News Analysis India

Tag: Bombay HC

  • No evidence against Aryan Khan, WhatsApp chats not objectionable: Bombay HC on cruise drugs case

    By Express News Service

    MUMBAI: There is no evidence of any conspiracy between Aryan Khan, Arbaaz Merchant and Munmun Dhamecha to commit drug-related offences and there is also nothing objectionable in the WhatsApp conversations between them, the Bombay High Court said in its bail order released on Saturday.

    The high court uploaded the detailed bail order in the drug case and stated that the trio did not conspire to commit the offence under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. The court on October 28 had granted bail to all the three accused.

    “Prima facie there is no evidence against Aryan Khan and the other two accused. The court also rejects the hatching the conspiracy plan claimed by the NCB by this trio,” the order stated.

    The court rejected the NCB’s argument that since Section 29 of the NDPS Act pertaining to conspiracy was applicable, rigours for bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act would apply and the cumulative quantity recovered should be considered.

    The court noted that no drug was found in Aryan’s possession while the quantity recovered from Arbaz and Munmun were “small” quantities under the NDPS Act. In such a scenario, in order to invoke offence of conspiracy against the accused, there has to be positive evidence about an agreement to do an unlawful act or to do lawful act by unlawful means and such agreement must precede with meeting of minds, the court said.

    But there was no such material in the instant case, the court held. As per the presented material, it showed that Aryan and Arbaz were travelling together while Munmum had an independent travel plan. The court observed that merely because Aryan Khan, Arbaaz Merchant and Munmun Dhamecha were travelling in the same cruise, that by itself cannot be a foundation for the charge of conspiracy.

    The accused were not even subject to a medical examination to determine whether at relevant time they had consumed drugs. The court also stated that the confession statement of the accused presented by the NCB could not be cited as evidence considering the Supreme Court observations in the Tofan Singh versus State of Tamil Nadu.

    Therefore, the NCB claim of the accused admitting their crime must be rejected. Aryan was taken into custody by the NCB on October 2 after the agency raided a cruise ship en route to Goa from Mumbai. He was arrested from the terminal to the cruise.

  • Sameer Wankhede is govt officer, his actions can be examined by anyone, Bombay HC says while hearing defamation suit

    By PTI

    MUMBAI: NCB zonal director Sameer Wankhede is a “public officer” and his actions can be scrutinized by anyone, the Bombay High Court said on Wednesday while hearing a defamation suit filed by his father against Maharashtra minister Nawab Malik.

    Dnyandev Wankhede, Sameer’s father, has sought damages of Rs 1.25 crore from Malik and an order restraining him from making further false or incorrect statements against the Wankhede family.

    The NCP leader has levelled a series of allegations against Sameer Wankhede, accusing him, among other things, of forging his birth certificate to get a government job.

    During the hearing, Dnyandev Wankhede’s lawyer Arshad Shaikh asked why Sameer should provide any justifications to a person who is “just an MLA and not a court.”

    To which, Justice Madhav Jamdar said, “You are a public officer…you just need to prove that the tweets (posted by Malik) are prima facie false…Your son is not only an individual, but a public officer and can be examined by any member of public.”

    On the other hand, the court also asked Malik’s lawyer Atul Damle, “Is it not your duty to verify the documents before posting? Have you verified the authenticity of the documents as a responsible citizen and spokesperson of a national party?” Wankhede’s lawyer then sought time to file an additional affidavit to establish that Malik’s allegations were false.

    The court granted him time till Friday, and also asked the NCP leader’s lawyer to file an affidavit to the effect that he had verified the documents (related to Sameer Wankhede’s personal details) before posting them on Twitter or publishing them.

    The matter was posted for further hearing on November 12.

    Dnyandev Wankhede’s suit said that Malik’s claim that he was Muslim amounted to questioning religious beliefs of the family, and the minister’s allegations had caused an irreparable damage to the family’s reputation.

    It also sought a direction to Malik to withdraw all “defamatory statements” and tweets about the Wankhede family.

    Sameer Wankhede last month led a raid on a cruise ship off the Mumbai coast during which the NCB allegedly seized drugs and arrested Aryan Khan, actor Shah Rukh Khan’s son, and 19 others.

    Malik alleged that the whose raid was bogus.

    He also claimed that Sameer Wankhede was born a Muslim as his father had converted to Islam, but later Sameer forged his birth certificate to get a job in the Scheduled Castes quota and stated falsely that he was Hindu.

    The NCB official has denied the allegations.

  • NCB ‘misinterpreting’ WhatsApp chats to implicate me in drugs case: Aryan Khan to Bombay High Court

    By PTI

    MUMBAI: Aryan Khan, son of Bollywood superstar Shah Rukh Khan, in his plea in the Bombay High Court seeking bail, has said the NCB was “misinterpreting” his WhatsApp chats to implicate him in the case of seizure of banned drugs aboard a cruise ship off the Mumbai coast earlier this month.

    Aryan Khan, currently in jail, on Wednesday moved the HC after a special court rejected his application for bail.

    The HC will hear his bail plea on October 26.

    In his appeal in the HC against the special court order, Aryan Khan said the Narcotics Control Bureau’s “interpretation and misinterpretation” of the WhatsApp chats collected from his mobile phone was “wrong and unjustified”.

    ALSO READ: Aryan Khan’s custody extended till October 30, Ananya Panday grilled

    The 23-year-old claimed no contraband was recovered from him after the NCB raided the ship and maintained he has no connection with any of the other accused in the case except Arbaaz Merchant and Aachit Kumar.

    So far, the anti-drugs agency has arrested as many as 20 people in connection with the case.

    The appeal further said the WhatsApp chats that are being relied upon by the NCB are “ex-facie (on the face of it) of a period prior to the incident”.

    “By no stretch of imagination can those purported messages be linked to any conspiracy for which the secret information was received,” it said.

    ALSO READ: Shah Rukh Khan’s bodyguard visits NCB office to hand over documents

    “The interpretation of the WhatsApp messages is that of the investigating officer and such interpretation is unjustified and wrong,” the appeal said.

    Aryan Khan also questioned the special court’s contention, while refusing him bail, that since he is an influential person he may tamper with evidence in the case if released from custody.

    “There is no presumption in law that merely because a person is influential, there is likelihood of him tampering with the evidence,” the appeal said.

    Aryan Khan was arrested on October 3 by the NCB along with his friend Arbaaz Merchant (26) and fashion model Munmun Dhamecha (28).

    The trio is presently in judicial custody.

    While Aryan Khan and Merchant are lodged at the Arthur Road prison in central Mumbai, Dhamecha is at the Byculla women’s prison.

    A special court, designated to hear cases related to the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS), refused to grant them bail noting that “they were part of the conspiracy”.

    The lower court had said Aryan Khan had a “nexus with drug peddlers and suppliers and had indulged in illicit drug activities on a regular basis”.

  • Bombay High Court reserves order on ZEEL’s plea against EGM as requested by Invesco

    By PTI

    MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court on Friday reserved its order on Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd’s (ZEEL) plea after the media company said it was unwilling to hold an extraordinary general meeting (EGM) of shareholders as requested by Invesco, its largest shareholder.

    A single bench of the high court presided over by Justice G S Patel had on Thursday asked the media company if it was willing to hold such a meeting.

    On Friday, senior counsel Gopal Subramanium, who appeared for ZEEL, informed the court that the company’s board of directors could not grant permission for something that could turn out to be “illegal”.

    Subramanium said that “clouds of concern had appeared on the horizon”, following the court’s query posed in the previous hearing and the ZEEL board had decided against holding an EGM.

    Invesco Developing Markets Fund and OFI Global China Fund, the largest investors of ZEEL, had sent a requisition to the company on September 11 to call for an EGM for the removal of MD and CEO Punit Goenka and two other non-independent and non-executive directors from the company’s board.

    It had also sought the induction of six new independent directors.

    ZEEL, however, moved the high court on October 2, seeking that the court declare the requisition notice sent by Invesco as illegal and invalid.

    On Friday, Subramanium told the court, “If the board of directors are compelled to carry out the requisition, then it would be violative of other provisions of laws.”

    He further stated that the existing legal provisions permitted the board of directors to reject a requisition for an EGM if it had reasons to believe that the objective of such meeting was illegal.

    Senior counsel Kapil Sibal, who appeared for Goenka, questioned what would happen to the mandate if these resolutions were passed and Goenka was removed, and said that the board could not exist without anyone in the two top roles.

    Invesco’s counsel, senior advocate Janak Dwarkadas, however, argued that calling for the EGM was not in violation of any law and that the shareholders had a right to call for the meeting.

    “Before calling the meeting, how can you (ZEEL) come to the court and say look into the legality of this?” asked Dwarkadas.

    The high court closed all arguments and reserved its order on the suit filed by ZEEL.

    It is likely to pronounce its order on October 26.

  • Bombay High Court orders fresh NEET for two medical courses aspirants after mix-up by invigilators

    By PTI

    MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court has directed the National Testing Agency (NTA) to conduct the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET) afresh for two medical college aspirants as they had been handed question papers and answer sheets with incorrect serial numbers during the recently held exam.

    The order was passed by the high court on Wednesday on a petition filed by the two students through advocate Pooja Thorat.

    The petitioners told the court that NEET candidates are given a question paper and answer booklet (sheet) bearing the same code and same seven-digit serial number.

    But due to a mix-up by invigilators, some students including the petitioners received question papers and answer booklets bearing different codes and serial numbers, they said.

    Advocate Thorat told a bench of Justices R D Dhanuka and Abhay Ahuja that though the petitioners immediately pointed out the mix-up, the invigilators threatened to report them for “causing a disturbance in the examination hall and committing unfair practice.”

    Advocate Rui Rodrigues, who appeared for the NTA, said it was “not possible” for the exam authority to allow the petitioners to reappear for the exam.

    The judges, however, held that the petitioners “shall not suffer because of the mistake on the part of respondents.”

    It directed the NTA to hold a “fresh examination for the two petitioners for the academic year 2021-22,” and to declare their results within two weeks.

  • Supreme Court collegium recommends 16 names for elevation as judges of four HCs

    By PTI

    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court collegium, headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) NV Ramana, has recommended 16 names for elevation as judges of the high courts of Bombay, Gujarat, Orissa and Punjab and Haryana.

    In its meeting held on Wednesday, the collegium approved the proposal for elevation of 16 names — six judicial officers and 10 advocates — as judges of these four high courts.

    As per the statements uploaded on the apex court website on Thursday, the collegium has approved the proposal for elevation of four judicial officers — AL Pansare, SC More, US Joshi-Phalke and BP Deshpande — as judges of the Bombay High Court.

    Similarly, the collegium has recommended names of advocates Aditya Kumar Mohapatra and Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo and judicial officers Radha Krishna Pattanaik and Sashikanta Mishra for their elevation as judges of the Orissa High Court.

    For the Gujarat High Court, the collegium has approved the proposal for elevation of seven advocates — Mauna Manish Bhatt, Samir J Dave, Hemant M Prachchhak, Sandeep N Bhatt, Aniruddha Pradyumna Mayee, Niral Rashmikant Mehta and Nisha Mahendrabhai Thakore — as judges there.

    “The Supreme Court collegium in its meeting held on September 29, 2021 has approved the proposal for elevation of Sandeep Moudgil, advocate, as judge in the Punjab and Haryana High Court,” said one of the statements.

    Besides the CJI, the three-member collegium which deals with the appointment in high courts includes Justices UU Lalit and AM Khanwilkar. The collegium has been taking steps by recommending names to fill up a large number of vacancies in higher judiciary in the country.

    After assuming charge as the CJI in April this year, Justice Ramana has recommended nearly 100 names for appointment to different high courts, besides filling up nine vacancies of judges in the Supreme Court in one go.

    The 25 high courts in the country have a combined sanctioned strength of 1,080 judges and on May 1, 2021, they were functioning with 420 judges only. In a historic decision on August 17, the collegium had recommended nine names, including three women, for elevation as judges of the Supreme Court.

    The names were cleared with significant pace by the Centre leading to the swearing-in ceremony on August 31 when the new judges were administered oath of office as apex court judges.

  • Bombay HC asks CBI to file reply to bail plea of prime accused in Narendra Dabholkar killing

    By PTI

    MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court on Tuesday issued a notice to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and directed it to file a reply to the bail plea of Virendrasingh Tawade, a prime accused in the 2013 case of killing of rationalist Narendra Dabholkar in Pune.

    A bench of Justices SS Shinde and NJ Jamadar directed the CBI to file its reply within two weeks.

    The central agency had arrested Tawade in 2016 and said in its charge-sheet that he was one of the masterminds of the conspiracy to kill the rationalist.

    Tawade, lodged in Pune’s Yerwada Jail under judicial custody, approached the HC for bail earlier this year.

    Last week, a special court in Pune framed charges against Tawade and three co-accused for the offence of murder under the IPC and relevant provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.

    The fifth accused in the case, Sanjeev Punalekar, faces charges under IPC section 201 (causing disappearance of the evidence or giving false inform to screen offender).

    The HC will hear the bail plea further on October 13.

    Dabholkar, who headed the Maharashtra Andhashraddha Nirmoolan Samiti, an anti-superstition outfit, was shot dead in Pune on August 20, 2013.

  • Bombay HC to hold virtual hearing in Tarun Tejpal case on October 27

    By PTI

    PANAJI: The Goa Bench of the Bombay High Court on Monday said it will hear virtually on October 27 the Goa government’s appeal against journalist Tarun Tejpal’s acquittal in a 2013 rape case.

    A bench of Justices M S Sonak and M S Jawalkar adjourned the matter till October 27 after Goa’s Advocate General Devidas Pangam and a lawyer representing Tejpal asked for a next date of hearing.

    Justice Sonak said the court will set up the facility for virtual hearing into the matter by the next date.

    The hearing into the matter would be held virtually as Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta, representing the Goa government, will participate in the court proceedings from Delhi.

    Advocate General Pangam said the hearing on Monday was held to decide the next date (of hearing into the matter).

    Earlier, the HC had on August 31 adjourned the hearing on the Goa government’s appeal against Tejpal’s acquittal in the rape case till September 20, pending request before the Chief Justice for a hybrid (physical plus virtual) hearing into the matter.

    Before that, the matter was being heard online.

    On August 31, for the first time the matter was taken up physically, in the wake of the Goa government relaxing several COVID-19 curbs.

    Last month, Tejpal in a submission before the HC sought an ‘in-camera’ hearing of the Goa government’s petition challenging his acquittal in the case, and sought its dismissal while raising preliminary objections on its maintainability.

    However, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta had at that time opposed Tejpal’s request for the ‘in-camera’ hearing, saying the “country has the right to know how the institution dealt with the girl (victim)”.

    On May 21 this year, a sessions court acquitted Tejpal, the former editor-in-chief of the Tehelka magazine, in the case where he was accused of sexually assaulting his then colleague in a lift of a five-star hotel in Goa in November 2013 when they were attending an event.

    Later, the Goa government filed an appeal against it in the HC.

  • Bombay High Court allows private doctors to visit Rakesh Wadhawan at government hospital

    By PTI

    MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court on Friday permitted a team of doctors from a private hospital to examine HDIL promoter Rakesh Wadhawan, an accused in the Punjab and Maharashtra Co-operative (PMC) Bank scam, at a government hospital.

    Justice Bharati Dangre granted the permission after Wadhawan’s counsel said he suffered from multiple ailments and had contracted coronavirus infection twice.

    Senior Advocate Aabad Ponda, appearing for Wadhawan, said his medical condition required some procedures which were not available at the KEM Hospital where he is being treated at present.

    Ponda sought permission for doctors from a private hospital to visit Wadhawan.

    The high court allowed the request and asked state prison authorities to submit a report on September 24.

    Wadhawan was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate in 2019 on the charges of money laundering in connection with the alleged PMC Bank scam.

    He is in judicial custody since then.

  • Bombay High Court orders man, his family to vacate his elderly parents’ flat for harassing them

    By PTI

    MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court has ordered a Mumbai resident and his wife to vacate the flat of his elderly parents within a month after it came to light that the man had been harassing them and refusing to leave the property.

    A single bench presided over by Justice G S Kulkarni passed an order earlier this week, directing the man, Ashish Dalal, and his family to vacate the flat owned by his 90-year-old father and 89-year-old mother after noting that the elderly couple had been “suffering” at the hands of their only son and his wife.

    While directing Dalal to vacate the flat, the high court also rued that parents have to approach courts to secure their rights and protect themselves from harassment meted out by their own sons.

    “Before parting and having noticed that this is a case where the old parents are suffering at the hands of the only son and daughter-in-law, it appears that there is certainly some element of truth in the popular saying that ‘daughters are daughters forever and sons are sons till they are married’ albeit there would surely be exemplary exceptions,” the HC said.

    The bench further said that the Senior Citizens Act mandated that offsprings and relatives of elderly citizens ensure that the latter led a normal life, free if any kind of harassment.

    It also said that the present case was a sad one, where the man was intentionally preventing his parents from leading a normal life in their old age.

    “The obligation of the children or relatives, as the case may be (under the Act), extends to ensure that a senior citizen may lead a normal life,” the high court said.

    “This would certainly include within its ambit, protection from any harassment and torture meted out by a son or relative by keeping himself on the premises owned by the senior citizens,” it said.

    The court was hearing a plea filed by Dalal challenging an order of the Senior Citizens Tribunal, which asked him and his wife to vacate the said flat.

    The tribunal, too, had noted in its order that the couple was being harassed by their son.

    During the arguments in the high court, the bench saw that while Dalal owned three residential premises himself in Navi Mumbai and Dahisar area, he had been insisting on staying in his parents’ flat in the city.

    The benchrejected Dalal’s petition and directed him to vacate the flat within 30 days.

    It said that the purpose of the Senior Citizens Act was to “aid senior citizens to lead a normal life” and that the provisions if the Act recognised and protected a senior citizen’s right to property.