A weekly round-up of the top stories from the Supreme Court of India and High Courts across the country summed up in a 3-minute read.
Supreme Court:
Plea filed in Supreme Court for probe into share market crash on counting date
An application has been filed in the Supreme Court to direct the Union government and the SEBI to file a detailed report on the share market crash and losses suffered by the investors on June 4, when the Lok Sabha 2024 polls results were announced.
Advocate Vishal Tiwari, who filed the plea, also asked the court to direct the Union government and SEBI to submit a status report on the directions given on January 3, 2024 for considering the suggestion of the expert committee headed by Justice A M Sapre in its report in the PIL related to Hindenburg report on Adani group of companies.
The court had then issued multiple directions on the plea by Tiwari and others.
Supreme Court asks Mumbai authorities to ensure no hoarding collapse during monsoons
The Supreme Court on Friday directed the authorities in Mumbai to ensure that no untoward incident relating to hoardings should takes place in the city considering that monsoon season has arrived, in view of Ghatkopar tragedy in Mumbai, in which 17 people lost their lives and several others were injured.
A bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and P B Varle issued the direction while hearing a case filed by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) regarding the applicability of certain provisions of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation (MMC) Act to hoardings erected on Railways' land.
The court fixed the matter for further hearing to next week.
"In the meanwhile, all the parties concerned, including the Railways, ensure that no untoward incident happens in connection with any hoardings, be it on Railway land or on anywhere. So whoever is in charge of whichever land, please see that nothing happens atleast within a week, now that the monsoons have arrived," the bench said in its order on Friday.
Shortlisted candidates have no automatic right to appointment: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has recently held that even when vacancies are notified and an adequate number of candidates are shortlisted, these candidates do not acquire an indefeasible right to be appointed against those vacancies.
A bench comprising Justices Hrishikesh Roy and Prashant Kumar Mishra set aside the orders of the Calcutta High Court that had directed the West Bengal Board of Primary Education to appoint these candidates against the remaining 3,929 vacancies from the 2020 recruitment process. The apex court also held that the candidates did not have any legitimate claim for appointments as the panel/merit list had expired, and the entire selection process was marred by irregularities.
The Court was hearing appeals against the Calcutta High Court's judgment regarding the mode of appointment and the validity of the panel/merit list for the recruitment of primary school teachers in West Bengal.
Supreme Court refuses bail to ex Delhi Dy CM Manish Sisodia in liquor policy scam case
The Supreme Court on Tuesday declined to entertain a plea for bail by former Deputy Chief Minister of Delhi Manish Sisodia in the liquor policy scam case as the Enforcement Directorate said that it would file the final charge sheet by July 3.
A bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and Sandeep Mehta granted him liberty to file a fresh plea.
Senior A M Singhvi appeared for the petitioner and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta for the Directorate of Enforcement and Central Bureau of Investigation.
High Courts:
Delhi High Court orders blocking of rogue websites spreading fake interview with Anant Ambani
The Delhi High Court has ordered the blocking of rogue websites spreading false information about an interview between Reliance Industries Director Anant Ambani and TV18 journalist Anand Narasimhan. [Case Title: Network 18 Media and Investments Limited & Ors vs. www.BrawlersFightClub.Com & Ors]
Justice Sanjeev Narula directed Meta and X to remove the related Facebook posts and tweets and to provide user details within four weeks. “Block/remove the Facebook post available at the URL identified in paragraph no. 70 of the plaint. Within four weeks from today, file in a sealed cover the complete details of the user who made the post, as available with them. A copy of the said documents shall also be provided to counsel for Plaintiffs, strictly for the purpose of investigation and identification of the perpetrators,” Justice Narula ordered.
The Delhi High Court recently observed that a single-judge appeared to have prima facie erred in refusing to grant interim relief to Ayurvedic cosmetics, skincare, and perfume company Forest Essentials in a trademark dispute against Ayurvedic baby care products company Baby Forest.
A Division Bench of Justices Vibhu Bakhru and Tara Vitasta Ganju gave a prima facie finding that the single-judge misinterpreted the doctrine of 'initial interest confusion' in denying relief to Forest Essentials.
"Prima facie, we find merit in the appellant’s contention that the learned single-judge has erred in its interpretation of the doctrine of ‘initial interest confusion’ to entail persistence of confusion till a stage that the transaction is consummated. The doctrine of ‘initial interest confusion’ entails that there is confusion only at the initial stage and there is no confusion when the transaction for sale and purchase is completed. The customers are in no doubt of the product they are buying when the sale is completed. The confusion is only at the initial stage,” the Division Bench observed.
Awarding interest is on the discretion of the arbitrator: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has held that in arbitration matters, award of interest, if any, and the interest rate thereon is on the discretion of the arbitrator. Interest on award cannot be claimed by any party as a matter of right.
The matter was decided by a bench of Justice Neena Bansal Krishna. The bench held in this regard, "So far as the interest component is concerned, it is the discretion of the Arbitrator and the same cannot be claimed by the petitioner as a matter of right."
In the present case, the Court also took into consideration the fact that the petitioner (one M/s Space 4 Business Solution Pvt Ltd) agreed that the entire amount due to the company sans interest was already received.
Calcutta High Court seeks response from NTA on alleged irregularities in NEET (UG) 2024
The Calcutta High Court has recently directed the National Testing Agency (NTA) to file an affidavit explaining the marking scheme and the implementation of reservation policies in the NEET (UG) 2024 examination. This directive comes in response to a public interest litigation alleging irregularities in the conduct of the medical entrance test.
The division bench, comprising Justices Kausik Chanda and Apurba Sinha Ray, issued the order after petitioner Tanmoy Chattopadhyay raised concerns over the scoring system employed in NEET (UG) 2024. He alleged that certain candidates could not have scored 718 or 719 marks according to the applicable marking/score system.
“The respondent no.1 shall file an affidavit within a period of ten days from the date in response to the allegations made in this writ petition. The affidavit should also disclose how the reservation policy of the State as well as the Central Government has been followed in preparing the merit list,” the Court said.
Threat of false rape allegations constitutes abutment of suicide: Madhya Pradesh High Court
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has recently dismissed a petition seeking the quashing of criminal proceedings initiated under Section 306 (abetment of suicide) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The court held that a constant threat by the accused to falsely implicate the deceased/victim in a case of rape and eve-teasing amounts to abetment of suicide.
A single-judge bench of Justice Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia found that sufficient material existed for the prosecution of the applicants for the alleged offence under Section 306 IPC.
“A constant threat to falsely implicate the deceased in a case of rape and eve-teasing and to send him to jail would not be a mere empty threat but would demean and destroy his self-esteem as well as his career by branding him as a criminal of committing a heinous crime of rape. By ensuring that the deceased is lodged in jail on the basis of false allegations, if the deceased was afraid and apprehensive of the destruction of his self-esteem and respect in society, then on account of daily humiliation at the hands of the accused persons, if the deceased committed suicide, then prima facie an offence under Section 306 of IPC would be made out,” the court said.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has recently quashed an FIR registered against YouTubers Elvish Yadav and others after a compromise was reached with the victim, Sagar Thakur (also known as Maxtern), who is also a content creator.
The court found that the parties had amicably settled the matter through a compromise deed, and the victim had willingly consented to the quashing of criminal proceedings.
"As per the FIR, petitioner-Elvish Yadav and respondent no.2 Sagar Thakur assert themselves as social influencers and content creators on YouTube, Instagram, and 'X' (formerly Twitter). While violence portrayed in the media may seem 'cool' or entertaining, attracting a wide audience across platforms, such content often serves to further a narrative or garner viewership and associated popularity, influencing societal perceptions detrimentally, illustrating a story, and promoting hero culture. Such actual use of violence in society cannot be accepted and needs to be condemned," the court observed.
Bombay High Court refuses to stay release of film ‘Humare Baarah’
The Bombay High Court has refused to stay the release of the movie 'Hamaare Baarah', citing resulting losses to the filmmaker caused by such a move at the 'nth hour'.
Adding that the locus standi for an individual to claim such a relief at the last hour is undecided still, a division bench of Justices Kamal Khata and Rajesh Patil said, “We are totally in disagreement... One individual in a country of 130 crore citizens can not bring such a petition which can stall a film release, without granting any guarantee whatsoever for costs incurred by filmmakers in such a case.”
The Court also pointed out that when such a petition is brought in right before the release it is also not reasonable to expect the courts to hear them on all aspects.
The Delhi High Court has issued a restraining order against a Punjab-based food chain, barring it from using the trademark "Donito's," due to its deceptive similarity to "Domino's Pizza". Justice Anish Dayal ruled that the balance of convenience favored Domino's, which would face irreparable harm without an interim injunction.
"Balance of convenience lies in favour of plaintiffs, and they are likely to suffer irreparable harm in case the injunction, as prayed for, is not granted," stated the order dated May 31.
The ruling came in response to Domino's application for an injunction in their trademark infringement case against MG Foods, the operator of Donito's.
Delhi High Court grants INR 217 crores as lost profits in patent infringement matter
In a landmark judgment on Patent Law in India, Justice Jyoti Singh of the Delhi High Court has granted an unprecedented amount of INR 217 Crores (US$ 26.1 Million) as compensatory damages for lost profits to the Plaintiff, namely Communication Components Antenna Inc., a Canadian enterprise, against Mobi Antenna Technologies (Shenzhen) Co. Ltd., a Chinese corporation.
In a detailed ruling issued by the Delhi High Court on 16th May 2024, the Hon’ble Court, after relying on the pleadings and evidence led by both parties, found the Defendants to be infringing the Plaintiff’s intellectual property rights in its Indian Patent No. IN240893.
The Court was hearing a patent infringement suit filed by CCAI against Mobi for infringing a patent granted for an invention called ‘Asymmetrical Beams for Spectrum Efficiency’ in telecommunication antennas. As per the suit, CCAI had asserted that the novelty of the patent was in the fact that by changing the beam pattern, greater efficacy in the usage of spectrum could be achieved.
Delhi High Court declines plea by AAP for temporary use of Minister’s house for office use
The Delhi High Court on Wednesday declined a plea by Aam Aadmi Party to direct the Union government to allow use of a housing unit presently in occupation of a Delhi Minister on a temporary basis for its office use.
A single judge bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad, however, directed the Union government to consider the request of the petitioner within six weeks and take a decision by passing a detailed order as to why even one housing unit from the GPRA cannot be allotted to it when all other political parties have been allotted similar accommodation from the GPRA for the purpose.
"Let a detailed order deciding the request of the petitioner be provided to it so that it can take other remedial steps available to it under law if the request of the petitioner is not being considered adequately," the bench said.
![Indian Courts this Week: Law Street Journal's Weekly Round-Up of SC & HCs [May 6 - May 10]](/secure/uploads/2024/05/lj_8735_court-this-week-new-article.webp)
![Indian Courts this Week: Law Street Journal's Weekly Round-Up of SC & HCs [May 13 - May 18]](/secure/uploads/2024/05/lj_6979_17da0e79-6a3d-43d3-ae51-cbcfe5c15201.jpg)
![Courts this Week: Law Street Journal's Weekly Round-Up of SC & HCs [May 20 - May 25]](/secure/uploads/2024/05/lj_7654_fed10f96-f7fb-440a-8714-0a4cae086414.webp)
