Advocate PV Jeevesh filed a PIL in the Kerala High Court urging the Central government to name three new criminal laws in English to alleviate confusion, especially in South India where Hindi is not the primary language. The PIL is rooted in the constitutional ethos of linguistic unity and federalism, confronting the legislative naming practice in Hindi and advocating for broader linguistic inclusivity. Jeevesh vehemently opposes the practice of naming laws in Hindi, denouncing it as an act of linguistic imperialism, and seeks broader judicial intervention, including a declaration affirming that Parliament lacks the authority to title any law in any language other than English.
The Bombay High Court ruled in favor of a female employee denied maternity leave by the Airport Authority of India due to having two children. The court emphasized the naturalness of motherhood and the need for employers to show understanding and provide necessary support. The AAI’s denial was invalidated, and the employee was granted maternity leave benefits.
![[Nagaland Reservation Policy] 33% Reservation for Women in Nagaland Finally Approved](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/MicrosoftTeams-image-86.png?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
Nagaland approved a 33% reservation for women in municipal and town council elections, after a 15-year legal battle. Despite opposition, the Supreme Court upheld this constitutional mandate. The state government repeatedly postponed elections, defying court orders. This decision marks a significant step towards empowering women and promoting gender equality in the region.
![[ Right to Privacy] Sharing Google Pin as Bail Condition Violates the Fundamental Rights Under Article 21: Supreme Court](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/MicrosoftTeams-image-15-2.png?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
Today (29th April): The Supreme Court observed that requiring individuals to share their Google pin location as a condition for bail violates their fundamental rights under Article 21, which guarantees the right to privacy. The Court emphasized that while there have been instances where such conditions were imposed, they cannot be a prerequisite for bail.
Today,22nd April, Karnataka High Court upheld hookah ban, dismissing belief in reduced harm compared to cigarettes due to similar health risks. Ruling aligns with Article 47 of Indian Constitution on public health duties. Decision also based on COTPA and Prohibition of Smoking in Public Places Rules, regulating hookah as a tobacco product and service violating smoking prohibition laws. Public health concerns remain prominent.
The Madras High Court allowed BJP President J P Nadda’s rally in Tamil Nadu, stating that mere traffic disruptions not sufficient grounds for denial. The political rallies aimed to campaign for the upcoming Lok Sabha Election. The court instructed approval of an alternative route with police protection, ultimately granting the petition.
On Friday (5th April): The Kerala High Court declined to postpone the airing of the movie “The Kerala Story” on Doordarshan channel despite a petition seeking a delay until after the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. The petitioner alleged that the movie contains propaganda that could influence voters, leading to a scheduled hearing on April 11.
The Kerala High Court denied anticipatory bail to Anwar Sadique K for assaulting an advocate commissioner at Tirur Munsiff Court. Justice Badharudeen stressed the severity of attacking court officials, stating it undermines the judiciary and democratic values. Sadique’s plea was rejected, and he was directed to surrender within ten days for further interrogation.
![[BREAKING] Excise Policy Case: Delhi HC Sets Arvind Kejriwal's Plea Against ED Summons on September 9](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/MicrosoftTeams-image-6-1.png?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
The Delhi High Court rejected a PIL seeking the removal of Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, stating it as his personal decision. The court emphasized that only the Lieutenant Governor or the President of India should decide such matters. The petitioner was advised to approach the competent authorities. This was the second PIL of its kind to be dismissed by the High Court.
A letter to CJI D.Y. Chandrachud, drafted by senior lawyers Harish Salve and Adish Agarwala, aimed to address alleged corruption in the apex court’s electoral bond decision. The AILU claims it defends the judiciary’s independence but has faced criticism for remaining silent when the government challenged constitutional fundamentals. The AILU refutes accusations against responsible lawyers and legal bodies.