Legal500.com

The Legal 500 provides the complete worldwide coverage on recommended Law firms, Lawyers, Attorneys, Advocates, Solicitors, and Barristers. This site will help you to choose the law firm for your internship or practice.

LegallyIndia

Legally India website reports, news, and information related to Indian law firms, the Indian law industry, Lawyers in India etc.  LegallyIndia’s comments will help the law students to grab knowledge.


A Law Intern Found Dead After Filing Sexual Harassment Complaint Against Senior Lawyers.

November 29, 2018

A law intern in Banglore was recently found dead. Curiously, the law intern had filed a sexual harassment complaint with Commercial Street police station just days before she was found dead. The intern was from Andaman & Nicobar Islands and had traveled to Bangalore.
A law intern found dead after filing sexual harassment complaint against senior lawyers


Times Of India report, she was assigned to work with an advocate named Chandra Naik T, who introduced her to another advocate called Chetan Desai, a pleader with Karnataka High Court.

She also alleged that the two advocates “used to take her to pubs and bars and force her to consume alcohol. They would then touch her inappropriately and sexually harass her.”.

She had then filed a sexual harassment complaint against those advocates with the Commercial Street police station on 20th November.  However, she was found dead on Saturday, November 24, under mysterious circumstances at her PG in Malleswaram. The matter is now under investigation. 

Death Penalty is a Valid in Law, held Supreme Court in its 2:1 Ruling

November 29, 2018

The Hon'ble Supreme Court, by 2:1 majority, upheld the validity of death sentence in the statute book on Wednesday.

Supreme Court held Death Penalty is Valid in law



On Wednesday, a three-judge bench comprising Justices Kurian Joseph, Deepak Gupta, and Hemant Gupta, ruled upon the validity of the highest punishment under the penal law in India while dealing with a case of a death sentence.


Justice Kurian Joseph, the most senior judge on the bench, cited the 262nd Law Commission's report to state that death penalty has failed to prove a deterrent for crimes in the society. 


He ruled that trials are usually subject to public opinion and collective demand and that investigating agencies mount pressure on the courts by invoking passions and public sentiments.


But the other two judges in the bench dissented with their senior colleague. 


Justice Deepak Gupta, reading out the majority opinion on this point, held that death penalty is a valid punishment and in view of the Supreme Court's rulings in Bachan Singh and Machhi Singh in 1980s, there is no need to debate the correctness of the capital punishment.


However, in the case concerned, the three judges were unanimous when they commuted the death penalty of convict Chhannu Lal Verma to life term. 


Chhannu Lal Verma was convicted of killing three persons in 2011. The Apex court on Wednesday noted that there was no evidence to show he was beyond reformation and that life term will prove to be an inadequate punishment for his crime.


Tuesday, 27 November 2018

DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE ON ALLEGATION OF EXTRA MARITAL AFFAIR WITH DOMESTIC MAID

November 27, 2018

dissolution of marriage on allegation of extra marital affair with domestic maid
legalfunda.org

In the case of Narendra Vs. K. Meena Hon’ble Supreme Court of India had discussed the issue of dissolution of Marriage on the allegation of an extramarital affair with the domestic maid. For more details please read the entire judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court.


Narendra Vs. K. Meena
[Civil Appeal No.3253 of 2008]
ANIL R. DAVE, J.

1. This appeal has been filed by the Appellant husband, whose decree for divorce passed by the trial Court has been set aside by the impugned judgment dated 8th March 2006 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in Miscellaneous First Appeal No.171 of 2002 (FC).
2. The facts giving rise to the present appeal, in a nutshell, are as under : The Respondent wife filed Miscellaneous First Appeal under Section 28(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") before the High Court as she was aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 17th November 2001, passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore in M.C. No.603 of 1995 under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Act filed by the Appellant husband seeking divorce.
3. The Appellant husband had married the Respondent wife on 26th February 1992. Out of the wedlock, a female child named Ranjitha was born on 13th November 1993. The case of the Appellant was that the Respondent did not live happily with the Appellant even for a month after the marriage.
The reason for filing the divorce petition was that the Respondent wife had become cruel because of her highly suspicious nature and she used to level absolutely frivolous but serious allegations against him regarding his character and more particularly about his extra-marital relationship. Behavior of the Respondent wife made the life of the Appellant husband miserable and it became impossible for the Appellant to stay with the Respondent for the aforestated reasons.
Moreover, the Respondent wanted the Appellant to leave his parents and other family members and to get separated from them so that the Respondent can live independently; and in that event, it would become more torturous for the Appellant to stay only with the Respondent wife with her such nature and behavior. The main ground was cruelty, as serious allegations were leveled about the moral character of the Appellant to the effect that he was having an extramarital affair with a maid, named Kamla. Another important allegation was that the Respondent would very often threaten the Appellant that she would commit suicide.
In fact, on 2th July, 1995, she picked up a quarrel with the Appellant, went to the bathroom, locked the door from inside and poured kerosene on her body and attempted to commit suicide. On getting smell of kerosene coming from the bathroom, the Appellant, his elder brother and some of the neighbours broke open the door of the bathroom and prevented the Respondent wife from committing suicide. The aforestated facts were found to be sufficient by the learned Family Court for granting the Appellant a decree of divorce dated 17th November 2001, after considering the evidence adduced by both the parties.
4. Being aggrieved by the judgment and decree of divorce dated 17th November 2001, the Respondent wife had filed Miscellaneous First Appeal No.171 of 2002 (FC), which has been allowed by the High Court on 8th March 2006, whereby the decree of divorce dated 17th November 2001 has been set aside. Being aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the High Court, the Appellant has filed this appeal.lawyers in India.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the Respondent was not present when the appeal was called out for hearing. The matter was kept back but for the whole day, the learned counsel for the Respondent did not appear. Even on an earlier occasion on 31st March 2016, when the appeal was called out, the learned counsel appearing for the Respondent wife was not present and therefore, the Court had heard the learned counsel appearing for the Appellant.
6. The learned counsel appearing for the Appellant submitted that the High Court had committed a grave error in the process of re-appreciating the evidence and by setting aside the decree of divorce granted in favour of the Appellant. He submitted that there was no reason to believe that there was no cruelty on the part of the Respondent wife. He highlighted the observations made by the Family Court and took us through the evidence, which was recorded before the Family Court.
He drew our attention to the depositions made by independent witnesses, neighbours of the Appellant, who had rescued the Respondent wife from committing suicide by breaking open the door of the bathroom when the Respondent was on the verge of committing suicide by pouring kerosene on herself and by lighting a match stick. Our attention was also drawn to the fact that serious allegations levelled against the character of the Appellant in relation to an extra-marital affair with a maid were absolutely baseless as no maid named Kamla had ever worked in the house of the Appellant.
It was also stated that the Respondent wife was insisting the Appellant to get separated from his family members and on 12th July, 1995 i.e. the date of the attempt to commit suicide, the Respondent wife deserted the Appellant husband. According to the learned counsel, the facts recorded by the learned Family Court after appreciating the evidence were sufficient to show that the Appellant was entitled to a decree of divorce as per the provisions of Section 13(1)(ia) of the Act.
7. We have carefully gone through the evidence adduced by the parties before the trial Court and we tried to find out as to why the appellate Court had taken a different view than the one taken by the Family Court i.e. the trial Court.
8. The High Court came to the conclusion that there was no cruelty meted out to the Appellant, which would enable him to get a decree of divorce, as per the provisions of the Act. The allegations with regard to the character of the Appellant and the extra-marital affair with a maid were taken very seriously by the Family Court, but the High Court did not give much importance to the false allegations made.
The constant persuasion by the Respondent for getting separated from the family members of the Appellant and constraining the Appellant to live separately and only with her was also not considered to be of any importance by the High Court. No importance was given to the incident with regard to an attempt to commit suicide made by the Respondent wife.
On the contrary, it appears that the High Court found some justification in the request made by the Respondent to live separately from the family of the Appellant husband. According to the High Court, the trial Court did not appreciate the evidence properly. For the aforestated reasons, the High Court reversed the findings arrived at by the learned Family Court and set aside the decree of divorce.
9. We do not agree with the manner in which the High Court has re-appreciated the evidence and has come to a different conclusion.
10. With regard to the allegations of cruelty leveled by the Appellant, we are in agreement with the findings of the trial Court. First of all, let us look at the incident with regard to an attempt to commit suicide by the Respondent. Upon perusal of the evidence of the witnesses, the findings arrived at by the trial Court to the effect that the Respondent wife had locked herself in the bathroom and had poured kerosene on herself so as to commit suicide, are not in dispute.
Fortunately for the Appellant, because of the noise and disturbance, even the neighbours of the Appellant rushed to help and the door of the bathroom was broken open and the Respondent was saved. Had she been successful in her attempt to commit suicide, then one can foresee the consequences and the plight of the Appellant because in that event the Appellant would have been put to immense difficulties because of the legal provisions.
We feel that there was no fault on the part of the Appellant nor was there any reason for the Respondent wife to make an attempt to commit suicide. No husband would ever be comfortable with or tolerate such an act by his wife and if the wife succeeds in committing suicide, then one can imagine how a poor husband would get entangled into the clutches of law, which would virtually ruin his sanity, peace of mind, career and probably his entire life.
The mere idea with regard to facing legal consequences would put a husband under tremendous stress. The thought itself is distressing. Such a mental cruelty could not have been taken lightly by the High Court. In our opinion, only this one event was sufficient for the Appellant husband to get a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty. It is needless to add that such threats or acts constitute cruelty. Our aforesaid view is fortified by a decision of this Court in the case of Pankaj Mahajan v. Dimple @ Kajal (2011) 12 SCC 1, wherein it has been held that giving repeated threats to commit suicide amounts to cruelty.
11. The Respondent wife wanted the Appellant to get separated from his family. The evidence shows that the family was virtually maintained from the income of the Appellant husband. It is not a common practice or desirable culture for a Hindu son in India to get separated from the parents upon getting married at the instance of the wife, especially when the son is the only earning member in the family.
A son, brought up and given education by his parents, has a moral and legal obligation to take care and maintain the parents, when they become old and when they have either no income or have a meagre income. In India, generally people do not subscribe to the western thought, where, upon getting married or attaining majority, the son gets separated from the family. In normal circumstances, a wife is expected to be with the family of the husband after the marriage. She becomes integral to and forms part of the family of the husband and normally without any justifiable strong reason, she would never insist that her husband should get separated from the family and live only with her.
In the instant case, upon appreciation of the evidence, the trial Court came to the conclusion that merely for monetary considerations, the Respondent wife wanted to get her husband separated from his family. The averment of the Respondent was to the effect that the income of the Appellant was also spent for maintaining his family. The said grievance of the Respondent is absolutely unjustified. A son maintaining his parents is absolutely normal in Indian culture and ethos. There is no other reason for which the Respondent wanted the Appellant to be separated from the family - the sole reason was to enjoy the income of the Appellant.
Unfortunately, the High Court considered this to be a justifiable reason. In the opinion of the High Court, the wife had a legitimate expectation to see that the income of her husband is used for her and not for the family members of the Respondent husband. We do not see any reason to justify the said view of the High Court. As stated hereinabove, in a Hindu society, it is a pious obligation of the son to maintain the parents. If a wife makes an attempt to deviate from the normal practice and normal custom of the society, she must have some justifiable reason for that and in this case, we do not find any justifiable reason, except monetary consideration of the Respondent wife.
In our opinion, normally, no husband would tolerate this and no son would like to be separated from his old parents and other family members, who are also dependent upon his income. The persistent effort of the Respondent wife to constrain the Appellant to be separated from the family would be torturous for the husband and in our opinion, the trial Court was right when it came to the conclusion that this constitutes an act of 'cruelty'.
12. With regard to the allegations about an extra-marital affair with maid named Kamla, the re-appreciation of the evidence by the High Court does not appear to be correct. There is sufficient evidence to the effect that there was no maid named Kamla working at the residence of the Appellant. Some averment with regard to some relative has been relied upon by the High Court to come to a conclusion that there was a lady named Kamla but the High Court has ignored the fact that the Respondent wife had levelled allegations with regard to an extra-marital affair of the Appellant with the maid and not with someone else.
Even if there was some relative named Kamla, who might have visited the Appellant, there is nothing to substantiate the allegations levelled by the Respondent with regard to an extra-marital affair. True, it is very difficult to establish such allegations but at the same time, it is equally true that to suffer an allegation pertaining to one's character of having an extra-marital affair is quite torturous for any person - be it a husband or a wife.
We have carefully gone through the evidence but we could not find any reliable evidence to show that the Appellant had an extra-marital affair with someone. Except for the baseless and reckless allegations, there is not even the slightest evidence that would suggest that there was something like an affair of the Appellant with the maid named by the Respondent. We consider levelling of absolutely false allegations and that too, with regard to an extra-marital life to be quite serious and that can surely be a cause for metal cruelty.
13. This Court, in the case of Vijaykumar Ramchandra Bhate v. Neela Vijaykumar Bhate, 2003 (6) SCC 334 has held as under:-
"7. The question that requires to be answered first is as to whether the averments, accusations and character assassination of the wife by the appellant husband in the written statement constitutes mental cruelty for sustaining the claim for divorce under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Act. The position of law in this regard has come to be well settled and declared that levelling disgusting accusations of unchastity and indecent familiarity with a person outside wedlock and allegations of extramarital relationship is a grave assault on the character, honour, reputation, status as well as the health of the wife.
Such aspersions of perfidiousness attributed to the wife, viewed in the context of an educated Indian wife and judged by Indian conditions and standards would amount to worst form of insult and cruelty, sufficient by itself to substantiate cruelty in law, warranting the claim of the wife being allowed. That such allegations made in the written statement or suggested in the course of examination and by way of cross-examination satisfy the requirement of law has also come to be firmly laid down by this Court.
On going through the relevant portions of such allegations, we find that no exception could be taken to the findings recorded by the Family Court as well as the High Court. We find that they are of such quality, magnitude and consequence as to cause mental pain, agony and suffering amounting to the reformulated concept of cruelty in matrimonial law causing profound and lasting disruption and driving the wife to feel deeply hurt and reasonably apprehend that it would be dangerous for her to live with a husband who was taunting her like that and rendered the maintenance of matrimonial home impossible."
14. Applying the said ratio to the facts of this case, we are inclined to hold that the unsubstantiated allegations levelled by the Respondent wife and the threats and attempt to commit suicide by her amounted to mental cruelty and therefore, the marriage deserves to be dissolved by a decree of divorce on the ground stated in Section 13(1)(ia) of the Act.
15. Taking an overall view of the entire evidence and the judgment delivered by the trial Court, we firmly believe that there was no need to take a different view than the one taken by the trial Court. The behaviour of the Respondent wife appears to be terrifying and horrible. One would find it difficult to live with such a person with tranquillity and peace of mind. Such torture would adversely affect the life of the husband. It is also not in dispute that the Respondent wife had left the matrimonial house on 12th July, 1995 i.e. more than 20 years back.
Though not on record, the learned counsel submitted that till today, the Respondent wife is not staying with the Appellant. The daughter of the Appellant and Respondent has also grown up and according to the learned counsel, she is working in an IT company. We have no reason to disbelieve the aforestated facts because with the passage of time, the daughter must have grown up and the separation of the Appellant and the wife must have also become normal for her and therefore, at this juncture it would not be proper to bring them together, especially when the Appellant husband was treated so cruelly by the Respondent wife.
16. We, therefore, quash and set aside the impugned judgment delivered by the High Court. The decree of divorce dated 17th November, 2001 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore in M.C. No.603 of 1995 is hereby restored.
17. The appeal is, accordingly, allowed with no order as to costs.
...................................J. (ANIL R. DAVE)
...................................J. (L. NAGESWARA RAO)
NEW DELHI

OCTOBER 06, 2016.

Tuesday, 15 May 2018

Supreme Court found Navjot Singh Sidhu not guilty for Culpable Homocide not amounting to murder in 1988 road rage case

May 15, 2018
Supreme Court of India on 15.05.2018 acquitted ex-cricketer-turned-politician Navjot Singh Sidhu from the charge of Culpable Homicide not amounting to murder (U/S304 of IPC) in the 1998 road rage Case. But the Hon’ble Bench found him guilty for an offense under Section 323 IPC (voluntarily causing hurt) and sentenced him with a fine of Rs. 1000 only. His co-accused Rupinder Singh Sandhu has been acquitted of all the charges.

A bench headed by Justices J Chelameswar and Sanjay Kishan Kaul had pronounced the judgment on an appeal filed by Navjot Singh Sidhu against a December 2006 Punjab and Haryana High Court decision convicting and sentencing him three years in jail in a road rage case.

"The net result of all the above discussion is that the first accused cannot be held to be responsible for causing the death of Gurnam Singh. Therefore, the judgment under appeal is required to be set aside and is accordingly set aside. The material on record leads us to the only possible conclusion that we can reach that the first accused voluntarily caused hurt to Gurnam Singh punishable under Section 323 IPC", said Justice Chelameswar in the Verdict.


Tuesday, 24 April 2018

A litigant cannot plead that he should not be suffer for not giving the correct advise by the advocate, held Madhya Pradesh High Court

April 24, 2018
The Hon’ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that a litigant cannot plead that if his lawyer had not given correct legal advice to him/her, he should not suffer from adverse orders.

Before the Hon’ble High Court, in an appeal proceeding against a trial court order which had decreed a suit for declaration of title and specific performance of the contract, an interim application was preferred for sending an agreement to sell to a handwriting expert for verification of the signatures of the appellant.

Court held:
A litigant cannot plead that since his lawyer had not given correct legal advice to him, therefore, he should not suffer.

The counsel for the appellants’ argued before the Hon’ble Court that the parties are rural villagers and they are not aware of the technicalities of law and if it was not advised by their advocate. It was a lapse on the part of the advocate in not giving proper and correct advise, the party to a litigant should not suffer.

Dismissing the contentions of the appellant’s, Hon’ble Justice GS Ahluwalia had observed: “Advocates claim themselves to be professionals having knowledge of the law. They are law graduates. They cannot claim that they were not having knowledge of the law. The Advocates cannot say, that the party should not suffer because they were not technically sound.”

The Hon’ble court also held that since there are two parties in a matter, if a very lenient view is adopted by ignoring the mistake of an advocate, then it would always adversely affect the rights of the other litigant also. The court observed “If a litigant feels that he has been cheated by his Counsel by not giving proper legal advice, then the said litigant has remedy, against his lawyer, under the law of the land, but to the detriment of the interest of the other litigant, no leniency can be shown to a litigant on the ground that the Counsel engaged by such litigant was not professionally competent,” the court said.


Read Order here

Tuesday, 17 April 2018

Supreme Court Issue Notices to State of Jammu and Kashmir in Kathua Rape Case

April 17, 2018

Supreme Court has issued a notice to the state of Jammu and Kashmir in the writ petition filed on behalf of the Kathua gangrape and murder victim’s father, requesting for the transfer of the trial proceedings outside of the state of Jammu and Kashmir. The Bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra, Justice D. Y. Chandrachud and Justice A. M. Khanwilkar has also directed protection to victim's family members and Advocates Deepika Singh Rajawat and Talib Hussain. At the commencement of the urgent hearing on Monday of the writ petition instituted by the father of the 8-year-old victim of the Kathua rape and murder.

Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has issued following order:-


“As an interim measure, it is directed that the respondent-State shall keep the security, as provided to the family members of the victim, in continuity; provide security to Ms.Deepika Singh Rajawat and her family members; and that protection shall be provided to Mr.Talib Hussain, who is assisting the victim's family in prosecution of the grievance by remaining present in the Court or engaging counsel to assist the public prosecutor. Ms.Deepika Singh Rajawat shall provide the details of Mr.Talib Hussain to Mr.M.Shoeb Alam, learned Sanding Counsel for the State of Jammu & Kashmir to that he can do the needful in the matter. At this juncture, a submission has been advanced by Ms.Indira Jaising, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner that the State authority should provide security in plain clothes. Mr.Shoeb Alam, learned standing counsel for the State of Jammu and Kashmir accepted the same and, therefore, we direct that the security shall be provided in plain clothes.”

Saturday, 14 April 2018

CIC direct the govt. authorities not to hold the pension of the employees for want of linking adhar.

April 14, 2018
The Central Information Commission has held that the public authority cannot delay the payment of pensions to the senior citizens and retired employees shifting away the burden in the name of linking to Aadhar.

Even if linking with Aadhaar is necessary, it should not result in delaying the payment of pension or denial of information regarding pension, said Prof. M. Sridhar Acharyulu.

The pensioners might mainly depend upon the pension for their livelihood and delaying it will be inhumane and also amounts to denial of their fundamental right to life. Even if linking with Aadhaar is necessary, it should not result in delaying the payment of pension or denial of information regarding pension, said Prof M Sridhar Acharyulu while deciding an appeal filed by a retired govt. employee.

In this matter, the employee had required the details of names of the persons whose pension was held for want of Aadhaar card for the month of March 2017. The Chief Public Information Officer declined information on the ground that it would cause unjustified invasion of the privacy of an individual, hence the details cannot be supplied.

The Chief Information Commission, in this regard, held: “Pension is part of the salary as consideration for the services rendered and continuation of payments to the retired public servants, and that would paid out of public exchequer as per the pre-fixed scale and other aspects. The salary detail of the public servant is not his personal information. It has to be in the public domain under Section 4. On the same logic the pension-related information is not personal information of the pensioner. The CPIO should not have denied that information wrongly invoking Section 8(1)(j) of RTI Act.”