97-Year-Old Kerala Lawyer Makes History with 73-Year Legal Career

by News

Advocate P. Balasubramanian Menon, a 97-year-old lawyer from Kerala, has set a Guinness World Record for having the longest career as a lawyer. He hails from Palakkad district in Kerala and has had a remarkable career spanning 73 years and 60 days since graduating from Madras Law College. Advocate Menon began his litigation career in the early 1950s and continues to practice civil law in his hometown.

Advocate Menon has surpassed the previous record set by Louis Triay, a government lawyer from Gibraltar who passed away at the age of 94. Louis Triay held the record for 70 years and 311 days. Advocate Menon aims to continue his legal practice as long as his health permits, serving as an inspiration to others.

Delhi High Court Calls for Government and Rapido’s Response in Making App-Based Cabs Disability-Friendly

by News

The Delhi High Court has taken a significant step towards enhancing the accessibility of app-based cab aggregator services for individuals with disabilities. In response to a plea filed by disability rights activist Amar Jain and visually impaired banker Dipto Ghosh Chaudhary, the court has issued notices to both the Central government and ride-hailing service Rapido.

The plea underscores the challenges faced by disabled individuals, asserting that not only Rapido but other cab aggregators also lack adequate systems to meet the accessibility needs of this demographic. The incident involving Dipto Ghosh Chaudhary being denied a ride by a Rapido driver based on his disability is highlighted as a violation of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act, 2016.

According to the RPwD Act, all service providers, both public and private, are legally obligated to ensure that their digital platforms are fully accessible to individuals with disabilities. The petitioners argue that the government, specifically the Central government, has failed to implement a mandate to guarantee digital accessibility for persons with disabilities in the realm of cab aggregator services.

The plea contends that this failure directly contradicts Section 41(1)(b) of the RPwD Act, which mandates the government to take suitable measures to provide access to all modes of transport for individuals with disabilities. The case is scheduled for the next hearing on December 20, 2024.

In seeking redress, the petitioners have urged the court to direct the Central government to establish a robust legal mandate and operational guidance for all app-based aggregators. The objective is to ensure that the digital platforms and operational processes of these services become more disability-friendly. Additionally, the plea calls for imposing fines on Rapido for its alleged failure to make its app accessible to persons with disabilities.

The outcome of this case could potentially set a precedent for making transportation services more inclusive and accessible for people with disabilities in India.

Manipur High Court Directs State to Lift Mobile Internet Ban in Violence-Free Areas

by News

The Manipur High Court has issued a directive to the State of Manipur concerning the use of mobile internet. They ordered the state to open and test mobile towers on a trial basis in district headquarters that have not experienced violence. Chief Justice Siddharth Mridul and Justice Golmei Gaiphulshillu Kabui, part of a Division Bench, also instructed the state to expand mobile services to other areas where the law and order situation permits.

Previously, the Manipur government extended the ban on mobile internet until November 8, with plans to conduct a trial run of mobile towers in district headquarters not affected by violence. Special State counsel M Rarry for the Manipur government provided the court with a copy of the government’s order, leading to the court’s directive.

The court emphasized that even in districts partially affected by violence, mobile towers should be put into operation in areas that have remained unaffected. Furthermore, the government was instructed to publish copies of all orders related to the suspension of internet services in Manipur on its official website.

This matter is scheduled for a compliance check on November 9, ensuring that the directive is followed. The court’s decision aims to allow more areas to access mobile internet while considering the security situation in different parts of Manipur.

Supreme Court Recommends Lawyers to Use ‘Sir’ to Address Judges Instead of ‘My Lords’

by News

The Supreme Court of India has recently taken a unique step in urging lawyers to alter their traditional way of addressing judges during court proceedings. They are advocating for lawyers to discontinue the use of customary phrases like “My Lords” or “Your Lordships” and instead adopt a simpler and more direct term, “Sir.” This unconventional request was made by a bench of justices, including AS Bopanna and PS Narasimha. Their motivation for making this request became evident when a lawyer repeatedly used the older honorifics during a court session.

Justice Narasimha, in a surprising move, went even further by offering the lawyer an intriguing proposition. He stated that he would personally give the lawyer half of his own salary if they agreed to make the switch to using “Sir” in place of “My Lords.” He playfully remarked, “How many times will you say ‘My Lords’? If you stop saying this, then I will give you half of my salary. Why don’t you use ‘Sir’ instead?” This offered a unique and somewhat humorous dimension to the situation.

This initiative is not entirely novel, as it resonates with a resolution that the Bar Council of India (BCI) passed in 2006. The BCI had called upon lawyers to refrain from using “My Lord” and “Your Lordship” when addressing judges. The BCI’s guidelines prescribed that lawyers should demonstrate respect for the court and its dignity. In the Supreme Court and High Courts, they should use “Your Honour” or “Hon’ble Court.” In Subordinate Courts and Tribunals, lawyers have the option to address the court as “Sir” or use equivalent terms in their regional languages.

This call for modernizing language and etiquette in the courtroom has not been limited to the Supreme Court alone. Judges in various high courts across India have extended similar advice to lawyers. For instance, the Orissa High Court, under the leadership of then Chief Justice S Muralidhar, advised that advocates and parties-in-person appearing before the court avoid “My Lord,” “Your Lordship,” “Your Honour,” and the prefix “Hon’ble.” In the Punjab & Haryana High Court, Justice Arun Kumar Tyagi requested lawyers not to use “Your Lordship” and recommended avoiding certain terms, such as “obliged” and “grateful,” during case arguments. Justice Devan Ramachandran of the Kerala High Court indicated a preference for being addressed as “Sir.”

This shift in addressing judges reflects a broader movement to simplify language and formalities in the courtroom. It underscores a commitment to promoting a more straightforward and respectful approach within the Indian legal system. By moving away from traditional colonial-era phrases and embracing more direct and contemporary language, the legal community in India is signaling its readiness to modernize court etiquette.

CJI Chandrachud Warns Against Becoming a ‘Tareekh Pe Tareekh Court’

by News

Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud has voiced concerns about the rising number of adjournment requests in the Supreme Court. He expressed worry that the court is increasingly becoming a ‘tareekh pe tareekh’ court, a term referring to a court characterized by frequent adjournments. CJI Chandrachud emphasized the significance of expediting cases and the adverse impact of excessive adjournments on the court’s image and public trust.

CJI Chandrachud recognized the efforts of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) and the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association (SCAORA) in reducing the time between filing cases and listing them for hearings. He acknowledged the improvement in reducing this period.

However, he pointed out that lawyers are frequently seeking adjournments, undermining the objective of faster case resolution. Between September and October, lawyers requested a total of 3,688 adjournments. CJI Chandrachud cited examples of multiple adjournment slips filed for various dates, including 178 adjournment slips for cases scheduled for November 3.

The CJI also noted the contradictory behavior of lawyers, who often request expedited listings for their cases and then seek adjournments when these cases are scheduled. He highlighted the inconsistency between the desire for quick hearings and the subsequent requests for delays.

CJI Chandrachud stressed the court’s moral responsibility in addressing this issue, as it negatively affects the perception of the judiciary among the citizens. Excessive adjournments erode public trust and can harm the court’s credibility.

In summary, Chief Justice DY Chandrachud expressed concerns about the rising number of adjournment requests in the Supreme Court and the consequent delay in case resolutions. While acknowledging improvements in reducing case listing times, he emphasized the importance of addressing the issue of excessive adjournments to maintain public trust and the court’s reputation.

Kerala High Court: Introducing Malayalam Version of Indian Law Reports

by News

The Kerala High Court has broken new ground by launching a Malayalam version of the Indian Law Reports (ILR) on its website. This marks a pioneering effort by a High Court in India to make law journals available in a regional language. The decision to publish the law reports in Malayalam is driven by the aim to enhance legal accessibility for the general public.

With this initiative, important judgments from the Supreme Court and High Courts will be accessible to a wider audience, without language barriers. By providing legal information in the local language, the Kerala High Court hopes to make the legal landscape more understandable and approachable for the common people.

The inauguration of this unique venture took place on November 1, Kerala Piravi Dinam, which commemorates the founding of the state. Chief Justice AJ Desai inaugurated the initiative at 9:50 am.

In summary, the Kerala High Court has set a significant precedent by launching a Malayalam version of the Indian Law Reports, thereby making legal knowledge more accessible to the public.

Section 295A IPC Considered for Teacher in Student Slap Case: UP’s Response to Supreme Court

by News

The Supreme Court has issued a judgment on the matter of a school teacher in Uttar Pradesh who was accused of inciting students to slap a Muslim classmate. The State government informed the Supreme Court that the teacher may face charges under Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which deals with deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings.

The case centers on a school teacher, Tripta Tyagi, who allegedly made derogatory comments about a Muslim student’s religion and asked his classmates to physically harm him. A video of this incident went viral on social media, leading to the sealing of the private school in Khubbapur village. The teacher, in response to the public outcry, released a video statement acknowledging her mistake but denying any communal angle to the incident.

Tushar Gandhi, the great-grandson of Mahatma Gandhi, filed a plea with the Supreme Court, seeking a time-bound and independent investigation into the incident. He also sought remedial actions to address violence against school children, especially those from religious minority groups. The Court expressed its concern about how the Uttar Pradesh Police and government were handling the case during earlier hearings.

The Court took issue with the contents of the first information report (FIR), which omitted critical allegations. As a result, the Court directed that the investigation be led by a senior Indian Police Services (IPS) officer nominated by the State government. The appointed officer was tasked with examining whether the offense of hate speech under Section 153A of the IPC applied to the case.

The Court also emphasized the importance of proper counseling for the victim-child and his classmates. It recommended that professional counseling services be provided to address the emotional and psychological impact of the incident.

During a recent hearing, the Additional Solicitor General, KM Nataraj, representing the Uttar Pradesh Police and the State’s Home Department, informed the Court of their decision to invoke Section 295A of the IPC instead of Section 153A, which pertains to promoting enmity between different groups. However, they were awaiting formal sanction from the State government to proceed under Section 295A.

In response, the bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Pankaj Mithal directed the State government to promptly make a decision regarding the grant of sanction. The Court also discussed the possibility of involving professional agencies, such as the Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) or the National Institute of Mental Health and Neuro-Sciences (NIMHANS), to provide counseling to the victim student and his classmates.

The Supreme Court’s decision underscores the significance of addressing incidents that have the potential to outrage religious feelings and incite violence in schools. By invoking Section 295A of the IPC, the Court sends a message that such actions will not be tolerated and will be met with legal consequences. It also highlights the importance of providing psychological support and counseling to the victims and witnesses in such cases to help them cope with the trauma and emotional distress caused by such incidents.

This case has garnered significant attention and serves as a reminder that promoting religious tolerance and respecting the rights of individuals from all communities is essential in a diverse and pluralistic society. The legal process is ongoing, and further actions will be taken to ensure that justice is served and the rights of the victim are protected.

Chhattisgarh High Court: Wife’s Suspicions of Husband’s Late Nights Not Cruelty

by News

The Chhattisgarh High Court recently ruled that a wife’s doubts about her husband coming home late frequently and suspecting him of having an affair cannot be considered an act of cruelty. The division bench, led by Justices Goutam Bhaduri and Deepak Kumar Tiwari, found that such conduct by the wife under these circumstances was “normal human behavior” and could not be deemed cruel.

The case revolved around a husband who frequently returned home late at night, and sometimes did not return home at all. He cited his involvement in political activities as the reason for his late arrivals. The husband claimed that his wife was being cruel by doubting his character based on these late-night arrivals. A family court had previously granted the husband’s request for a divorce, which the wife then challenged in the High Court.

The High Court’s opinion was that the wife’s doubts about her husband would not have arisen if the husband’s behavior was different or better explained. The bench noted that the allegations against the husband were made due to his abnormal and unexplained behavior. The husband, in turn, suspected his wife of talking to her brother’s friends. The court stressed the importance of trust between spouses and maintaining a minimum standard of belief in each other.

The High Court’s ruling highlights that in a husband-wife relationship, mutual trust is essential, and it is not expected that the wife should comply with the husband’s wishes in her interactions with others, unless there is concrete evidence to cast doubt on her character.

With these observations, the High Court overturned the family court’s 2017 judgment, which had granted the husband a divorce. The judgment underscores the significance of trust and effective communication in marital relationships and emphasizes that doubts stemming from a spouse’s unexplained behavior may not be grounds for cruelty in a marriage.

Advocates Sumesh Bajaj and Rishabh Bajaj represented the wife, while Advocates Anup Majumdar and Saket Pandey represented the husband in this case.

Court Rejects Coca Cola’s Plea to Quash Case Over Expired Maaza Sale

by News

The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently handed down a significant decision in a case involving Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. (hereafter referred to as Coca Cola) and the sale of expired Maaza Mango Drink. This case highlighted the responsibilities of manufacturers in ensuring the quality and safety of their products even after they leave their control.

The case originated in March 2013 when a Food Safety Officer in Dewas, Madhya Pradesh, collected a sample of ‘Maaza Mango Drink’ from a local restaurant. Upon examination, the sample was found to be unsafe for consumption due to the presence of fungal growth formation on the neck and mouth of the bottle, as well as on the surface of the product.

After obtaining the necessary sanctions, the Food Safety Officer filed a formal complaint in March 2014. Subsequently, on August 20, 2014, a Judicial Magistrate First Class issued summons in the case.

Challenging these summons, Coca Cola argued that the responsibility for the sale of the expired product rested with the retailer who continued to sell it even after the expiry date. Coca Cola contended that it could not be held accountable for the retailer’s actions.

Coca Cola pointed out that the product was distributed to stockists and retailers with clear indications of its date of manufacture and the period during which it was safe for consumption. However, the Court raised concerns regarding the lack of documented evidence to support the claim that the product reached the restaurant, the point of sale, and whether it was indeed sold after its expiry date.

The Court emphasized that the manufacturer of a food product cannot evade liability for the sale of unsafe products by shifting the blame to the retailer. Under the Food Safety and Standards Act, a manufacturer or packer of a food item is liable for ensuring that their products meet the necessary safety and quality standards. All parties involved in the distribution chain, including manufacturers, distributors, packers, wholesalers, and retailers, operate under contractual agreements. As such, the manufacturer shares a significant responsibility for the safety and quality of their products.

The Court further noted that the duty of the manufacturer extends to ensuring that none of their products, including expired ones, remain within the possession of wholesalers, distributors, or sellers beyond their expiry dates. Manufacturers are expected to recall or remove expired products from the market and take appropriate actions to prevent their sale.

In summary, the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s decision reaffirms the principle that manufacturers are ultimately accountable for the safety and quality of their products, even after they have left their control. The judgment reinforces the duty of manufacturers to maintain the integrity of their products throughout the supply chain, emphasizing that they cannot shift responsibility to retailers when unsafe or expired products are found in the market.

Delhi High Court Quashes Sexual Harassment Case Due to Accused’s Mental Condition

by News

The Delhi High Court has quashed a case of sexual harassment and stalking against an individual due to concerns about his mental condition. Justice Tushar Rao Gedela made this ruling based on a report from a medical board at the All India Institute of Medical Science (AIIMS).

In November 2021, the Delhi Police had charged the man under Section 354D (stalking) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 12 (sexual harassment) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO). These charges stemmed from allegations made by a sixth-grade student who claimed the man had touched her inappropriately and followed her.

The defendant’s legal counsel argued for the case to be quashed, explaining that the accused had bipolar disorder and was not in control of his actions during the incident. The AIIMS medical board confirmed the accused’s mental health condition, diagnosing him with psychosis NOS (Not Otherwise Specified) along with Borderline Intellectual ability. The report also noted his need for regular medical care and supervision.

Earlier, in April, the Court had granted the accused interim bail and directed AIIMS doctors to assess his condition. Taking the medical report into consideration, as well as the victim’s father’s consent to drop the case, the Court decided to quash the FIR and all related proceedings.

This case highlights the importance of considering an individual’s mental condition and capacity when assessing their actions in legal matters. It underscores the significance of a comprehensive evaluation of a person’s mental state in cases that involve potential legal consequences.