Category: Uncategorized

Categories
Uncategorized

Important Section Under Right to Information Act- 2005

Here are some of the important sections under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act):

  • Section 2(j): This section defines the term “right to information”. It states that the right to information means the right to information accessible under this Act which is held by or under the control of any public authority and includes the right to:
    • Inspection of work, documents, records;
    • Taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records;
    • Taking certified samples of material;
    • Obtaining information in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through printouts where such information is stored in a computer or in any other device.
  • Section 4(1): This section lays down the obligations of public authorities under the RTI Act. It states that every public authority shall:
    • Maintain all its records duly catalogued and indexed in a manner and the form which facilitates the Right to Information under this Act;
    • Publish in the Official Gazette, or in such other manner as may be prescribed, the following particulars:
      • The names, designation and other particulars of the Public Information Officers;
      • The powers and duties of the Public Information Officers;
      • The procedure for obtaining information under this Act;
      • The fees payable for obtaining information; and
      • The manner of payment of such fees;
    • Provide to the public for inspection all its records;
    • Provide copies of its records on payment of such fees as may be prescribed;
    • Publish every year a report in the Official Gazette or in such other manner as may be prescribed, regarding the number of applications received and disposed of by it, the number of appeals filed before it, the number of appeals disposed of by it and the reasons for the delay, if any, in disposal of the applications or appeals.
  • Section 6: This section deals with the procedure for making a request for information under the RTI Act. It states that a request for information can be made in writing or in electronic form. The request should be addressed to the Public Information Officer of the concerned public authority. The request should specify the information that is being sought.
  • Section 7: This section deals with the disposal of a request for information under the RTI Act. It states that the Public Information Officer shall, on receipt of a request for information, take necessary steps to provide the information to the applicant within 30 days of the receipt of the request. If the information is not available or cannot be provided within 30 days, the Public Information Officer shall inform the applicant in writing about the reasons for the delay and the likely date on which the information will be provided.
  • Section 8: This section deals with the exemptions from disclosure of information under the RTI Act. It states that the following information shall not be disclosed under the RTI Act:
    • Information that is likely to affect the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, or the public interest;
    • Information that relates to the personal information of any individual;
    • Information that has been obtained in confidence from another public authority;
    • Information that would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders;
    • Commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property; and
    • Information that is likely to cause a breach of privilege of Parliament or State Legislature.
  • Section 19: This section deals with the appeals against the decisions of Public Information Officers under the RTI Act. It states that an applicant can appeal against the decision of a Public Information Officer to the State Information Commission or the Central Information Commission. The appeal should be filed within 30 days of the receipt of the decision of the Public Information Officer.

These are just some of the important sections under the RTI Act. For more information, you can refer to the Act itself or the websites of the State Information Commissions and the Central Information Commission. If you need help regarding the RTI Act in Ahmedabad, contact Parth Raval, an advocate in Ahmedabad.

Categories
civil procedure code

14 Stages of Civil Suit As Per Civil Procedure Code

Stage Provision Time Option
Filing of plaint Order 7, Rule 1 30 days Plaintiff can withdraw the plaint within this time period.
Service of summons Order 7, Rule 2 30 days Defendant can file a written statement within this time period.
Appearance of parties Order 9, Rule 1 30 days Parties can appear in person or through their lawyers.
Written statement Order 8, Rule 1 30 days Defendant can file a written statement denying the plaintiff’s claim.
Settlement Section 89 Any time Parties can settle the dispute at any time before the judgment is pronounced.
Interlocutory proceedings Various orders As per order These are proceedings that are taken up by the court during the course of the suit to decide some interim matter, such as the grant of an injunction or the appointment of a receiver.
Production of documents Order 13 As per order Parties are required to produce all documents relevant to the case.
Examination of parties Order 10 As per order Parties are examined by the court to elicit their evidence.
Discovery and inspection Order 12 As per order Parties are allowed to inspect each other’s documents and to ask questions about them.
Admission Order 11 As per order Parties can admit facts that are not in dispute.
Framing of issues Order 14 As per order The court frames the issues that are to be decided in the case.
Hearing of suit and examination of witnesses Order 18 As per order The court hears the evidence of the parties and their witnesses.
Judgment Order 20 As per order The court pronounces its judgment after considering the evidence and arguments of the parties.
Appeal, review, and revision Various provisions As per provision The parties can appeal against the judgment, or the court can review or revise it.
  1. Filing of plaint
    • The plaintiff files a plaint in the court of competent jurisdiction. The plaint must contain the following:
      • The names and addresses of the plaintiff and the defendant.
      • The facts of the case.
      • The relief that the plaintiff is seeking.
    • The plaint is then served on the defendant.
  2. Service of summons
    • The summons is a document that orders the defendant to appear in court and answer the plaintiff’s claim.
    • The summons must be served within the prescribed time period.
  3. Appearance of parties
    • The defendant must appear in court on the date mentioned in the summons.
    • If the defendant does not appear, the court may proceed ex parte (in the absence of the defendant).
  4. Written statement
    • The defendant files a written statement in response to the plaintiff’s plaint.
    • The written statement must deny or admit the plaintiff’s allegations.
    • The defendant may also raise a counterclaim against the plaintiff.
  5. Settlement
    • The parties may settle the dispute at any time before the judgment is pronounced.
    • If the parties settle, the court will pass an order dismissing the suit.
  6. Interlocutory proceedings
    • These are proceedings that are taken up by the court during the course of the suit to decide some interim matter, such as the grant of an injunction or the appointment of a receiver.
  7. Production of documents
    • The parties are required to produce all documents relevant to the case.
    • The court may order the parties to produce specific documents.
  8. Examination of parties
    • The parties are examined by the court to elicit their evidence.
    • The court may also examine witnesses.

If you need help with civil litigation cases in Ahmedabad, you can hire Parth Raval, a civil litigation lawyer.

Categories
Uncategorized

DIVORCE GRANTED DUE TO MENTAL CRUELTY ON HUSBAND BY WIFE

To prove mental cruelty of a spouse on the other spouse, it depends on the facts and circumstances for each case. It differs for each case.

The Apex Court noted that wife not attending the divorce proceedings and coercing husband to stay in a dead marriage is mental cruelty and the court exercised power under Article 142 of the Constitution of India and dissolved their marriage though there were no grounds for divorce according to the facts of the case.

The husband apprehended that it would be injurious for him to stay with his wife as the wife tortured him mentally and the court dissolved their marriage.

The wife was purposely trying to make her life and life if husband miserable by causing mental cruelty on husband and so the court dissolved the marriage under Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

 Allegation placed on husband by wife amounted to mental cruelty and dissolved their marriage as per Section 13 (1) (ia), Hindu Marriage Act.

Filing complaint against the husband by the wife under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and thereafter, getting him arrested along with imprisoned for a period of 7 days caused mental cruelty to the husband and the court dissolved their marriage as per Section 10 (1)(x), Indian Divorce Act, 1869.

Mental cruelty can cause more injury than physical cruelty and dissolved the marriage between them.

The wife had filed a false complaint against husband and family along with defaming him which amounted to mental cruelty thereby granting divorce and annulment of marriage under Section 13 (1) (i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

The teasing of the husband by wife for being overweight was causing mental cruelty to husband and marriage was dissolved.

Decision only by the wife of not having a child was amounting to mental cruelty to husband and the court granted a dissolution of marriage.

Mental cruelty is that which creates mental agony or mental suffering in the spouse in such a manner that it breaks the bond between a husband and wife making it very difficult to live with the other spouse.

Categories
Uncategorized

पुलिस द्वारा वाहन से चाबी निकालना गैरकानूनी है।

पुलिस द्वारा वाहन से चाबी निकालना गैरकानूनी है। अगर कोई पुलिसकर्मी ऐसा करता है तो वह पुलिस विभाग और मोटर वाहन एक्ट द्वारा जारी किए गए दिशानिर्देशों का उल्लंघन कर रहा है।

PHOTO FROM GOOGLE

किसी भी पुलिसकर्मी को आपके वाहन की चाबी निकालने का अधिकार नहीं है। पुलिस विभाग में दायर सूचना का अधिकार (आरटीआई) के तहत मिली जानकारी के अनुसार कोई भी पुलिसकर्मी चाहे वह किसी भी रैंक का हो, किसी भी दोपहिया, तिपहिया या चारपहिया वाहन की चाबी नहीं निकल सकता है।

नए मोटर वाहन एक्ट 2019 में ये निर्देश दिया गया है कि सिर्फ सहायक सब-इंस्पेक्टर (एएसआई) या उससे ऊपर के रैंक के ट्रैफिक पुलिस अधिकारी ही ट्रैफिक उल्लंघन के लिए चालान या नोटिस देने के लिए अधिकृत हैं। एएसआई (वन-स्टार), सब-इंस्पेक्टर (टू-स्टार) और इंस्पेक्टर (थ्री-स्टार) रैंक के अधिकारी केवल स्पॉट जुर्माना जमा करने के लिए अधिकृत हैं।

अगर ट्रैफिक पुलिस वाले चेकिंग के नाम पर आपसे बदसलूकी करते हैं या गाली गाली-गलौज या मारपीट करते हैं तो आप इसके खिलाफ नजदीकी पुलिस स्टेशन में शिकायत कर सकते हैं या 100 नंबर पर डायल कर पुलिस हेल्पलाइन में इसकी शिकायत कर सकते हैं।

यदि इसपर भी कार्रवाई नहीं हो तो मामले को हाईकोर्ट में ले जा सकते हैं। पुलिस वाले के खिलाफ नागरिक और मानवाधिकार हनन का केस डालिये। इससे उक्त पुलिसकर्मी ससपेंड हो सकता है और उसे बचने वाले पुलिस अधिकारीयों पर भी कार्रवाई हो सकती है।

हमेशा ध्यान रखें की मोटर वाहन एक्ट पुलिसकर्मी को गुंडा गर्दी करने का अधिकार नहीं देता। वो सिर्फ चलन काट सकते हैं और गाड़ी जब्त कर सकते हैं। पुलिसकर्मी सिर्फ हाथ से इशारा कर गाड़ी रुकवा सकते हैं। अगर कोई वाहन नहीं रोकता है तो उसके खिलाफ उचित कार्रवाई करने का अधिकार है। पुलिसकर्मी को प्रदूषण स्तर का सर्टिफिकेट चेक करने का अधिकार है।

Categories
Uncategorized

RIGHT TO BAIL , “BAIL IS RULE, JAIL IS EXCEPTION”

‘Bail is a rule, jail is an exception is a legal doctrine that was laid down by the Supreme Court of India in a landmark judgment of State of Rajasthan vs. Balchand alias Baliya (AIR 1977 2447). The legal doctrine, in this case, was laid down by Justice V. Krishna Aiyer, who based it on fundamental Rights guaranteed by the constitution of India.

The right to bail is concomitant of the accusatorial system, which favors a bail system that ordinarily enables a person to stay out of jail until a trial has found him/her guilty. In India, bail or release on personal recognizance is available as a right in bailable offenses not punishable with death or life imprisonment and only to women and children in non-bailable offenses punishable with death or life imprisonment. The right of police to oppose bail, the absence of legal aid for the poor, and the right to speedy reduce to vanishing point the classification of offenses into bailable and non-bailable and make the prolonged incarceration of the poor inevitable during the pendency of investigation by the police and trial by a court.

The fact that undertrials formed 80 percent of Bihar’s prison population, their period of imprisonment ranging from a few months to ten years; some cases wherein the period of imprisonment of the undertrials exceeded the period of imprisonment prescribed for the offenses they were charged with- these appalling outrages were brought before the Supreme Court in Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar AIR 1979 SC 1360.

Justice Bhagwati found that these unfortunate under trials languished in prisons not because they were guilty but because they were too poor to afford bail. In Mantoo Majumdar v. State of Bihar AIR 1980 SC 846, the Apex Court once again upheld the undertrials right to personal liberty and ordered the release of the petitioners on their own bond and without sureties as they had spent six years awaiting their trial, in prison. The court deplored the delay in the police investigation and the mechanical operation of the remand process by the magistrates insensitive to the personal liberty of the undertrials, remanded by them to prison. The Court deplored the delay in a police investigation and the mechanical operation of the remand process by the magistrates insensitive to the personal liberty of under trials, and the magistrate failure to monitor the detention of the undertrials remanded by them to prison.

The travails of illegal detainees languishing in prisons, who were uninformed, or too poor to avail of, their right bail under section 167 Cr.P.C. was further brought to light in letters written to Justice Bhagwati by the Hazaribagh Free Legal Aid Committee in Veena Sethi v. State of Bihar (1982) 2 SCC 583. The court recognized the inequitable operation of the law and condemned it- “The rule of law does not exist merely for those who have the means to fight for their rights and very often for the perpetuation of status quo… but it exists also for the poor and the downtrodden… and it is the solemn duty of the court to protect and uphold the basic human rights of the weaker section of the society. Thus having discussed various hardships of pre-trial detention caused, due to unaffordability of bail and unawareness of their right to bail, to under trials and as such violation of their right to personal liberty and speedy trial under Article 21 as well as the obligation of the court to ensure such right. It becomes imperative to discuss the right to bail and its nexus to the right of free legal aid to ensure the former under the Constitution- in order to sensitize the rule of law of bail to the demands of the majority of poor and to make human rights of the weaker sections a reality. The right to bail is concomitant of the accusatorial system, which favors a bail system that ordinarily enables a person to stay out of jail until a trial has found him/her guilty. In India, bail or release on personal recognizance is available as a right in bailable offenses not punishable with death or life imprisonment and only to women and children in non-bailable offenses punishable with death or life imprisonment. The right of police to oppose bail, the absence of legal aid for the poor, and the right to speedy reduce to vanishing point the classification of offenses into bailable and non-bailable and make the prolonged incarceration of the poor inevitable during the pendency of investigation by the police and trial by a court.

The fact that undertrials formed 80 percent of Bihar’s prison population, their period of imprisonment ranging from a few months to ten years; some cases wherein the period of imprisonment of the undertrials exceeded the period of imprisonment prescribed for the offenses they were charged with- these appalling outrages were brought before the Supreme Court in Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar AIR 1979 SC 1360.

Justice Bhagwati found that these unfortunate under trials languished in prisons not because they were guilty but because they were too poor to afford bail. In Mantoo Majumdar v. State of Bihar AIR 1980 SC 846, the Apex Court once again upheld the undertrials right to personal liberty and ordered the release of the petitioners on their own bond and without sureties as they had spent six years awaiting their trial, in prison. The court deplored the delay in the police investigation and the mechanical operation of the remand process by the magistrates insensitive to the personal liberty of the undertrials, remanded by them to prison. The Court deplored the delay in the police investigation and the mechanical operation of the remand process by the magistrates insensitive to the personal liberty of under trials, and the magistrate failure to monitor the detention of the undertrials remanded by them to prison.

The travails of illegal detainees languishing in prisons, who were uninformed, or too poor to avail of, their right bail under section 167 Cr.P.C. was further brought to light in letters written to Justice Bhagwati by the Hazaribagh Free Legal Aid Committee in Veena Sethi v. State of Bihar (1982) 2 SCC 583. The court recognized the inequitable operation of the law and condemned it- “The rule of law does not exist merely for those who have the means to fight for their rights and very often for the perpetuation of status quo… but it exists also for the poor and the downtrodden… and it is a solemn duty of the court to protect and uphold the basic human rights of the weaker section of the society. Thus having discussed various hardships of pre-trial detention caused, due to unaffordability of bail and unawareness of their right to bail, to under trials and as such violation of their right to personal liberty and speedy trial under Article 21 as well as the obligation of the court to ensure such right. It becomes imperative to discuss the right to bail and its nexus to the right of free legal aid to ensure the former under the Constitution- in order to sensitize the rule of law of bail to the demands of the majority of poor and to make human rights of the weaker sections a reality.