CASE STUDIES

CASE NUMBER: 01

HIMANSHU KUMAR AND ORS. vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND

ORS.

FACTS:

Petitioners 1 to 12 are family members of persons who had their tongues and other body parts
such as hands cut off by the security forces and saw their relatives killed in cold blood by the
Chhattisgarh police, Special Police Officers (SPOs) and Salwa Judum activists. Petitioners
seek directions to the effect that the investigation into the extra judicial executions as outlined
below be done by the CBI as the police have shown no inclination to investigate. Petitioners
point out that in two similar massacres of innocent civilians which took place on 8.1.09 at
Singaram Village, Tehsil action has been taken by the police at all. The statements of the
accused persons were either not recorded or recorded incorrectly and deliberately so, charge
sheets were not filed and no person was arrested despite the passage of many months.
Petitioners have no hope that justice will be done to them unless an independent agency like
the CBI is directed to take over both the investigation and the prosecution.

The details of the killings are as follows:

• In the early hours of 17th September, 6 villagers were murdered by security forces in
Singanpalli village in Telangana. Dudhi Muye (70 yrs) who could hardly walk was
murdered after her breasts were cut off. Madvi Deva was tied to a tree and shot at
three times and then beheaded. All the houses were ransacked, broken and burnt
down. Family members are either living in sheds in the forests or have taken shelter
with relatives.

• Muchaki Deva (60 yrs) of Ondherpara was grazing cattle on the morning of 17
September. He was caught, beaten and dragged into the village by security forces.
Hanged upside down from a tree and a pot of hot oil was lit below and he was
dropped into it. As a result, the upper part of his body is severely burnt and he has
developed maggots in wounds. Security forces killed 9 villagers in Bhadarpadar and
left their bodies in the village while no casualties were inflicted on them by the
Naxalites.

• In Chintagufa, a 45yr old man, Tomra Mutta was stabbed and shot inside his house.
Another couple, Soyam Subba and Soyam Jogi were stabbed and killed inside their
house. Yet another villager, Madvi Enka was stabbed inside the house and then
 dragged all over the village. There is apprehension that the total number of killings
may be much higher as many villages could not be accessed or accessed.

ISSUE- Whether it is a fit case for the Hon'ble Supreme Court to issue a writ of mandamus
or/and any other appropriate writ to have the CBI take over the investigation and prosecution.

PRAYER- A petition has been filed in the Supreme Court asking for the Central Bureau of
Investigation (CBI) to take over the investigation and prosecution into the mass massacres
that took place in the villages mentioned in the petition.

CASE NUMBER: 02

JUDGMENT PASSED BY HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA on

06.05.2022
CASE NAME- BHARAT PETROLEUM Co. LTD vs. KERALA STATE ROAD
TRANSPORT

BENCH- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.S.DIAS and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BASANT
BALAJI

CASE DETAIL- The hon'ble High Court of Kerala has decided on a writ petition seeking
relief in respect of arbitrariness in fixing fuel prices.

ISSUES RAISED IN THE WRIT PETITION- (i) whether the learned Single Judge has
erred in proceeding with the writ petition without considering the objection raised by the 2 nd
respondent and not stating any reason in not relegating the petitioner to the 'ADR' mechanism
provided in the contract? and

(ii) whether the direction in the impugned order that the respondents 2 to 4 have to supply
diesel to the petitioner at par with the current market price available to retail outlets is
sustainable in law?

FACTS OF THE CASE- The petition was filed by a State Transport undertaking (Petition)
in the Indian state of Kerala on behalf of its 26578 employees and 41,000 pensioners
following an increase in the price of diesel. Before the pandemic, the petitioner used to
transport nearly 35,00,000 passengers every day using 6241 buses on 6389 routes. The
petition alleges that it is paying Rs.21 per litre more than the retail consumers for diesel,
violating Article 14 and 19 (i) (g) of the Constitution of India. The Petition was enjoying the
price concession granted by the first respondent to all the bulk consumers of the OMCs. The
benefit was withdrawn in 2013, and a non-subsidized market- determined price was fixed. As
an aftermath of the dismantling of the APM, there is an unprecedented hike in the price of
petroleum products as per the whims and fancies of the respondents 2 to 4. After the
dismantling of the APM, the OMCs are enjoying unbridled power to fix the prices of
petroleum products. The Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board Act, 2006 provided
for the establishment of the PNRB to monitor the price fixation of petroleum product and
protect the interest of consumers. Even though the Board has advised notifying petroleum,
petroleum products and natural gas, the first respondent has not taken any action.

ARGUMENTS RAISED BEFORE THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA-

PETITIONER- He contended that the learned Single Judge ought to have adverted to the
objection raised by the 2nd respondent in the counter affidavit regarding the maintainability
of the writ petition, in view of Clause 14 of Exhibit P1. He placed reliance on the decisions of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gail (India) Ltd v. Gujarat State Petroleum Corporation Ltd
[(2014) 1 SCC 329] and Kerala State Electricity Board and Anr v Kurien E.Kalathil [(2000) 6
SCC 293] to support his submission.

RESPONDENT- The respondent has filed an affidavit arguing that there is no public law
element or violation of rights of any person involved in the writ petition. This Court may not
invoke its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for
resolving contractual disputes. The pricing of products, which is the subject matter of this
writ petition, squarely falls within Clause 14 of Exhibit P1 and the petition is silent on the
alternative remedy provided in the agreement.

Sri. Dushyant Dave argued that writ appeals are devoid of merit. He contended that the
learned Single Judge has passed the interim order in exercise of his discretionary powers
under Article 226 of the Constitution. According to him, the respondents 2 to 4 are
contractually bound to supply petroleum products at the most competitive price available in
the market. Petitioner argued that if respondents 2 to 4 are given such leeway, the petitioner
would have to stop their operations completely. Appellate Court should not interfere with the
discretionary orders passed by the Single Judge.

OBSERVATION OF THE KERALA HIGH COURT AN ITS DECISION-

We accept the submission of Sri. Parag P.Tripathi that the petitioner cannot be treated at par
with retail customers because the latter would have to go to a retail outlet and pay for the
product then and there. On the contrary, petroleum products are supplied to the petitioner at
their doorsteps, with credit facilities and other benefits as envisaged in the contract.

There is no infringement of the petitioner's fundamental right as alleged in the writ petition.
The petition has not represented their alleged grievance to the OMCs; instead has rushed to
this Court. The impugned order directing the respondents 2 to 4 to sell diesel to the petitioner
at par with the market price available to retail customers is unsustainable in law.

CASE NUMBER: 03

SUPREME COURT PROCEEDINGS

 COURT ROOM - 06

(05.05.2022)

BENCH- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL and HON'BLE

MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH

ITEM NO. 15

CASE- ABU SALEM ABDUL KAYYUM ANSARI vs. THE STATE OF

MAHARASHTRA.

ISSUES RAISED-

1. Effect of section 428 of Code of Criminal Procedure can be considered by the court in this
case.

2. Whether the solemn commitment given by the Indian Government to the Portuguese
Government, is applicable to this court or not?

PETITIONER'S COUNSEL- Vikas Singh, AOR

• Counsel asked the court to refer to the section 428, 438 and 427 of CrPc.

• Counsel asked the court to comply with the solemn commitment given by India to the
Portugal, that the Indian court shall not grant the death penalty to the accused and also
in case of life imprisonment punishment shall not exceed 25 years.

• Counsel also asked the court to count the period of detention right from the date of the
isuuance of red cornor notice, so that court finds it helpful for itself to easily comply
with the commitment made by the government.

• It also asked, if the court can try to merge the punishment of TADA court and the
punishment which this court hopes to grant.

• Counsel refers the cases of ALLEN JOHN WATER and NAZAKAT ALI in front of
the court.

RESPONDENT'S COUNSEL- Sachin Patil

• Respondent counsel has counter the points just by giving indepth interpretation of the
sections mention above of the CrPc.

COURT- Court said that law cannot applies in abstract and that how they count the detention
period take place in another country beyond our jurisdiction. Further court gives next date of
10th May, 2022.
 CASE NUMBER: 04

SUPREME COURT PROCEEDINGS

COURT ROOM 06

(13.05.2022)

BENCH- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL and HON'BLE

MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH
ITEM NO. 39 - P C FINANCIAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED vs. UNION OF INDIA

PETITIONER'S COUNSEL- Mukul Rohatgi, Adv

RESPONDENT'S COUNSEL- Vikram Banerjee, Adv

The matter is of the action taken against the petitioner under Foreign Exchange Management
Act, 1999. By the pursuance of which an amount of Rs. 270.00 crores has been seized.

Mr. Rohatgi said that the honorable High Court has passed an interim order which has not
been complied with, despite by telling them (respondent). He further state the order of
Divisional Bench that the respondent will have to give them Rs. 15 crore back but they
actually taken away 150-200 crores.

I have been consistently writing to them but they are not willing to respond, they simply don't
comply with the court's order.

Whereas Mr. Banerjee said that they have filed two affidavits, one on behalf of the Union of
India and on behalf of the Enforcement Directorate (ED) we have filed a counter opposing
the prayer made by Mr. Rohatgi and also demanded the stay from the court.

Countering Mr. Banerjee, the bench asked ''whether you have complied with the high court's
order or not?'' also ''what is your answer to the question that if the tribunal doesn't function
then there should not be automatic stay in every appeal. To this, Mr. Banerjee replied that the
board was not constituted yet and accepts that the money have not been released but will try
to release it.

Later, the bench commented that the respondent party will suffer the consequenses of
contempt for making people run from pillar to post and for not complying with the order.

Counsel further asked the bench to look at the status report filed by the respondents.

The court observed mentioned in its order that the learned counsel for the petitioner states
that despite the stay order granted on 29.04.2022 of the order of the Divisional Bench, the
amounts have not been released in terms of the order of the single Judge. So, this amounts to
the contempt of the order of this court.
On asking a query as to which the officer to whom contempt proceedings have to be issued,
Mr. Banerjee replied that the amount will be released within three days. So the court hold its
order on issuance of notice of any contempt.

Court is are of the view that status report does not reflect the complete picture and also the
court would like to know the details as to what steps were taken starting from atleast three
months prior to the chairman demitting the office on 21.09.2019 and also fill up that post
right up to department order dated 26.10.2021 with supporting document.

CASE NUMBER: 05

SUPREME COURT PROCEEDINGS

COURT ROOM 06

(13.05.2022)

BENCH- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL and HON'BLE

MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH
ITEM NO. 9 - HAJI ABDUL GANI KHAN vs. UNION OF INDIA

PETITIONER'S COUNSEL- Sriram Parakkat, Adv

RESPONDENT'S COUNSEL- ASG, K.M. Nataraj

Mr. Sriram pointed out the articles 170(3), 55, 81, 82, 330 and 332 of the constitution of
India, the essence of this provision is the extent of such constituencies has delineated now
shall remain frozen till the first census to be taken after the year 2026 and therefore the
alteration of boundaries and extent areas could not be done because of this provision.

Countering Mr. Sriram, the bench asked that why don't you challenged the delimitation at
that point of time when it was formed. To this, Mr. Sriram replied that he is not questioning
the delimitation rather he is questioning the increase of seats which cannot be done under
above mentioned articles.

The bench told that it has been two years, now you are coming for challenging the
constitutional validation. Later, the same has been accepted by Mr. Sriram.

Further, Mr. Nataraj asked the court to look at the prayers made by the petitioner, in which
Mr. Nataraj made the counter that the erstwhile constitution of Jammu and Kashmir frozen
the census of 1975.

Now, the court observed that in their view certain allegations impleading in that behalf is
completely irrelevant and are to be ignored. The court has listed the next date of 30th of
August, 2022.
CONCLUSION

It is absolutely impossible to conclude one’s experience and experimental

journey; likewise, it is impossible to conclude one’s training process because
with each step and every level of difficulty a new and more proficient
personality is born.

As from my above submissions in the project it can be easily construed that my

experience of the legal arena was very exciting and proactive. But sometimes I
felt a bit obtuse in understanding and absorbing the procedures and different
legal dogmas.

Initially during my training I felt as a destitute in the legal field but it was the
guidance and enlightenment by my mentor which gave me confidence and zeal
to work and therefore learn step by step. I would like to thank respected partners
and associates of the firm for their vision and guidance throughout this
programme. They unstintingly shared their extraordinary knowledge of the field
of Law and litigation and the technically related challenges associated with it,
helping me get up to speed in an area with which I had little previous
familiarity. Their passion for finding solutions to the issues addressed in
different day to day challenges in cases has been a source of inspiration.

Assistant Professor Ms. Gaurika Sharma at Trinity Institute of Professional

Studies, New Delhi was tremendously supportive of the work on this project
and continues to serve as exemplary models of both scholarly productivity and
collegiality. She gave very generously of her time to provide useful background
information on the scope of the issues associated with Law.

In the end, I would like to opine that the real legal practice is absolutely
different from the theoretical version of law which we study. Without exposure
to the real world, one cannot understand the analytical and positive application
of law and jurisprudence and the actual function and structure of law. What we
study is the body, but what we have learned from this internship is the
mechanism of this body.

I was surprised to see how the simplest of laws were applicable in the most
difficult of situations and how loopholes leave so much scope for evolution and
improvisation today in this field. I also observed that law is everything but
constant but with the same soul as that of a human. In other words or as that of
our Counsel, laws may come and law may repeal, but they must always stay
true to our original values and in case of laws, they must always be faithful to
the Constitution, which is the most supreme law of the land and governs all
equals and unequals in respect of each other.

To conclude, I would like to state that like the arrow goes forward only after
pulling in to backward, bullet goes forward only after pressing the trigger
backward, likewise, every human being will get happy only after facing the
difficulties in their life path….so do not afraid to face your difficulties. They
will push you forward.

With a vote of thanks and gratefulness for reading this report thoroughly and for
giving me this wonderful opportunity to grow my vision in this field, I conclude
this report with a great lot in my mind.

MY EXPERIENCE

It was a great experience working under the guidance of Sr. Adv. Pradeep Rai
Everyone is very cooperative and understanding. They guided me at every step
and helped me in learning the technicality of legal world. They taught me how
to deal with clients in their problems. I am thankful to Adv. Vipin Bharti
(Associate to Mr. Pradeep Rai) my college and my teachers for their guidance
and help without them this project could never be reality.

REFERENCES

I was allowed to use internet library for research work of the cases. Ma’am had
explained me how to use the citations and how to research the case digests and
commentaries for the case proceedings.

The judgments and facts/doctrines hence forth used are photocopied for the use
of the Counsel and for the Court.

Some of the sources of my research work are –

• Manupatra

• Recent Civil Reports

• Supreme Court Criminal Digest

• Supreme Court Civil Digest

• Lawyer’s Club India

• E-Judis

• eLegalix

• Many other commentaries and internet surfing