Tag: Delhi HC

  • Delhi HC Asks Lawyer Ashwini Upadhyay To File Information On Similar Pleas Before SC

    Delhi HC Asks Lawyer Ashwini Upadhyay To File Information On Similar Pleas Before SC

    The Delhi High Court said on Tuesday the petition by lawyer Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay seeking implementation of a Uniform Civil Code (UCC) was prima facie not maintainable and asked him to place before it the prayers made by him before the Supreme Court in similar matters.

    “You file those prayers. We will see. It is prima facie not maintainable. We will first see if it is maintainable,” a bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Subramonium Prasad told Upadhyay.

    The court was informed that in March the top court refused to entertain petitions by Upadhyay in respect of gender neutral and religion neutral laws observing that these fell within the legislative domain and that he had even withdrawn a plea from there in relation to UCC in 2015.

    The court remarked that a “simpliciter withdrawal” has to be distinguished from a “withdrawal with liberty” to approach a court with the same grievance and directed the petitioner to file the prayers in these matters in four weeks.

    Lawyer MR Shamshad, representing the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, said he was the intervenor in the case and the Supreme Court has rejected Upadhyay’s petitions on the same subject matter.

    “He filed four petitions in Supreme Court which were dismissed….This was his second round,” he said.

    Upadhyay said his pleas before the apex court concerned talaq (divorce) under the muslim law and he was awaiting the response of the law commission.

    In May 2019, the high court had sought the Centre’s response to Upadhyay’s petition seeking constitution of a judicial commission to draft the UCC in order to promote national integration, gender justice and equality, and dignity of women.

    Besides Upadhyay’s petition, there are four others petitions as well which have contended that India “urgently needs a Uniform Civil Code”.

    The petitioners have contended that gender justice and gender equality, guaranteed under Articles 14-15 of the Constitution and dignity of women, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution, cannot be secured without implementing Article 44 (the State shall endeavour to secure for citizens a UCC throughout the territory of India).

    The petitions have claimed that the UCC, with a common set of rules governing every citizen of the country, will replace the personal laws, which are based on the scriptures and customs of various religious communities.

    In response, the Centre has said citizens from different religions and denominations following different property and matrimonial laws is an affront to the nation’s unity and the Uniform Civil Code will result in the integration of India.

    It has, however, stated that a petition is not maintainable for formulation of the UCC as it is a “matter of policy”, which has to be decided by the elected representatives of the people and no direction can be issued in this regard.

    The Centre has asserted it will examine in consultation with stakeholders the issue of formulating the Code after it receives the report of the law commission.

  • Delhi HC summons Uddhav Thackeray, Aditya, Sanjay Raut in defamation case by Shiv Sena MP

    Delhi HC summons Uddhav Thackeray, Aditya, Sanjay Raut in defamation case by Shiv Sena MP

    Uddhav Thackeray, son Aaditya Thackeray and Shiv Sena (UBT) Member of Parliament Sanjay Raut were on Tuesday, March 28, issued summons by the Delhi High Court in a defamation suit filed by Shiv Sena MP Rahul Shewale, a close aide of Maharashtra Chief Minister Eknath Shinde. According to the plaintiff, Uddhav and the two others named above made frivolous allegations against Shiv Sena and its members. As per the allegations, the Thackerays and Raut said the Eknath Shinde faction bought the Shiv Sena symbol for ₹2000 crore.

    The suit filed by Shewale was heard by the Bench of Justice Prateek Jalan of the Delhi High Court. The court admitted the suit after hearing the arguments from Senior Advocate Rajiv Nayar, who appeared for the plaintiff. It also directed them to answer all material questions. The defendants were also asked to file responses to the interim applications.

    Request for an injunction order
    Shewale’s lawyer pleaded with the court to pass an injunction order which would bar Raut and others from making any further comments, which may allegedly amount to defamation. However, the court said it would wait for the responses from the parties and then pass an order.

    READ | Maharashtra speaker grants Sanjay Raut more time to respond to his controversial remark

    The matter will be heard next on April 17, 2023. The Delhi High Court also stated the shoulders of the election commission are broad enough to deal with such matters.

    READ | Sanjay Raut accuses ‘dishonest group’ for buying Shiv Sena symbol; ‘Rs 2000 cr worth deal’
    Moreover, the court asked Google, Twitter, Uddhav Thackeray, Aaditya Thackeray and Sanjay Raut to file the responses within 30 days on the suit.

    Sanjay Raut had on February 19, 2023, made some remarks against the Maharashtra Chief Minister during a press conference and a case was filed by a Shiv Sena leader against Raut in Nashik in connection with the same. As per the complaint, Sanjay Raut, a Rajya Sabha MP of Shiv Sena (UBT), had alleged that a “deal of ₹ 2000 crore” had taken place to “purchase” the Shiv Sena party name and its ‘bow and arrow’ symbol.

    The statement was made days after the Election Commission of India allotted the ‘bow and arrow’ symbol to the Eknath Shinde faction and recognised it as the original Shiv Sena.