The Commission in the said matter has also come across various such advertisements and fundraising activities by prominent NGOs and organizations.

New Delhi [India], April 18 (ANI): The Delhi High Court on Monday refused to set aside the order passed by the trial court dismissing the mutual divorce petition filed within one year of marriage.

New Delhi [India], April 5 (ANI): The Supreme Court on Tuesday granted four weeks more time to the Centre to file a reply on a petition on gender discrimination in Hindu succession law.

New Delhi Feb 25 PTI The Supreme Court Friday said it would be open to the chief metropolitan magistrate or the district magistrate to appoint an advocate commissioner to assist in execution of order passed under section 14 1 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest SARFAESI Act 2002 Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act deals with the aspect related to chief metropolitan magistrate CMM or district magistrate DM to assist the secured creditor in taking possession of a secured assetA bench of Justices A M Khanwilkar and C T Ravikumar said the underlying purpose of the 2002 Act is to empower the financial institutions in India to have similar powers as enjoyed by their counterparts that is international banks in other countries and one such feature is to empower them to take possession of securities and sell themWe hold that it would be open to the CMMDM to appoint an advocate commissioner to assist himher in execution of the order passed under Section 141 of the 2002 Act said the bench in its 48-page judgementThe top court delivered the verdict on a batch of pleas which involved the question whether it is open to the DM or the CMM to appoint an advocate and authorise him or her to take possession of the secured assets and documents relating thereto and to forward the same to secured creditor within the meaning of section 141A of 2002 ActThe bench noted that advocate commissioner is not a new concept and lawyers are appointed as court commissioner to perform diverse administrative and ministerial work as per the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure and Code of Criminal ProcedureIt is well established that an advocate is a guardian of constitutional morality and justice equally with the judge He has an important duty as that of a judge He bears responsibility towards the society and is expected to act with utmost sincerity and commitment to the cause of justice He has a duty to the court first it saidPertinently no such rule has been framed by the Central government in reference to sub-section 1A of section 14 of the 2002 Act much less to expressly or by necessary implication prohibiting the CMMDM to engage an advocate commissioner for taking possession of the secured assets In absence thereof exclusion of engagement of an advocate as commissioner cannot be countenanced it addedThe bench noted that Section 14 of the Act predicates that if the secured creditor intends to take possession of the secured assets he must approach the CMMDM by way of an application in writing and on receipt of such request the magistrate must move into action in right earnestAs soon as such an application is received the CMMDM is expected to pass an order after verification of compliance of all formalities by the secured creditor referred to in the proviso in section 141 of the 2002 Act and after being satisfied to take possession of secured assets and documents relating thereto and to forward them to secured creditor at the earliest opportunity it saidThe latter is a ministerial act It cannot brook delay Time is of the essence This is the spirit of the special enactment However it is common knowledge that the CMMDM are provided with limited resources it saidThe apex court said that inevitably makes it difficult if not impossible for the CMMDM to fulfil his or her obligations with utmost dispatch to uphold the spirit of the special legislationIt is common knowledge that in the respective jurisdictions there is only one CMMDM If he is expected to reach at every location himself for taking possession in some jurisdictions it would be impracticable if not impossible for him to do so owing to large number of applications in the given jurisdiction being a commercial city it saidHowever we are persuaded to take the view that an advocate is and must be regarded as an officer of the court and subordinate to the CMMDM for the purposes of section 141A of the 2002 Act the apex court saidThe bench further observed that there is no reason to assume that the advocate so appointed by the CMMDM would misuse the task entrusted to him or her and that will not be carried out strictly as per law or it would be a case of abuse of powerRather going by the institutional faith or trust reposed on advocates being officers of the court there must be a presumption that if an advocate is appointed as commissioner for execution of the orders passed by the CMMDM under section 141 of the 2002 Act that responsibility and duty will be discharged honestly and in accordance with rules of law it saidIn our view in law an advocate is an officer of the court and thus subordinate to the CMMDM Further there is no indication in the 2002 Act or the Rules made thereunder to exclude such interpretation it saidThe bench was dealing with pleas including those arising out of the Bombay High Court judgement of November 2019 which had opined that the advocate not being a subordinate officer to the CMM or DM such appointment would be illegalThe top court was also dealing with pleas filed against the Madras High Court verdict of March 2020 which had taken a contrary view while following earlier decision of the same high court on the reasoning that advocate is regarded as an officer of the court and thus subordinate to the CMM or the DM PTI ABA SA

Mumbai (Maharashtra) [India], February 23 (ANI): A case has been registered against actor and director Mahesh Manjrekar at Mahim police station in Mumbai for allegedly showing obscene scenes involving minor children in a Marathi film, said police on Wednesday.

Thiruvananthapuram (Kerala) [India], February 22 (ANI): Opposition in Kerala Assembly on Tuesday staged a walkout after Speaker M V Rajesh rejected the request for an adjournment motion to discuss Lokayukta Amendment Act.

New Delhi Jan 24 PTI The Delhi High Court on Monday listed for April 30 a public interest litigation PIL concerning the safety and security of the Prime Minister considering the pendency of overlapping issues before the Supreme CourtA bench headed by Chief Justice D N Patel initially said that it would ask the Centre to consider as representation the PIL which seeks a declaration that all authorities civil or military shall act under the supervision of the Special Protection Group SPG in matters of security of the Prime Minister and his immediate family membersLawyer V Govinda Ramanan representing the petitioner Ashish Kumar said that the plea was on a limited point of law that the SPG should have the power of superintendence in respect of the PMs safety and that he has already made a representation to the Ministry of Home AffairsThe petitioner has claimed that he filed the PIL in view of media reports on a security breach during Prime Minister Narendra Modis recent visit to PunjabCentral government counsel Amit Mahajan informed the court that the Supreme Court is already seized of overlapping issuesThe bench also comprising Justice Jyoti Singh adjourned the hearing on the PIL and noted that the apex court has passed directions and is awaiting the report of the committee already appointed by itOn January 5 the prime ministers convoy was stranded on a flyover due to a blockade by protesters in Ferozepur after which he returned from poll-bound Punjab without attending any event including a rallyOn January 12 the Supreme Court had on a petition seeking a thorough investigation into the matter appointed a five-member committee headed by former apex court judge Justice Indu Malhotra to probe the security breachIn the PIL before the high court the petitioner has argued that the security of the Prime Minister cannot be left to the discretion of the states and the absolute superintendence in matters of his safety should be exercised by the SPGHe has submitted that the SPG was created with the sole purpose of ensuring the safety and security of the prime minister and all authorities are therefore duty-bound to aid their functionsThe petitioner has alleged that recently the Govt of Punjab including the Police officials of the state instead of coming to the aid of SPG in terms of Section 14 of the SPG Act 1988 was creating obstacles to the proximate security of the Honble Prime MinisterIt came to the knowledge of the petitioner via media reports that there has been a breach in the security of the Honble Prime Minister during his recent visit to the border state of Punjab on 05012022 which inter-alia is further evidence from the fact that his convoy was stuck and was made to wait on a flyover for more than 20 minutes thereby exposing and putting his life at risk to a terrorist attack the petition saidIn a country that has witnessed the assassination of two PMs such security lapses pose a great threat to national security and also put the life of the common citizens at risk the petitioner has arguedPTI ADS SA

New Delhi [India], January 10 (ANI): A plea has been moved in Delhi High Court seeking direction to quash Section 14 of the impugned National Commission for Indian System of Medicine (NCISM) Act, 2020 that mandated a common NEET for taking admission in all the disciplines of medical education like MBBS, BDS, BAMS, BSMS, BUMS and BHMS.

New Delhi [India], October 4 (ANI): The Delhi High Court on Monday issued notice to the Delhi Government and Central Government on a petition challenging the constitutional validity of Section 6(2) and Section 14(1) of the Civil Defence Act, 1968.