Proposed LTCG on shares can be taken back

In order to minimize economic distortions and curb erosion of tax base, it has been proposed in Union Budget 2018-19 to withdraw the exemption under clause (38) of section 10 of the Income Tax Act, 1961(for short ‘the Act’) and to introduce a new section 112A in the Act to provide that long term capital gains arising from transfer of a long term capital asset being an equity share in a company or a unit of an equity oriented fund or a unit of a business trust shall be taxed at 10 % of such capital gains exceeding Rs. 1,00,000.

Legal Aspects Concerning the Proving of a ‘Will’

Will

Legal Aspects Concerning the Proving of a ‘Will’: Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 read with Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872

What is a ‘Will’?

A ‘Will’ is an instrument by which a person makes a disposition of his property to take effect after his death and which is in its own nature ambulatory and revocable during his life. A ‘Will’ is an obstruction in the line of succession. Alternatively, ‘Will’ may be defined as a continuous act of gift up to the moment of death.[1] In civil law, ‘Will’ is also known as ‘Testament’ or ‘Elogium’. Lord Penzance in the matter of Leimage v. Goodban[2] held that, a ‘Will’ is an aggregate of a man’s testamentary intentions so far as they are manifested in writing duly executed according to the requirements of the statute for time being in force. In the absence of a statute, a ‘Will’ may be in any form, oral or in writing. A document can be said to be a ‘Will’ only when it is executed with an intention to regulate succession after death. ‘Varas Patra’ or nomination cannot be construed as a ‘Will’.[3]

Delhi HC acquits person convicted for murder caused by co-accused for lack of common intention

Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court comprising a bench of Justices Vipin Sanghi and P.S. Teji in the case of Dil Bhar v. State has acquitted a person convicted by the Trial Court for murder committed by his co-accused by stabbing a person, while robbing the deceased of his phone and wallet, for lack of evidence to show common intention under Section 34 IPC.

Delhi HC grants bail when custody ordered by Reader and not the judge

Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court comprising a bench of Justice Mukta Gupta has held the period of extension of custody of an accused by the reader of the court to be illegal. Moreover, the said custody was extended for 20 days as against the maximum time period of 15 days and hence bail was granted to the accused.

SC: treatment of Meritorious Reserved Candidate seat when he chooses to take benefit of reserved category

Supreme Court

The Supreme Court of India comprising a bench of Justices Arun Mishra and Mohan M. Shantanagoudar gave an important decision about how the seat vacated by a Meritorious Reserved Candidate be filled up if he decides to take advantage of the Reserved Category seat.

Chhattisgarh HC: Aadhar of accused and surety mandatory for bail

Chhatisgarh High Court

The Chhattisgarh High Court comprising a Single bench of Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra has directed all the trial courts in Chhattisgarh to obtain Aadhar Card of the accused as well as of the surety while directing the release of an applicant on bail for their verification.

Cross Examination of Expert Witness before Arbitral Tribunal: An Outlook

Arbitration

An expert is a person of peculiar knowledge or skill as to some particular subject, such as any art or science, or particular trade, or profession, or any special branch of learning; or is professionally or peculiarly acquainted with its practices and usages; a person who has technical or peculiar knowledge in relation to the matters with which the mass of mankind are supposed not to be acquainted; he who has some special, particular or practical knowledge in relation to some special department of the affairs of men as would qualify him to stand as an expert, skilled enough to teach others.[1] In the case of, Board of Education of Claymont Special School Dist. v. 13 Acres of Land in Brandywine, Del Super[2], it was held that, expert testimony, is in fact, opinion evidence of some person who possesses special skill or knowledge in some science, profession or business, which is not common to the average man and which is possessed by the expert by reason of his special study or experience. Expert evidence is almost invariably given in the form of a written report which is produced prior to the hearing and on which the expert is cross examined at the hearing.[3] It is settled law that it is permissible to an arbitrator to take assistance of experts (including institutional experts such as Institute of Engineers) in technical matters, in so far as such assistance is necessary, for discharge of his duties.[4]

SC: Not mandatory to play National Anthem before a Movie

Supreme Court

The Supreme Court of India comprising a bench of Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra and Justices A.M. Khanwilkar and Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud has modified their previous order and has held that it is not mandatory to play the National Anthem in a theatre before a movie.

Understanding the Law of Defamation in the context of Newspaper Publication and Other Allied Areas: From K.M. Mathew (2002) to Mohammed Abdulla Khan (2017)

Defamation

Good name in man and woman, dear my lord,

  Is the immediate jewel of their souls.

 Who steals my purse steals trash…

 But he that filches from me my good name

 Robs me of that which not enriches him,

 And makes me poor indeed.[1]

 

Freedom of Expression and Democracy are the cornerstone of our Constitution. Article 19 of the Constitution of India, 1950 does not specifically mention ‘freedom of press’, but the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in a catena of cases has held that freedom of the media is included in Article 19(1) (a) of the Constitution of India, 1950 and it constitutes one of the essential foundations of the Indian democratic society.[2] The constitutional guarantee of free speech does not confer a right to defame persons and harm their reputations by false and baseless allegations and by innuendoes and insinuations. In India there can be criminal prosecution for defamation with imprisonment for up to two years and a fine. There is also civil remedy of damages for defamation.[3] The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India while upholding the constitutional validity of Sections 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in the matter of Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India, Ministry of Law and Others [4], held that the right to free speech cannot mean that one citizen can defame the other.  

Accused in cheque bouncing case to pay 20% compensation on institution of complaint

Cheque bounce case

A bill titled “The Negotiable Instruments (Amendment) Bill, 2017” has been introduced before the Lok Sabha by Shri Arun Jaitley, Minister of Finance and Corporate Affairs on 2nd January 2018 to amend the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and its provisions relating to the trial in a cheque bouncing case under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act.

Bill introduced in the Parliament to revise the salary of HC and SC Judges

Supreme Court

The High Court and the Supreme Court Judges (Salaries and Conditions of Service) Amendment Bill, 2017 has been introduced in the Lok Sabha by the Union Law Minister Shri Ravi Shankar Prasad on 21st December 2017.

Inordinate delays in the turning of the wheels of justice – Memoirs

Tilak Marg

Thakurdas Choithram Pagarani (08.06.1914 to 19.03.1992) has made substantial contribution to our lovely city of Indore. Choithram Hospital and Research Centre (a 500 bedded super specialty hospital of international standard), Choithram College of Nursing (providing training up to post graduation standard), Choithram Netralaya (a charitable eye hospital), Choithram School (a reputed public school probably the first in Indore with CBSE affiliation present strength : 3000 students), Tirathbai Kalachand Higher Secondary School with 1500 students affiliated to M.P. Board of Secondary Education, Choithram International School affiliated to the International Baccalaureate and a centre for Cambridge International Examinations, London are only six out of the sixteen institutions run at Indore by the trusts established by this great philanthropist. Unfortunately his great contribution to this city has eluded public recognition so far. The number of people acquainted with this name is meager less than 100 in the city. He was a real philanthropist and loved anonymity. All trusts and institutions established by him bore the name of his father Choithram with only first alphabet of his own name “T” prefixed.

Patient hearing and courtesy – essence of judicial culture and legitimate expectation of Bar – Memoirs

Justice

This was a revision under Section 115 C.P.C., a routine matter even then in 1968. It was one of my early cases in the High Court. It is memorable for me only because of insufferable judicial misbehavior, which I was made to suffer without any justification whatsoever. The scars of injury suffered by an advocate on account of judicial misbehavior in open Court are lasting and unforgettable. The all time great Justice G.P. Singh has given an account of judicial misbehavior suffered by him in 1956 in his first case in the High Court in an article “My Days in the High Court” published in 1996 MPLJ (Journal part) Page 24 almost forty years after the event.

Suspension of sentence order by Sessions Judge at night time at his residence – Memoirs

Justice

This was a trivial and insignificant matter from professional and legal angle. However, the thrill, pleasure, satisfaction and a sense of achievement imbibed therein makes it memorable for me.

Arbitration – Laws and Flaws

Arbitration

Arbitration is a system of adjudication of a dispute by a judge appointed by the choice of the parties. In rural India it was the only prevalent and widely accepted mode of dispute settlement for several centuries. It was simple, inexpensive and revered as a decision given by Almighty through a human agency. The immortal story of Munshi Premchand “Panch Parmeshwar” lucidly illustrates this and takes us to a traditional Indian village.

Old car of Arvind Kejriwal, buffalos of Azam Khan and Indian Police

Police Station

Goswami Tulsidas was a great saint and the writer of the epic Ramcharitmanas. But, the legend goes that he was like any other ordinary person in his childhood, and that the turning point in his life came a few years after his marriage. He was madly in love with his wife. One day, he went out leaving his wife at home. When he returned, his wife Ratnavali had gone to her father’s place with her brother. Tulsidas was unable to bear the separation. He at once set out for his father-in-law’s house. He walked ten miles at night time in the dark, through wind and rain. On the way, he jumped into the flooded Yamuna river and swam across it. He mistakenly used a dead body, thinking it to be a boat, to cross the swollen river. When he reached at his father-in-law’s home, all the doors were closed there. He had to climb to the upper floor in order to reach his wife’s room. To do this, he took a python thinking it to be a thick rope; he scaled it and slipped into his wife’s room. But instead of being happy, his wife felt ashamed of his insane attachment to her. On being asked how he could enter the house, Tulsidas replied “Your love for me is so great that you threw a rope.” Ratnavali was surprised to hear that. She asked Tulsidas to show her the rope. Both of them were surprised to see an enormous snake hanging down instead of a rope. Ratnavali chided Tulsidas for this, and told him that if he was even half as devoted to God as he was to her body of flesh and blood, he would have been redeemed and would have attained immortality and eternal bliss like a great saint. These words came as a shock to Tulsidas who felt ashamed of his attachment to her body. He left her instantly and left for the holy city of Prayag. He renounced the Grihastha stage (householder’s life) and became a Sadhu. The rest is history. He wrote Ramcharitmanas and several other great works.

My Lords, the Emperor has no clothes!!!

Supreme Court

You would have heard it earlier. An Emperor was fond of wearing new and fancy clothes. He always wanted the newest fashions. Two swindlers convince him that the clothes they are making are made of such fine fabric that it is invisible to anyone who is either unfit for his position or “hopelessly stupid”, and that only the most elevated people can see the clothes. The Emperor can’t see the clothes himself, but he can’t admit that. So he wears the clothes in the palace, and everyone bows down and says what a fine set of clothes he has, because they are also afraid to contradict the Emperor. This is in spite of the fact that the Emperor was nude. Then, the Emperor goes out and leads a parade to show off his new clothes to the people. Everyone on the road pretends to admire the clothes, being afraid of contradicting the Emperor. However, one little boy yells out, “but the Emperor has no clothes”!!! The Emperor realizes the assertion may be true but continues the procession.

Delhi Pollution and the farce of odd-even scheme

Pollution

By blaming the neighbouring States for pollution/ smog, the Delhi Govt headed by an ex-IITian is only passing on the buck without assuming its own responsibility. They are behaving like an ostrich. They have not learnt a lesson from their casual measures like Odd-Even which had proved to be utter failures in the past. Well to do people, who suffered in the first phase of Odd-Even, got wiser and bought additional vehicles of alternate numbers, defeating the very purpose of Odd-Even. That’s why, the second phase of Odd-Even was a miserable failure with hardly any drop in the traffic volume. By taking such half-baked measures, the inefficient Arvind Kejriwal & Co. are only paying lip service to the social welfare. They are making the society sick by trying to cure only the symptoms instead of the disease. Even after getting the expert opinions, they have not woken up to the reality of what indeed causes incessant pollution.

Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. – Requirements for Magistrate directing police for investigation

Police Station

Question: What are the requirements that are to be fulfilled for requesting Magistrate to direct police under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code to conduct investigation?

Ryan International School murder case – how unprofessional and inhuman can police be?

Ryan International School

Joseph Stalin was the dictator of Russia (the erstwhile Soviet Union) for more than three decades. One day, he lost his watch. He telephoned Lavrentiy Beriya, chief of the Soviet security and secret police apparatus and informed him that someone had stolen his watch. Now, Lavrentiy Beriya, who was notorious for his cruelty and wickedness, gets on to the job immediately by arresting suspects and interrogating them. After some time, Stalin telephoned Beriya again, this time to inform him that he had already found his watch in his bathroom where he had kept it and forgotten. So, Stalin asked Beriya not to bother about the watch. However, Beriya told Stalin that he had already arrested 10 suspects for stealing the watch, and out of them, 9 persons had already confessed to having stolen the watch, and also that the last suspect was also about to confess it. So, how come his watch was not stolen?