Uniform Marriage Age: Delhi High Court Issues Notice in PIL
A notice was issued by the Delhi High Court to the Centre and Law Commission of India on a plea that seeks uniform marriage age for men and women.
A division bench comprising of Chief Justice D. N. Patel and C. Hari Shankar issued the notice.
The plea, which was filed by Bharatiya Janata Party leader Ashwini Upadhyay and advocate calls the distinction in the marriage age unscientific and patriarchal stereotype.
As per the Petition, there is a discriminatory minimum age limit for marriage for men and women in India as men in India are permitted to get married at the age of 21, while for women it is 18.
As per the plea this is based on patriarchal stereotypes, has no scientific backing, perpetrates de jure and de facto inequality against women, and goes completely against the global trends.
As per the PIL this differential bar infringes fundamental principles of gender equality, gender justice and dignity of women and breaches Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution.
Delhi High Court Says Security Agencies Not Bound to Provide Information under RTI Act
The Delhi High Court said that the information about money laundering, hawala transactions, acts of tax evasion and smuggling do not relate to corruption or human rights violations and, thus cannot be questioned to the intelligence and security organisations which are not bound to provide such information under Right to Information Act (RTI Act).
Justice Prathiba M Singh has set aside the Central Information Commission order which directs (CIC) directing the Central Economic Intelligence Bureau (CEIB) for providing the outcome of the complaint made by the RTI applicant named G. S. Srinivasan.
The Court reiterated that the CEIB is exempted from Section 24(1) Schedule II of the RTI Act and to provide details in the case is contrary to law.
Jan 28, 2023
Supreme Court Dismisses Plea Challenging AP High Court Order
The Supreme Court refused the plea of the Andhra Pradesh Government assailing the Andhra Pradesh High Court's order that held the decision of appointing an Executive Officer for controlling and managing the affairs of Ahobilam Temple in Kurnool violative of Article 26(d) of the Constitution and affects the Mathadipathi's right of administration.
The plea by the State came up for hearing before a Bench of Justice S.K. Kaul and Justice A.S. Oka. The Bench was not convinced why the State should interfere in matters of a temple.
Jan 27, 2023
CJI Announces Launch of E-SCR to Provide Verdicts in Scheduled Languages
Chief Justice of India (CJI) D. Y. Chandrachud said that the electronic Supreme Court Reports (E-SCR) project started providing apex court judgements in various Indian scheduled languages from Republic Day.
The CJI told the lawyers the apex court operationalised the part of the E-SCR project for providing verdicts in some local scheduled languages free of cost.
There are of 22 languages in the Eighth Schedule of the Constitution. They include Assamese, Bengali, Gujarati, Hindi, Kannada, Kashmiri, Konkani, Malayalam, Manipuri, Marathi, Nepali, Oriya, Punjabi, Sanskrit, Sindhi, Tamil, Telugu, Urdu, Bodo, Santhali, Maithili and Dogri.
The apex court verdicts, as part the e-SCR project, will be available on the apex court website, its mobile app and on the judgment portal of the National Judicial Data Grid.
Jan 26, 2023
Supreme Court Removes Condition of Magistrate's Approval in Living Will Process
In a bid to make the guidelines on "living will" more workable and less cumbersome, the Supreme Court removed the condition that mandated a magistrate's approval for withdrawal or withholding of life support to a terminally ill person.
Living will is an advance medical directive on end-of-life treatment.
The Supreme Court's 2018 order on passive euthanasia wherein it recognised the right to die with dignity as a fundamental right and an aspect of Article 21 (right to life) notwithstanding, people wanting to get a "living will" registered were facing problems due to cumbersome guidelines, prompting a reconsideration by the apex court.
A five-judge Constitution bench headed by Justice K. M. Joseph said the document will now be signed by the executor of the living will in the presence of two attesting witnesses, preferably independent, and attested before a notary or Gazetted Officer.
Jan 24, 2023
Scheduled Caste Status to Dalit Christians, Dalit Muslims: Supreme Court Dismisses Plea against C...
The Supreme Court rejected a petition challenging the setting up of a three-member Commission by the Union government in October 2022 to examine the possibility of granting the Scheduled Caste status to Dalit Christians and Dalit Muslims.
The Bench of Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice B. V. Nagarathna disposed of the plea, observing that it did not see any ground to quash the appointment of the Commission.
Marriage Before 18 Years cannot be Annulled: Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court ruled that the marriage of a woman that has taken place before her attaining 18 years of age cannot be annulled. The bench also quashed the earlier order in this regard by a Family Court.
The division bench comprising Chief Justice P. B. Varale and Justice S. Vishvajith Shetty gave the order, while looking into the petition in this regard by a woman.
According to the Hindu Marriage Act Section 5 (3), the age of bridegroom should be 21 years and bride should be 18 years. The rule specifying 18 years of age for marriage is being kept out of Section 11 of the Act, the bench said. Besides for cancellation of marriage, the facts have to be in contravention to the Section 5 and rule 1, 4 and 5. Hence, the annulment of marriage won't apply to this case, the bench said.