The Kerala High Court ruled that the Kerala State Minority Commission exceeded its authority by ordering eviction proceedings, holding that only a competent civil court can issue such directions against individuals belonging to minority communities under applicable law.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled that information related to an employee’s ACRs cannot be denied under the RTI Act only on privacy grounds. It said fairness and transparency require that such records should normally be disclosed to the concerned person.
The Karnataka High Court has held that couples need not register their marriage under the Special Marriage Act, 1954 to file or maintain a divorce petition. The Bench dismissed the wife’s writ petition challenging the lower court’s decision.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court reaffirmed that a legally valid adoption does not rely on registration of the adoption deed and set-aside the state authority’s refusal to grant compassionate appointment to an adopted son on technical grounds alone. This ruling clarifies that technical objections cannot defeat rightful claims arising from lawful adoption.
Andhra Pradesh High Court held Income Tax action based on Tax Evasion Petition valid, rejecting malice claims, noting summons under Section 131(1A) issued after due process, approvals, and material review by Investigation Wing authorities under Income Tax Act 1961.
Orissa High Court held that orders passed by a Bench in matters outside the roster assigned by the Chief Justice are per se illegal. The Court said entertaining cases beyond allocation amounts to jurisdiction without authority, rendering such decisions fundamentally invalid.
The Supreme Court of India dismissed a writ by Karanartham Viramah Foundation alleging CITES violations, holding disturbing lawfully imported animals’ environment may cause cruelty, citing East India Commercial case and refusing directions under Article 32.
The Calcutta High Court held that serving summons or notices through electronic mail amounts to valid service under proceedings governed by the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. The ruling reinforces digital communication as effective in PMLA cases.
The Supreme Court sharply criticised a Dehradun lawyer for trying to block the Sainya Dham war memorial project. CJI Kant said, “You must have taken possession…those who sacrificed their lives for the nation deserve respect,” from us today.
The Rajasthan High Court’s Division Bench set aside controversial orders that treated a personal writ like a PIL and directed FIR registration. The Court ruled that judges cannot exceed the scope of relief sought in petitions, reinforcing strict judicial discipline.
