List of Current Affairs

Source: Bombay High Court

Why in News?

• Recently in the matter of XYZ v. State of Maharashtra & Anr., the Bombay High Court addressed the refusal of Juvenile Court clerk Sudhir Pawar to accept a charge sheet despite court orders. This defiance prompted the court to criticize Pawar for obstructing justice and raised concerns about the oversight of Presiding Officer Smt. Seema Ghute.
  • The court opted for a detailed inquiry by the Principal District Judge, Thane, rather than immediate contempt proceedings, to investigate Pawar's actions and evaluate the overall functioning of the Bhiwandi Juvenile Court.

What was the Background of XYZ v. State of Maharashtra & Anr.?

• The Investigating Agency was authorized by a court order dated December 12, 2023, to file a charge sheet upon completing their investigation.
  • However, when the Investigating Officer (IO) attempted to file the charge sheet at the Juvenile Court in Bhiwandi, the clerk Sudhir Pawar refused to accept it because the juvenile in question was not present.
• Despite a subsequent court order on April 8, 2024, explicitly allowing the charge sheet to be filed without the juvenile's presence, Sudhir Pawar continued to refuse to accept the charge sheet.
• This led to the prosecutor informing the court on June 11, 2024, that despite two High Court orders, the IO was still facing obstruction.

What were the Court’s Observations?

• The court strongly criticized Sudhir Pawar, the clerk at Juvenile Court Bhiwandi, for blatantly disregarding court orders, which it deemed as interference in the administration of criminal justice.
• The court also expressed concern over the apparent lack of control by Presiding Officer Smt. Seema Ghute over her court, suggesting her role needed examination by the Principal District Judge.
• Instead of immediately pursuing contempt proceedings, the court ordered a detailed inquiry by the Principal District Judge, Thane.
  • This inquiry would investigate Pawar's conduct and assess the overall functioning of the Juvenile Court at Bhiwandi.
• The concerned police officer, on court direction, filed an affidavit detailing the issue, submitted on June 12, 2024.
  • The Principal District Judge was mandated to complete the inquiry within one week and submit a comprehensive report to the High Court .
• Pending the inquiry, the Principal District Judge was granted authority to suspend Pawar if deemed necessary and to take any other appropriate legal action for a thorough investigation.

What is the Juvenile Justice System?

• The juvenile justice system concerns children who have conflicted with the law and need care and protection.
• In India, a person below the age of 18 years is considered a juvenile.
• Minor is a person who has not attained the age of full legal responsibility and the juvenile is a minor who has committed some offence or needs care and protection.
• In India, any child below the age of 7 years cannot be convicted of any crime because of the doctrine of Doli incapax which means incapable of forming intent to commit a crime.

What is the Objective of the Juvenile Justice System?

• To rehabilitate young offenders and give them a second chance.
• The main reason for this protection is that children's brains are not fully developed, and they do not have a complete sense of wrong and right.
• When parents have poor parenting skills, abusive home, violence in the home, a single parent who left their children for a long time unsupervised.
• The influence of news, movies, web series, social media, and lack of education are also reasons why children indulge in criminal activities.

What is the Power and Function of Juvenile Court?

• Section 8 of the Juvenile Justice (care and protection of children) Act, 2015 deals with Powers, functions and responsibilities of the Board.
  • Power of Board:
    • The Board constituted for any district shall have the power to deal exclusively with all the proceedings under this Act, relating to children in conflict with law, in jurisdiction of such Board.
    • The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Children’s Court, when the proceedings come before them under section 19 or in appeal, revision or otherwise.
  • Function of Board:
    • Ensuring the informed participation of the child and the parent or guardian, in every step of the process;
    • Ensuring that the child’s rights are protected throughout the process of apprehending the child, inquiry, aftercare and rehabilitation;
    • Ensuring availability of legal aid for the child through the legal services institutions;
    • Wherever necessary the Board shall provide an interpreter or translator, having such qualifications, experience, and on payment of such fees as may be prescribed, to the child if he fails to understand the language used in the proceedings;
    • Directing the Probation Officer, or in case a Probation Officer is not available to the Child Welfare Officer or a social worker, to undertake a social investigation into the case and submit a social investigation report within a period of fifteen days from the date of first production before the Board to ascertain the circumstances in which the alleged offence was committed;
    • Adjudicate and dispose of cases of children in conflict with law in accordance with the process of inquiry specified in section 14;
    • Transferring to the Committee, matters concerning the child alleged to be in conflict with law, stated to be in need of care and protection at any stage, thereby recognising that a child in conflict with law can also be a child in need of care simultaneously and there is a need for the Committee and the Board to be both involved;
    • Disposing of the matter and passing a final order that includes an individual care plan for the child’s rehabilitation, including follow up by the Probation Officer or the District Child Protection Unit or a member of a non-governmental organisation, as may be required;
    • Conducting inquiry for declaring fit persons regarding care of children in conflict with law;
    • Conducting at least one inspection visit every month of residential facilities for children in conflict with law and recommend action for improvement in quality of services to the District Child Protection Unit and the State Government;
    • Order the police for registration of first information report for offences committed against any child in conflict with law, under this Act or any other law for the time being in force, on a complaint made in this regard;
    • Order the police for registration of first information report for offences committed against any child in need of care and protection, under this Act or any other law for the time being in force, on a written complaint by a Committee in this regard;
    • Conducting regular inspection of jails meant for adults to check if any child is lodged in such jails and take immediate measures for transfer of that child to an observation home or place of safety, as the case may be; and
    • Any other function as may be prescribed.

Source: Madras High Court

Why in News?

A bench of Justice RMT Teekaa Raman, made observations related to relationships of marriage like nature.

• The Madras High Court made observation in the case of P Jayachandran v. A Yesuranthinam (Died).

What is the Background of P Jayachandran v. A Yesuranthinam (Died) Case?

• A.Yesurathinam (plaintiff/respondent) filed a suit seeking declaration of title over a property and possession of the property from P.Jayachandran (defendant/appellant).
• Defendant/Appellant had executed a settlement deed (Ex.A2) transferring the property to Y.Margarette Arulmozhi, describing her as his wife. Margarette Arulmozhi later died on 24^th January 2013.
• Defendant/Appellant claimed he divorced his first wife Stella through a customary divorce and then married Margarette Arulmozhi. He relied on service records where Margarette had nominated him as her husband.
• Plaintiff/Respondent claimed that defendant/appellant and Margarette were only in a live-in relationship as defendant/appellant's marriage to Stella was still subsisting.
• The conflict arose because while defendant/appellant relied on Section 114 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (IEA) presumptions based on his long co-habitation with Margarette and her nominating him as husband in service records, the plaintiff/ respondent argued that this relationship did not amount to a valid marriage under the Christian laws.
• The trial court sided with plaintiff/respondent, holding that defendant/appellant's existing marriage was not dissolved as per the Divorce Act, 1869 thereby violating Section 60 of the Christian Marriage Act, 1872 which requires monogamy.
• Defendant/appellant then appealed to the High Court, which had to determine whether the presumptions under the IEA could override the express provisions of the Christian personal laws governing the validity of marriage.

What were the Court’s Observations?

• Observations:
  • The court differentiated between a legally valid “marital relationship” and merely a “live-in” or “marriage-like relationship”.
    • It observed that the law has distinguished the rights and obligations flowing from a legally wedded marriage versus an informal live-in arrangement.
  • The court referred to the judgment of Supreme Court in Indra Sarma v. V.K.V. Sarma (2013), the court noted that while live-in relationships are not illegal, they cannot be equated to a legal marriage.
    • A legal marriage involves legal requirements of formality, publicity, exclusivity and binding legal consequences.
  • The court stated that a live-in relationship is purely an arrangement between the parties, unlike a legal marriage.
    • If one party decides they no longer wish to continue the live-in relationship, it ends.
  • On the other hand, a legally valid “marital relationship” continues despite differences or marital unrest, being based on law and not just an arrangement between parties.
  • The court observed that by entering into a live-in relationship with Margarette Arulmozhi despite being married to Stella, the defendant committed “an intentional tort of interference in the marital relationship” by alienating himself from his legal wife and children.
  • It noted the Supreme Court's view that not all live-in relationships can be considered “relationships in the nature of marriage”.
    • For a relationship to be treated as akin to marriage, it must meet certain criteria like exclusivity, being otherwise qualified to marry, and public conduct showing them as akin to spouses.
• Judgment:
  • The court finally said, mere entries in service records nominating defendant/appellant as Margarette's husband do not establish a legal marriage between them.
  • The settlement deed (Ex.A2) made Margarette Arulmozhi the owner of the property.
    • After her death, her father plaintiff/respondent is the legal heir entitled to the property under the Indian Succession Act.
  • The appeal by defendant/appellant was dismissed and the trial court's decree declaring plaintiff/respondent’s title over the property was confirmed.

What are the Legal Provisions Involved in the Case?

Section 114 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (IEA):

• Section 114 allows the court to presume the existence of certain facts based on the natural course of events/human conduct.
• It states that, the Court may presume the existence of any fact which it thinks likely to have happened, regard being had to the common course of natural events, human conduct and public and private business, in their relation to the facts of the particular case
• Section 119 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA) deals with this provision.

Section 122 of Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (TPA):

• Section 122 states that for a gift of immovable property to be valid, the transfer must be effected by a registered deed and the property's possession must be delivered to the transferee.

Section 42 of Indian Succession Act, 1925:

• Section 42 gives priority to the intestate's father as the first legal heir to inherit their property.
• Section 45 provides that if the father is dead, the property devolves equally upon the mother and children of any predeceased children.

Section 5 and 60 of Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872 :

• Section 5 prescribes the formalities for solemnizing a Christian marriage.
• Section 60 additionally requires that at the time of marriage, neither party should have a living spouse from an earlier marriage.
• It upholds the principle of monogamy - that a person cannot have two spouses at the same time.
• Any marriage contracted during the subsistence of an earlier valid marriage would be considered void.

Section 10 of Indian Divorce Act, 1869:

• Section 10 lays down the specific grounds on which a Christian marriage can be dissolved by a decree of divorce from a competent court.
• These grounds include adultery, cruelty, desertion for 2+ years, ceased to be Christian by conversion to another religion etc.
• The Act does not recognize customary forms of divorce as may be permitted in other personal laws like Hindu law.
• To contract a second marriage, a Christian has to first obtain a valid divorce decree dissolving the earlier marriage.

Source: Allahabad High Court

Why in News?

Recently, the Allahabad High Court in the matter of Ruksar v. State of UP & Ors., has held that the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021 (Act of 2021) will fail to achieve its intended purpose, if there is frequent interference with prosecutions at the initial stage.

What was the Background of Ruksar v. State of UP & Ors. Case?

• In this case, the petitioner is charged with offences under provisions of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Sections 3 and 5 (1) of the Act of 2021.
• The allegation against the petitioner and the co-accused, Abdul Rahman, is that Abdul Rahman would stalk the informant since the year, 2022 when she was reading in Class-X.
• He would follow her to the temple and college. It is also said that once he called her home and ravished her. Later on, this became a regular feature.
• Abdul Rahman was married and his brother, Irfan alias Chotu, started stalking the informant. He made friends with the informant. They put the informant under fear of losing her reputation and spoiling her life.
• The allegation against the petitioner is that he suggested the informant that she better convert to Islam and marry Irfan alias Chotu.
• On 30^th March 2024, all the accused acting in conspiracy called the informant over to their place on the pretext of meeting her where she was ravished by the man. Irfan would take her to a mazar and force her to wear Burqa.
• After this ordeal, the accused put her on board a train bound for Karvi and sent her back. At the Karvi Station, Abdul Rahman received the informant and threatened her with death and told her that if she disclosed anything to anyone all her family would be done to death.
• The petitioner filed a petition before the Allahabad High Court to quash the proceedings.
• Dismissing the petition, the High Court did not find it a fit case to grant relief to the accused.

What were the Court’s Observations?

• A bench of Justices JJ Munir and Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal observed that the Act of 2021 is a new statute which has been enacted by the legislature to curtail a prevailing malady in society. If there is frequent interference with prosecutions at the initial stage under the Act of 2021, the legislation which is still young and designed to curtail mischief in society that is rife it would be bogged down and fail to achieve its purpose.
• The Court further emphasized that such interferences, especially at the initial stages of legal proceedings, could undermine the effectiveness of the law.

What are the Relevant Legal Provisions Related to Religious Conversions?

About Religious Conversions:

• Religious conversion is the adoption of a set of beliefs identified with one particular religious denomination to the exclusion of others.
• It would describe the abandoning of adherence to one denomination and affiliating with another.
• In some cases, religious conversion marks a transformation of religious identity and is symbolized by special rituals.

Status of Anti-Conversion Laws in India:

• Constitutional Provision:
  • The Constitution of India, 1950 (COI) under Article 25 guarantees the freedom to profess, propagate, and practice religion, and allows all religious sections to manage their own affairs in matters of religion, subject to public order, morality, and health.
  • However, no person shall force their religious beliefs and consequently, no person should be forced to practice any religion against their wishes.
• Existing Laws:
  • There has been no central legislation restricting or regulating religious conversions.
  • However, since 1954, on multiple occasions, Private Member Bills have been introduced in (but never approved by) Parliament, to regulate religious conversions.
  • Further, in 2015, the Union Law Ministry stated that Parliament does not have the legislative competence to pass anti-conversion legislation.
• Anti-Conversion Laws in Various States:
  • Over the years, several states have enacted legislation to restrict religious conversions carried out by force, fraud, or inducements.
  • Several states in India, including Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, Gujarat, Odisha and Uttarakhand have implemented anti-conversion laws.

Supreme Court on Conversion:

• Rev. Stainislaus v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 1977- The Supreme Court held that Article 25 of the COI does not grant the right to convert other persons to one’s own religion but to transmit or spread one’s religion by an exposition of its tenets.
• Hadiya Case (Shafin Jahan v Ashokan K.M.), 2017 – The Supreme Court held that matters of dress and of food, of ideas and ideologies, of love and partnership are within the central aspects of identity. It was also held that the right to marry a person of one’s choice is integral to Article 21.

What is Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021?

About the Act:

• In the year 2021, the Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly passed this Act which replaced the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Religious Conversion Ordinance, 2020 which was promulgated in November 2020.
• The Uttar Pradesh State Assembly cleared the ordinance on 24 November 2020 following which it was approved and signed by State Governor Anandiben Patel on 28 November 2020.
• Applicable in the State of Uttar Pradesh, it is an anti-conversion law enacted by the Government of U.P.
• This Act provides for prohibition of unlawful conversion from one religion to another by misrepresentation, force, undue influence, coercion, allurement or by any fraudulent means or by marriage.

Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Religious Conversion Ordinance, 2020:

• It makes religious conversion for marriage a non-bailable offence and the onus will be on the defendant to prove that conversion was not for marriage.
• The notice period to the District Magistrate for the religious conversion is two months.
• In case of conversion done by a woman for the sole purpose of marriage, the marriage would be declared null and void.
• Violation of the provisions of the law would invite a jail term of not less than one year extendable to five years with a fine of Rs. 15,000.
• If a minor woman or a woman from the Scheduled Caste (SC) or Scheduled Tribe (ST) converts, the jail term would be a minimum of three years and could be extended to 10 years with a fine of Rs. 25,000.
• The ordinance also lays down strict action, including cancellation of registration of social organisations conducting mass conversions, which would invite a jail term of not less than three years and up to 10 years and a fine of Rs. 50,000.