LEGAL DAILY DOSE – 10

18.05.2021 true apprehensions regarding the threat to their life and who will
be responsible if tomorrow something has happened to the couple.
Legal experts find recent judgment against SC The court has caused a major legal injury to the couple,” said
stance on ‘live-in’ relationships Sharma.
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chandigarh/legal-experts- HC a safe haven for runaway couples
find-recent-judgment-against-sc-stance-on-live-in-
relationships/articleshow/82669265.cms The cases of runaway couples are being entertained by the Punjab
and Haryana high court since October 2002 when the then Chief
The recent decision of the Punjab and Haryana high court refusing Justice of the Punjab and Haryana high court, Justice BK Roy set
to grant security to a runaway couple living in a “live-in” the precedent by granting protection to every runaway couple who
relationship has spurred outrage among the lawyers and the civil approached the HC. In July 2012, the HC had empowered the
rights activists. deputy commissioners (DCs), superintendents of police (SPs) and
In its order dated May 12, Justice Anil Khsetarpal of the HC had the district and sessions judges to protect the life and liberty of
held that if directions for the protection of a runaway couple, these couples, whenever approached. However, the couples still
living in “live-in relationship,” is granted, the social fabric of the are approaching the HC. In a majority of the cases, the petition is
society would get disturbed. filed by the girl fearing a threat to her life for marrying a boy of
“Petitioner No 1 (girl) is barely 18 years old whereas petitioner No her choice.
2 (boy) is 21 years old. They claim to be residing together in a Before the Covid-19 pandemic, around 100-120 cases by runaway
live-in relationship and claim protection of their life and liberty couples seeking protection were heard by the HC daily. Even
from the girl’s relatives. In the considered view of this bench, if during the restrictive hearing of cases during the pandemic, around
such protection as claimed is granted, the entire social fabric of the 20-25 such cases were being heard by the HC benches via virtual
society would get disturbed,” Justice Kshetarpal had observed hearing.
while refusing to grant any protection to the couple.
Notable cases of runaway couples
In this case, the couple had claimed to have been living in a “live-

In the Manoj-Babli case, the couple had married in a
in relationship” without marrying each other and had moved the
Chandigarh temple in April 2007 and procured protection
high court to protect their lives from the girl’s disapproving
orders from the Punjab and Haryana high court. However, in
family.
June 2007, the couple was dragged out by the accused from a
According to the lawyers and rights activists, such orders are in crowded bus and murdered for marrying in the same gotra. In
complete disregard to the law laid down by the Supreme Court that this case, the police provided for the couple’s protection by
has recognized live-in relationships and also jeopardize the life of the HC orders, had abandoned the couple
a couple under threat from their relatives.

On a local khap’s diktat, Ved Pal of Haryana’s Kaithal
According to senior advocate Anupam Gupta, the order passed by district, who had married Sonia in May 2011, was lynched. In
Justice Khsetarpal is in violation of judicial discipline. The live-in this case, the warrant officer of the high court was also injured
relationships were clearly recognized by the apex court way back by the relatives of the girl’s family, when he went to protect
in 2010 in Veluswamy’s case and again in 2013 in Indra Sarma’s the couple
case. “By disregarding the law laid down by the SC, Justice

In April 2012, a lesbian couple from Punjab’s Bathinda
Khsetarpal has chosen to express a contrary view in a summary
district fleeing their families moved the HC and sought
one-liner. Apart from being legally indefensible, his view is
protection from their relatives. In this case, the HC directed
socially and culturally retrograde,” reacted the lawyer.
the Bathinda SSP to look into the threat perception of the
Rohit Sud, former secretary of the Punjab and Haryana high court couple and provide protection, if necessary
bar association, said the issue before the judge was to see the threat

In February 2010, a couple from Haryana’s Jind district, who
to the life and liberty of the couple and not to decide about the
had married against the khap norms, were chased and thrashed
legality of their relationship. “Another important issue, in this
by their relatives in the high court premises. At that time, the
case, is what the couple would do if they do not have enough
girl was pregnant and had been given protection by the Chief
resources to approach the higher court for security and would be
Justice on her mercy appeal. Interestingly, the couple stayed
forced to live in constant fear of their relatives who are against
in police line in panchkula for a long time and even delivered
their relationship,” Sud added.
their first baby under heavy police protection.
Another HC lawyer, advocate H S Bath said that on merit, it is an
illegal order because the couple had asked for protection of their ISSUES
life and liberty and had not asked for the certificate of their
Live in relationship under law
relationship. “Their relationship may be immoral but the court’s
Protection of life and liberty by the higher Judiciary
job was to see the legal point not the morality,” Bath added.

Individual liberty v Societal Values
Advocate Lekh Raj Sharma, former chairman of the state bar
council of Punjab and Haryana, said that the protection to the
Right to Marry
couple could not have been denied in this case. “They may have
Article 21 of the Constitution of India
(1)
© Possible education Pvt. Ltd. All rights reserved. Unauthorized copying, sale, distribution or circulation of any of the contents of this work is a
punishable offence under the laws of India.
India loses ONGC Videsh discovered Farzad-B gas Meanwhile, on the basis of new studies, a revised Provisional
field in Iran Master Development Plan (PMDP) was submitted to POGC in
March 2017, sources said, adding that in April 2019, NIOC
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/energy/oil- proposed development of the gas field under the DSC and offtake
gas/india-loses-ongc-videsh-discovered-farzad-b-gas-field-in- of raw gas by NIOC at landfall point.
iran/articleshow/82706779.cms
However, due to the imposition of US sanctions on Iran in
India on Monday lost the ONGC Videsh Ltd-discovered Farzad-B November 2018, technical studies could not be concluded which is
gas field in the Persian Gulf after Iran awarded a contract for a precursor for commercial negotiations. The Indian consortium
developing the giant gas field to a local company. has so far invested around USD 400 MILLION in the block.
"The National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC) has signed a contract ISSUES
worth USD 1.78 billion with Petropars Group for the development
of Farzad B Gas Field in the Persian Gulf," the Iranian oil
What is a valid contract?
ministry's official news service Shana reported. "The deal was
Breach of Contract
signed on Monday, May 17, in a ceremony held in the presence of
Iranian Minister of Petroleum Bijan Zangeneh in Tehran."
Damages under the Contract Law.

The field holds 23 trillion cubic feet of in-place gas reserves, of
Private International Law
which about 60 per cent is recoverable. It also holds gas Legal Current Affairs
condensates of about 5,000 barrels per billion cubic feet of gas.
The buyback contract signed on Monday envisages daily Answers 17.05.2021
production of 28 million cubic meters of sour gas over five years,
Air India
Shana said.

Nazhat Shameem Khan
ONGC Videsh Ltd (OVL), the overseas investment arm of state-
owned Oil and Natural Gas Corp (ONGC), had in 2008 discovered
Free legal aid to the poor and weaker sections of the
a giant gas field in the Farsi offshore exploration block. OVL and society and ensures justice
its partners had offered to invest up to USD 11 billion for the
18.05.2021
development of the discovery, which was later named Farzad-B.
After sitting over OVL's proposal for years, on October 18, 2020,
Who has been appointed as the Executive Chairman of
NIOC had informed OVL of its intention to conclude the contract National Legal Services Authority?
for Farzad-B development with an Iranian company, in an

Which country has passed a law prohibiting sale, leasing
apparent rejection of the Indian firm's bid. The 3,500 square
of farm land to foreigner and foreigner companies?
kilometer Farsi block sits in a water depth of 20-90 metres on the
Iranian side of the Persian Gulf.
Which conventions establish the standards of international
law for humanitarian treatment in war?
OVL, with 40 per cent operatorship interest, signed the
Exploration Service Contract (ESC) for the block on December 25,
2002. Other partners included Indian Oil Corp (IOC) with 40 per
cent stake and Oil India holding the remaining 20 per cent stake.
OVL discovered gas in the block, which was declared
commercially viable by NIOC, on August 18, 2008. The
exploration phase of the ESC expired on June 24, 2009.
The firm submitted a Master Development Plan (MDP) of Farzad-
B gas field in April 2011 to Iranian Offshore Oil Company
(IOOC), the then designated authority by NIOC for the
development of Farzad-B gas field.
A Development Service Contract (DSC) of the Farzad-B gas field
was negotiated till November 2012, but could not be finalized due
to difficult terms and international sanctions on Iran.
In April 2015, negotiations restarted with Iranian authorities to
develop the Farzad-B gas field under a new Iran Petroleum
Contract (IPC). This time, NIOC introduced Pars Oil and Gas
Company (POGC) as its representative for negotiations.
From April 2016, both sides negotiated to develop the Farzad-B
gas field under an integrated contract covering upstream and
downstream, including monetization/marketing of the processed
gas. However, negotiations remained inconclusive.

(2)
© Possible education Pvt. Ltd. All rights reserved. Unauthorized copying, sale, distribution or circulation of any of the contents of this work is a
punishable offence under the laws of India.