Subject Notes on HINDU MARRIAGE ACT

News Of the Day

Exclusive preaching of particular religion in private school resist the secular character of the Constitution: Kerala HC
No school that requires recognition from the state government has right to impart religious instruction of a particular religion, the Kerala High Court bench of Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque held. The exclusive preferment of one religion by private educational institutions defies the secular character and negate constitutional value and morality, the court said. India is a secular state and it has no religion of its own. Secularism is a part of fundamental law and the basic structure of the Indian constitution. The rights of minorities under the Constitution do not permit them to weaken the secular nature of education, or override the basic values of the Constitution, it said. "Exclusivism or preference of one religion over others by State while discharging public functions strikes at the very root of the fundamental values of our Constitution, namely, secularism. It negates neutrality and denies equal treatment. Private schools which are required to have recognition from State must not promote one religion over others. - KERALA HC | The Trustee Hidaya Educational & Charitable Trust, Muhammed V/S State Of Kerala |24t/01/2020
Date - 25/01/2020 18:29:51

Madras HC clarifies, case bunch under NI Act can’t be quashed even if Corporate Insolvency Resolution is accepted
In a significant ruling single-judge bench of Justice G.R. Swaminathan of Madras High Court has passed a landmark judgment on NI act & has held that even if the Section 31 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 is accepted, it cannot be ground for quashing the prosecution of cheque bounce initiated under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 against the corporate debtor and its officials. The High Court has given landmark verdict while dealing case in which petitioner argued that the Resolution Professional had taken over the whole management of the company with its all assets and liabilities, he didn't have access to any of the company records and hence, couldn't conduct the case. The petitioner filed his plea under section 482 of the CrPC to quash to proceedings under section 138 of the NI Act. The Court held that the main object of Section 138 of the NI Act is to safeguard the credibility of commercial transactions by providing a personal criminal liability against the drawer of the cheque in public interest. Therefore, if even Section 31 of the Code is accepted, criminal proceeding against petitioner aforesaid management can’t be abated. The Court has cemented its statement with Case JIK Industries Limited v. Amarlal V Jumani, (2012) 3 SCC 255.| Case: Ajay Kumar Bishnoi v. M/s Tap Engineering|09/01/2020
Date - 25/01/2020 18:28:17

SC issues notice to hear the plea for mandatory judicial probe in case of custodial death /rape by implementing section 176(1A)
A Bench of Justice R.F. Nariman and Justice S. Ravindra Bhat of the Supreme Court issued notice to Centre to hear a petition seeking mandatory judicial probe in case related to death, disappearance and alleged rape in police custody or in jail. The plea filed by human right activist Sudha Chakma urged that though section 176(1A) of CrPC provides for the judicial enquiry into such cases, the provision is not being followed. Under this section, the word “shall” have been used therefore it should be mandatorily implemented. The plea referred to National Crime Bureau’s annual report which recorded death or disappearance of 1,303 persons in the police custody (827 persons not remanded to police custody by court and 476 persons remanded to police custody by court from 2005 to 2017) he submitted that the number of custodial deaths/rapes per day in India have increased by 66% after the enactment of the mandatory provision on June 23, 2006. He said that such death or disappearance of persons not remanded to police custody by court is nothing but murder of the defenceless citizens, who have appeared after being summoned by the police or already taken into custody and it exposes the abysmal failure of the laws relating to the arrest and detention, laid down by the Supreme Court in D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal.
Date - 25/01/2020 18:25:02

Middle School can be upgraded to senior secondary school without paying charges to DDA in Delhi: Delhi HC
Responding to the petition filed by the members of the Association/Society for the income tax exemption, Delhi HC Justice C Hari Shankar paved the way for the middle schools to get exempted from tax and can upgrade their level to senior secondary schools without paying any charges to DDA. This order was taken to resolve the tussle between the bureaucracy and educational institutions so that the education system can get better.| Action Committee Unaided Recognized Private Schools vs DDA | 24/01/2020
Date - 25/01/2020 18:23:03

SC Set Aside Finding Of NCDRC That Airtel and Star Plus Are Guilty Of Unfair Trade Practice
In a reliever to KBC broadcaster Star Plus and Show sponsor Bharti Airtel, the Hon'ble SC has set aside the award of National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission and order to pat the compensation of Rs. One crore for alleged unfair trade practice as to the most successful game show in Indian television 'Kaun Banega Crorepati'. In Sep 2008, the Commission presided by Justice M B Shah said, ' Star plus and Airtel' had violated the provisions under the Consumer Protection Act by adopting the deceptive practice in conducting the Har Seat Hot Seat(HSHS) contest. On 23rd of Jan, 2020 the SC has allowed the appeal and set aside the order of NCDRC. The SC bench consists of Justice MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR and Justice R. SUBHASH REDDY held that "we find that the finding of the commission of an unfair trade practice under Section 2(1) (r)(3)(a) in the impugned judgement is bad in law. The appeals are allowed and the impugned judgement is set aside in the aforesaid terms." Star India (P) Ltd. vs. Society of Catalysts & Anr.| 23/01/2020
Date - 24/01/2020 18:13:45

Share: