October 4, 2022

The Lawmatics Bulletin-15

7-December-2020 to 20-December-2020

Case Reports: Courts of India


dash

The Data has been updated from the official website of National Judicial Data Grid


KARNATAKA ASSEMBLY PASSES BILL TO BAN SLAUGHTER OF CATTLE EXCEPT BUFFALO ABOVE THE AGE OF 13 YEARS

The bill titled the Karnataka Prevention of Slaughter and Preservation of Cattle Bill, 2020, imposes a total ban on the slaughter of cattle. The bill repeals the Karnataka Prevention of Cow Slaughter and Cattle Preservation Act 1964.  Under the 1964 law, slaughter of bullock or buffalo was permissible with certification from the competent authority as the ban was only on the slaughter of “cow or calf of she-buffalo” but in present bill it prohibits slaughter of any kind of cattle and also prohibits transportation of cattle within or outside the state mainly for the purpose of slaughter. The offences under this law are cognizable and violations can be punished with imprisonment of three to five years and fine ranging from Rs 50,000 to Rs 5 lakh. 


FEMALE EMPLOYEE IS ENTITLED TO MATERNITY LEAVE EVEN IF THE CHILD IS BORN PRIOR TO JOINING GOVERNMENT SERVICE: SC

Smt. Neeraj v. State of Rajasthan

Recently in the present case, the question arises before the bench that whether a candidate, who has given birth to a child prior to joining the Government service, is entitled for maternity leave under Rule 103 of Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951?
The Bench of Justice Dinesh Mehta ruled that, A female Government servant is entitled to avail maternity leave, if she joins within the period of confinement, i.e. 15 days before to three months after the childbirth, regardless of the fact that the child was born prior to joining or before issuance of appointment order.
In the case of Harshita Yadav Vs. State of Raj. & Ors, 2017 it was also held that the petitioner is entitled for maternity leave, irrespective of the fact that she gave birth to a child before entering into the Government Service.


IT MINISTRY IN ITS REPLY TO RTI SAID THAT THERE IS NO PENALTY FOR USER WHO USE BLOCKED APPS

The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology banned many chinese apps by citing the reason of threat to national security, safety and sovereignty of Indian cyberspace, and said in its reply to RTI that there is no penalty for individual users who use the blocked application. However, there is a penalty prescribed for intermediaries under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act who fail to comply with blocking orders.
SECTION 69A-Power to issue directions for blocking for public access of any information through any computer resource. –
3)The intermediary who fails to comply with the direction issued under sub-section (1) shall be punished with an imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine.


TERMINATION OF PREGNANCY IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT ENSHRINED UNDER ARTICLE 21: ORISSA HC

A Division Bench of Justices SK Mishra and Savitri Ratho, in its order permitted a rape victim to terminate her pregnancy after 20 weeks of gestation, the Court held that right to progeny and termination thereof is a fundamental right enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The Bench observed that India has ratified the Convention for Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) in 1993 and is under an international obligation to ensure that the right of a women in reproductive choices is protected.
In the famous case of Meera Santosh Pal v. Union of India 2017, the Supreme Court held that women’s right to make reproductive choice is also a dimension of personal liberty as understood under Article-21 of the Constitution.


FARMERS HAVE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO CONTINUE PROTEST WITHOUT IMPEDIMENT: SC

Rakesh Vaishnav & Ors. V. UOI & Ors.

The Supreme Court this week said farmers have a constitutional right to continue with their “absolutely perfect” protest as long as their dissent against the controversial agricultural laws did not slip into violence and said their purpose would not be served if the protestors continued to protest without talks. The court said,”We are of the view at this stage that the farmers’ protest should be allowed to continue without impediment and without any breach of peace either by the protesters or the police”. The bench headed by Chief Justice of India S A Bobde reiterated its suggestion to constitute a committee “impartial and independent” to facilitate talks between the protesting farmers and the Central Government to resolve the disputes over the recently passed farm laws. The CJI also suggested the Central Governemnt to put on hold the implementation of the farm laws to facilitate discussions