List of Current Affairs

Home / List of Current Affairs

Criminal Law

Circumstances When Accused and Victim Can Reach a Compromise Under POCSO

 14-Dec-2023

Source: Himachal Pradesh High Court

Why in News?

Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Satyen Vaidya has observed that the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO) cases can be quashed if the victim and the accused reach a genuine compromise and are leading a happy married life.

  • The Himachal Pradesh High Court gave this judgment in the case of Ranjeet Kumar v. State of H.P. & Ors.

What is the Background of the Ranjeet Kumar v. State of H.P. & Ors. Case?

  • The Single Judge, while hearing the plea for quashing of the First Information Report (FIR) on the ground of compromise had held that the compromise of the child victim and her parents with the petitioner was inconsequential.
  • The court had emphasized that in serious offences like those under the POCSO Act, the crime is against the State, and private parties cannot compromise the matter.
  • The Division Bench explored the nature and scope of inherent powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (Cr.PC) and Section 320 of CrPC, which deals with compounding of offences.
  • The Division bench held that the view taken by the Single Judge on the issue was not correct and hence set it aside. Resultantly the petition was allowed and the FIR for POCSO Act was quashed.

What were the Court’s Observations?

  • It is not in dispute that the accused was interested to soleminise marriage with the child victim and has, in fact, soleminised marriage.
  • The victim got married and was leading a peaceful life and, therefore, allowing the prosecution to continue in such case would only result in disturbance in their happy family life and ends of justice in such circumstances would demand that the parties be allowed to compromise.

What is the Landmark Judgment Cited in the Case?

  • B. S. Joshi v. State of Haryana (2003):
    • The Supreme Court held that Section 320 CrPC does not limit or control the exercise of powers vested in the High Courts under Section 482 CrPC and the High Courts would have the power to quash criminal proceedings on an FIR under exercise of power under Section 482 CrPC, even if the offence was non-compoundable under Section 320 CrPC.
    • SC held that the power of the High Courts under Section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings or an FIR were not circumscribed by Section 320 CrPC.
  • Manoj Sharma v. State & Other (2008):
    • SC took the view that once disputes are settled between the parties amicably, HC cannot refuse to exercise the jurisdiction either under Section 482 CrPC or under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution to quash the criminal proceedings, even if the offence involved is non-compoundable.
  • Nikhil Merchant v. C.B.I. & Anr. (2009):
    • The SC held that since the criminal proceedings had the overtone of the civil dispute, which have been amicably settled between the parties, it was a fit case where technicalities should not be allowed to stand in the way of quashing criminal proceedings, since the continuance of the same after the compromise arrived at between the parties would be a futile exercise.

Mercantile Law

Supreme Judgment on Unstamped Arbitration Agreement

 14-Dec-2023

Source: Supreme Court

Why in News?

A seven-judge bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud, Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, B R Gavai, Surya Kant, JB Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra observed that non-stamping or inadequate stamping of arbitration agreement is a curable defect.

  • The Supreme Court gave this judgment in In Re Interplay Between Arbitration Agreements Under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 And the Indian Stamp Act, 1899.

What is the Background of In Re Interplay Between Arbitration Agreements Under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 Case?

  • Challenge by Petitioners:
    • The petitioners contended that the deficiency in stamping is a curable defect, the effect of which ceases to operate as soon as the revenue interest of the state is secured.
    • The non-payment of stamp duty, being a temporary affliction, cannot affect the validity of an arbitration agreement.
    • Petitioners said that mandating the courts at Section 8 or Section 11 stage of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act) to examine the issue of stamping will defeat the legislative purpose of minimal judicial interference enshrined in Section 5 of the A&C Act.
    • The arbitral tribunal has the competence to rule under its own jurisdiction, including on issues pertaining to stamping under doctrine of competence-competence.
  • Reference by Supreme Court:
    • SC was called upon to resolve an issue which arose in the context of three statutes that are A&C Act, Indian Stamp Act, 1899 and Indian Contract Act, 1872 (ICA).
    • The major issue before the court under reference was whether such arbitration agreements would be non-existent, unenforceable, or invalid if the underlying contract is not stamped?
  • Challenge to Landmark Judgments:
    • N N Global Mercantile (P) Ltd. v. Indo Unique Flame Ltd. (2023):
      • Judgment given by a constitutional bench of SC was taken under consideration where the SC held that an unstamped instrument containing an arbitration agreement is void under Section 2(g) of the ICA.
      • The court further said that a court acting under Section 11 of the A&C Act cannot disregard the mandate of Sections 33 and 35 of the Stamp Act, 1899 requiring it to examine and impound an unstamped or insufficiently stamped instrument.
    • SMS Tea Estates (P) Ltd. v. Chandmari Tea Co. (P) Ltd (2005):
      • SC considered its Judgment where it held that an arbitration agreement in an unstamped contract could not be acted upon.
    • Garware Wall Ropes Ltd. v. Coastal Marine Constructions & Engg. Ltd (2019):
      • In this case SC said an arbitration agreement in an unstamped commercial contract would not “exist” as a matter of law and could not be acted upon until the underlying contract was duly stamped.

What were the Court’s Observations?

  • The Difference Between Inadmissibility and Voidness:
    • The court said when an agreement is void, we are speaking of its enforceability in a court of law. When it is inadmissible, we are referring to whether the court may consider or rely upon it while adjudicating the case.
      • This is the essence of the difference between voidness and admissibility.
  • Primacy of A&C Act:
    • The Court said that the A&C Act is a legislation enacted to consolidate the law relating to arbitration in India. It will have primacy over the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 and ICA in relation to arbitration agreements as the latter are general laws.
    • It is trite law that a general law must give way to a special law.
  • Position of Unstamped Arbitration Agreement:
    • Agreements which are not stamped or are inadequately stamped are inadmissible in evidence under Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899.
    • Such agreements are not rendered void or void ab initio or unenforceable.
  • Court’s Power to Examine Arbitration Agreement:
    • An objection to stamping does not fall to a determination under Sections 8 or 11 of the A&C Act.
    • The court concerned must examine whether the arbitration agreement prima facie exists.
  • Overruled Landmark Judgments:
    • The SC overruled its judgment given in N N Global Mercantile Case (2023), SMS Tea Estate Case (2005) and Para 22 of Garware Wall Ropes (2019).

What are the Legal Provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Involved in the Case?

  • Section 8: Power to refer parties to arbitration where there is an arbitration agreement
    • Section 8 of the A&C Act generally pertains to the judicial intervention in the arbitration process.
    • It addresses the issue of referring parties to arbitration and staying court proceedings when there is an arbitration agreement.
    • It typically emphasizes the importance of respecting arbitration agreements and allowing the arbitration process to proceed as agreed upon by the parties.
  • Section 11 of A&C Act: Appointment of Arbitrators
    • Section 11 of the A&C Act pertains to the appointment of arbitrators.
    • It outlines the procedure for the appointment of arbitrators in cases where the parties are unable to agree on the appointment themselves.
    • The section provides for the intervention of the SC and the High Court to have the power to designate, arbitral institutions, from time to time and appoint arbitrator.

Constitutional Law

Second Appeal under RTI Act

 14-Dec-2023

Source: Bombay High Court

Why in News?

Justice Devendra Upadhyaya and Justice Arif Doctor has observed that Maharashtra State Information Commission (SIC) to establish a reasonable time limit for the expedited disposal of second appeals and complaints filed under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005.

  • The Bombay High Court gave this judgment in the case of Shailesh Gandhi and Ors. v. Maharashtra State Information Commission.

What is the Background of Shailesh Gandhi and Ors. v. Maharashtra State Information Commission Case?

  • A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed by former Chief Information Commissioner Shailesh Gandhi and a group of RTI activists, seeking more efficient functioning of the SIC.
  • The PIL emphasized the protracted duration taken for the disposal of second appeals, citing instances where the delays led to frustration among information seekers.
  • The petitioner referred to the Calcutta High Court's stance, which suggested a reasonable time limit of 45 days for the disposal of second appeals similar to that for the disposal first appeal.
  • He further submitted that the Madras HC, Bombay HC, and J&K HC had earlier sought a roadmap for the disposal of the second appeal.
  • The court noted that while a statutory time limit of 45 days exists for first appeals, there is no such time limit for the disposal of second appeals.
  • The Bombay HC acknowledged the imperative for the efficient functioning of the Commission and the desirability of early disposal of appeals and complaints and directed the SIC to take appropriate steps to formulate a reasonable time limit for the early disposal of second appeals and complaints.
  • It directed the counsel for the SIC to report on the steps taken in compliance with this order by the next hearing scheduled for March 6, 2024.

What were the Court’s Observations?

  • Once the Commission starts functioning with full roster including the Chief Information Commissioner and other Commissioners, it would be appropriate to evolve and work out certain norms for more efficient functioning which would include chalking out some reasonable time limit for disposal of second appeal under the RTI Act.
  • Accordingly, a copy of the order shall be placed before the SIC who shall take appropriate steps to formulate some reasonable time limit and prescribe the same for early disposal of second appeals and complaints.

What is the Concept of Second Appeal under Right to Information Act, 2005?

  • About RTI Act:
    • The Right to Information is an act of the Parliament of India which sets out the rules and procedures regarding citizens' right to information.
    • It replaced the former ‘Freedom of Information Act, 2002’.
  • Concept of Second Appeal under RTI Act:
    • Second Appeal under RTI Act is defined under Section 19 (3) of the Act.
    • A second appeal under the RTI Act becomes necessary when an appellant is dissatisfied with the decision of the First Appellate Authority.
    • The second appeal is filed with the Information Commission, which is an independent body established under the Act.
      • Each state has its own State Information Commission, and at the national level, there is the Central Information Commission (CIC).
  • Time Period:
    • The filing of the Second Appeal is permissible either 45 days after submitting the First Appeal or immediately following the decision of the First Appellate Authority.
    • It is essential to submit the Second Appeal within 90 days of either receiving the First Appellate Authority's decision or after the expiration of the initial 45-day period if no response has been received.
    • Regarding delays, if the Second Appeal is lodged more than 90 days after the appellant received the decision from the First Appellate Authority, the Commission may consider admitting the appeal if convinced that the appellant had a valid reason preventing them from filing within the stipulated time.

What is a PIL?

    • Public Interest Litigation (PIL) is a legal tool that allows citizens to approach courts to seek justice in matters of public interest.
    • The concept of PIL was first introduced in India by Justice P.N. Bhagwati in the 1980s.
    • It has since become an important legal mechanism to address issues of public concern.