Get the Best Legal advice and know the latest legal developments in India : Legal Consult

Hi Friends,

Thank you all for patronising and appreciating my blog. With your love and support, the Blog is shortly going to cross the 1,00,000 milestone !

As you are aware, I with assistance from my collegues was earlier running a Facebook page by the name 'Law Reservoir' where the posts about the latest / interesting judgements passed by the Supreme Court, High Courts and other Courts in India were being published. Now, the said FB page has been shifted to a more interactive and effective page 'LegalConsultIndia'. 

It is being run by LegalConsult, a legal startup and platform which provides legal consultation and advice to the masses at very affordable prices. I am glad to be associated as one of the mentor in the pool of legal experts at LegalConsult whose aim is to make legal advice easily accessible to every common man and to the remotest corner of the country at very affordable cost and from the convenience of their home or workplace or while commuting. One needs to simply book an online consultation by whatsapp at mobile no. 844 855 9696. More information can be had at LegalConsult .

 

If you like this initiative, you may Like, Subscribe, Recommend and Share the Facebook Page of LegalConsult to your friends and acquaintainces. In this way, you will be helping lots of needy people. 

Wishing you all a HAPPY NEW YEAR 2022.

Yours 

Sunil Goel

 

Supreme Court rejects the various petitions challenging validity of National Judicial Appointment Commission Bill

The Supreme Court on 25th August 2014 rejected a bunch of PILs challenging the validity of Constitution (99th Amendment) Bill and the National Judicial Appointment Commission Bill 2014 on the ground that these are pre-mature as the bill is still in the process of becoming law and it has only been passed by the Rajya Sabha and Lok Sabha at the moment. Since it will amend Articles 124(2) and 217(1) of the Constitution of India, it needs to be ratified by the legislatures of at least half of the States of India (i.e. min. 15 States) before being sent to the President for approval. This law will replace the present collegium system for appointment of Supreme Court and High courts judges under which the collegium comprising three senior most judges of Supreme court including the CJI recommends the appointment of High Court and Supreme Court judges. 

Under the new system proposed to be introduced by this new law, the appointment will be made by a Commission which will be called National Judicial Appointment Commission which will comprise of 6 persons comprising the Chief Justice of India, two other seniormost judges of Supreme Court, Law Minister of India and two eminent personalities who would be chosen by a panel of Prime Minister, Chief Justice of India and leader of single largest party in Lok Sabha. 

The Attorney General argued that the Court can not restrain a government from enacting a law, it will lead to chaos, it will amount to interference of judiciary in legislative and executive domain.

Download free Android app for latest and important court decisions. https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.sgsolicitors.indianlaw&hl=en

CBI is not a constitutionally valid police force : Gauhati High Court

The Division Bench of Gauhati High Court in its detailed judgment on 6^th November 2013 in the case of ‘Navendra Kumar vs Union of India’ has held that CBI is not a constitutionally valid police force. Tracing the history of the CBI and the discussions which took place in the Constituent Assembly in 1949 on the issue of forming a Central bureau of investigation and intelligence while drafting the Constitution, the court held that it is the exclusive function of state Police in every state to carry out police functions like investigation, arrest, seizure, filing chargesheet and prosecution. The Parliament or the Central Government can make laws regarding police only for the Union Territories and not for the States. Moreover, the CBI was constituted by a mere Resolution of Ministry of Home affairs in 1963 and not by any statute and thus this agency is not legally and constitutionally formed and hence is not competent to take up police functions. It can only assist the police in collecting information by way of enquiries.  The Court thus quashed the resolution which constituted the CBI and also set aside the order of the Single Judge and further quashed the chargesheet which was filed by the CBI against the Petitioner in the designated CBI Court and the consequent trial. The Court however clarified that quashing of the proceedings, pending in the CBI Court, would not be a bar to any further investigation by police having jurisdiction over the subject matter.

Read the full Judgment.

Sunil Goel advocate B.Sc. L.Lb L.Lm

Supreme Court : Police bound to register the Complaint else face action

The Supreme Court of India recently passed an order thereby alleviating the often made grievance of the public that their compaint is not registered in the form of FIR by the police officers and they have to run from pillar to post for getting the FIR registered.

The relevant part of the said Order reads as under :
“The grievance in the present writ petition is that the occurrence had taken place in the month of May and, in that very month, on 11th May, 2008, the written report was submitted by the petitioner before the officer In-charge of the concerned Police Station, who sat tight over the matter. Thereafter, when the Superintendent of Police was moved, a First Information Report (for short "F.I.R.") was registered.Even thereafter, steps were not taken either for apprehending the accused or recovery of the minor girl child. It is a matter of experience of one of us (B.N. Agrawal, J.) while acting as Judge of Patna High Court, Chief Justice of Orissa High Court and Judge of this Court that in spite of law laid down by this Court, the concerned police authorities do not register F.I.Rs unless some direction is given by the Chief Judicial Magistrate or the High Court or this Court. Further experience shows that even after orders are passed by the concerned courts for registration of the case, the police does not take the necessary steps and when matters are brought to the notice of the Inspecting Judges of the High Court during the course of inspection of Courts and Superintendents of Police are taken to task, then only F.I.Rs are registered. In large number of cases investigations do not commence even after registration of F.I.Rs and in case like the present one, steps are not taken for recovery of the kidnapped person or apprehending the accused person with reasonable despatch. At times it has been found that when harsh orders are passed by the Members of the Judiciary in a State, the police becomes hostile to them for instance in Bihar when a bail petition filed by a police personnel, who was accused was rejected by a member of Bihar Superior Judicial Service, he was assaulted in the Court room for which contempt proceeding was initiated by Patna High Court and the erring police officials were convicted and sentenced to suffer imprisonment. On the other hand, there are innumerable cases that where the complainant is a practical person, F.I.Rs are registered immediately, copies thereof are made over to the complainant on the same day, investigation proceeds with supersonic jet speed, immediate steps are taken for apprehending the accused and recovery of the kidnapped persons and the properties which were subject matter of theft or dacoity. In the case before us allegations have been made that theStation House Officer of the concerned Police Station is pressurising the complainant to withdraw the complaint, which, if true, is a very disturbing state of affairs. We do not know there may be innumerable such instances. In view of the above, we feel that it is high time to give directions to Governments of all the States and Union Territories besides their Director Generals of Police/Commissioners of Police as the case may be to the effect that if steps are not taken for registration of F.I.Rs immediately and copies thereof are not made over to the complainants,they may move the concerned Magistrates by filing complaint petitions to give direction to the police to register case immediately upon receipt/production of copy of the orders and make over copy of the F.I.Rs to the complainants, within twenty four hours of receipt/production of copy of such orders. It may further give direction to take immediate steps for apprehending the accused persons and recovery of kidnapped/abducted persons and properties which were subject matter of theft or dacoity. In case F.I.Rs are not registered within the aforementioned time, and/or aforementioned steps are not taken by the police, the concerned Magistrate would be justified in initiating contempt proceeding against such delinquent officers and punish them for violation of its orders if no sufficient cause is shown and awarding stringent punishment like sentence of imprisonment against them inasmuch as the Disciplinary Authority would be quite justified in initiating departmental proceeding and suspending them in contemplation of the same. Keeping in mind these facts, we are of the view that notices should be issued to Government of all the States and Union Territories besides Director Generals of Police/Commissioners of Police as the case may be. Issue notice to the Chief Secretaries of all the States and Union Territories and the Director Generals of Police/Commissioners of Police,as the case may be, to show cause as to why aforesaid directions be not given by this Court. Notices may be sent to the parties by Fax and it should be mentioned therein that the order has been put on the Website of the Supreme Court of India so that they may file response without loss of time.”