New Delhi Apr 25 PTIThe Delhi High Court on Monday said that police booths are a public requirement and a necessity and refused to examine a plea alleging encroachment upon pavement by such establishments which obstruct pedestrians This is a public requirement They need a booth it is a requirement and a necessity You cant say as a principle that there cant be a police booth Where will they hang it On a tree or what said a bench headed by Acting Chief Justice Vipin Sanghi while hearing the petition by the Jan Seva Welfare Society The bench also comprising Justice Navin Chawla asked the petitioner to raise a grievance before the authorities in case there is a specific instance of a police booth obstructing any passage If your grievance is that any particular booth is causing difficulty you may raise it stated the court It added that the authorities shall consider any grievance raised by the petitioner within four weeks and if the same is found to be justified they would take appropriate remedies Delhi police counsel informed the court that the issue of regulating the establishment of the police boothskiosks has already been considered by the court pursuant to which an order was also issued by the authorities The court was also informed that an earlier petition by the petitioner seeking similar relief was unconditionally withdrawn by him and the same issues cannot be raised again In that petition the petitioner had prayed for a direction for the removal of illegally constructed police booths PTI ADS RKS RKS

New Delhi Apr 25 PTI The Delhi High Court on Monday directed the Delhi Police Commissioner to look into and fix responsibility for the serious lapse outside the residence of Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal last month when certain miscreants breached the barricades reached the gate and destroyed public property and called the incident a very disturbing state of affairs A bench headed by Acting Chief Justice Vipin Sanghi which was hearing a plea by AAP MLA Saurabh Bhardwaj concerning the alleged attack outside the CMs residence on March 30 during a protest against his remarks on The Kashmir Files film said that it was clear there was a failure on the part of the police force and that the bandobast security arrangement was inadequate The bandobast made outside the residence of the CM and the road leading to the residence in the wake of the permission sought on behalf of Bhartiya Janta Yuva Morcha which was declined was not adequate said the bench also comprising Justice Navin Chawla The court noted that as per the status report filed by the police certain miscreants breached the barricades and reached the gate of the residence and said in our view the aforesaid lapse is a serious lapse and should be looked at by the Commissioner of Police Delhi Police This kind of incident happening at the residence of any constitutional functionary whether it is the CM it could be a judge of the high court or Supreme Court it could be any other Union Minister this is a very disturbing state of affairs that this kind of a thing could in the first place occur or such miscreants should succeed in their endeavourwhat kind of a bandobast did you have in place that people could breach three barricades Then you seriously need to look into your efficiency and functioning remarked the court It is very clear that there has been a failure on part of the force to prevent the incident We want the Commissioner of Police to look into the lapse on part of the police the court observed The court questioned if additional force was called when the first barricade was broken or the mob reached the CMs residence and said that the issue concerning the security arrangement needs investigation at the highest level He CP should inquire into firstly whether bandobast was adequate secondly the reasons for the failure of the arrangements made and thirdly fix the responsibility for the lapse which admittedly has occurred the court stated The court clarified that it was not satisfied with the present police status report which was given in a sealed cover as far as the security arrangement was concerned and granted two weeks to the police commissioner to file a further status report including on the aspect of the review of the CMs security In case of any lapse in the investigation in the matter the magistrate concerned may look into it and there are judicial remedies available it added Additional Solicitor General Sanjay Jain appearing for the Delhi Police stated that the investigation in the matter was ongoing and a review of the CMs security has been undertaken and the petition should thus be closed He added that although the incident ought to not have happened a failure does not mean that the bandobast was fundamentally flawed Once there is a failure it has to come with consequences Responsibility has to be fixed so that remedial action is taken This is a very important facet of democracy irrespective of our ideology just like we say nobody can say he is not our PM It is the constitutional office we are concerned with It is not about A individual or B individual the court said Senior advocates Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Rahul Mehta appearing for the petitioner urged the court to constitute an SIT for an impartial and independent probe into the incident which was no laughing matter Singhvi claimed that certain persons who were seen in the videos and pictures of the incident were later felicitated by a political party Bhardwaj in his petition through advocate Bharat Gupta has sought the constitution of an SIT to probe the alleged attack and argued that the vandalisation of the official residence of the Chief Minister during a protest against his remarks on The Kashmir Files film appears to have been carried out with Delhi Polices tacit complicity On March 30 2022 several BJP goons in the garb of a protest launched an attack on the official residence of the Delhi CM Videos and photographs show that these goons casually walked through the security cordon maintained by Delhi Police kicked and broke the boom barrier broke the CCTVs cameras with lathis threw paint on the gate of the residence and almost climbed over the gate while Delhi Police personnel simply looked on doing little to stop the protestors the plea alleged On April 1 the high court had sought a status report from the police concerning the incident and said that an element of fear was sought to be created by the unruly crowd and the police force at the spot was inadequate and outnumbered The matter would be heard next on May 17 PTI ADS RKS RKS

New Delhi Apr 21 PTIThe Delhi High Court on Thursday sought the stand of court authorities on public interest litigation against the fraudulent use of Judge parking stickers on vehicles A bench headed by Acting Chief Justice Vipin Sanghi issued notice to the administration of the Delhi High Court and Tis Hazari courts on the petition by lawyer Sanser Pal Singh and asked the authorities to file their response specifically dealing with certain instances mentioned by the petitioner concerning the infraction of the guidelines on issuance of such parking stickers and to take remedial steps where required The petitioner has claimed that there have been several instances when he noticed the presence of cars with a Judge parking sticker but it was subsequently found that no such sticker was issued by the authorities against the registration numbers of those vehicles In two cases it was found that the registration number of the vehicles indicated that they were taxicab he has asserted The petitioner has also sought action against judicial officers who have obtained Judge car parking stickers without following the applicable guidelines The petitioner has argued that the fraudulent use of Judge stickers is a serious matter and poses a security threat as such vehicles having such stickers are not subjected to the security check at the court premises The petitioner has said that he made complaints to the concerned authorities on the issue but no action was taken The matter would be heard next in November PTI ADS RKS RKS

New Delhi Apr 20 PTI Pleas against the anti-encroachment drive by North Delhi Municipal Corporation in violence-hit Jahangirpuri were not taken up for hearing on Wednesday by the Delhi High Court following an order of status quo passed by the Supreme Court concerning the demolitionA bench headed by Acting Chief Justice Vipin Sanghi had agreed to list pleas against the drive for hearing during the day and asked the lawyers who mentioned the cause for urgent listing and relief in the morning to file their petitions and said I am not saying anything on stopping the demolition but that they authorities should be ready with instructions Later in the day the bench also comprising Justice Navin Chawla was informed by one of the lawyers that the Supreme Court has ordered the maintenance of the status quo on the site and agreed to hear a petition challenging the action of the civic bodies allegedly aimed against the accused of the communal offencesThe pleas including a PIL thereafter did not come up for hearing before the high courtWhen the matter was mentioned in the morning Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma told the court that the Supreme Court is already seized of the issue as certain parties were going to mention the issue there The Acting Chief Justice then said that the petitions would be heard during the day once they were filed and observed that there was nothing new and the drive was already in contemplation They have acquired force now You file it the petitions Justice Sanghi said and asked the authorities to be ready with instructionsThe high court further said that if the structures were part of a notified juggi slum cluster there was a process of rehabilitation otherwise there is no protection available The lawyer appearing for one of the aggrieved parties urged the high court to protect the dwellers till 2 pm In the aftermath of the violence some residents are not in the area and some are in custody she added The area had witnessed violent clashes including stone-pelting arson and firing between two communities during a Hanuman Jayanti procession on Saturday PTI ADS RKS RKS

New Delhi Apr 18 PTI The Delhi High Court on Monday dismissed public interest litigation seeking the removal of election symbols from the ballot papers for the municipal elections in the city A bench headed by Acting Chief Justice Vipin Sanghi said that it was not impressed by the stand taken by petitioner Alka Ghalot We are dismissing it We are not impressed by your submissions stated the bench also comprising Justice Navin Chawla The petitioner who had contested and lost the MCD polls earlier contended that the objective behind the municipal elections is local self-governance which is taken away by the appearance of election symbols of political parties on the ballot paper The petitioner represented by lawyer HS Gahlot argued that a candidate with an existing symbol of a recognized political party gets an unfair advantage over a candidate with an unknown symbol It was further contended that a candidate sponsored by a recognized political party would have the advantage of having a reserved symbol which violates the basic principle of having a level playing field The court asked the petitioner if political parties were banned from contesting local body elections and remarked that if the petitioners submission is good then it should be applied to all other elections as well and not just municipal elections He a candidate will not be elected if he is not popular Independent candidates are elected very often the court said The petitioner also stated that the presence of election symbols on the ballot paper was in violation of the Constitution and the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act as both of them make no reference to political parties in relation to municipal polls Counsel for State Election Commission Sumeet Pushkarna emphasised that there were Supreme Court orders holding that symbols were important and relevant to the elections and help the illiterate relate to their candidate of choice He also said that neither the Election Commission of India nor any political party was made a party to the petition PTI ADS RKS RKS

New Delhi Feb 18 PTI The Delhi High Court on Friday said that a detenu has the fundamental right under Article 225 of the Constitution to know the grounds of his detention and such communication has to be furnished to him in a language that he understandsA bench headed by Justice Siddharth Mridul clarified that merely because a detenu is able to sign or write a few words in English or any other language would not mean that he is conversant with the languageWhether he has sufficient working knowledge has to be examined in each case and it would always be the safer course to furnish translations of the grounds of detention and the documents that are relied upon in the language that a detenu understands stated the bench also comprising Justice Anup J BhambhaniAs far as the documents that are only referred-to in a detention order are concerned the detenu must show the prejudice being caused to him by their non-supply in making an effective representation it addedThe court which was dealing with a habeas corpus petition against the allegedly illegal preventive detention of the petitioners son under the anti-smuggling law also said that the purpose of Article 225 is not served if the grounds of detention are only verbally explained and nothing in writing is left with the detenu in a language which he understandsIn the order the court further noted that if a detenu is illiterate the Supreme Court has held that it would be sufficient if the grounds of detention are explained to him in a language that he understandsA detenu has a fundamental right under Article 225 that the grounds on which a detention order has been made against him be communicated to him as soon as may be and that he be afforded an opportunity of making a representation against the detention order at the earliest the court said in the orderIn the present case the court ruled that the detention of the petitioners son who was a class 10 drop-out and attended a Hindi-medium school fell foul of the constitutional mandate as the detention order was not communicated to him in a language that he understoodMerely because a detenu is able to sign or write a few words in English or any other language does not mean that the detenu is conversant with the language since the detenu may yet not be able to effectively understand the contents of the grounds of detention and the relied-upon documents to be able to make an effective representation against the detention order the court saidCommunicating the grounds of detention effectively and fully to a detenu implies that the grounds must be furnished to him in a language which the detenu understands and if that entails the translation of the grounds to such language then that is part of the Constitutional mandate it addedThe court quashed the detention order and directed that the petitioners son be released from preventive detention forthwith unless required in any other case PTI ADS RKS RKS

New Delhi Jan 24 PTI Senior advocate Rebecca John on Monday told the Delhi High Court that she has been receiving hate mails asking her to step down from the position of amicus curiae in petitions seeking the criminalisation of marital rape as she already has an opinion on the issueThe senior lawyer who contendedthat the marital rape exception was not constitutional said that the marital rape exception would be tested on the anvil of its constitutionality and an individuals opinion was not relevantTo all those who asked me to recuse from the matter because I have an opinion on the subject Ive been receiving a lot of hate mail Ultimately the challenge is only to be tested on the anvil of constitutionality If it is constitutionally sound the exception remains If it is unconstitutional it goes It doesnt matter what views we hold on the subject she saidIf having a view was a ground for recusal then everyone should recuse from every case Every intelligent person has a view on everything remarked Justice C Hari Shankar who is part of the division bench headed by Justice Rajiv ShakdherThe bench is hearing PILs filed by NGOs RIT Foundation All India Democratic Womens Association a man and a woman seeking striking down of the exception granted to husbands under the Indian rape lawThe senior lawyer argued before the court that forced intercourse with the wife violated her right to bodily integrity and sexual decisional autonomy as she concluded her submissions She had earlier argued that there is no right but only an expectation of conjugal relations with wife in a marriage and the same also cannot lead to the husband having forced relations with herShe had also said that unlike several offences under the Indian Penal Code the offence of rape was gendered having consent of a woman as one of the ingredients and that the Justice JS Verma Committee report on amendments to criminal law had also recommended the deletion of the marital rape exceptionThe petitioners have challenged the constitutionality of the marital rape exception under section 375 IPC rape on the ground that it discriminated against married women who are sexually assaulted by their husbands PTI ADS RKS RKS

New Delhi Jan 20 PTI Association of the Victims of Uphaar Tragedy AVUT on Thursday opposed before the Delhi High Court the release of real estate barons Sushil and Gopal Ansal in the Uphaar cinema evidence tampering case in which they have been convicted and sentenced to the seven-year jail termSenior counsel for AVUT Vikas Pahwa told Justice Subramonium Prasad that he was ready for expeditious hearings on the appeals by the Ansal brothers against their conviction in the case and urged the judge to not suspend the sentence during its pendency before the sessions courtThe senior lawyer claimed that the Ansals were incorrigible and that the instant matter pertained to majesty of the law and obstruction of justiceHe contended that the petitioners tampered with evidence in conspiracy with court staff to seek the benefit of acquittal in the main Uphaar cinema trial and the accused persons cannot be allowed to take the law into their handsThe accused should not take law in their hands If they influential accused start doing this evidence tampering in connivance with the court staff what will happen Suspension may not be given Im ready for expeditious hearing on appeals Pahwa saidThe senior advocate opposed the grant of any relief to the petitioners on account of their old age and said that if the age is criteria then twenty-nine children died in this tragedyThe Ansals had filed petitions before the high court for suspension of their seven-year jail terms in the evidence tampering case after a sessions court here in December rejected their plea to suspend the conviction by a magisterial court and refused to release them on bailDelhi police have opposed the petitions arguing that the petitioners mutilated vital documents which formed part of the trial record in the main Uphaar cinema case which forced the prosecution to record the secondary evidence in the main case and resulted in an enormous delay of trial court proceedingsSpecial Public Prosecutor Dayan Krishnan had also claimed that the pandemic cannot be the basis to allow the prayers of the petitioners who no longer have the presumption of innocence in their favourSenior advocate Arvind Nigam representing Sushil Ansal had contended that the mutilated documents were not even relevant to his culpability in the main Uphaar trial and his conviction in the evidence tampering case was a travesty of justiceHe had submitted that Sushil Ansal was over 80 years of age and suffered from various ailmentsSenior counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi appearing for Gopal Ansal had also argued that his client was over 70 years of age and the court should exercise its wide and liberal discretion to release himThe court was also informed that in the main case the petitioners were convicted and sentenced to a 2-year jail term by the Supreme Court which subsequently released them on payment of Rs 30 crore fine each after taking into account the prison time they had done While dismissing Ansals plea for suspension of sentence till the appeal against the conviction by a magisterial court is decided the sessions court had said that the case was one of the gravest of its kind and the offence appeared to be the outcome of a calculated design on the part of the convicts to interfere with the course of justiceThe sessions court had also refused to suspend the seven-year jail term each to former court staff Dinesh Chand Sharma and two others -- P P Batra and Anoop Singh Karayat -- in the case and release them on bailThe tampering was detected for the first time on July 20 2002 and when it was unearthed a departmental enquiry was initiated against Sharma and he was suspendedLater an enquiry was conducted and he was terminated from services on June 25 2004The magisterial court had also imposed a fine of Rs 225 crore each on the Ansals apart from imposing a seven-year term in the caseThe case was lodged on the direction of the Delhi High Court while hearing a petition by AVUT chairperson Neelam KrishnamoorthyThe matter would be heard next on January 25 PTI ADS RKS RKS

New Delhi Jan 18 PTI The Delhi High Court on Tuesday sought the stand of the Delhi government and other authorities on a petition seeking the removal of stray cows and bulls from roads and highways to prevent accidentsJustice V Kameswar Rao issued notice to the Delhi government Deputy Commissioner Traffic and Deputy Commissioner of South Delhi Municipal Corporation on the petition by Satish Sharma a lawyer who claimed to have suffered injuries after stray cows and bulls started quarrelling on the roadIn the petition the lawyer said that there are several stray cows and bulls wandering freely on the roads after being abandoned by their owners and despite several complaints to the concerned authorities the animals are yet to be removedOn December 15 2021 the petitioner was going to his home over his bike suddenly a flock of stray cow and bulls started quarrelling over the road By the quarrel of flock of stray cow and bulls the petitioner had sustained the injuries over his palm wrist knee and ankle Immediately the petitioner fall down over the road and anyhow the passer bye had saved him the petition saidIn these kinds of incidents and circumstances there can be grave possibilities of the road accident With the grace of God the life of the petitioner has been saved in two incidents Although the authorities and officials failed to perform their lawful duties and obligations it addedThe petition contended that it is the duty of the authorities to prevent the gathering of cows and bulls on the roads and their inaction is illegal wrong and uncalled for PTI ADS RKS RKS

New Delhi Nov 25 PTI Asking what it could do if people were feeling so sensitive the Delhi High Court Thursday dismissed a petition to stop the publication circulation and sale of Congress leader Salman Khurshids book Sunrise Over Ayodhya Nationhood In Our TimesJustice Yashwant Varma who was hearing a plea which claimed the book by the former Union minister impinges upon the faith of others told the petitioner Vineet Jindal-- to ask people to not read the book insteadCounsel for the petitioner contended that the book in its chapter called The Saffron Sky compared Hindutva to radical groups like ISIS and Boko Haram which could harm public peaceAsk people not to buy the book or read it Tell people it is badly authored tell them to read something better People who are incensed should write their own chapter responded the judge who noted that the entire book was not before the court Claiming that it was the duty of all persons to maintain peace the lawyer added that the author was a public figure and there has already been an incident of violence concerning the bookNot impressed with the submission the judge remarked What can we do if people are feeling so sensitive They can shut their eyes Nobody has asked them to read it During the hearing the lawyer submitted that freedom of speech was unfettered and that the government should see before giving licence for the publicationThe court dismissed the submission saying the government has not given any licence and a publisher does not need a license The lawyer claimed that every communal riot has come backing and argued that the objectionable parts should be removed from the book before its circulation The petitioner a lawyer had claimed that certain excerpts from the book were agitating the Hindu community while threatening the security peace and harmony of the nationSo in a country like India which is perpetually on a communal tinderbox where religious sentiments run deep where respect for certain public and historical figures always come accompanied with veneration for their demi-god status it doesnt take much for malice to be coated with a toxic communal hue based on the contents of the book the petition statedOn November 17 an additional civil judge here had refused to grant an ex-parte injunction on a lawsuit by Hindu Sena president Vishnu Gupta to stop the publication circulation and sale of the book for allegedly hurting sentiments of a large section of society While declining interim relief the trial court had said the author and publisher had the right to write and publish the book PTI ADS RKS RKS