August 2021

CP MAGAZINE
LEGAL
CURRENT AFFAIRS

24
00
20
17
20

For CLAT/AILET/SNAP/MHCET & other 5-

5-year
Law Entrance Exams in India
20
17
20
00
24
 24
CONTENT

00
Appointment Of Judges In The Supreme Court ……………………………………………….…………………………………......... 1

Constitutional 105th Amendment Act, 2021 ……………………………………….…………………….……………...................... 2

20
Question Time With CP Booster Series ……………………………………………..…………................................................... 2

The Tribunal Reforms Bill, 2021 ………………………………………….......…………..…………………...…............................... 4

Judicial Remarks Of The Month ………………………………………………………………….…………..……..….......................... 5

17

August 1: Muslim Women Rights Day …………………………………….…………………………..…………………...................... 5

Lok Sabha Passes Essential Defence Services Bill, 2021 …………….………………….…………………….…........................ 6

Governor’s Power To Pardon Overrides Section 433A CRPC: Supreme Court …………………………………………….…. 6
20

Rajya Sabha Passed Aera (Amedment) Bill, 2021 …………………….….……………………..………….….…………………….…. 7

Recent Legal News …………………….….…………………….….…………………….……..…………………….….…………………….…. 7

Opinion Which Matters …………………….….…………………….….…………………………………….…….….…………………….…. 8

Comments Of The Month …………………….….…………………….….……………………….……………….….…………………….…. 9

A Case Study- Rahmat Khan @ Rammu Bismillah vs. Deputy Commissioner of Police ……………………………….…. 9

Marital Rape …………………….….…………………….….…………………….….…………………….….……………..………………….…. 9

Battle For The Future: Amazon And Reliance Saga- Explained ………………….…...….….……………..………………….…. 10
  At least ten years an advocate of a High Court or two or
more courts in succession; or
APPOINTMENT OF JUDGES IN
 In the opinion of the President, a distinguished jurist.
THE SUPREME COURT
Removal from Office:-
 Resignation addressed to the President.
In a first, nine (09) new judges took oath as Supreme Court
Judges in one go. Also, for the first time in Indian history, three  Completion of retirement age.
women Judges are appointed to the Supreme Court in one go.  Impeachment on the grounds of proved misbehaviour or
incapacity- Both House of Parliament by a majority of the
Name of Judges total membership of that House and by a majority of not
Last Position Held
(as per seniority) less than two-thirds of the members of that House present
and voting; Presented to the President in the same session.
Justice A.S. Oka Chief Justice of Karnataka HC
President then by an order impeach the Judge.

Justice Vikram Nath
Justice J K Maheshwari
Justice Hima Kohli
Justice BV Nagarthna
Chief Justice of Gujarat HC
Chief Justice of Sikkim HC
Chief Justice of Telangana HC
Judge Karnataka HC
24
HOW JUDGES ARE APPOINTED IN THE SUPREME
COURT?
Article 124 of the Constitution of India talks about
Establishment and appointment of Judges in the Supreme
Court. As per Article 124(2) “Every Judges of the Supreme Court

Justice CT Ravikumar
Justice M.M. Sundresh
Justice Bela M Trivedi
Justice P.S. Narasimha
17
00
Judge Kerala HC shall be appointed by the President by warrant under his hand
and seal after consultation with such of the Judges of the
Judge Madras HC Supreme Court and of the High Courts in the States as the
President may deem necessary for the purpose and shall hold
Judge Gujarat HC
office until he attains the age of sixty-five.”
Senior Advocate SC
20 The Supreme Court of India has developed a convention on the
appointment of Judges in Supreme Court and High Courts
through their judicial pronouncements. The system is known as
“Collegium System”
ABOUT COLLEGIUM

Evolution of the Collegium System- Four Important Case till

now on Collegium

S.P. Gupta vs. Union of India (1981) commonly
known as First Judges Case
 The recommendation of Chief Justice of India can be
20

refused for “cogent reasons”

 Executive Primacy over Judiciary

Supreme Court Advocates-on Record Association vs
(Source- Bar and Bench Twitter Handle) Union of India (1993)- Second Judges Case
 Introduction of Collegium System. Word
IMPORTANT POINTS TO REMEMBER “consultation” in Article 124(2) will mean

List of firsts:- “concurrence”
 9 Judges took oath in one go.  Collegium included Chief Justice of India and two senior-
 3 women judges appointed in one go. most judges of the Supreme Court. (Three-Member
Body)
 Justice BV Nagarthna in line to become first women
chief justice of India.
In re special reference of 1 of 1998 (1998)- Third
Judges Case
 Justice Bela M Trivedi- the only present judge to come from
Judicial Service Background.  Collegium expanded to five-member body, Chief Justice
of India plus four senior-most judges of the Supreme Court.

Total Sanctioned Strength- 33 Judges + Chief Justice of India
In the year 2014, the Parliament of India passed 99th

Present Strength- 32 Judges+ Chief Justice of India Constitutional Amendment Act which established

Present Chief Justice of India- Justice N V Ramana National Judicial Appointment Commission for the

Previous Chief Justice of India- Justice Sharad Arvind Bobde appointment, transfers of Judges in India. However, the
Supreme Court in the year 2015, struck down 99th

First Chief Justice of India- Justice Hiralal Jekisundas Kania
Constitutional Amendment Act as violative of basic

Age of retirement- 65 years structure of constitution in the case of Supreme Court

Eligibility:- Advocates on record Association vs Union of India.
 Citizen of India
Working Of Collegium:-
 At least five years a Judge of a High Court or of two or more  SC Collegium headed by CJI and four other judges
such courts in succession; or recommends names to the President.

(1)
Clat Possible: All rights reserved. Unauthorized copying, sale, distribution or circulation of any of the contents of this work is a
punishable offence under laws of India
  Government runs the background check on the names.
 If agreed by the Government, President appoints the
Judges.
 If rejected, names are send back to the Collegium, and if
Collegium sends back the name again, President has to
appoint the Judge.
FOR HIGH COURTS

Article 217 is the Constitutional Provision.

High Court Collegium includes Chief Justice of that High
Court and four senior-most judges of the High Court.

High Court Collegium sends the name to the Government
after approval of the Supreme Court Collegium.

President appoints the Judges of a High Court.

Retirement age- 62 years.
CONSTITUTIONAL 105TH
00
AMENDMENT ACT, 2021
20
17
(Source- padmad.org)
20

Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha passed The Constitution (One
Hundred and Twenty-Seventh Amendment) Bill,
2021.

President gave his assent to the bill on 19th August 2021,
consequently 105th Amendment Act, 2021 is now passed by the
parliament.

The Bill aims at restoring powers of states and union
territories to prepare their own list of socially and
educationally backward classes (SEBC)

The Amendment Bill amends Articles 342 A (Clauses 1 and 2)
and introduces a new clause- 342A (Clause 3) specifically
authorising states to maintain their state list.

The states will thus be able to directly notify SEBCs
without having to refer to the National Commission
for Backward Classes (NCBC)
BACKGROUND
102nd Constitutional Amendment Act was passed by the
parliament in the year 2018 which inserted Articles 338 B and
Article 342 A. Article 338 B deals with the structure, powers and
duties of National Commission for Backward Classes and Article
342 A deals with the power of the president to notify a particular
caste as Socially and Economically Backward. Article 366 and
Article 342 says that only President shall identify SEBCs for any
state and union territory. 102nd Constitutional Amendment Act
was challenged before the Supreme Court.
(2)
Clat Possible: All rights reserved. Unauthorized copying, sale, distribution or circulation of any of the contents of this work is a
punishable offence under laws of India
102ND CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT ACT AND
SUPREME COURT
SC delivered its verdict in the case of Dr Jaishri
Laxmanrao Patil & ors vs. Chief Minister & Ors.
upholding the constitutional validity of 102nd Constitutional
Amendment Act, 2018 and ruling that only President can take
decisions in declaring Socially and Economically Backward
Classes.
ISSUE IN DR JAISHRI LAXMANRAO PATIL & ORS
VS. CHIEF MINISTER & ORS.
Maharashtra State Government declared the “Maratha
Community” as the Socially and Economically Backward Class
24
and extended reservation to the Maratha Community in public
education and employment through Maharashtra State
Reservation for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes
Act, 2018, thereby exceeding the 50% limit as decided in Indra
Sawhney Case. The act was challenged through numerous
petition in the Supreme Court.
INDRA SAWHNEY CASE (1992)
Also known as Mandal Commission Case. In this case, it was
held that unless there exists an extraordinary situation,
reservation cannot exceed 50%.
VERDICT IN DR JAISHRI LAXMANRAO PATIL &
ORS VS. CHIEF MINISTER & ORS.

No need to visit Indra Sawhney Judgment i.e. reservation
cannot exceed 50% unless there exists some exceptional
circumstances.

Maratha Community are dominant forward class in the state
and no exceptional circumstances is there to provide
reservation to them.

The President (that is the Central government) alone, to the
exclusion of all other authorities, is empowered to identify
SEBCs and include them in a list to be published under Article
342A.

Article 342A which was inserted by 102nd Constitutional
Amendment Act does not violate the basic structure of the
Constitution.
WHY NEED OF THIS BILL?
To bypass the decision of the Supreme Court in Dr Jaishri
Laxmanrao Patil case, the legislature decided to amend the
Constitution, thereby giving powers to a State and Union
territory to prepare their own list of SEBCs.
QUESTION TIME WITH CP
BOOSTER SERIES
CP BOOSTER #1
A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in May 2021 has
struck down the Maratha quota in excess of 50% ceiling limit as
unconstitutional. The Court unanimously held that there were
no exceptional circumstances justifying the grant of reservation
to Marathas in excess of 50% ceiling limit as a Socially and
Educationally Backward Classes.
"Neither the Gaikwad Commission nor the High Court have
made out any situation for exceeding the ceiling of 50%
reservation for Marathas. Therefore, we find there are no
extraordinary circumstances for exceeding the ceiling", Justice
Ashok Bhushan, the presiding judge, read out the operative
portion of the judgment.
The bench struck down the Maharashtra SEBC Act 2018 to the
extent it held Marathas as a socially and economically backward
class as violating the principles of equality. The bench struck
down the reservation given to Marathas in job and education.
However, the bench clarified that the judgment will not affect
the PG Medical Admissions under Maratha quota made till
09.09.2020.
A Constitution Bench pronounced judgement in a batch of pleas
challenging the Maharashtra SEBC Act, 2018, which provides 16%
reservation for Marathas in jobs and education. After the grant of
Maratha quota, the reservation in Maharashtra became 68%.
“We have found that no extraordinary circumstances were made
out in granting separate reservation of Maratha Community by
00
exceeding the 50 percent ceiling limit of reservation. The Act, 2018
violates the principle of equality as enshrined in Article 16. The
exceeding of ceiling limit without there being any exceptional
circumstances clearly violates Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution
which makes the enactment ultra vires.’’
20
The Court held that there need not be representation
proportionate to the population of the community. What is
required by the State for providing reservation under Article
16(4) is not proportionate representation but adequate
representation. But the Gaikwad commission proceeded on the
basis of proportionate reservation.
17
The Supreme Court in a separate judgment held that The
Constitution (One Hundred and Second Amendment) Act, 2018
which introduced Article 338B which provides for a Commission
for the socially and educationally backward classes to be known
as the National Commission for Backward Classes as
constitutional. Further, the court stated that as per Article 342A,
20
President may with respect to any State, after consultation with
the Governor thereof, by public notification, specify the socially
and educationally backward classes which shall for the purposes
of this Constitution be deemed to be socially and educationally
backward classes in relation to that State or Union territory, as
the case may be.
Q.1. A is a MBBS doctor who wrote PG entrance exam in July
2020 and the results were to be announced in August 2020
and the entire admission process was to be completed in
the first week of September 2020. However, due to COVID-
19 the results got delayed and consequently the admission
process was stopped till October 2020. When the results
broke out in November 2020, A was eligible for a seat in
Maratha quota as per the SEBC Act, 2018 but was not
eligible as a general candidate. Decide as per the passage
whether A will get the benefit of SEBC Act, 2018 or not?
a) A will get the benefit as the judgment of the Supreme
Court was pronounced in May 2021 and there cannot be
retrospective application of this judgment.
b) A will not get the benefit as he was unable to take
admission in the college in the first week of September.
c) A will not get the benefit as SEBC Act 2018 has been
held as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.
d) A will get the benefit as he has written the exam in July
2020 and it is the fault of state that they did not
complete the admission process on time.
(3)
Clat Possible: All rights reserved. Unauthorized copying, sale, distribution or circulation of any of the contents of this work is a
punishable offence under laws of India
Q.2. As per your understanding of the passage, which of the
following statement is true?
a) Ceiling of 50% reservation cannot be violated by any
state or central legislation under any circumstances.
b) Ceiling of 50% reservation is absolute, but it may be
extended in exceptional circumstances.
c) Reservation mandating more than 50% reservation is
against the principles of just, fair and reasonable law as
per Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution.
d) Reservation can be extended beyond 50% if there is
proportionate representation of the community in
question.
Q.3. State of Gujarat in a special legislation declared that
24
“Marwari” community is socially and educationally
backward community due to which they could now get
reservation under OBC category. Marwari community is
considered to be as one of the elite community in Gujarat.
The reservation given to state did not alter the 50% ceiling
of total reservation. A, a Gujrati challenged the legislation
as constitutionally ultra vires. Decide.
a) The law made by the State Government is valid as
reservation ceiling do not go beyond 50%.
b) The law made by the State Government is invalid as
“Marwari” community is a rich community and they are
not socially and educationally backward.
c) The law made by the State Government is valid as
“Marwari” community are not adequately represented
in the state employment.
d) None of the above.
Q.4. Suppose the Central Government comes up with a
legislation providing 10% reservation to Economically
Weaker Sections of the society in public employment in
addition to 50% reservation to Socially and
Educationally Backward Classes of the society. A
challenges the legislation as being violative of Article 14
& 16 of the Indian Constitution. As per your
understanding of the passage,
a) The law is violative of Article 14 and 16 as reservation
cannot go beyond 50%.
b) The law is violative as it gives unfair advantage to a
particular section of the society.
c) The law is valid as economically weaker section is not
similar to socially and educationally backward classes
and ceiling of 50% is related to socially and
educationally backward classes.
d) Cannot be determined.
Q.5. The President of India after consultation with the State of
Bihar, by a notification included “Lohar” Community as
socially and educationally backward classes. The
Government of Bihar proposed 5 % reservation for Lohar
community in Government jobs. Which of the following
statements would undermine the actions of Government of
Bihar?
a) Lohar community is considered to be a forward caste
and they are adequately represented in the state of
Bihar.
b) The stats show that Lohar community hold 0.1% of total
employment in the state of Bihar.
c) People of Bihar usually boycott the marriages and
ceremonies of Lohar community.
d) The literacy rate in Lohar community is less than 10%.
ANSWER KEY
1. Option (b).
The last line of third passage clearly says that the
Judgment delivered by the Supreme Court will not affect
the PG Medical Admissions under Maratha quota made till
09.09.2020. It is clear from the passage that admission
should be granted before 09.09.2020. In the instant case,
the admission process is going on and so, it will be affected
by the judgment.
2. Option (b)
It can be inferred from para 2 and 5 of the passage that 50%
ceiling can be extended if exceptional circumstances arises.

24
3. Option (b). (Image Source- soolegal.com)
The last paragraph of the passage states that “President
may with respect to any State, after consultation with the
Governor thereof, by public notification, specify the THE TRIBUNAL REFORMS
socially and educationally backward classes which shall for
BILL, 2021

00
the purposes of this Constitution be deemed to be socially
and educationally backward classes.” It is the President
who has to specify Socially and Educationally backward
Ministry Concerned- Finance
classes. As per the passage, the power is not vested with
Introduced in Lok Sabha by Finance Minister- Ms
State Government. Nirmala Sitharaman
4. Option (d).
Bill is identical to The Tribunals Reforms (Rationalisation
20
Nothing in the facts and passage gives the information that and Conditions of Service) Ordinance, 2021 promulgated in
EWS reservation creates an exceptional situation or not. April 2021.
Also, the passage is silent as to whether 50% ceiling on
The Bill seeks to dissolve certain existing appellate
reservation is applicable only to SEBCs. bodies and transfer their functions (such as
5. Option (a). adjudication of appeals) to other existing judicial
17

Option A, if true, means that there is no exceptional bodies.

situation for providing reservation to Lohar community.
The Bill removes certain provisions from the Finance Act,
All other options support that Lohar community should be 2017 like Composition of search-cum-selection committees,
given reservation. qualifications of tribunal members, their terms and conditions
of service.
CP BOOSTER #2
20

Provisions on composition of selection committees, and

Q.1. The legislature has passed Constitutional 105th Amendment term of office is included in the Bill.
Act, 2021 to supersede which decision of the Supreme Court?
Qualification of members and other terms and conditions of
Q.2. The Supreme Court of India in which decision has upheld service will be notified by the central government.
the Constitutional Validity of 102nd Constitutional
As per the Bill, the search-cum-selection committees will
Amendment Act? consist of i) the Chief Justice of India, or a Supreme Court
Q.3. As per the 105th Constitutional Amendment Act, who has Judge nominated by him, as the Chairperson (with casting
the power to identify Socially and Educationally Backward vote), (ii) two Secretaries nominated by the central
Classes in a state? government, (iii) the sitting or outgoing Chairperson, or a
Q.4. Which Article of the constitution is amended by the 105th retired Supreme Court Judge, or a retired Chief Justice of a
Constitutional Amendment Act? High Court, and (iv) the Secretary of the Ministry under which
the Tribunal is constituted (with no voting right).
Q.5. Indra Sawhney Case deals with?

The Bill provides for a four-year term of office (subject to the
Q.6. Which case is also known as Mandal Commission Case?
upper age limit of 70 years for the Chairperson, and 67 years
Q.7. Which Article of the constitution was inserted by 102nd for members). Further, it specifies a minimum age
Constitutional Amendment Act, 2018? requirement of 50 years for appointment of a chairperson or a
member.
ANSWER KEY
Appellate
1. Dr Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil & Ors Vs. Chief Minister & Ors. Acts Proposed Entity
Body
2. Dr Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil & Ors Vs. Chief Minister & Ors.
The Appellate High Court
3. Respective States and Union Territories
Cinematograph Tribunal
4. Article 342 A Act, 1952
5. Reservation
The Trade Marks Appellate High Court
6. Indra Sawhney vs Union of India Act, 1999 Board
7. Article 342A

(4)
Clat Possible: All rights reserved. Unauthorized copying, sale, distribution or circulation of any of the contents of this work is a
punishable offence under laws of India
 The Copyright Appellate Commercial Court or
Act, 1957 Board the Commercial JUDICIAL REMARKS OF THE
Division of a High Court
MONTH
The Customs Act, Authority for High Court
1962 Advance Sending a legal notice and filing a criminal complaint does not
Rulings amount to offence of abetment to suicide in spite of the presence
The Patents Act, Appellate High Court of a suicide note. “Abetment involves a mental process of
1970 Board instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person in
doing of a thing.”
The Airports Airport  Central Government ---- Delhi High Court
Authority of India Appellate for disputes arising
Act, 1994 Tribunal from the disposal of
properties left on

24
airport premises by
unauthorised
occupants.
 High Court, for
appeals against orders

00
of an eviction officer.
The Control of Airport Civil Court
National Appellate
Highways (Land Tribunal
and Traffic) Act,
2002
20
(Image Source- https://affairscloud.com/)
The Geographical Appellate High Court
Indications of Board
Goods
(Registration and
AUGUST 1: MUSLIM WOMEN
Protection) Act, RIGHTS DAY
17

1992

Muslim Women Rights Day is observed on August 1 in the
Table- Transfer of functions of key appellate bodies as
backdrop of Triple Talaq Bill that was approved in
proposed under the Bill
Parliament on August 1, 2019.
BACKGROUND
The Triple Talaq law made ‘triple talaq’ a cognizable
20

In March 2017, The Finance Act 2017 reorganised the criminal offence. Law provides for imprisonment of 3 years
tribunal system by merging tribunals based on functional along with a fine.
similarity (26 to 19). Delegated powers to the central
Egypt was the first country to ban triple talaq in 1929.
government to make rules for the qualifications, Pakistan in 1956 also banned this practice.
appointments, term of office, salaries and allowances,
Law is named as Muslim Women (Protection of Rights
removal, and other conditions of service for chairpersons on Marriage) Act, 2019.
and members of these tribunal. In July 2017, Ministry of

In the Case of Shayara Bano vs Union of India & Ors,
Finance notified these rules.
instant triple talaq was declared unconstitutional by the

In 2019, the SC in the case of Rojer Mathew vs South Supreme Court.
Indian Bank Ltd & Ors struck down some of the rules on
the pretext of judicial independence and directed the central
government to reframe the rules.

In Feb 2020, new rules were notified which were again struck
down by the SC in Madras Bar Association vs Union of
India & Anr.

In April 2021, an Ordinance with similar provisions was
promulgated which was again challenged and struck down by
the Supreme Court in Madras Bar Association vs Union
of India & Anr. The provisions were related to the four-year
tenure and the minimum age requirement of 50 years for
members of tribunals.

In August 2021, The Tribunals Reforms Bill, 2021 was thus,
introduced in the Lok Sabha.

(Image Source- https://newsonair.com/)

(5)
Clat Possible: All rights reserved. Unauthorized copying, sale, distribution or circulation of any of the contents of this work is a
punishable offence under laws of India

LOK SABHA PASSES
ESSENTIAL DEFENCE
SERVICES BILL, 2021

Bill that seeks to prevent workers of government-owned
ordnance factories from going on strike to oppose
corporatization of units.

Gives power to the government to declare services mentioned
in it as essential defence services.

Bill also prohibits strike and lockouts across industrial
establishment or unit engaged in essential defence services.

In June 2021, union cabinet chaired by Prime Minister
Narendra Modi had given nod for corporatization of Ordnance
Factory Board (OFB), under which 41 factories involved in
production of ammunition and other equipment for armed
forces will become part of seven government-owned corporate
00
units.
20
17
20
(Image Source- https://lexlife.in/)
GOVERNOR’S POWER TO
PARDON OVERRIDES SECTION
433A CrPC: SUPREME COURT
WHY IN NEWS?
Recently, the Supreme Court held that the Governor’s power to
pardon overrides Section 433A of Code of Criminal Procedure.
Sec 433A of CrPC- It says that if a sentence of life
imprisonment is imposed on a person who is convicted for an
offence for which death is one of the punishments, or where a
death sentence has been commuted into life imprisonment, such
person cannot be released from prison unless he had served at
least fourteen years of imprisonment.
KEY POINTS FROM THE JUDGMENT

Governor of a State can pardon prisoners, ever before they
have served a minimum 14 years of prison sentence.

The Constitutional powers of Governor given under Article 161
overrides Section 433A of Cr P C.
(6)
Clat Possible: All rights reserved. Unauthorized copying, sale, distribution or circulation of any of the contents of this work is a
punishable offence under laws of India

The sovereign power of a Governor to pardon a prisoner under
Article 161 is actually exercised by the State Government and
not the Governor on his own. The advice of the appropriate
government binds the Head of the State.
Do you know?
Section 432 of the Cr P C empowers the Government to remit
sentence.
PARDONING POWER OF THE PRESIDENT OF
INDIA:

Article 72 of the Constitution- The President shall have
the power to grant pardons, reprieves, respites or remissions
of punishment or to suspend, remit or commute the sentence
24
of any person convicted of any offence where the
sentence is a sentence of death.

The President cannot exercise his power of pardon
independent of the government.

Supreme Court in case of Maru Ram vs Union of India
(1980) has ruled that the President has to act on the advice
of the Council of Ministers while deciding mercy pleas.

President is bound by the advice of the Council of
Ministers, but Article 74(1) empowers the President to
return the advice for reconsideration once. If the
Council of Ministers declines to reconsider, the
President has to accept the recommendation of Council of
Ministers.
Pardoning Power Of The Governor:-

Article 161 empowers the Governor to grant pardons,
reprieves, respites or remissions of punishment or to suspend,
remit or commute the sentence of any person convicted of any
offence against any law relating to a matter to which the
executive power of the State extends.
Difference Between Pardoning Powers Of President
And Governor:-

The Scope of the pardoning power of the President under
Article 72 is wider than the pardoning power of the Governor
under Article 161.

The President’s power to grant pardon extends in cases where
the punishment or sentence is by a Court Martial. Governor do
not have this power.

President has the power to grant pardon in death sentence
cases as well while Governor’s power does not extend to death
sentence cases.
SOME IMPORTANT TERMINOLOGIES

Pardon: It removes both the sentence and the
conviction and completely absolves the convict from all
sentences, punishments and disqualifications.

Commutation: It denotes the substitution of one form
of punishment for a lighter form. For example, a death
sentence may be commuted to rigorous imprisonment, which
in turn may be commuted to a simple imprisonment.

Remission: It implies reducing the period of sentence
without changing its character. For example, a sentence
of rigorous imprisonment for two years may be remitted to
rigorous imprisonment for one year.

Respite: It denotes awarding a lesser sentence in place
of one originally awarded due to some special fact,
such as the physical disability of a convict or the pregnancy of
a woman offender.

Reprieve: It implies a stay of the execution of a
sentence (especially that of death) for a temporary
period. Its purpose is to enable the convict to have time to
seek pardon or commutation.
(Image Source- https://hranker.com/)
00
RAJYA SABHA PASSED AERA
(AMEDMENT) BILL, 2021

Rajya Sabha passed Airports Economic Regulatory
Authority of India (Amendment) Bill, 2021
20

Bill was tabled by Civil Aviation Minister Jyotiraditya
Scindia

Bill seeks to aide government’s plan of privatisation of
smaller airports under its asset monetisation
17
programme.

AERA i.e. Airports Economic Regulatory Authority will now
have the power to regulate tariff and other charges of
aeronautical services for major airports.

UDAN Scheme i.e. UDE DESH KA AAM NAAGRIK- It
20
aims to make air travel affordable and widespread.
(Image Source- LiveLaw.com)
ASSAM PASSED CATTLE PRESERVATION BILL, 2021

Assam Assembly passed the “Assam Cattle Preservation Bill,
2021.

It will repeal the Assam Cattle Preservation Act, 1950.

It prohibits the sale and purchase of beef in areas
inhabited by non-beef eating communities.

It also prohibits the sale and purchase of beef within a radius
of 5 Km of a temple or a Satra (Vaishnavite monastery)

Aim is to regulate “slaughter, consumption illegal
transportation” of cattle.
(7)
Clat Possible: All rights reserved. Unauthorized copying, sale, distribution or circulation of any of the contents of this work is a
punishable offence under laws of India

It also aims to curb the cattle smuggling to Bangladesh.

Provision of minimum 3 years imprisonment which can
extend to 8 years; Fine of Rs 3 Lakh which can extend up to
Rs. 5 Lakh, if found guilty.
RECENT LEGAL NEWS
24
(Image Source- https://www.dreamstime.com/)

In a case, Delhi High Court has observed that permitting
Public Entity to not dispose of RTI Application in
timely manner would defeat the purpose of Right to
Information Act.
 Section 7 of the Right to Information Act, 2005
mandates the Public Information Officer of a public body to
dispose off the RTI application within a period of 30
days except those relating to life or liberty of a person.

Kerala High Court in a remarkable order directed the State
and concerned authorities to take steps to ensure that
economically weaker students are not sidelined by the digital
divide and are able to pursue education like other children
who have the access to electronic gadgets.
 The order also highlighted that students have the right to
free and compulsory education as per Article 21A of the
Constitution. Provisions of Right To Education Act,
2009 were also relied upon by the court.

President appoints Justice CK Abdul Rahim, a retired
judge of Kerala High Court as chairman of Kerala
Administrative Tribunal.

In a divorce dispute, Bombay High Court granted divorce
to husband whose wife created matrimonial profiles
on two matrimonial websites on the grounds of ‘mental
cruelty’.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court observed that the act of
leaving the National Flag in hoisted position even
after sunset, maybe an act of advertent or inadvertent
forgetfulness, misconduct, but it can’t be held to be a
contemptuous act.
 Flying of the National Flag between sunset and
sunrise is not prohibited by law.

Tamil Nadu High Court in its decision ruled that personal
feud, misunderstandings and not getting along with a
male colleague would not constitute sexual
harassment.

Bombay High Court in a bail order observed that touching
The Gujarat High Court while protecting inter-faith marriages
cheeks without sexual intent wouldn’t attract offence by consenting adults from rigours of the Gujarat Freedom
of ‘Sexual Assault’ under POCSO. of Religion (Amendment) Act, 2021 (commonly
 POCSO is Prevention of Children from the Sexual known as ‘live jihad’ law) observed that the law
Offences Act, 2012 “interferes with the intricacies of marriage including
the right to the choice of an

In a peculiar case, Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court individual, thereby
held that mere refusal to repay a loan cannot in any way infringing Article 21 of the
be considered to be an act of abetment to drive someone Constitution of India”. The
to commit suicide. court expressed its concern
 “In order to constitute an offence of abetment, the about the provisions which treat
act committed by the accused must be of such every conversion by marriage as
nature so that the deceased must be left with no unlawful.
other option but to take extreme step of ending his

24
(Image Source- https://exceptionnotfound.net/)
life.”

The Gujarat High Court struck down the Gujarat
Cooperatives Societies (Amendment) Act, 2019 by
ruling that the legislation is “unconstitutional, absurd
OPINION WHICH MATTERS
and manifestly arbitrary and not in the public
Honourable Mr Justice D.Y. Chandrachud on

00
interest.”
 The amendment removed 13 sugar factories from the list of
343 specified cooperative societies under Section 74C (1)(v)
of the Gujarat Cooperative Societies Act, 1961.

A Delhi Court directed Bollywood Singer and Actor Honey
Singh to appear before it in connection with the domestic
20
violence case filed against him by his wife. Court Says, “No
one is above law”

The Kerala High Court took suo motu cognizance in the
matter where a mother and her children were forced to spend
their time in a train fearing harassment from anti-social
17
“Speaking Truth to Power: Citizens and the Law”

“One can consider speaking truth to power as a right of every
citizen which they must have in a democracy but equally a
duty of every citizen”.

“Democracry and truth go hand in hand. Democracy needs
truth to survive”.

“What can we as citizens of India do. First thing is to
strengthen our public institutions. As citizens, we must strive
to ensure that we have a press which is free from influence of
any kind, be it political or economic, which can provide

elements. The Court directed that the family should be
protected and that their security should be ensured.
 Suo Motu means “on its own motion”

States cannot withdraw cases against MPs, MLAs
without an approval of the High Court of the
20
information in an unbiased manner.

“Similarly, schools and universities need to be supported to
ensure that they create an atmosphere where students can
learn to differentiate truth from falsehood and develop a
temperament to question power.”

“Secondly, we must not only acknowledge the plurality of

concerned state, rules Supreme Court.

opinions in a country as diverse as India but celebrate this

Equal Pay for Equal Work is not a fundamental right
plurality. This allows open space for more opinions.”
but Constitutional Goal- Bombay High Court.

“We also need to protect the integrity of our elections seeing

Supreme Court has directed Election Commission to
elections not only as a right but also as a duty. To do this, we
create Mobile App with information about criminal
need to ensure all citizens are given basic education to realise
antecedents of politicians.
the value of their vote.”

Throwing chit at woman professing love for her

“As citizens of a democracy, we need to commit ourselves to
amounts to outraging modesty of a woman. Modesty
the search for truth as a key aspiration of our society”
of a woman is her most precious jewel- Bombay High
Court. Wish to read his full text? Go to this link:
https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/mc-chagla-memorial-

In a progressive judgment, Delhi High Court ruled that Every
lecture-399521.pdf
child has a right to use mother’s surname. Father
does not own the daughter to dictate that she should use
only his surname.

Kerala High Court in its judgment held that Article 25 of the
Constitution does not provide any immunity from
taxation on the basis of religion. Salaries of Nuns and
Priests working as teachers are liable to Tax Deduction at
Source (TDS).

Justice UU Lalit, Judge Supreme Court of India and
Executive Chairman, National Legal Services
Authority stated that “Each Police Station in the
country must have display boards informing about
the right to legal aid and the availability of free legal
aid services.” (Image Source- https://www.drivedigital.in/)

(8)
Clat Possible: All rights reserved. Unauthorized copying, sale, distribution or circulation of any of the contents of this work is a
punishable offence under laws of India
 COMMENTS OF THE MONTH

Justice B.V. Nagarathna in her farewell speech to women
advocates “With access to the right opportunities, each one of
you can achieve your dreams. I, therefore, urge each one of
you to seek out these opportunities armed with faith in
yourself and stride ahead to achieve all that you want to and
also give back to society.”

Chief Justice of India NV Ramana remarked that Big Law
Firms should hire graduates from Tier 2 and Tier 3 cities also. (Image Source-https://www.sentinelassam.com/)
He also stated that Law firms should look for more inclusivity,
diversity and community reach.

24
MARITAL RAPE
Why in news?
Chhattishgarh High Court on 27th August 2021, held that sexual
intercourse by a man with his wife is not rape, even if it was

00
done by force or against her wish.
Marital Rape Law

Section 375 IPC defines Rape.

Section 375 IPC lays down seven elements as to what
20 constitutes rape including factors like age, lack of consent,
consent obtained through coercion or fraud etc. However, this
section carves out two exceptions, A medical procedure or
intervention and Sexual intercourse or sexual acts by a man
(Image Source- https://dare2compete.com/) with his own wife, the wife not being under fifteen years of age
will not be rape.
17

In the year 2017, the Supreme Court in Independent

A CASE STUDY- Rahmat Khan @ Thought vs. Union of India increased the age of
consent for sexual intercourse within marriage from
Rammu Bismillah vs. Deputy fifteen to eighteen.
Commissioner of Police Implication Of The Exception
20

If a husband has forceful sexual intercourse/act with his wife

Facts- Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone-1, Amravati City, who is above eighteen years of age will not fall in the definition
passed an externment order under Section 56(1)(a)(b) of the of rape.
Maharashtra Police Act, 1951, in which he directed the
In a reformatory decision of the Kerala High Court, divorce
Journalist Rahmat Khan to not to enter or return to Amravati was granted on the ground of Marital Rape.
City or District for a period of one year from the date on which
he leaves, or is taken out of Amravati City and/or District. Important Points To Remember
The contention of Mr Khan was that, the externment
Age of woman for giving consent for sexual intercourse/sexual
proceedings were initiated against him when he started act is Eighteen Years.
requesting the Collector and the police to investigate
Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 is
misappropriation of Government Grants by Madrasas in applicable when the victim is below eighteen years of age.
collusion with Government officials, after he found out that
Sexual Intercourse with a woman by obtaining her consent on
there were irregularities and misappropriation of public money the false pretext of marriage also constitutes rape.
distributed to Madrasas in Amravati District.
The court observed that the impugned externment order was
an outcome of the complaints lodged by Mr Khan and FIRs filed
against him were clearly vindictive, retaliatory and aimed to
teach a lesson to Mr Khan and stifle his voice.
Court Stated that “A person cannot be denied his
fundamental right to reside anywhere in the country
or to move freely throughout the country, on flimsy
grounds.”
Court, therefore, quashed the externment order.
Read the Judgment at
https://main.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2021/4211/4211_2021_3
8_8_29538_Judgement_25-Aug-2021.pdf (Image Source- https://legaladviceguru.com/)

(9)
Clat Possible: All rights reserved. Unauthorized copying, sale, distribution or circulation of any of the contents of this work is a
punishable offence under laws of India
Basic Structure Doctine Is Legitimate & Sound: Kenyan nisi mens sit rea unless there is a guilty intent
Court Of Appeals
jus cogens the peremptory norm of general
The Kenyan Court of Appeals in BBI Judgment held that international law
the Doctrine of Basic Structure as propounded by the
Supreme Court of India in Keshavananda Bharati Case is assentio mentium meeting of minds
applicable in Kenya as well.
All About Keshavananda Bharati Vs State Of Kerala
(1973) BATTLE FOR THE FUTURE:
FACTS- Keshavananda Bharati challenged the Constitution
(29th Amendment) Act, 1972, questioning the Kerala AMAZON AND RELIANCE
government’s attempts, under two-state land reform acts, to
impose restrictions on the management of mutt property.
SAGA- EXPLAINED
Bharati also challenged three Constitutional amendments – the

24
24th, 25th and 26th amendments – introduced by the Indira
Gandhi government.
ISSUE- The basic question that the Supreme Court had to
decide was whether Parliament could alter, amend, abrogate any
part of the Constitution even to the extent of taking away all

00
fundamental rights?
JUDGEMENT- The Constitutional Bench-led by Chief Justice
SM Sikri -- ruled by a 7-6 verdict held that Parliament can
amend every Article in the Constitution but should be restrained
from altering the ‘basic structure’ of the Constitution.
The court held that under Article 368, which provides
20
Parliament amending powers, something must remain of the
original Constitution that the new amendment would change.
The court did not define the ‘basic structure’, and only listed a
few principles — federalism, secularism, democracy — as being (Image Source- LiveLaw)
its part. Since then, the court has been adding new features to WHY IN NEWS?
17

this concept.
Some Fun Facts About Kesavananda Bharati Case:-

13 Judge Bench was formed to preside over the case.

Matter was heard over 68 days.

11 different judgments were delivered in 7-6 majority.
20
On August 6, 2021, The Supreme Court of India stalled the
August 2020 sale of Future Retail Limited to Reliance
Industries, handling a major victory to Amazon. The Court said
that the order by the Singapore Arbitrator (October 2020),
which puts the deal between Future Group and Reliance

Industries, is valid.

Full name of the case- His Holiness Kesavananda Bharati
Sripadagalvaru and Ors. Vs. State of Kerala and Anr. BACKGROUND
Basic Structure Since Kesavananda Bharati Case:-
In August 2019, Amazon signs an agreement with Future
The ‘basic structure’ doctrine has since been interpreted to Coupons, a Future Group promoter entity, to buy a 49% stake
include the supremacy of the Constitution, the rule of law, for Rupees 1,500 Crores. As Future Coupons holds a 7.3%
Independence of the judiciary, doctrine of separation of powers, stake in Future Retail, the deal effectively gives Amazon an
federalism, secularism, sovereign democratic republic, the indirect 3.58% stake in Future Retail. The Competition
parliamentary system of government, the principle of free and Commission of India approved Amazon’s proposed acquisition
fair elections, welfare state, etc. in November 2020.
SOME IMPORTANT LEGAL MAXIMS
At the time of this deal, Amazon had set a condition for Future
Group to not to sell its assets to a list of companies which
Legal Maxims Meaning included Mukesh Ambani’s Reliance Industries.

In August 2020, Reliance Retail Ventures stated that it is
prima facie at first sight
acquiring Future Group’s Retail, Wholesale, and Logistics &
status quo the current situation Warehousing business for a lump sum amount of Rupees
24,713 Crores.
actionable per se actionable without the proof of
actual damage
Apprehending this, Amazon approaches the Singapore
International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) claiming that Future
ipso facto by the very fact itself Group breached the terms of their 2019 agreement, therefore,
Reliance Acquisition of Future Group should be called off.
persona non-grata person non-wanted

In the Arbitration proceedings, Singapore Emergency
Alibi at another place Arbitrator halts the Reliance Future Group deal in an interim
order. It said that the Amazon has an “apparent right” to be
amicus curiae friend of the court
present for any restructuring of Future Retail and the Future
actus non facit reum the act does not make one guilty Groups.
(10)
Clat Possible: All rights reserved. Unauthorized copying, sale, distribution or circulation of any of the contents of this work is a
punishable offence under laws of India

In November 2020, Future Retail moves the Delhi High Court
against Amazon alleging interference. Meanwhile,
Competition Commission of India, approved the Reliance
Retail Deal with Future Group.

In December 2020, A Single Judge Bench of the Delhi High
Court, said that the Court will not halt the Future-Reliance
deal, which was then challenged by Amazon. On March 18th
2021, A Single Judge Bench of Delhi High Court upholds the
Singapore International Arbitration Order, putting the deal on
hold. It also fined Rupees 20 Lakhs to Future Group and
asked Future Group to approach all the authorities to recall all
the approvals granted to it in connection with its deal with
Reliance Industries.
KEY POINTS FROM THE JUDGMENT OF THE
SUPREME COURT IN AMAZON.COM NV
INVESTMENT HOLDINGS LLC VERSUS
FUTURE RETAIL LIMITED & ORS.

An Emergency Arbitrator’s order, if provided under
institutional rules which the parties agreed to, would be
covered by the Indian Arbitration Act.

Party autonomy is one of the pillars of Arbitration in the
Arbitration Act.

There is nothing in the Arbitration Act that prohibits
contracting parties from agreeing to a provision providing for
an award being made by an Emergency Arbitrator.

24

However, after few days, the Division Bench of the Delhi High

Interim Award that are passed by Emergency Arbitrators
Court stayed the Single Bench Order of the High Court, which
under the rules of a permanent arbitral institution would be
was then challenged in the Supreme Court by Amazon.
included within the ambit of Section 17 of Arbitration Act.

On August 6th 2021, the Honourable Supreme Court of India
ruled in favour of Amazon and held that Emergency award
(interim award) passed by Singapore Arbitrator stalling

00
Future Retail Limited and Reliance deal is enforceable as per
Indian Laws. The apex Court upheld the order of the Single
Bench of the Delhi High Court.
WHAT IS ARBITRATION?
20

The dictionary meaning of ‘arbitration’ is the process of
solving an argument between people by helping them to agree
to an acceptable solution.

Arbitration is a form of Alternative Dispute Resolution which
is duly recognized by Indian Laws.
17

It benefits parties who want to avoid the normal lengthy
recourse to the local courts for settlement of disputes. It is a
legal technique for the resolution of dispute outside the courts,
wherein the parties to a dispute refer it to one or more persons
namely arbitrator(s) by whose decision (the “award”) they
agree to be bound.
20

The Indian arbitration is governed and regulated by the

Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, which derives its basis
from the 1985 UNCITRAL Model on International
Commercial Arbitration and the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules
of 1976.

In Arbitration, the parties are free to decide the Adjudicating
Authority, the Seat of the Arbitration, the Applicable Laws and
the Procedure which shall be applicable to the Arbitration
proceedings.

It is important to note that for a valid Arbitration, Arbitration
agreement (or Clause) must be entered into by the parties.
Arbitration Agreement must be in Black and White.

“Interim Award” is the award which is given by the Arbitrator
during the pendency of the Arbitration proceedings.

“Emergency Arbitrator” The emergency arbitrator provisions
were introduced in the SIAC Rules in order to address
situations where a party is in need of emergency interim relief
before a Tribunal is constituted.

(11)
Clat Possible: All rights reserved. Unauthorized copying, sale, distribution or circulation of any of the contents of this work is a
punishable offence under laws of India
 24
00
20
17
20

(12)
Clat Possible: All rights reserved. Unauthorized copying, sale, distribution or circulation of any of the contents of this work is a
punishable offence under laws of India
 24
00
20
17
20

(13)
Clat Possible: All rights reserved. Unauthorized copying, sale, distribution or circulation of any of the contents of this work is a
punishable offence under laws of India