List of Current Affairs

Source: Punjab and Haryana High Court

Why in News?

Recently, the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the matter of Harinder Pal Singh @ Hinda v. State of Punjab & Anr., has summoned the ADGP (Prison) as well as the Deputy Inspector General of Prisons as false affidavit has been filed denying the incident of assault on jail inmate.

What was the Background of Harinder Pal Singh @ Hinda v. State of Punjab & Anr. Case?

• In this case, Harinder Pal Singh, who was serving a life sentence in a murder case, was beaten mercilessly by jail officials and a private individual in civilian clothing.
• The prison authorities filed a false affidavit wherein it stated that an inmate was neither beaten nor he suffered any injury.
• Thereafter, a plea was filed before the High Court for judicial enquiry into alleged mental and physical torture against the prisoner by Central Jail, Hoshiarpur, Punjab.
• The Court sought a reply to an affidavit by the ADGP (Prisons) and it further directed to preserve all the CCTV footage.
• The Court directed the ADGP (Prisons), Punjab, Chandigarh as well as Deputy Inspector General of Prisons, Amritsar to remain present in the Court on the next date of hearing.

What were the Court’s Observations?

• Justice N.S Shekhawat reprimanded the prison authorities for filing a prima facie false affidavit before the Court, wherein it stated that an inmate was neither beaten nor he suffered any injury.
• The Court also noted that during the proceeding when the CCTV footage was played by the counsel for the inmate, it is apparent that some person was being beaten up by the jail officials inside the jail.

What is Assault?

• About:
  • Section 351 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) deals with the offence of assault. It states that whoever makes any gesture, or any preparation intending or knowing it to be likely that such gesture or preparation will cause any person present to apprehend that he who makes that gesture or preparation is about to use criminal force to that person, is said to commit an assault.
  • Explanation. —Mere words do not amount to an assault. But the words which a person uses may give to his gestures or preparation such a meaning as may make those gestures or preparations amount to an assault.
• Essential Ingredients for Assault:
  • The Prosecution must establish the following two ingredients to prosecute a person for assault -
    • Making any gesture or preparation by a person in the presence of another; and
    • Intention or Knowledge of likelihood that such gesture or preparation will cause the person to apprehend that the person making it is about to use criminal force to him.
• Punishment for Assault:
  • As per Section 352 of IPC whoever assaults any person otherwise than on grave and sudden provocation given by that person, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three months, or with fine which may extend to five hundred rupees, or with both.

Source: Allahabad High Court

Why in News?

Recently, the Allahabad High Court in the matter of Hemsingh @ Tinchu v. Smt. Bhawna has held that once cruelty is found to be committed, the cause of action to seek divorce does arise.

What was the Background of Hemsingh @ Tinchu v. Smt. Bhawna Case?

• In this case, the respondent (wife) had sought dissolution of marriage on grounds of cruelty.
• The learned Principal Judge, of Family Court has dissolved the marriage between the parties at the instance of the respondent.
• Thereafter, the appellant (husband) filed an appeal before the High Court.
• Dismissing the appeal, the High Court held that the act of cruelty was established.

What were the Court’s Observations?

• The bench comprising Justices Saumitra Dayal Singh and Shiv Shanker Prasad held that once cruelty is found to be committed, the cause of action to seek divorce does arise. How the parties may conduct themselves, thereafter, may remain a relevant factor. Yet, no rule of law may arise as may dictate to the Court to pass an order to restore the matrimonial relationship between the parties, without looking into the other attending circumstances.
• The Court further held that the acts of cruelty were not sporadic or singular as may have warranted any further consideration.

What is the Cause of Action?

• About:
  • Cause of Action is a bundle of facts which when taken with the facts applicable to them gives the plaintiff the right to relief against the defendant.
  • In other words, it is the factual circumstances which led to the dispute arising between the parties.
  • Section 20 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) deals with the concept of cause of action.
• Section 20 of CPC:
  • This Section states that subject to the limitations aforesaid, every suit shall be instituted in a Court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction—

(a) The defendant, or each of the defendants where there are more than one, at the time of the commencement of the suit, actually and voluntarily resides, or carries on business, or personally works for gain; or

(b) Any of the defendants, where there are more than one, at the time of the commencement of the suit, actually and voluntarily resides, or carries on business, or personally works for gain, provided that in such case either the leave of the Court is given, or the defendants who do not reside, or carry on business, or personally works for gain, as aforesaid, acquiesce in such institution; or

(c) The cause of action, wholly or in part, arises.

• Case Laws:
  • In South East Asia Shipping v. Nav Bharat Enterprises (1996), the Supreme Court held that cause of action is essentially a bundle of facts which led to the genesis of the dispute, and to the plaintiff obtaining a right in law to approach the court for legal redress. The cause of action, therefore, necessarily includes an act of the defendant, in the absence of which the suit itself could not possibly exist.
  • In Rajasthan High Court Advocates Association v. Union of India & Ors. (2000), the Supreme Court held that the term cause of action had a judicially established meaning. It refers to the conditions surrounding the violation of the right or the direct cause of the conduct.

Why in News?

Recently, a bench of Justice Suman Shyam gave observations on fundamental right of being considered for promotions.

• The Gauhati High Court gave this judgment in the case of Syed Habibur Rahman v. The State of Assam & 2 Ors.

What is the Background of Syed Habibur Rahman v. The State of Assam & 2 Ors. Case?

• The petitioner was originally appointed as Fisheries Extension Officer pursuant to that, he had joined the department in the year 1982.
• In the year 1992, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Sub-Divisional Fisheries Development Officer (SDFDO).
• In the year 2005, the petitioner was entrusted with the charge of District Fisheries Development Officer (DFDO), although he was not promoted to the said post on regular basis.
• The basic case of the petitioner is that there were vacancies available in the cadre of DFDO for being filled up by way of promotion on regular basis.
• Notwithstanding the same and despite the fact that the date of superannuation of the petitioner was approaching fast, no steps were being taken by the authorities to consider his case for promotion.

What were the Court’s Observations?

• The HC observed that “Law is well settled that the right to be considered for promotion is a facet of fundamental right”.
  • Whether a particular candidate is entitled to be promoted or not is a matter that would depend on application of the promotional criteria to the candidature of such candidate, i.e. in the facts and circumstances of each case.
  • But if there are vacancies available for being filled up by way of promotion and there are eligible departmental candidates who had a right to be considered for promotion to such posts, the authorities cannot deny such candidates, coming within the zone of consideration, an opportunity of being promoted and thereby deprive them not only of the satisfaction of career progression but also the consequential pecuniary benefits.
• The court gave judgment in the favor of the petitioner and disposed of the petition.

What is the Right to Be Considered for Promotions?

• Constitutional Position:
  • In the Constitution of India, 1950 the fundamental right that deals with the consideration for promotion is primarily found in Article 16.
    • Article 16 guarantees equality of opportunity in matters of public employment and prevents discrimination on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, descent, place of birth, residence, or any of them.
• Position Established through Precedents:
  • Ajit Singh v. State of Punjab (1999):
    • Supreme Court laying emphasis on Article 14 and Article 16(1) of the Constitution of India held that if a person satisfies the eligibility and the criteria for promotion but still is not considered for promotion, then there will be a clear violation of his/her's fundamental right.
  • Ajay Kumar Shukla and Ors. v. Arvind Rai and Ors. (2021):
    • Gauhati HC held in this case that there is no fundamental right to promotion, but an employee has only the right to be considered for promotion, when it arises, by relevant rules.