In BMC's demolition of Kangana Ranaut's Office, the Bombay High Court bench comprising of Justices SJ Kathawalla and RI Chagla noted that the BMC proceeded with the demolition of the property on "wrongful grounds, against rights of the citizens, calling it "nothing but malice in law".
The HC in its verdict said, "The court does not approve of illegal works or of loose statements made against the government or against the film industry." It also said that the bench does not approve of "colorable exercise of power on a person by any authority". The Notice issued and served to actress Kangna Ranawat was defective and for this reason is also in violation of section 354A of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888; said Bombay High Court.
Bombay High Court noted
that anything which is not authorized by law and which infringes a citizen’s rights is wrongful on the part of the state. While summing up the case, the Bombay high court stated that the MCGM, which is an organ of the state, has done something “without lawful excuse”; it has proceeded to act “wrongfully and willfully without reasonable or probable cause”
The State questioned as to the maintainability of the writ petition wherein Bombay High Court observed that “Section 515A of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 which incorporates a bar of jurisdiction and provides that any notice issued, Order passed or direction issued by the designated officer, under Sections 351 or 354A shall not be questioned in any suit or legal proceedings. The constitutional validity of this provision was challenged before this Court in the case of Abdul Razzaq Sunesra v/s. MCGM. A Division Bench of this Court after analyzing the scheme of the Act upheld the validity of the provision and held that a remedy of a Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is available to the Petitioner.”
The Court had allowed Kangana Ranaut to take such steps as required to make the building habitable she can immediately start occupying and using the said premises. The Court also ordered that she is entitled to compensation to make good the loss and damage caused to her as a result of the illegal and highhanded action of MCGM. The Court appointed M/s. Shetgiri and Associates, Architects, Engineers, Interior Designers and Valuers as the Surveyors / Valuers to value and determine the extent and value of damage and loss caused to Kangana Ranaut and PA Nitin Jagtap, submit their report to this Court on 9th March 2021 to enable the Court to award compensation to Kangana Ranaut.
Magistrate’s Order Directing FIR Against Kangana Ranaut for Tweets on Farmers Protest Quashed by Karnataka High Court
CelebStreet
Mar 30, 2021
Tanya Sehrawat
(
Editor: Ekta Joshi
)
3 Shares
An order which was passed by a Magistrate in the State directing the police to register an FIR against Kangana Ranaut over controversial tweets on Farmers Protest was quashed by the Karnataka High Court on Thursday (March 25, 2021).The order was set aside by the Single Judge Bench of Justice HP Sandesh. He said that the Magistrate acted mechanically without properly examining if any offences were made out. Now the matter is remitted back to the Magistrate in order to consider it...
Karnataka HC issues Notice on Kangana Ranaut’s Plea to Quash FIR Over Tweets on Farmer Protests
CelebStreet
Mar 22, 2021
Tanya Sehrawat
(
Editor: Ekta Joshi
)
3 Shares
A petition had been filed by Kangana Ranaut which sought quashing of an FIR registered over her tweets that compared farmers protesting against the farm laws to terrorists. On Friday (March 19, 2021), Karnataka High Court issued a notice on the same. While the case was being heard, Advocate Ramesh Naik L being the respondent in the petition appeared before the HC through video conference. He submitted neither being served the petition and nor the Interlocutory Appeal. He thereby requested...
![Andheri Court Orders Inquiry into Complaint Against Kangana Ranaut & Sister Rangoli Chandel for Allegedly Spreading Communal Hatred [READ ORDER]](https://lawstreet.co/secure/uploads/2020/11/lj_8252_Andheri_Court.jpeg)
Facebook Comments