October 2020 - Page 11 of 15

The Special leave petition challenging the judgment of the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad high Court, filed by Keshav Ram and Ram Kuber was dismissed, albeit in the case of co-accused Satya Deo@ Bhoorey notice was issued on the plea of juvenility. The impugned judgment had confirmed the conviction of Keshav Ram, Ram Kuber and Satya Deo by the trial court for the offence under section 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal code, 1860 and the order of sentence directing them to undergo imprisonment for life. Leave was granted in the case of Satya Deo and the trial court was directed to conduct an inquiry to ascertain if Satya Deo was a juvenile on the date of occurrence on the basis of material which would be placed on record.

Pursuant to the directions, the First Additional District and sessions Judge, Bahraich, Uttar Pradesh has conducted an inquiry and submitted the report. As per report, the date of birth of Satya Deol is 15.4.1965. Accordingly, he was 16 years 7 months and 26 days of age on the date of commission of the offence. The report relies on the Transfer Certificate issued by Ram Narayan Singh Inter College, ramnagar Khajuri, bahraich and the Admission Register of Primary School which documents were proved by Sh. Krishn Deo, Clerk at ram Narayan Singh Inter College, ramnagar Khajuri, Bahraich and Smt. Anupam Singh, in –charge head-mistress of Primary School, Pairi, respectively. Further, Satya Deo had appeared in class 10 examination and his date of birth as recorded in the gazette relating to this exam.

The report states that the complainant had died and consequently notice was served on the heirs of the complainant, who did not appear before the First additional district and session’s judge, bahraich. The prosecution had not led any evidence. The date of birth of Satya Deo is undisputed and not challenged before us. Notwithstanding this finding, the First additional district and sessions judge Bahraich has observed that the Satya Deo was not a juvenile as per the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 as he was more than 16 years of age on the date of commission of offence.

The conundrum is in light of the definition of juvenile under the act which was below sixteen years in case of a boy and below eighteen years in case of girl on the date of boy or girl is brought for first appearance before the court or the competent authority whereas the 2000 Act as noticed does not distinguish between a boy or a girl and a person under a age of eighteen years is a juvenile. Further, under the 200 Act the age on the date of commission of the offence if the determine factor.

It is thus well settled that in terms of Section 20 of the 2000 Act, in all cases where the accused was above 16 years but below 18 years of age on the date of occurrence, the proceeding pending in the court would continue and be taken to the logical end subject to an exception that upon finding the juvenile to be guilty the court would not pass an order of sentence against him but the juvenile would be referred to the board for appropriate orders under the 2000 Act.

Following the aforesaid ratio and the legal position elucidated above, while we uphold the conviction of Satya Deo, we would set aside the sentence of life imprisonment. We could remit the matter to the jurisdiction of the board for passing appropriate order under section 15 of the 2000 Act including the question of determination and payment of appropriate quantum of fine and affirmative or negative comments either way on the direction under section 15 pf the 2000 act.

Jail authorities were directed to produce satya deo before the Board within seven days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Board shall then pass appropriate order regarding detention and custody and proceed thereafter to pass order under the 2000 Act. The appeal filed filed by Satya Deo was partly allowed in the aforesaid terms and all the pending applications are disposed of.

The right to protest in public places is not absolute and public places cannot be occupied indefinitely for such protests, the Supreme Court ruled that in a case highlighting the troubles faced by general public due to the road blockade at shaheen Bagh in south Delhi by protestors who were opposing the Citizenship Amendment Act(CAA). Dissent and democracy go hand in hand but protests must be carried out in designated areas, a three- judges bench, headed by justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul ruled. The Citizenship (Amendment) ACT, 2019 was passed last year which seeks to grant citizenship to non- muslim migrants belonging to Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Christian, Jain communities who came to the country from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan on or before December 31, 2014. The passage of CAA led to nationwide protests calling the CAA and the National Register of Citizens discriminatory. A women led protest 24/7 sit- in protest was also initiated in Shaheen Bagh, Delhi. The Shaheen Bagh protest result in the closure of the Kalindi kunj Shaheen Bagh stretch, including the Okhla underpass from 15. 12. 2019. It was submitted that the public roads could not be permitted to be encroached upon in this manner and thus a direction be issued to clear the same. The interlocutors made appreciable effort and submitted a report on 24.02.2020 which highlighted that the nature of demands was very wide and that it did look difficult to find a middle path towards at least facilitating the opening of the blocked public way. The second report suggested that the views reflected in private conversations with the protestors were somewhat different from the public statements made to the media and to the protesting crowd in attendance. While the women protestors had sat in protest inside the tent, there was a huge periphery comprising mainly of male protestors who all seemed to have a stake in the continuance of the blockade of the road.

The Shaheen Bagh protest perhaps no longer remained the sole and empowering voice of women, who also appeared to no longer have the ability to call off the protest themselves. There was also the possibility of the protestors not fully realizing of the protestors not fully realizing the ramifications of the pandemic, coupled with a general unwillingness to relocate to another site.

The court noticed that the Constitutional scheme comes with the right to protest and express dissent, but with an obligation towards certain duties. Article19, one of the cornerstones of the Constitution of India, confers upon its citizens two treasured rights which is freedom of speech and expression and right to assemble peacefully without arms that enable every citizen to assemble peacefully and protest against the actions or inactions of the State.

These rights are subject to reasonable restrictions, which, inter alia, pertain to the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India and public order, and to the regulation by the concerned police authorities in this regard. Noticing that in this age of technology and the internet, social movements around the world have swiftly integrated digital connectivity, publicity or effective communication, the court said that technology, however, in a near paradoxical manner, works to both empower digitally fuelled movements and at the same time, contributes to their apparent weakness.

The Court said that both these scenarios were witnessed in Shaheen Bagh, which started out as a protest against the Citizenship Amendment Act, gained momentum across cities to become a movement of solidarity for the women and their cause, but came with its fair share of chinks- as has been opined by the interlocutors and caused inconvenience of commutors.

While interpreting the constitutionally guarranteed right to protest and to assemble in the Shaheen Bagh case, the Supreme Court does reiterate that protection of the rights should be balanced.

This article is written by Arshdeep Bedi ( Student of the final year -Punjabi University, Patiala)

INTRODUCTION

The internet, computers, mobiles, and other forms of technology have revolutionized every aspect of human life from decades including how we communicate, shop, obtain news, entertain our self etc. This technological advancement has also created innumerable opportunities for offenders to commit various forms of crime. Online crimes are often referred to as cybercrime. The main cause of cybercrimes is our dependency on it, of which the perpetrator takes advantage and uses his special knowledge of cyberspace for committing the crime. The first case of cybercrime has appeared in Yahoo!, Inc. vs Akash Arora & Anr, 1999

What is a Cybercrime

Cybercrime can be defined as any type of illegal activity that takes place via digital means. Cybercrime is a Criminal activity that either targets individuals, or organizations, or society. Some of the examples of cybercrime are cyberstalking, cyber terrorism against a government organization, online gambling, committing fraud, trafficking in child pornography, intellectual property, stealing identities or violating the privacy, etc.

Types of Cybercrime

HACKING: It is unauthorized access or control over a computer or someone’s network security systems for some illegal purpose.
PHISHING: It is a practice where a person having fraudulent intent of sending emails creating fake web pages to be from a known company or a a well-known company in order to induce an individual to get some personal information or some passwords such as credit cards, etc.
IDENTITY THEFT: The fraudulent exercise of using personal information in order to obtain credit, loans etc.

LAWS RELATED TO CYBERCRIME

Our Indian laws have not defined the term cybercrime but an act has been introduced to tackle types of cyber crimes and such act is INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT 2000 and IPC can also be used to prosecute against cybercrimes or to supplement provisions to the IT act.

For instance: offences like hacking, data theft and virus attack could be prosecuted under sec 6 read with sec 43 of the IT act. Some of the provisions stated in the act are:

Sec 65: Tampering with computers source and code documents: This section applies to people who intentionally conceals, alters or destroy any computer source and code using any network or program.

Punishment for such crime is imprisonment for 3 years or 2 lakh fine or both.

Sec 67: Penalizes publication and transmission of obscene material or material containing sexually explicit acts and of material depicting children in sexually explicit acts in electronic form.

Punishment can be up to 7 years or fine that can be up to 10 lakh.

Sec 72: Breach of confidentiality and privacy: A person with secured access to any electronic record, information, or any other material discloses it with other people without their consent.

Punishment imprisonment up to 2 years or fine up to 1 lakh.

ARE INDIAN LAWS ARE STRICT ENOUGH TO CURB THE CYBER CRIMES?

NO, Indian laws are not strict enough to curb cybercrimes. There are provisions related to various cyber crimes but there are few loopholes in those provisions which are not strict enough to deal with cybercrime. For instance: sec 66E of IPC wherein it as mentioned that capturing should be nonconsensual and as opposed to that, it has been seen in most of the cases where images are taken with consent in the past, of which convicted person will take advantage of it and publishes on the internet, this is also called revenge porn.

In the modern era, people are using technology for revenge if these types of laws exist then it’s difficult to stop cybercrimes and cybercrime has expanded its roots to almost every aspect of the life of netizens. Even in Shreya Singhal V Union of India, 2015 it was contended that any matter posted on the internet is universally accessible than any other media to the netizens, it is not confined to any particular boundary, unlike any other media. It, therefore, becomes obvious that this requires more and strict regulations because there is a growth of scammers, phishing, money laundering, etc. If we compare Indian cyber laws with any other country then our laws are not strict enough to deal with the crimes. For instance: in Indian punishment for child pornography under the protection of children from sexual offences (POSCO) act 2012 is imprisonment up to 5 years for a first conviction whereas in USA imprisonment up to 15 to 30 years for the first conviction.

As per the data, the conviction in cases cybercrime in India continues to less. If systems continue in the same manner means it will become difficult to tackle the growing crime rate. Apart from all the legal aspect, the important thing to be done is awareness on the individual level. According to the reports, most of the government officials are not aware of their adjudicating powers under IT act. Unless each person doesn’t become aware and cautious it will be difficult to regulate the crimes.

Issues yet to be covered under the Information and Technology Act

Information and Technology Act and Amendment Act are the landmark first step and milestone in the technological growth of the nation. But at the same time, the existing law is not sufficient. It would not be a new thing to say that our laws are not so efficiently to provide proper protection. Even in the act, there are many issues which are still to be touched or are completely untouched.

Territorial Jurisdiction

TerritorialJurisdiction is the major issue which has not been properly addressed by the legislation. Jurisdiction of the officer as per Sections 46, 48, 57 and 61 in the relation to adjudication process and the appellate procedure under Section 80 is not sufficient as though they provide the police officers with the powers to enter, search a public place for a cybercrime etc. But since cyber crimes which are computer-based crimes and if the mail of one is hacked in one place by accused in another state, determination of concerned Police station is needed that who will take cognizance. One can’t ignore the fact that the investigators generally try to avoid acceptance of such complaints on the grounds of jurisdiction itself. Since the crime is borderless and territory free and generally in matter of few seconds gets changed into territories of several jurisdictions which is commonly seen. There is a need for proper training is to be given to all the police officers and the authority in relation to it. Moreover, the jurisdiction should not be a bar in arresting the convict.

Some of the strict laws and amendments which help to prevent the crime:

The matter on social media is confined and can be accessed from anywhere, so lawmakers should impose restrictions on accessibility or limit it so that abuses can be reduced.
Judicial proceedings on such matters have to be specific.
More advance training to be given to police officials on this subject.
The term of imprisonment should be increased for some crimes.
If possible a special court shall be introduced to deal with these cases separately and also there will be no unwanted accumulation of cases, which we already have.
Improvise the standard procedure for seizing and analysis the digital evidence.

How to protect oneself against cybercrimes

The best ways to protect your computer and your personal data are:

Software and system updated

software and operating system must be up to date so as to ensure benefit from the latest security.

Use of anti-virus software

Using anti-virus is a smart way to protect your system from attacks. If one uses anti-virus software, it must be updated so to get the best level of protection.

Use of strong passwords

strong passwords must be used that can’t be guessed and must not be recorded anywhere.

Never open attachments in spam emails

The computers generally is infected by malware attacks and another cybercrime is via email attachments that are present in spam emails. The attachment from a sender who is unknown must not be opened.

Links in spam emails stop clicking them!

Another way by which people become victim of cybercrime is by clicking on links in spam emails or other messages. To be safe these must be avoided.

Do not give personal information unless it is secure

personal data must not or never be given over the phone or via email unless one is completely sure the line or email is secure.

Contact companies directly about suspicious requests

Generally, it is seen that many times call comes from fake numbers who claim to be the real company personals. Their calls must not be picked or the necessary info must not be given.

Be mindful of website URLs

URLs you are clicking on must be clicked without proper knowledge proper care is needed to check them. Do they look legitimate? Avoid clicking on links with unfamiliar or spams looking URLs.

Conclusion

Society and its citizens are today happening to be more and more dependent upon technology. More use of technology beings the crime based on electronic offences. Even though one tried to avoid them but they keep on peeping in. The undertaking of law-making machinery of the nation which we all know is not sufficient even to curb all the crimes, which is still in the developing stage. The care towards the crimes of the cyber world is also needed to be addressed as efficiently as the others. The laws should be proper and effective. Hence, there should be the persistent efforts of rulers and lawmakers to ensure that laws of technology must contain aspect and issues in relation to cybercrimes. A constant vigil and eye must be kept on the issue. The issue seems to be very minute but actually, it is not. The issue gives rise to many other crimes also. So proper address to such crime is essential and need of the hour.

Latest Posts

Archives

This article is written by Arshdeep Bedi, (Student of final year, Punjabi University, Patiala)

Introduction

The Hindus have considered the institution of sonship as important as the institution of marriage. To have a son was regarded as the must for every Hindu. Begetting a son was one the three debts (debt to manes i.e. Ancestors) that a Hindu was required to discharge to the world. Similar to marriage, Sonship was considered as a purely secular act. Son called Putra, as he delivers his father from hell, as stated by Manu (V.138).

Predominantly, adoption was considered as a sacramental act. There had been always a controversy that will in the adoption of secular motive predominates or the religious motive predominates. (as according to Mayne, Hindu Law and Usage). But in the present submission, the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 has steered off all religious and sacramental aspects of adoption and has made it a secular institution and secular act. With the passage of the act, the religious ceremony is also not necessary. After it, all the adoption would be considered as valid one if they are according to the requirements of the act. Even the person adopts the child with sacramental or secular motive, the act would essentially be regarded as the secular act.

Nature of Adoption

Parenthood is one of the most essential parts of an individual’s life. Every individual has the right to become a parent. Sometimes, this experience is missed by due to various factors, like biological infertilities, economic constraints etc. Thus, came the institution of adoption. By Adoption an individual belonging to one kinship acquires new kinship ties which are socially and legally equivalent to the natural ties. Adoption in India has been recognised since long as a part of personal laws and had no uniformity. Only a ‘son’ was accepted as an alternative to fill the absence of natural heirs. As a belief that the son was essential for both material and spiritual welfare of family and adoption of a son recognised in Hindu personal laws. In Bal Gangadhar Tilak vs. Shrinivas Pandit (1915) BOM LR 527 held that the adoption was a means by which not only father’s name was carried forward, but it fulfilled religious rites and practices under Hindu law that mandated the son. However, it beneficial to note that traditionally adoption of a daughter was not legally recognised, even though it was possible under certain customary law. Prior to the enactment of the Act of 1956, adoption of a daughter was almost unheard, but the act brought the Adoption of a daughter also into the picture.

The Act of 1956: The Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act

The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act was passed in the year 1956 as part of Hindu Code Bills. This act was introduced to codify and standardize the current Hindu legal traditions. This act dealt with the legal process of adopting by the Hindu adult, and with the legal obligations of a Hindu to provide maintenance to various family members. This is the main legislation governing adoption process under Hindu personal laws. The law brought radical changes in the process by giving women the right to adopt and to be adopted, Moreover giving rights to married women, the widows and the single women as well.

Meaning and Objectives of Adoption

The Act has not defined the word “Adoption” per se, but it is derived from Dharmasastra, specifically Manusmriti. Adoption has been defined in Manusmriti as ‘taking someone’s son and raising him as own’. The act made ‘adoption’ much wider by inserting the word ‘child’ instead of ‘son’ like the word includes both a girl and boy child.

Objectives:

To get old-age protection by having a child.
To continue the family name.
To secure the property of the family.
To conduct the last rites and rituals of the parents.

Who may take the child in Adoption

In order to adopt the child, a person must be a Hindu and must have the capacity to adapt. A Hindu male must meet the requirements as in Section 7 act and a Hindu female shall abide by the requirement of Section 8.

The capacity of the Hindu male

Section 7 states , male Hindu who is willing to adopt must fulfil the conditions which are:

Attained the age of the majority
To Be of sound mind.
Must have the consent of alive wife.
This provision can be overlooked if wife is incapable of giving consent because of insanity or other reasons.
If the person has multiple wives, the consent of all is necessary for the adoption.

In Bhola and others v. Ramlal and ors AIR 1989 MP198, the plaintiff had two wives and the validity of adoption was in question as he had not taken the consent of one of them before adopting. It was then contended that the plaintiff’s wife has been absconded and could be considered as equal to death.

The Madras High Court observed that the wife had run away but couldn’t be considered dead unless she had not been heard from for the last seven years. It was held that as long as wives are alive, the consent of each wife is essential.

If the wife has converted religion or had renounced world then her consent isn’t necessary.

In the case of Ghisala.v.Dhapubai 2011 (2SCC298), It was held that the consent of wife should be either in writing or must be reflected by affirmative or positive voluntary act and her willingness to do so.

The Capacity of the Hindu Female

Section 8 states that a Hindu Female willing to adopt a child must:

Have attained the age of minority;
Should be of sound mind;
Be either a widow; Divorced, or Unmarried as to adopt.
If she has an alive husband, she will not have the capacity to adopt a child, except with the consent of the husband.
Consent of husband not needed, if he had renounced the world, or had ceased to be a Hindu, or had been declared as unsound.

Who Can give the child in Adoption

Section 9 of the act provides that, who are capable of giving children in adoption. According to it, no one except father and mother of the child has the right to give a child in adoption and both of the parents have equal rights of giving up the child. If one of them wants to give the child for adoption, the consent of the other has to be obviously taken, except such spouse has renounced the world, ceases to be the Hindu, or has been declared of the unsound mind by a court of competency.

The right to adoption has been provided to the guardian of the child in case both the parents are dead, or have renounced the world, have been declared to be of unsound mind by a court of competency, or if parentage of the child is not known. However, the welfare of the child wishes of the child with respect to age and understanding and that the guardian receives or pays no consideration. Payment or reward for such adoption is the important points which are taken into account by the court, during the process of adoption.

The section states that the father and mother mean biological parents and not adoptive parents.

Of Whom the Adoption Can be Made

Section 10 provides for the Capacity of a person which can be adopted. According to it, to be capable of being adopted, one has to be-

A Hindu
Not already adopted
Unmarried, unless the custom or the usage allows adoption of married individuals
Below the age of 15 years, unless custom or usage allows the contrary.

Requisites and Essentials of Valid Adoption

Section 6 states that

all adoptions shall be considered as void-ab-initio or invalid unless:

the person who is adopting must have the right and capacity to adapt.
the person giving in adoption must also have the capacity to do so.
the person being taken in adoption must be capable of being taken.
the adoption must be made in consonance with the conditions enumerated in Chapter-II of the Act.

For an adoption to be considered valid, it needs to be proved that there was a real and proper giving and taking of the child.

Conditions for Valid Adoption

In adoption, the conditions must be fulfilled are:

As per section11 :

Adoption of the Son

In this case, the adoptive mother or father who is going to adopt, should not have a Hindu son, son’s son or son’s son’s son living at the time of adoption. They must not have a son even by legitimate blood relationship or by adoption. (11(i)).

Adoption of the Daughter

In such a case, the adoptive father or mother who is going to make adoption should not have a Hindu daughter, daughter‘s daughter or daughter‘s daughter‘s son living at the time of adoption. Even must not have a son whether by legitimate blood relationship or by adoption. (11(ii))

Adoption of the Female Child by the Male

Accordingly is such case, the adoptive father should at least twenty–one years older than the person to be adopted. That is the girl child. (11(iii))

Adoption of the Male by the Female

Similarly in such case, the adoptive mother should at least twenty–one years older than the person to be adopted. Which means the male child. (11(iv)).

Other Conditions

The same child cannot be adopted simultaneously by the two or more persons. (11(v)).

There must be an intention to transfer the child from the family of its birth. In case of an abandoned child or the child whose parentage is unknown, from the place, family where he has been brought up to the family of its adoption.

Moreover, the ceremony of Datta homam is not essential to validate an adoption.

Effect of the Adoption:

As per the provision of Section12 :

The adopted child will be deemed the child of adoptive parents with effect from the date of the adoption. From that date, all the ties with the family of birth will be deemed to be severed and replaced by those made in the adoptive family.

Points of Consideration:

The child cannot marry those whom she or he could not married if she or he had continued in the family of birth.
Any property which entrusted to the adopted child before adoption will continue to vest subject to any obligations, attaching to ownership of such property, including the duty to maintain relatives in the family of birth.
The child adopted can’t divest any person of the estate which vested earlier to the adoption.

Right of the Adoptive Parents in Disposing of their Property:

As per Section 13,

Unless an agreement to the contrary, an adoption does not dispossess the power to dispose of his or her property by transfer intervivos or by the will.

Determination of the Adoptive Mother

According to Section14: if a male Hindu has a wife living adopts, she will be called the adoptive mother.

In case of more than one wife, senior-most in marriage among them will be the adoptive mother and others be stepmothers.
In case a widower or a bachelor (widow or unmarried women), any wife whom he (she) subsequently marries will be deemed the stepmother (stepfather).

No Cancellation of Adoption

As per Section15,

The adoptive parent any by another person cannot cancel the adoption validly made. The valid adoption cannot be annulled if the child and he cannot return to the family of birth.

CONCLUSION

Adoption is a moral cause, which brings contentment to children, who were relinquished, or orphaned. This gives an opportunity for the humane side of civilization to shine through. It’s an effective program where the child is treated as the natural-born child, given all the love, care and attention. Adoption is the creation of a new, eternal alliance. Once this happens, there is no legal difference between a child who is adopted and a child who is born into a family.

Latest Posts

Archives

Fugitive Indian Businessman and former member of Parliament Vijay Mallya’s extradition from the United Kingdom to India has been stalled by “secret” proceedings that have commenced in the UK, the central government told the Supreme Court on Monday, a development suggesting that the former liquor baron may have sought asylum in the UK. Although the extradition proceedings against the liquor baron concluded in May after the UK high court rejected Mallya’s plea to approach the UK Supreme Court against the proposed extradition to India, the fresh proceeding have delayed his departure for India, the apex court was told.

“After extradition proceedings were complete, another secret proceeding has commenced, but we have not been notified and we are not a party to the proceedings. The extradition is not happening. Mallya flew to the UK in March 2016 as a consortium of India banks, which claims that he owes them 9,000 crore in principal and interest on loans extended to his defunct Kingfisher Airlines, closed in on him to recover the money. He was subsequently declared a wilful defaulter in India. In London, speculation arose that most likely issue holding up Mallya’s extradition to India was an application for asylum, which is a process on which British authorities do not publicly comment in individual cases as a matter of policy and strict data protection laws. Mallya has lost a series of challenges to his extradition in the Westminster Magistrates Court and the high court since proceedings began after his arrest in April 2017. Under Uk rules, until an asylum application is determined, extradition cannot be carried out.

A ministry of home affairs spokeperson did not respond to HT’s queries on the matter. A high commission spokesperson had stated on June 5. Vijay Mallya last month lost his appeal against extradition, and was refused leave to appeal further to the UK Supreme Court. However, there is a further legal issue that needs resolving before Mr Mallya’s extradition can be arranged. Under United Kingdom law, extradition cannot take place until it is resolved. The issue is confidential and we cannot go into any detail. We cannot estimate how this issue will take to resolve. We are seeking to deal with this as quickly as possible. The UK home office has a backlog of over 1,00,000 asylum applications. In the year ending June 2020, the UK offered protection- in the form of asylum, humanitarian protection, alternative forms of leave and resettlement – to 16,952 people, latest official figures show.

The court also ordered Mallya’s lawyer to submit a concrete response on November 2 about the nature of the fresh proceedings in the UK, when those proceedings are likely to conclude and when Mallya will make an appearance before Supreme Court. Mallya’s lawyer Ankur Daigal told that he did not know what kind of proceedings were going on. He said, that he knew that it is enough that his plea against the extradition proceedings has been rejected. The bench directed proceedings has been rejected. The bench directed Mallya’s lawyer to inform him by November 2 when the fugitive businessman would be able to appear in the court and when be able to appear in the court and when the confidential proceedings would be over. Advocate Rajat Nair on behalf of the Center told the bench that extradition has been requested as per the direction of the court. He said that no confidential extradition proceedings were going on which he was not aware of. He said that the Supreme Court of Britain has ratified the extradition proceedings of Mallya but that is not yet taking place.

Mallya has been based in the UK since March 2016 and remains on bail on an extradition warrant executed three years ago by Scotland Yard on April 18, 2017.

Justice SV Kotwal of the Bombay High Court today granted bail to Bollywood actress Rhea Chakraborty, Dipesh Sawant and Samuel Miranda in cases registered under the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act by the NCB. The court, however, rejected the bail applications filed by Abdul Parihar and Showik Chakraborty, who are also accused of NDPS offences by the NCB.

Rhea Chakraborty’s bail application was allowed subject to furnishings a PR Bond of Rs. 1 lakh, among other conditions. The court had directed Rhea Chakraborty to appear before the nearest police station every day for 10 days after she is released on bail. Rhea has also restricted from leaving the country as a bail condition.

Dipesh Sawant and Samuel Miranda have been allowed bail subject to furnishing of a PR bond of Rs.50000/- each. Their passports are also directed to be impounded. Appearing for the NCB, the ASG Anil Singh requested for a stay on the order’s operation. However, the same was rejected by the court.

Advocate Satish Maneshinde, appearing for Rhea, requested for 1 month to furnish bail bond, which was allowed. Rhea Chakraborty, Showik Chakraborty, Abdek Basit Parihar, Samuel Miranda and Dipesh Sawant had filed bail applications before the Bombay High Court after their bail plea was rejected by a Special NDPS Court in Mumbai.

Justice Kotwal of the Bombay High Court had reserved the judgment after a marathon hearing of all 5 bail applications on September 29, which lasted beyond the Court’s usual working hours.

Rhea Chakraborty and the others are accused of having facilitated the procurement of drugs for consumption by late actor Sushant Singh Rajput.

Advocates Satish Maneshinde, Tariq Sayed, Subodh Desai and Rajendra Rathod argued for the accused in the matter, contending that they ought to be granted bail for the following, among other reasons:

The narcotics crime bureau had no jurisdiction to investigate in this matter because of the Supreme Court order of August 19, 2020 to hand over all investigations pertaining to the death of actor Sushant Singh Rajput to the CBI.
Even if NCB had jurisdiction, the offences that were charged on the accused were of a bailable nature. On this aspect, the counsel added that the quantities of the substance allegedly involved in the matter were small, and not commercial.
The charges against the accused under Section 27A of the NDPS Act were not made out with supporting evidence.

Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh appeared for the NCB and maintained his stand that NCB had the jurisdiction to investigation in the matter. He asserted that the NCB had enough evidence to show that the accused were all part of the larger drug cartel.

Rhea Chakraborty and the others were arrested by the NCB for alleged offences under the provisions of the NDPS Act. Upon making a remand application for judicial custody, the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Esplanade Court granted 14 days judicial custody over the accused.

The Special NDPS Court rejected bail on September 11.

After the Special NDPS Court refused to grant bail, rhea and the others filed individual bail applications before the Bombay High Court, submitting 51 grounds for seeking bail.

Justice Kotwal gave a preliminary hearing to the applicants before listing the matter for final hearing on September 29, when he reserved the matter for verdict.

The Delhi High court Bar Association (DHCBA) has moved that High Court challenging the classification of law offices as “commercial activity” for the purposes of calculation of property tax under Delhi Municipal Act. “A professional activity like an advocate is not a business and cannot be deemed as a commercial activity and as such, the non- residential rates would not apply in the case of an advocate using premises for an office,” DHCBA has asserted that the classification of law offices as the commercial establishment is unintelligible and falls foul of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Asserting that the offices of lawyers should be treated under the category “for residential purpose and public purpose”, DHCBA has asserted that the classification of law offices as the commercial establishment is unintelligible and falls foul of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

Lawyers appear before the Hon’ble Court to represent their clients but in effect assist the Hon’ble court to dispense justice, and this cannot be a business or any commercial activity. It is also pleaded that while treating law offices as commercial units, the Assessing Authorities have also ignored the law laid by the Supreme Court regarding the profession of advocates not being a “commercial enterprise, industrial, mercantile, shop or business venture”. Professional activities of lawyers are done purely on the strength of their knowledge and skills. Even those who have separate offices have to carry briefs home for reading and necessary preparations for the next day’s hearing. It has been stated that the Bar Council of Delhi sent a representation to the municipal corporations on July 21 for reduction of the ‘use factor’ 4to 1 for levy of property tax in respect of offices of advocates in Delhi. ‘Use factor’4 is for business buildings which attracts the highest tax. The Petition also submitted that if the law offices were treated as commercial units, the Assessing Authorities would also ignore the Supreme Court’s rule of the profession of advocates not being a “commercial enterprise, industrial, mercantile, shop or business venture. “Hon’ble Justice Najmi Waziri presided over the petition. Citing recent developments that indicate immense mental and economic pressure on lawyers owing to the continued suspension of physical trials and limitations on proceedings only by video conferencing on urgent matters, the letter argues that the suspension of physical proceedings cannot continue at the expense of the livelihood of the vast majority of lawyers.

In light of this, the Bar Association is hoping to give way to a ‘hybrid system’ in compliance with the un- lockdown guidelines. Subsequently, the letter notes that the restriction of the proceedings of the Court and the judicial system to video conferencing only comes with its ‘inherent limitations’ which have led to a backlog of pending cases and that many sub-judice have been in a state of suspension for 4 months now, thus slowing the efficiency of the system of dispensation of justice. As an interim relief, the plea sought to stay the operation of November 2018 notice issued by the authorities for self assessment property tax return of the lawyers office. The plea has arrayed the three municipal corporations as parties

Introduction

The Apex Court set aside the order of the High Court dated 23 July 2020, which declined to permit Parvez Noordin Lokhandwalla to travel to the US for a period of eight weeks from 25 July to 6 September 2020. He urged that it was mandatory for him to return to the US within stipulated period of his departure from that country, failing which the conditions for revalidation of the Green Card would not be fulfilled. The High Court declined to relax the conditions imposed by it for the grant of interim bail on the ground that an FIR has been registered against him.

The Supreme Court bench consisted Justices DY Chandrachud and Indira Banerjee.

Court’s Decision

After hearing both the sides the Court shared its views:

The conditions which a court imposes for the grant of bail-in this case temporary bail- have to balance the public interest in the enforcement of criminal justice with the rights of the accused. The human right to dignity and the protection of constitutional safeguards should not become illusionary by the imposition of the conditions which are disproportionate to the need to secure the presence of the accused, the proper course of investigation and eventually to ensure fair trial. The conditions which are imposed by the court must bear a proportional relationship to the purpose of imposing the conditions. The nature of the risk which is posed by the grant permission as sought in this case must be carefully evaluated in each case.
The appellant is an Indian citizen and holds an Indian passport. While it’s true that an FIR has been lodged against the appellant, should not itself prevent him from travelling to the US, where he is a resident since 1985, particularly when it has been drawn to the attention of the High Court and this Court that serious consequences would ensue in terms of the invalidation of the Green card if the appellant were not permitted to travel. The record indicates the large amount of litigation between the family of the appellant and the complainant. The appellant has frequently travelled between the US and India even after the filing of the complaint and the FIR. The application for modification was incorrectly rejected by the High Court and the appellant ought to have been allowed to travel to the US for a period of eight weeks.
The Court hence allowed the appellant to travel to the US for a period of eight weeks, subject to furnishing an undertaking to the Court before the date of the travel that he will return to India after the expiry of eight weeks and he shall be available on all dates of hearing before the court of criminal jurisdiction, unless specifically exempted from personal appearance.
Hence, the order of the High Court dated 23 July 2020 was set aside.

Key Highlights

Case name: Parvez Noordin Lokhandwalla v. State of Maharashtra & Anr.
Case no.: Criminal Appeal No.648 of 2020
Counsel: Adv Subhash Jha for appellant, Adv Sachin Patil for State.

Delhi’s Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University has released a notice to take exams of intermediate semester LL.B students. The students are supposed to appear in the examination that is going to be conducted in offline mode From 27th of October. At the times when the cases are rising university’s move is totally unjustified from the student’s point of view.

The petrifying and severe impact of COVID-19 has shaken the world to its core. Further, most of the governments around the world have temporarily closed educational institutions in an attempt to contain the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. In India too, the government as a part of the nationwide lockdown has closed all educational institutions, as a consequence of which, learners ranging from school going children to postgraduate students, are affected. It’s been almost four months since India’s national lockdown sent student lives into limbo. At universities across India, students are battling varying guidelines, changing exam dates and the whims of authorities as they prepare for their final year exams. All at a time when colleges have struggled to conduct classes online, share study material and well, teach. An online survey on college student; sentiments about conducting examinations amid the COVID-19 pandemic has drawn over 5,000 respondents in a single day, with 72.2% of the students backing results on the basis of the average of internal exams of current and previous semesters. As many as 87.1% of the students said they are not in the mindset to appear for physical or online exams even if the government relaxes the lockdown. While 93.5% did not want to be conducted during the pandemic, 92.9% said their parents will not send them to exam centres.

“There is a lot of uncertainty among students on how to face the situation. They are facing a situation of panic and are stressed because there are no clear-cut instructions from the university or government. Of those surveyed , 15.1% are third –year or final –year undergraduate students who have applied for admission to foreign universities. As many as 58% said their end semester mark sheet will affect admissions to these universitie, while 62.2% said it would affect their job prospects.

A lot of students had left for their hometowns before the nationwide lockdown was announced. Candidates from far-flung areas will face difficulties in coming back to colleges or universities. Hostel accommodation will be risky due to covid-19 restrictions. Students, especially those from economically weaker sections, might face difficulties in making these arrangements. Besides, students might be asked to quarantine; that will be another challenge.

With classes, libraries and study centres closed, people have no recourse but to study at home, which is not always conducive to productivity. Like some students who live in remote areas or areas where connections are bad can face great difficulty in completing their exams .on time or even appearing in it. This can affect their grades and performance. Online examination process security is one of the critical challenges. Proper authentication, authorization process should be followed to ensure that the right candidate is appearing for the exam in a secure environment without any malpractices. Timely examinations can be bad. If any circumstance online examinations then they should give enough time to the students for the completion. Time should be set according to the level of questions. And for physical exams it will be hard for students to maintain social distance at all the times. Also students who would be suffering from general cold and cough will suffer as they won’t be allowed inside the examination centres. This can take a toll on their careers. This situation isn’t favourable for any kind of gathering and giving exams is going to violate that. Exam cancellation is of utmost importance for our safety. I only hope for some consideration regarding the same from the university.

It is noteworthy that the university doesn’t allow to make any kind of student unions and in these situations, students do not even have proper leadership to put forth their views with solidarity. Although students have seen taking the help of social media platforms like twitter and hashtags like

#IPUAGINSTSTUDENTS #IPUCHALEGACORONABADHEGA is fetching attention on twitter.

About the Client Consulting Competition

Amidst COVID-19 pandemic, the prestigious 20th National Client Consulting Competition for Justice P. Govinda Menon Memorial Ever Rolling Trophy, hosted by the Kerala Law Academy will be held on virtual mode from 5th to 7th of November 2020 from the Kerala Law Academy Campus, Peroorkada, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala.

The Client Consulting Competition is intended to explore the client-lawyer interaction skills and to improve the problem analysing techniques of the students and giving such information which a client would like to know regarding his legal problem/case. In order to satiate the client, a lawyer is expected to have excellent listening and advisory skills required to conduct a successful client interview.

Online Platform

The competition is conducted through the online platforms Zoom and Google Meet. All the participating teams should have good access to the internet and be able to access the above said online platform. This is a mandatory requirement for participation.

Eligibility

Students pursuing 3 year/5 year LLB course, in Law Colleges/Law schools/Law Universities/ Departments of Law in India recognised by the Bar Council of India.

Registration Process

The team for the competition must register on or before 29th October 2020, after complying with the formalities in Clause (2) of the Regulations of the competition, by submitting the duly filled Proforma provided in the Kerala Law Academy website, here.

Registration Details

Registration Fees: for a team is Rs 2500./-.

Please Note: Only 30 teams will be selected on ‘first come, first serve’ basis” plus previous performances in this competition. Only a single team (2 members) is permitted from a college.

Registration form for the participants, the competition format, Regulations of the competition and judging standards are available in Kerala Law Academy website, here.

Prizes

The winner will be awarded the Justice P. Govinda Menon Memorial Ever Rolling Trophy, other prizes and a cash prize of Rs 50,000 (Rupees Fifty Thousand only).

The Runners-up will be awarded a trophy, other prizes and a cash prize of Rs 30,000 (Rupees Thirty Thousand only).

Contact

For any queries, please write to mcs@keralalawacademy.in or contact any of the following:

General Secretary, Moot Court Society: Dr Dakshina Saraswathy: 9744169215
Assistant Professor & Member MCS Faculty Team: Sunil Kumar S: 9744036660
Student Convenor, Moot Court Society: Nithin Rajeev: 8075278235