The Bombay High Court has ruled that a legally adopted child is entitled to take the caste of the adoptive parents and cannot be denied caste-based benefits. The Court directed authorities to issue caste and validity certificates, stressing that denying such rights would leave the child’s future “in limbo.”
The Bombay High Court has dismissed a PIL challenging the land sale of Mukesh Ambani’s Antilia residence, stating, “The issue has already been adjudicated, no interference is called for.” The court said no further action was needed.
The Bombay High Court ruled that dependent parents of a deceased, unmarried government employee are entitled to a family pension. This decision ensures financial support for elderly parents left behind after their child’s death.
New Delhi: Today, 27th March, The Supreme Court has adjourned the hearing on the bail plea of advocate Surendra Gadling and activist Jyoti Jagtap, both arrested in the Elgar Parishad-Maoist links case, by two weeks. A bench of Justices M M Sundresh and Rajesh Bindal also postponed the hearing on the National Investigation Agency’s (NIA) petition challenging the bail granted to activist Mahesh Raut.
The Supreme Court dismissed`(28th sept) a curative petition from the Central government and Airports Authority of India regarding GMR’s operation of Nagpur Airport. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta asserted there were no grounds for curative jurisdiction. The Court’s previous judgment upheld GMR’s rights, and clarification was provided to prevent future legal misunderstandings.
On Wednesday(25th Sept), a two-judge bench of the Supreme Court of India issued a split verdict in a 1995 custodial death case involving Shama alias Kalya, who was allegedly tortured in police custody in Gondia City, Maharashtra. The trial court had convicted some accused of culpable homicide while acquitting them of murder charges, a decision upheld by the Bombay High Court.
The Bombay High Court today dismissed a PIL challenging Maharashtra’s ‘Ladki Bahin Yojana’ scheme, stating it benefits women without discrimination. The court deemed the scheme a valid policy decision beyond judicial interference. The PIL’s arguments about political motivation and discriminatory nature were disregarded, and the court emphasized the scheme’s social welfare intent.
