Posted by 1. Accused had been watching child pornography for 2 years during which he retained it and did not delete it: Petitioner
Reserving its judgment on petitions that have questioned the correctness of the Madras High Court verdict that held “viewing child pornography is not an offence under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act”, the Supreme Court has said that merely receiving a child pornography clip on WhatsApp may not be an offence, but after receiving it and not deleting it or destroying is an offence under the POCSO Act. The court also said that a child watching porn may not be an offence but a child being used in pornography will be an offence. This observation from a bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala came while hearing petitions by NGO’s, Just right for Children Alliance and Bachpan Bachao Andoolan, challenging the Madras High Court order that quashed a criminal case against an individual who had received two child pornography clip on his phone and held that the act becomes an offence only when the pornography clip is distributed, circulated or publicly exhibited. The petition filed by the NGOs also says that the Madras High Court judgement gave the impression that individuals who download and posses child pornography clip will not face prosecution and would potentially impact child welfare. “This would increase the demand for child pornography and encourage people to involve innocent children in pornography,” says the petition. Attacking the Madras High Court judgment, senior advocate HS Phoolka on Friday submitted to the court that the merely possessing or storing of a child pornography clip is also an offence and the burden of proof shifts on the accused to prove that he had inadvertently received the offending clip. Explaining the genesis of the case to the court, Phoolka informed the court that information with respect to child pornography clips were received by the union Home Ministry from a US-based agency that monitor child pornography globally. The information received by the Home Ministry was transmitted to the state police and following the tip, the state police had seized the mobile phone of the accused, S Harish, from which two clips of child pornography were discovered.
Also read: Child watching porn may not be an offence but child being used in pornography will be an offence: SC
2. Apex court bench heard an urgent medical termination case in a late evening hearing
The Supreme Court on Friday ordered a medical examination of a 14-year-old alleged rape victim seeking medical termination of her 28-week pregnancy. The order was passed by a bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala, who assembled in late evening at around 4.30 pm to hear the matter urgently after perusing an e-mail sent on behalf of the alleged rape victim seeking the urgent intervention of the top court. The petition has been filed by the rape survivor’s mother, who has challenged an order of the Bombay High Court, which refused to allow medical termination of pregnancy of the rape victim relying on the opinion of the medical board. The counsel, who appeared before the top court on petitioner’s behalf said that the minor girl is 28-week pregnant and is presently in Mumbai. Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Aishwarya Bhati also appeared in the matter representing the government. She told the court that as per the report of the medical board, there is no compelling reasons to abort but the perspective of the girl needs to be seen. The top court noted that the medical report of the girl does not contain the impact of physical and mental status of the pregnancy on the minor and the background leading to the pregnancy including alleged sexual assault and it is necessary that the court is apprised that carrying its full term will impact physical and mental well being of the minor. The top court then directed Sion hospital in Mumbai to constitute a medical board and examine the minor girl tomorrow and has sought a report from the hospital about the possible physical and psychological condition of the girl if she undergoes medical termination of pregnancy or if she is advised against the medical termination of pregnancy. The top court has directed Sion hospital to place its report before the court on April 22, when the court will take up the matter.
3. Patna, Raipur chapters of IMA lodged complaints against Ramdev over his remarks on allopathic medicines
The Supreme Court on Friday asked Yoga guru Ramdev to implead all the complainants, who have filed cases against him over his alleged remarks on allopathic medicines during the COVID-19 pandemic, as a party in his plea seeking a stay of criminal proceedings against him. A bench comprising Justice MM Sundresh and Justice PB Varale told Ramdev that he needed to implead all the complainants in his plea for securing relief in the matter and granted the Yoga guru liberty to implead the complainants. Ramdev, in his plea seeking stay of criminal proceedings against him, has impleaded the Centre, Bihar, Chhattisgarh and the Indian Medical Association (IMA) as parties. The bench posted Ranmdev’s plea for further hearing after the summer vacations of the Supreme Court. The top court, while hearing Ramdev’s plea on October 9 last year, had issued notices to Centre, Bihar, Chhattisgarh and the IMA. Ramdev’s counsel had earlier told the top court that he had made a statement that he does not believe in allopathic medicines in 2021 to which some doctors took offence and they lodged multiple cases against him and sought a stay on investigation on the criminal complaints as an interim relief. The Patna and Raipur chapters of the IMA have lodged complaints against Ramdev’s remarks against allopathic medicines in 2021 alleging that his remarks were likely to cause prejudice to COVID-19 control mechanism and may dissuade people from availing proper treatment. Ramdev has been booked under various provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Disaster Management Act, 2005 on the complaints of IMA in Bihar and Chhattisgarh. The Yoga guru had later withdrawn his statement on allopathic medicines after then Union Health Minister Harsh Vardhan called his remarks over allopathic medicines “Inappropriate”.
Also read: Allopathic medicines remarks: Supreme Court asks Ramdev to implead all complainants as party
4. Jawahar Jha’s nomination papers were rejected by returning officer from Banka Lok Sabha seat
The Supreme Court has refused to entertain a petition by Jawahar Kumar Jha, an independent candidate from Banka Lok Sabha constituency in Bihar, whose nomination papers were earlier rejected by the returning officer. The Supreme court bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwal said, “If they start entertaining such petitions that claim that cancellation of their nomination papers is violation of their fundamental rights, there will be chaos in elections.” Jawahar Jha had last week approached the Supreme court challenging the action of the returning officer as arbitrary and illegal after his nomination papers were rejected and had sought the court’s intervention to declare him as a valid candidate for the upcoming parliamentary General Elections 2024 to be held on April 26, 2024 at the Banka Parliamentary Constituency. During the hearing on Friday, the Election Commission of India (ECI) took a preliminary objection to the petition saying that a candidate does not have any fundamental right to contest elections and as such a petition for enforcement of fundamental right by Jha was not maintainable. The court also agreed and said, “The right relief for a candidate challenging rejection of his nomination paper was an election petition and not a petition under article 32 of the Constitution before the Supreme Court of India. You have to follow the discipline of election law. We are not inclined to entertain the plea against his rejection of nomination papers. Petitioner can pursue such remedies as available under law.” However, advocate appearing for Jawahar Jha tried to explain his coming to the supreme court, saying that there were some high courts in the country that allowed filing of writ petitions against cancellation of nomination papers, while Patna High Court had refused to toe the same line and the petitioner had no option but to come to the Supreme Court. However, the Supreme Court refused to accept the argument and allowed Jha to purse remedies under law.
5. Apex court order came on a plea filed by civil right activists Aruna Roy and Nikhil De
The Supreme Court has directed District Magistrates (DMs) and returning officers across the country, where section 144 CrPC (which bans a gathering of more than 5 persons) has been imposed, in view of the Lok Sabha elections, to decide applications filed by persons seeking permission to conduct yatras to educate voters to be decided within three days time. The order by a bench of Justice BR Gavai and Justice Sandeep Mehta comes on a petition by civil right activists Aruna Roy and Nikhil De, who had raised a grievance saying that they wanted to conduct Democracy Yatras to educate voters on elections and had filed applications for the same, but the applications were not being decided by District Magistrates in the name of prohibitory orders due to general elections. The petitions also says that such prohibitory order have been passed across the country. Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for Aruna Roy, submitted to the court that after the announcement of the general elections, there have been generic prohibitory orders that have been passed by District Magistrates, banning any kind of gathering or procession or meeting without the permission. And only marriages and funeral procession are an exception to the prohibitory orders in the districts. Bhushan also submitted to the court that civil right organisation run by Aruna Roy had applied for permission to hold Democracy Yatra in the district of Barmer on March 16, but the same has not been decided by the District Magistrate. “The idea of the yatra is to educate the voters about elections and unless there is a genuine apprehension of breach of peace, orders under section 144 cannot be issued, “ argued Bhushan. The court passed interim orders saying that if any person makes an application before the District Magistrate for holding yatras to educate the general public on elections, the same shall be decided by the District magistrate in three days time.
Also read: SC directs DMs to decide application for holding Yatras to educate voters within 3 days
6. ED has alleged Kejriwal was eating mangoes, sweets to raise blood sugar level to create a ground for bail
A special court on Friday reserved its order for Monday on a plea filed by Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, who is currently lodged in judicial custody in Tihar Jail in a money laundering case connected with the alleged irregularities in the Delhi Excise Policy, seeking to consult his doctor daily for 15 minutes with respect to his diabetes and fluctuating blood sugar level. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) opposed the plea of Kejriwal, saying that content of his diet does not match the prescribed diet of the doctor and the diet chart has no reference to sweets or sweet fruits and it appears to be very regulated and strict and therefore, there is direct correlation between his submission that he is having an alarming rise in his sugar level and his diet. The ED on Thursday had alleged that the Delhi Chief Minister is deliberately eating mangoes, sweets and taking sugar with tea to raise his blood sugar level to create a ground for bail citing fluctuations in blood sugar level. Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, who appeared for Kejriwal, submitted before Special Judge Kaveri Baweja that it is a well-known fact that Kejriwal suffers from diabetes and he has got insulin everyday for 22 years and he was being given insulin everyday. An insulin reversal programme started from February, well before his arrest, and it has to be monitored very very minutely and he is unable to follow the programme in jail and only his doctor can monitor it minutely and he be allowed to consult his doctor. Singhvi further submitted that out of 48 meals sent from home, only three times mangoes were there and no mangoes have been sent after April 8. He alleged that the ED wants to do a media trial and their submission was only for media news. “I (Kejriwal) only use sugar free in my tea. How petty, political and ridiculous ED can be? Their statements are completely false and malicious. Just because you (ED) have a lot of influence in the media, you are able to publish that I am having aaloo puri even though this meal was sent once during pooja,” Singhvi submitted. Singhvi further asked, “Just because I am a prisoner, I have no right to a dignified life and good health? Am I a gangster that I cannot even be allowed to have 15 minutes of videoconferencing facility” and added, “We have had democracy for 75 years but I am seeing such an approach for the first time. Have never seen such kind of pettiness.” The ED, represented by Zoheb Hossain, submitted to the court that the diet chart has no reference to sweets or sweet fruits and that is why a report from the Tihar jail was sought and sought the permission of the court to file a reply to the application of Kejriwal. The counsels representing Kejriwal opposed the submissions of ED, however, the court said that it would hear the ED and directed it to file its reply on Kejriwal’s plea. The counsel representing the Tihar Jail, told the special court that when Kejriwal was admitted, he said he was taking insulin earlier but he is not taking it any more and on the whole, the blood sugar level has maintained. The counsel further said that there was no stipulation in his diet that he should have fruit or anything and in fact, he is not following the diet.
Also read: ‘Out of 48 home meals, only three times mangoes were there’: Arvind Kejriwal rebuts ED’s allegations