The bench of judges comprising Chief Justice Mohit Shah and Justice MS Sonak heard a petition filed by Kusum Harsora (54) and her 78 year old mother whose son is an abuser. The petition filed by the duo challenged the exclusion of women other than the wife or live-in partner of a male abuser from the ambit of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. The exclusion meant that none other than the spouse of an abuser was eligible to be included as ‘aggrieved persons” under the Act.
The division bench of the Court, consisting of Justice Pradeep Nandrajog and Justice Jayant Nath made these observations while reviewing a writ petition filed by the Zamrudpur Welfare Association. The petition had sought to make the South Delhi Municipal Corporation and DDA answerable in its inability to ensure proper traffic movement in the Zamrudpur area and to reverse a decision granted by the DDA approving the use of a community hall as a “barat ghar” or wedding hall.
Justice J.S. Khehar, speaking for the two-judge bench stated that in instances where a issue between the same parties is already under adjudication in a court which has the jurisdiction to pass judgement over the matter, then a law suit involving the same two parties will not be allowed to proceed in another court or legal forum. He added that the judgement reached by the first court would be valid for both instances and must be acceptable to both parties.
The court further said that the airline should be allowed to run by the management of Air India Ltd. in whichever way they think will serve their cause the best. Any decision made by the court in the matter will complicate issues. The court also confirmed that the Implementation Committee is already examining the Dharmadhikari Committee Report and trying to put the best method forward.
Rohatgi shifted base from the Delhi Court to the Supreme Court after he was appointed as ASG in the year 1999. He had to work in a hostile atmosphere, but his perseverance and determination earned him a reputation of being one of the top lawyers in the Supreme Court.
The Justice had pointed to the news reports about the death of the Tihar inmates in his letter and said that he wondered whether the Chief Justice can take suo motu action solely on the basis of the news articles and demand an explanation.
A bench of Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice RS Endlaw confirmed that the process of the court could not be set in motion on such half baked petitions, although the high rate in death cases (10,081) is really a cause of utmost concern and the lives of the children have ended before they got a chance to bloom.
Strongly condemning the government’s inaction as “insensitive” and “apathetic”, the court, while slapping the Delhi government with the fine of Rs 2 lakh; also called into question the actions of the Union ministry of women and child development in running a campaign in which the images of the ministers appeared to be larger than the campaign message itself. Also, the decision of the government in publishing most of the advertisements in English also came under fire from the Court.
The PIL which was filed through lawyer Prashant Bhushan accused the authorities of Steel India Limited for carrying out suspicious acts of corruption to award various tenders to the private firms. The PIL also stated that such tenders or contracts should be immediately cancelled.
The bench which comprised of Justices B S Chauhan and J Chelameswar, further explained that children born out of such relationships could not be termed as illegitimate and these children had the right to inherit the properties left behind by any of the partners in such relationship.