The B&B Causelist #242: Aadhar challenge, Patiala House violence, Entry tax, PSB strike, Bilkis Bano & more (Evening Updates)

A summary of important cases from the causelists of the Supreme Court of India, the Delhi High Court and the Bombay High Court..LIST OF CASES .Supreme Court of India.Jindal Stainless Steel v. State of HaryanaKamini Jaiswal v. Union of India and Ors.Jairam Ramesh v. Union of India And Ors.Kunwar Pranav Singh “Champion” & Ors. v. Speaker Legislative Assembly & Anr..Bombay High Court.High Court on its Own Motion v. State of MaharashtraPunjabi Cultural Heritage Board Public Charitable v. Union of India & 5 Ors.Jaswantbhai Chaturbhai Nai and Ors v. State of Gujarat & Ors.Delhi High Court.Major Dr. Surendra Poonia v. Badminton Association of India and Ors.Reckitt Benckiser (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Gillette India Ltd.State Bank of Patiala and Ors. v. State Sector Bank Employees Association.SUMMARY OF CASES.Supreme Court of India.1. Jindal Stainless Steel v. State of Haryana.[Item 901 in court 1 – SLP(CRL) 3119-3120/2014].Bench: Chief Justice TS Thakur, AK Sikri, SA Bobde, Shiva Kirti Singh, NV Ramana, R Banumathi, AM Khanwilkar, DY Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan JJ..Case relating to entry taxes imposed by States. Read more about the case here..Today in Court: Senior counsel Harish Salve continued his arguments today. His primary line of reasoning was related to the question, ‘when is a tax a compensatory tax’?..2. Kamini Jaiswal v. Union of India and Ors..[Item 4 in court 5 – Writ Petition (Crl.) 32/2016].Bench: Jasti Chelameswar, AM Sapre JJ..PIL filed by advocate Kamini Jaiswal seeking SIT investigation into violence by lawyers at Patiala House and initiation of contempt action against three lawyers involved in the incident..The Court had issued notice to three lawyers – Yashpal Singh,Vikram Chauhan and Om Sharma..Today in Court: This matter did not come up..3. Jairam Ramesh v. Union of India And Ors..[Item 2 in court 1 – WP(C) 231/2016].Bench: Chief Justice TS Thakur, AM Khanwilkar, DY Chandruchud JJ. .A petition by former Union Minister Jairam Ramesh challenging the passing of the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Bill, 2016 as a Money Bill. This case will be heard only if the 9-judge Bench does not sit..Today in Court: This matter was not taken up today..4. Kunwar Pranav Singh “Champion” & Ors. v. Speaker Legislative Assembly & Anr..[Item 4 in court 4 – IA 2/2016 in SLP(C) 14584/2016].Bench: Dipak Misra, Rohinton Fali Nariman JJ. .Plea by disqualified MLAs of the Uttarakhand Assembly seeking permission to attend the Assembly proceedings..Today in Court: The Supreme Court declined any interim relief to the nine disqualified Uttarkhand MLAs. The Bench also observed that if the motion that was moved by the petitioners (rebel MLAs) for removal of Speaker, were to be taken up in the Uttarakhand legislative assembly at any point of time, it shall be subject to final adjudication of the SLP and all the issues raised in the petition including the jurisdictional issue were to be kept open..The matter will now be heard on July 28..Bombay High Court.1. High Court on its Own Motion v. State of Maharashtra.[Item 25 Court 13- CRPIL/20/2012].Bench: AS Oka, AA Sayed JJ.A suo motu PIL on safety of women, and the prevention of eve teasing. A report from all commissionerates in Pune, Nagpur, Aurangabad, Solapur, Nashik has been submitted detailing the number of complaints recieved on the helpline setup by the police etc..Today in court: This case could not be tracked..2. Punjabi Cultural Heritage Board Public Charitable v. Union of India.[Item 905 Court 31- WP(OS)/1430/2016].Bench: SC Dharmadhikari, Dr. Shalini Phansalkar Joshi JJ.The petitioner, an MLC from suburban Mulund, has sought stay on release of the film ‘Santa Banta’ alleging that it hurts religious sentiments of the Sikh community..The bench had refused to stay the release. During the previous hearing Dharmadhikari J asked the petitioner’s lawyer to go through the Udta Punjab Order and consider withdrawing the petition..Today in court: This case was adjourned..3. Jaswantbhai Chaturbhai Nai and Ors v. State of Gujarat & Ors..[Item 901 Court 49- APEAL(Cri)/1020/2009].Bench: VK Tahilramani, Mridula Bhatkar JJ.The appeal of eleven convicts in the Bilkis Bano case is being heard along with the CBI’s petition seeking death penalty for three of these convicts. They were sentenced to life by a special court in January 2008 for gang-raping a five month pregnant Bilkis Bano and murdering seven of her family members in the post-Godhra riots of 2002..Harshad Ponda is appearing for the appellants and Hiten Venegaokar is appearing for the CBI..Today in court: CBI counsel informed the bench that ASG Anil Singh wishes to argue for the CBI, he has now been asked to prepare his arguements and be ready with written submissions..Meanwhile Harshad Ponda continued his submissions. He sought to illustrate how the prosecution’s arguement that the crime took place in a kachcha road is not feasible as the victim herself had stated that it was near a ravine which is some 3 kms away from the kachcha road..Ponda will continue his submissions tomorrow at 12 pm..Delhi High Court.1. Major Dr. Surendra Poonia v. Badminton Association of India and Ors..[W.P. (C) 5271/2014 – Court No. 1; Item No. 8].Bench: G. Rohini CJ, Sangita Dhingra Sehgal J..A PIL challenging certain amendments made in the Badminton Association of India Memorandum in 2013..Today in Court: The matter will be heard on September 28, 2016..2. Reckitt Benckiser (India) Pvt Ltd. v. Gillete India Ltd..[FAO (OS) 185/2016 – Court No. 2; Item No. 2].Bench: Badar Durrez Ahmed, Ashutosh Kumar, JJ..Civil proceedings initiated by Gillette India against Reckitt Benckiser (India) Pvt. Ltd, the manufacturers of “Veet” hair removal cream. A video advertisement for Veet claims that the cream cause smoothening of skin upto twice as long as shaving, while showing a blue razor in the background in a comparing manner. Gillette, whose razors are a typical light blue colour, says that this is a disparaging advertisement, and has sought an injunction on publishing the advertisement, as well as damages. The injunction was granted to them in the last hearing..Today in Court: A stay was granted to the appellant on the order of the single judge granting injunction. Chander Lall appeared for the appellant and Senior Advocate Sudhir Chandra appeared for the respondents. Lall argued that the advertisement made a comparison with men’s razors and that there cannot be a monopoly over the colour “blue”. The order has been reserved by the bench..3. State Bank of Patiala and Ors. v. State Sector Bank Employees Association .[W.P. (C) 5883/2016 – Court No. 16; Item No. 35].Bench: V. Kameswar Rao, J..Recently, Public Sector Bank employees had threatened to go on a nationwide strike to protest against the proposed merger of SBI associates as well as the privatisation of the IDBI bank. This was later deferred after an order from the Delhi High Court restraining the employees from proceeding with the strike till the next date of hearing..Today in Court: Notice was issued to the All India Banking Association Employees, with the interim order to continue. The matter ill now be heard on September 22, 2016.

The B&B Causelist #242: Aadhar challenge, Patiala House violence, Entry tax, PSB strike, Bilkis Bano & more (Evening Updates)

Related Stories