CURRENT AND IMPORTANT CASE LAW

"Necessity creates the law, it supersedes rules; and whatever is reasonable

in such cases is likewise legal"
Sir William Scott and Lord Stowell

How to deal with Sexual Crimes.-Judges Play
at all levels a vital role as teachers and thought
leaders. It is their role to be impartial in words
and action, at all times. If they falter, especially
in gender related crimes, they imperil fairness
and inflict great cruelty in the casual blindness
to the despair of the survivors.
On 18th March, 2021 Supreme Court issued the
guidelines or directions to be considered while
granting bail in sexual offences.
Sentence for rash driving after 26 years.-In an
incident a car driver was injured by a bus driver
who was driving in a rash and negligent
manner. Incident took place on 16.02.1995.
Accused, bus driver was throughout on the bail.
awarded the sentence
Accused was
further
imprisonment of six months and
sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.500/- under Section
337 after recording the conviction under Section
279 and 338, by the Trial Court. Conviction of
the bus driver was upheld by the Supreme Court
but the sentence was substituted by fine of Rs.
1000/- each. It was said that sending the accused
to jail after 26 years would be harsh.
is aftirmed,
"The conviction of appellant circumstances
however, looking to the tacts and
of the present case specially the fact that 26 years
have elapsed from the incident, we are incined
months
to substitute the sentence of six
mprisonment under Section 279 and 338 into
tine. Six months sentence under Section 279
and
338 IPCare substituted by fine of Rs.1000/- each
Section 337 PC
member committee to resolve the deadlock
between the Centre and farmers' unions over
them.
Bench headed by S.A. Bobde, CJ and A.S.
Bopanna and V. Ramasubramanian, JJ., stays the
implementation of farms laws.
Supreme Court stayed the implementation
of below stated Bills:
1. Farmers' Produce Trade and Commerce
(Promotion and Facilitation) Act, 2020
2. Essential Commodities (Amendment) Act,
2020
3. Farmers (Empowerment and Protection)
Agreement on Price Assurance and Farmn
of Services Act, 2020
Supreme Court also decided to set up a four
member committee to resolve the deadlock
between the Centre and farmers' unions over
them. The Committee will comprise of:
1. Shri Bhupinder Singh Mann, National
All
President, Bhartiya Kisan Union and
India Kisan Coordination Committee,
Economist
Gulati,AgriculturalCommission
2. Shri Ashok Chairman
and Former of the
Prices,
for Agricultural Costs and
3. Pramod Kumar
Joshi, Director South Asia
international Food Policy,
Sangathar)
4. AnilGhanwat (Shethkari India, 2021 SCC
Union of
Rakesh Vaishany v.
OnLine SC 18
2:1 verdict on

Whereas sentence of fine under Central Vista Project:

Surendran v. Sub Parliament.-On January
IS maintained. " court stated. construction of New of AM
Inspector of Police [2021 SCCOnLine SC
445]
i.e., Tuesday the 3-judge bench Sanjiv
5, 2021 Maheshwari and
Implementation of Three farm laws: Stayed. Khanwilkar, Dinesh to the
Court stayed has given a go ahead
On January 12, 2021 the Supremefarm laws till Khanna, J| has,
by a 2:1 verdict.
three
the implementation of the to set up a four Central Vista Project,
further orders and decided
 20
Legal General Knowledye
Court declares and direct as follows: Conservation Committee
(i) There is no infirmity in the grant of: actual
0s to ommence
(HCC),
development/redeveltheopment
and not
is the
(a) "N0 Objection" by the Central Vista
Accordingly, theformalisation inciofpieihent
Committee((VO:
planning and st
(b) "Appoval by the Delhi Urban rt aforementioned prior respondents shall Proe
Commission (DUAC) as per the DUAC
Act. 1073: and
designated Authority before
any permiacts0onualy ofobtaHui
() rior approval" by the Heritage stateddevelopment/ redevelopment
plots/structures/ workstariny
Conservation Committee (HCC) under
clause 1.12 of the Building Byelaws for
the heritage laws
includingprecionnctplot
already not obtained.
s governed
No.
b;
11%, i
Delhi. 2016. (vii) The
(i)The exercise of power by the Central selection/appointment Consultant,
light of the limited of
Government under Section 11A(2) of the DDA
Act, 1957 is just and proper and thus the
this case, is held to beexamination warranted
just and proper. in
Rajeev Suri v. Delhi
modifications regarding change in land use of
plot Nos. 2 to 8 in the Master Plan of Delhi,
2021/Zonal Development Plan for Zone-D and
2021 SCCOnLine SC7
Gender
Development Authorit,
Zone-C vide impugned notification dated NDA Discrimination:Court
Women to take h
20.3.2020 stands confirmed. Exam.Supreme
Union of India, 2021 issued in Kush Kalra t
(ii) The recommendation of Environmental permitting the women interim directior
Clearance (EC) by Expert Appraisal Committee the candidates
National Defence to take part ir
(EAC) and grant thereof by MoEF is just, examination. Academy (NDA
proper and in accordance with law including Supreme Court while issuing the interim
the 2006 Notification. We uphold the
same directions slammed the Indian Army for not
along with appropriate directions therein to
ensure that the allowing women to take part in National
measures highlighted mitigating Defence Academy (NDA) exams. Additional
are
followed bythe project Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati appearing for
proponent in their letter and spirit. the government and Indian Army told the court
(iv) The project
proponent may set up smog
tower(s) of adequate
that a policy decision should not be interfered by
an interim mneasure. However, the Supreme
capacity, as being integral
part of the new Parliament Court called the Army's "policy decision
and additionally, use smogbuilding project; gender discrimination.
construction site throughout theguns at the
phase is in progress on the site. construction "Three modes of recruitment of officers in the
(v) Court also call upon the Indian Army are through the National Detent
respondent MoEF to Academy (NDA) Indian Military Academ
consider issuing similar general (MA) and Officers Training Academy (01
directions
regarding installation of adequate capacity NDA and IMA are modes of direct enu
smog tower(s) as integral part in all of onnen
future through UPSC. Whereas through 0TA, throUgh
major development projects whilst are commissioned along with men,
both
Iheyar'
developrment permissions, granting UPSC and Non-UPSC mode of entry. both men
with bad track particularly in
record of air quality - cities granted Short Service Commission, considerd
relating to Government buildings, be it are
and women, and subsequently
or other private
projects of similar townships
scale and tor grant of Permanent Commission. rigorous
magnitude, including to use
the construction activity of smog guns during to in.M.
Imprisonment for life is equivalentCourt
progress. the Project is in imprisonment for life.SuupremeSpecial Leavt
Alfaz Ali v. State of Assam decided
(vi) The stage of prior 2018
of the Building Byepermission under clause 1.3 Petition (Crl.) No.6220 of
Laws of the Heritage September 2021.
 Inheritance
Daughter
Right claim tomaintain
sdaughter herself.
It that 1orunderEarlier
maintenance.-Unmarried married, Clàirn Rights practising years.
SC months three
and
September
undergo Prashant
one) Contemnor
2020 After tweets.
judiciary
Prashant 2020 CourtJudiciary.
unconditional Courtandadvocate
Latercontempt On
Constitution lndia.right,
ofContempt
Fredom of suspicion ItCurrent
5) can
1s daughter herself 646 imprisoment lifoer .petitioner.
Marzina alleged
complaint
was
absolute. säid be Sectionmaintenance in of In to
Supreme Supreme gave in August
held Re a giving this guaranteed sentencd and
this unmarried insimple 15, Bhushan be as Prashant
tor by a
which Prashant to Bhushan's Begum
of lmportant
Rights."Equal that
has 125 by this deposited time
heapology. matter, Speechand of
her
The was
Md. matter
matter the 2020 express his 14,
Abhilasha Court several
right toCr.P.C.,
was imprisonment
Court with refused Court to tweets Court: intideity, Petitioner was filed
Abdul
maintenance
section
under Supreme from Bhushan, further and Prashant on Bhushan 2020
prove Hindu under started
Coparcenary unmarried dismissed.
an
of an has
apology contempt August
to
killed by Case
v claiming for with a
if opportunities upheld
Further Tweets
Prakash, thatapplication her
Hindu fine to criticizingSupreme Expression Jalil Md.
he undergo killed by
Rights Court.fatherdaughter claim to 2020 a be sentenced apologise Bhushan guilty Article prosecultion.
rigorous in Law
she period
debarred for
fails the or 20, Abdul
daughter on its on worth his her hat
2006
of 2020 nmaintenance
Court
is SCC Re.1/ remarks 2020
Registry
a so, August the Court husband, his
wonen inby unable till August
verdict of 19isa wife Jalil.
was OnLine ofperiod headvocate Supreme to Supreme wherein
Birth: Hindu ruled she (Rupee to for submit criminal
of
natural Re. 1, Later daughter
filed can three from shall on It
to 24, the his held
is of by on24, the he the the was
a

On
titleAyodhya
The bynot November
as entrance
Constitution allowed
14,womenbejudgment
thatSabarimala
a
Association 2020 the alive was
thatancestral she coparcenary
in asthe has On 343. confer held Supreme
Danamma e Court
thequal (Amendment)
the well 2005.application
Amendment
Septernber 9 dealt
with abrogated
unrecognized and recognized
InSuccession
Amendment
yenerations
throe
andancestral
Act
dispute9 less 09-09-2005. had the thatsame 2016

November
five-judge Hon'ble than as
all SCC a
daughter on said beensame of decided
August
11 enforcernent that
full shares wherein
pilgrims
in September
property in
Case,--M
cases
the the
of v
SC
that
manner
son @ the
rights of the property"
Chietseven wriBench
t the State Case 641 manner a and by even
suman
amendment Act section the as Aowas as males
Supreme menstruating
2019,regardless
Vineeta can women son
birth that 2020
upon of held
ifthat of
case
Act, coparceners coparceers.
2005. themade
2019, from SiddigJustice
petitions
judges,reterred Supreme
2019.--1ndianof
claim 09, son
as at she with
daughters the Armendment
surpur the 2005 question dauyhters
of the were 1956
Kerala-In Sharma the with is and
the 6 rule
August
the Court v of Supreme Court
The toOn 2005. incidents Supreme
time treated
father
is the
Prakash
of to
Sabarimala.
of her even has the the provisions
daughter applicable of Women the the
section
Mahant India. may toathe age Court It of rights Amar, v daughterS
had
will
get again
Hindu ofsurvivorship In
coparceners
Supreme bench to review
larger
gender,
September right
vclearly thequal
e
if
birth.
same
as of have Act, Therefore v
2005
Hindu
October be of Young Rakesh Court died hulwati 6
Suresh group, earlier father coparcener a are
coparcenary 2018
coparcener retrospective of
heard constitutedpetitions India rights of
2005. Succesion Were
the Succession
Were
Further
rights only
Court, 2019. bench including
should ruled Lauyers indicates
Sharna. given right of section earier
3 Hindu
when
Das 2018, rom is as India SCC was
It frormn court up
the - of not in it it in in 6 to
the left was the not to 21
 22
build
ordereddecision
govermentgovernment
announcedheaded

the
the and
Hindu by
to land their
basedruled
give Chief
to verdict;
temple.
an be on that
alternate handed tax the Justice it
It vacated
land
records.
also over
five-acre belonged Ranjan
ordered to the
It
aprevious
tract trust
further toGogoi,
ofthe to the

mosque. land
2019.Court CPIOChief
November

v to
made Justice
Subhash the
CJI Sunni
of
under
ChandraIndia
Waqf
RTI Knowledge
General
Legal
Agarwal, came
vide Board
its under to
judgment inthe build
RTI-In
Supreme
the