i. Resorting to legal proceedings by the wife cannot be deemed as ‘cruelty’ in divorce proceedings – The Supreme Court has held that if a wife resorts to legal proceedings, it could not be treated as mental cruelty. In his divorce petition, the husband had alleged that the wife had filed a false case against his family and a civil suit seeking a declaration that the husband had defrauded her with regards the house they were living in. He went on to state that these actions amounted to mental cruelty and were sufficient grounds for divorce. The Court disagreed and explained that the actions were taken by the wife in 1995 when marital discord had surfaced and had been taken by her to protect her rights. These could not be termed as mental cruelty and “was only used as a shield against the assault”. [Ravinder Kaur v Manjit Singh, Civil Appeal No. 2021 of 2010, date of judgment: 21.08.2019]

ii. Notice issued on PIL against the Triple Talaq law – Various petitions had been filed in the Supreme Court against the new Triple Talaq law by different Muslim groups. The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 criminalises Muslim men to divorce their wives through the instantaneous Triple Talaq mechanism. The Supreme Court has issued notice to the Central Government and asked their response to the petition. The petitions argue that the specific classification of Muslim men being singled out amounts to discrimination on the basis of religion. The main aim of the Act if was to protect the rights of Muslim women, then the Act should have provided them with rights rather than imposing punishment on Muslim men. [Samastha Kerala Jamiathul Ulama v Union of India, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 994 of 2019, date of order: 23.08.2019]

iii. Director of a company can be made accused with it in a criminal case if there is evidence to show intent and active role – The Supreme Court has held that an individual, either as a Director or a Managing Director or Chairman of the company, could be made an accused with the company only if there was sufficient evidence to show his active role and criminal intent. In the instant case, a case had been filed against a hotel, the managing directors of the company and those in charge of daily administration. A petition had been filed to quash the FIR against the MD, but the same was rejected by the High Court. In the appeal, the Supreme Court noted that on a perusal of the final report submitted by the police, no specific ground was made out on which the MD of M/s Asian Hotels (North) Limited, the accused company could be linked with the negligence committed by the hotel. No specific allegations had been recorded against him and were only made out against the Company and those responsible for the day to day affairs. [Shiv Kumar Jatia v State of NCT of Delhi, Criminal Appeal No. 1263 of 2019(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No.8008 of 2018), date of decision: 23.08.2019]

iv. Imposition Of Compulsory Service Bonds For Admission To PG Medical/Super Speciality Courses upheld – The Supreme Court has rejected challenges against compulsory service bonds introduced by various states, to be signed by those admitted to PG and super-speciality courses. The service bonds were challenged on various grounds like the competence of the State Governments who have imposed the service bonds on the students through notifications, they were claimed to be unreasonable and arbitrary, violative of Articles 19, 21, Section 27 of the ICA. But the Court rejected the claims. It held that the executive power of the State government was co-extensive with the legislative power of the State legislature and as long as the action was not against the mandate of the MCI Act, the central governing legislation, it was valid. The violation of the constitution was also negatived in the light of the larger benefit that would be provided to the society. Further Article 23 of the Constitution allows the government to ask mandate public service – by which the students can be made to serve. [Association of Medical Super Speciality Aspirants and Residents & Ors. v Union of India, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 376 of 2018, date of decision: 19.08.2019]

v. Copy of oath taken by a High Court judge cannot be sought under RTI – The Chhattisgarh High Court has held that the text of the oath taken by a High Court judge cannot be sought through an RTI. The person seeking the information, one Arun Kumar Gupta, had written to the PIO of the High Court seeking the information. The PIO held that the information was barred from disclosure under the Act. The former appealed against the order and the State Information Commission set aside the order and asked for the text to be made public. The appeal then went to the High Court where the Court held that no larger pubic interest in seeking such information was shown by Mr. Gupta., as required by Section 8(1)(e), and so such information could not be disclosed under the Act.[The Public Information Officer, High Court of Chhattisgarh v Arun Kumar Gupta, Writ Petition (Art. 227) No.19 of 2017, date of order: 05.08.2019]

vi. NCLT has the inherent power to issue moratorium when an insolvency petition is admitted – The NCLAT has held that once an insolvency petition is filed, the NCLT has the inherent power to issue a moratorium preventing the Corporate Debtor concerned from creating third party rights in its assets. The same could lead to the purpose of the IBC itself being defeated. The moratorium could be passed even before the petition is admitted and as the NCLAT noted, the parties are not required to be heard before the order is passed. [NUI Pulp and Paper Industries Pvt. Ltd. v M/s. Roxcel Trading GMBH, Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 664 of 2019, date of order: 17.07.2019]

vii. Plea against detention of Shah Faesal adjourned until September 3 – The Delhi High Court did not issued a notice on the plea against detention of the ex-IAS officer Shah Faesal. He was detained at the Delhi Airport and then flown back to Srinagar where he is being kept under house arrest. The Centre has stated that it would file a response to the habeas corpus petition and so it wasn’t necessary to issue a formal notice. The Court also refused to give an earlier date for hearing the matter. The bench has allowed the members of family to meet Faesal but all cannot meet him together. The plea argues that he was sent to Kashmir without a transit remand and thus amounted to abduction, even though he was travelling to the US to complete his Masters in Public Administration. [Dr. Shah Faesal v Union of India, Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 2295 of 2019, date of order: 23.08.2019]

Others –
i. UAPA Amendment passed by both houses of Parliament – The Rajya Sabha has passed the amendment to the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act. The 2019 amendment allows the Central Government to designate any individual as a terrorist. The Act already allows the government to name organisations as terrorist organisations if they commit or participate in acts of terrorism, prepare for terrorism, promote terrorism, or is otherwise involved in terrorism. The Bill also provides for a mechanism for the person so named to challenge designation by the government. It will add a fourth schedule to the Act which will be the list of the individuals designated so. While many Parliamentarians called such a power draconian and cited misuse of such previous laws, the Home Minister explained that such organisations can change their names and still perpetrate their activities and so it would be more effective if individuals themselves are branded as terrorists. (IPA Service)