List of Current Affairs

Source: Kerala High Court

Why in News?

In a recent ruling, the Court dismissed a petition seeking to quash proceedings in a case of Don Paul v. State of Kerala. It involves allegations of misappropriation of marital assets. The court emphasized the need for caution by Magistrates in cases involving financial, matrimonial, or commercial disputes, urging verification of allegations before initiating investigations.

• The Court highlighted the importance of supporting applications under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 (CrPC) with sworn affidavits, aiming to deter malicious litigants.

What was the Background of Don Paul v. State of Kerala?

• The petitioner, the 1st accused filed a Criminal Miscellaneous Case under Section 482 of the CrPC to quash Annexure B final report and all proceedings in C.C.No.878/2019 pending at the Judicial First-Class Magistrate Court-I, Vaikom.
• The case revolves around allegations made in a complaint filed under Section 190 read with Sections 200 to 204 of Cr.P.C by the petitioner's wife.
• The complaint accuses the petitioner of committing an offense punishable under Section 406 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).
• Petitioner argues Section 406 IPC not applicable, suggests FIR under Section 154 CrPC instead of private complaint under Section 190 CrPC.
• According to the complaint, the petitioner demanded 75 sovereigns of gold ornaments and Rs.50 lakhs as part of the marriage arrangement. Rs.25 lakhs was handed over on the date of betrothal, and another Rs.25 lakhs was deposited in a fixed deposit jointly held by the petitioner and the complainant.
• Allegedly, without the complainant's consent, the petitioner and another accused encashed the fixed deposit receipts and misappropriated the gold ornaments entrusted to them.
• Police investigated the matter as per the Magistrate's direction under Section 156(3) of CrPC, resulting in the filing of Annexure B final report, alleging an offense under Section 406 of IPC by the accused.
• The Court dismissed the petition.

What were the Court’s Observations?

• Justice A. Badharudeen emphasized the importance of Magistrates exercising caution when considering applications for investigations in cases involving fiscal matters, matrimonial or family disputes, commercial offenses, medical negligence, corruption, or situations where there is significant delay or negligence.
• Where applications under Section 156(3) of CrPC are to be supported by an affidavit duly sworn by the complainant who seeks the invocation of the jurisdiction of the Magistrate.
  • In an appropriate case, the learned Magistrate would be well advised to verify the truth and the veracity of the allegations.
  • Before filing a petition under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, there must be applications under Section 154(1) and 154(3) of the CrPC.
  • The Court emphasized that the requirement of affidavits would discourage dishonest litigants from filing applications with malicious intent, as false affidavits could result in legal prosecution, thereby deterring casual approaches to criminal courts.
• Additionally, the Court highlighted that the accused's failure to contest the investigation promptly, prior to the police's final report, underscored the subsequent charge under Section 403 Indian Penal Code IPC, which was brought forth only after the investigation's conclusion.

What is an Affidavit?

• About:
  • An affidavit is a written statement of facts made voluntarily, confirmed by the oath or affirmation of the party making it, and signed before a person who is authorized to administer such oaths (such as a notary public or a court officer).
  • It serves as evidence in legal proceedings and is often used to provide information or testimony in court cases when a witness is unavailable to testify in person.
  • Affidavits are considered legally binding documents and carry the same weight as testimony given under oath in court.
  • They are commonly used in various legal matters, including civil lawsuits, criminal cases, and administrative proceedings.
• Authority to Draft Affidavits:
  • Affidavits can be drafted by any individual, only basic prerequisites such as legal age and comprehension of its components.
  • Mental competence is essential to ensure understanding of the affidavit's significance.
  • Affidavits presented by veiled female declarants require proper identification and certification by the relevant authorities for validity.

What are the Types of Affidavits?

Affidavits can be categorized into judicial affidavits and non-judicial affidavits:

• Judicial Affidavit:
  • A judicial affidavit is one submitted or filed in connection with a judicial proceeding, such as a criminal case.
  • A judicial affidavit contains the witness's statement of facts relevant to the case, sworn or affirmed under oath or affirmation, and signed before a competent officer authorized to administer oaths.
  • A judicial affidavit expedites the trial process by minimizing the need for oral testimony and cross-examination of witnesses during trial.
• Non-judicial Affidavit:
  • A non-judicial affidavit is executed outside of any judicial proceeding. It is used for various legal purposes, such as making declarations, affirmations, or statements of fact.
  • Non-judicial affidavits are commonly used in pre-trial stages of legal proceedings, during investigations, or for providing information or evidence to support a claim or defense.
  • These affidavits may be submitted to government agencies, private entities, or individuals for various purposes, such as applications, contracts, certifications, or disputes.
  • Non-judicial affidavits must still be sworn or affirmed before a competent officer authorized to administer oaths, such as a notary public or a court clerk, to be considered valid and legally binding.

What are the Essential Components of an Affidavit?

• Written Form: An affidavit must be documented in writing.
• Declaration by Deponent: It serves as a formal declaration made by the deponent, typically under oath or affirmation.
• Truthfulness: The facts stated in the affidavit must be accurate and true to the best of the deponent's knowledge.
• Sworn Oath: To validate the affidavit, it must be sworn or affirmed before an authorized officer, such as a notary public or magistrate.
• Personal Declaration: An affidavit is always a direct statement made by the deponent and cannot be made on behalf of another individual.

What are the Landmark Case Laws on Affidavits?

• Sheoraj v. A.P. Batra (1955):
  In this case, Allahabad High Court held the following points on position of affidavits as evidence:
  • IEA does not apply to affidavits is not the same thing as to say that affidavits are not evidence. The same preamble which lays down that the IEA does not apply to affidavits contains that the IEA applies to all judicial proceedings in or before any court.
    • Evidence viva voce is no doubt taken in judicial proceedings in or before a court, so that it is possible for the Judge presiding over the Court to central that evidence.
  • For instance, the Judge will disallow inadmissible evidence or leading questions in examination-in-chief.
    • But affidavits, while there appears to be no bar against it, are generally not sworn before the Court in which they are used, but before some other Court or person empowered to administer oath.
    • The aforesaid control of the Court over the deponent according to the rules of the IEA is therefore not possible in the case of an affidavit. That appears to be the reason' why the preamble to the Act lays down that it does not apply to affidavits.
  • Although the IEA does not apply to affidavits, there is no doubt that affidavits are used as a mode of proof.
• Khandesh Spg & Wvg Mills Co. Ltd. v. Rashtriya Girni Kamgar Sangh (1960):
  • The Supreme Court clarified in the case that an affidavit can only be used as evidence if the Court orders so with adequate reasons. Hence, without a specific court order, an affidavit typically cannot be used as evidence.

Source: Calcutta High Court

Why in News?

Recently a bench of Justice Kausik Chanda allowed a petition related to limitation under Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (PoSH).

• The Calcutta High Court gave this observation in the case of X v. State of West Bengal & Ors.

What was the Background of Siddha Nath Pathak and Another v. State of Uttar Pradesh Case?

• The petitioner, an Associate Professor at a University, filed a complaint against Respondent No. 7 under the PoSH before the local committee, 24-Parganas (North).
• In her complain the petitioner alleged incidents of sexual harassment from September 2019 to April 2023, and subsequent victimization and detrimental treatment from April 2023 to December 21, 2023.
• By an order dated 05th March 2024, the local committee rejected the petitioner's complaint on the grounds of limitation.
  • The committee found that the last incident of alleged sexual harassment occurred within 30^th April 2023, but the complaint was filed on 26^th December 2023, beyond the limitation period under Section 9(1) of the PoSH Act.
  • The committee also rejected the petitioner's application for condonation of delay.
• Aggrieved by the local committee's order, the petitioner filed a writ petition before the Calcutta HC.

What were the Court’s Observations?

• The court found that the local committee failed to consider the incidents alleged to have occurred between April 2023 and 21^st December 2023, as "sexual harassment" within the purview of Section 3(2) of the Act of 2013.
• The court held that the allegations made in the complaint suggest that the circumstances of victimization and detrimental treatment allegedly taken place between April 2023 and December 2023 have a nexus with the alleged sexual harassment of the petitioner between September 2019 and April 2023.
• The court ruled that if the complaint is read as a whole, it would lead to the conclusion that the same was within the period of limitation under Section 9(1) of PoSH.
• The court set aside the order dated 5^th March 2024, passed by the local committee, and directed the local committee to conclude the proceedings initiated on the petitioner's complaint on merit in accordance with the provisions of the PoSH.

What is a Local Committee under PoSH?

• Section 6: Constitution and Jurisdiction of Local Committee -
  • Constitution: Every District Officer to constitute a "Local Committee" in the district to receive sexual harassment complaints from establishments without an Internal Committee or if the complaint is against the employer.
  • Nodal Officers: District Officer to designate nodal officers in rural/urban areas to receive and forward complaints to the Local Committee within 7 days.
  • Jurisdiction: Local Committee's jurisdiction extends to the areas of the district where it is constituted.
• Section 7: Composition, Tenure and Other Terms of Local Committee -
  • Composition:
    • Chairperson: Eminent woman social worker nominated by District Officer
    • 1 Member: Woman working in block/municipality nominated by District Officer
    • 2 Members: From NGOs/persons committed to women's cause (preferably one with legal knowledge and one from SC/ST/OBC/minority)
    • Ex-officio Member: Officer dealing with social welfare/women & child development
  • Tenure: Chairperson and Members to hold office for up to 3 years as specified by District Officer.
  • Removal: Chairperson/Member may be removed if they contravene provisions, are convicted, found guilty in disciplinary proceedings or abuse their position.
  • Fees/Allowances: Chairperson and nominated Members entitled to fees/allowances for conducting proceedings as prescribed.
• Amendment of 2016:
  • Before substitution through amendment in 2016, the term Local Committee was known as Local Complaints Committee.

What is Limitation Period under PoSH?

• Section 9(1):
  • Any aggrieved woman may make, in writing, a complaint of sexual harassment at workplace to the Internal Committee if so constituted, or the Local Committee, in case it is not so constituted, within a period of three months from the date of incident.
  • And in case of a series of incidents, within a period of three months from the date of last incident.
• Proviso 1: Assistance in Writing Complaint -
  • Where such complaint cannot be made in writing, the Presiding Officer or any Member of the Internal Committee or the Chairperson or any Member of the Local Committee, as the case may be, shall render all reasonable assistance to the woman for making the complaint in writing.
• Proviso 2: Extension of Time Limit -
  • The Internal Committee or, as the case may be, the Local Committee may, for the reasons to be recorded in writing, extend the time limit not exceeding three months, if it is satisfied that the circumstances were such which prevented the woman from filing a complaint within the said period.
• Complaint by Legal Heir or Others under Section 9(2):
  • Where the aggrieved woman is unable to make a complaint on account of her physical or mental incapacity or death or otherwise, her legal heir or such other person as may be prescribed may make a complaint under this section.

Source: Supreme Court

Why in News?

Recently, the Supreme Court held that a person cannot raise a defence based on any right in respect of any property held benami either against the person in whose name the property is held or against any other person.

What was the Background of C. Subbiah @ Kadambur Jayaraj and Others v. The Superintendent of Police and Others Case?

• The complainant was appointed as a government teacher in 2007. Before this job he was doing real estate business for the last 16 years.
• The complainant came into contact with Subbiah and his wife. Through Subbiah, he met Chandrasekar, his son, wife and brother (accused). They were all involved in the real estate business.
• They forced the complainant to join their real estate business as they had strong political connections.
• They urged the complainant to enter into the land deals with the intention to defraud the complainant right at the inception of the transactions.
• As well as influencing the complainant to make investment in lands on the promise as they have political connections, they will help him to make profits.
• The complainant alleged that the accused (appellants) failed to pay his share.
• The complainant filed a complaint at the police station, but no action was taken.
• He approached Madras High Court and the High Court directed that he submits a fresh complaint to the District Superintendent of Police. Again, no First Information Report (FIR) was not registered.
• Then the complaint filed a complaint in the Court of the Jurisdictional Magistrate with a prayer to forward the same to the police under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
• After the court's direction, the FIR was registered, and a charge sheet was submitted.
• The complainant had also filed a civil suit for the same set of allegations which was pending before the District Judge.
• The accused (appellants) approached the High Court for assailing the FIR and the charge sheet. The High Court dismissed the petition.
• After that they filed an appeal by special leave before the Supreme Court.

What were the Court’s Observations?

• The Supreme Court (SC) refer the Section 2(a), Section 2(c) and Section 4 of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition), Act 1988 (Benami Act) applicable at the time of the alleged transactions.
• The SC observed that the complainant despite having made investments in the land deals which were evidently benami transactions, could not have instituted any civil proceedings for recovery against the persons in whose name, the properties were held which would be the accused appellants in this case.
• Since by virtue of the provisions contained in Sections 4(1) and 4(2) of the Benami Act, the complainant is prohibited from suing the accused for a civil wrong, in relation to these benami transactions, as a corollary, allowing criminal prosecution of the accused in relation to the self-same cause of action would be impermissible in law.
• The SC said that it cannot be doubted that a dispute which is purely civil in nature has been given a color of criminal prosecution alleging fraud and criminal breach of trust by misusing the tool of criminal law.
• The SC reiterated that in view of the clear bar contained in Section 4 of the Benami Act, the complainant could not have sued the accused appellants for the same set of facts and allegations which are made the foundation of the criminal proceedings.

What is Benami Transactions (Prohibition), Act 1988?

• Benami Property:
  • The word ‘Benami’ derived from Urdu which means ‘no name’ or ‘without name’.
  • Benami property includes any movable or immovable, tangible or intangible and right or any document evidencing title or interest in the property.
• Benami Transaction:
  • In Benami transactions the property is transferred to one person, but the consideration is provided or paid by another person.
  • This is a system where holding or acquiring property in names other than those of the real owners.
• Historical Background:
  • The transactions related to Benami Property were recognized for the first time by judiciary in 1778.
  • In the case of Gopeekrist Gosain v. Gungapersuad Gosain (1854) the Privy Council observed that Benami transaction warranted judicial recognition.
  • As there was no special provision in respect of benami transactions, it had legislative recognition through: Section 82 of the Trusts Act, 1882, Section 66 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) and Section 53 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (TPA).
  • In 1972 a reference was made by the government to the Law Commission. The Commission in its 57^th report recommended that the Benami transaction should be declared an offence.
  • On the recommendations of the Commission, the Legislature enacted the Benami Transactions (Prohibition of the Right to Recover Property) Ordinance, 1988 in 1988.
  • After that, the Commission recommended enacting a new statue and based on the 130^th report of the Law Commission, the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988 was enacted.
  • A major change was made through the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016.
    • This Act came into force on 1st November 2016.
    • This Act expanded to 72 Sections from 9 Sections.
    • It defines different aspects of Benami transactions and introduces new offences and their penalties.
    • The amended law provides procedure for confiscation.

What is the Legal Provision Involved in this Case?

• Section 2 (a) of Benami Act: Definitions

benami transaction means any transaction in which property is transferred to one person for a consideration paid or provided by another person.

• Section 2 (c) of Benami Act: Definitions

property means property of any kind, whether movable or immovable, tangible or intangible, and includes any right or interest in such property.

• Section 4 of Benami Act: Prohibition of the right to recover property held benami-

(1) No suit, claim or action to enforce any right in respect of any property held benami against the person in whose name the property is held or against any other person shall lie by or on behalf of a person claiming to be the real owner of such property.

(2) No defence based on any right in respect of any property held benami, whether against the person in whose name the property is held or against any other person, shall be allowed in any suit, claim or action by or on behalf of a person claiming to be the real owner of such property.

(3) Nothing in this section shall apply, -

(a) where the person in whose name the property is held is a coparcener in a Hindu undivided family and the property is held for the benefit of the coparceners in the family; or

(b) where the person in whose name the property is held is a trustee or other person standing in a fiduciary capacity, and the property is held for the benefit of another person for whom he is a trustee or towards whom he stands in such capacity.