Child born out of rape to have inheritance rights: Allahabad HC

Allahabad high court has in a landmark judgment ruled that a child born out of rape will have inheritance rights over the property of the the biological father reported NDTV.

The court also discussed the need for rehabilitation of victims of rape and their children while adjudicating a matter where a minor child of 13 years was raped and could not abort her child due to medical reasons.

A Division bench of Justices Shabihul Hasnain and DK Upadhayaya appreciated the gesture of the state of UP for not fighting the case adversely and being interested in paying compensation to the victims and their rehabilitation in the judgment. The court noted that the victim was suffering from “Rape Trauma Syndrome” and needs care and attention to lead a healthy and happy life as guaranteed by the constitution as the fundamental right of the citizens. The court also expressed its concern over the well-being of the child born out of the crime whose family was unwilling to accept her.

Noting that the child will be treated as an illegitimate child of the rape accused and will have inheritance rights to his property unless legally adopted by someone, it was reported.

“We may observe here that in the matter relating to inheritance, the manner of birth of a person is irrelevant; the rights of inheritance of a person are governed by the Personal Law to which the person is subject irrespective of the manner of birth of the person. It is irrelevant as to whether the newly-born child of a rape victim is born out of consensual sex or otherwise,”

The court also warned the biological father against claiming rights over the child like visitation or custody. Eventually, the court asked the government to pay the victim 10 lakh apart from the 3 lakhs already paid by them and made several directions to ensure that she is able to absorb herself in the society again.

While parting, the court made an emotional plea with the society to not discriminate with such victims and said,

“All solutions and answers cannot be given by the courts. There are certain social problems and issues which have to be answered by the society itself. It is for the society to decide as to how it wants to treat a rape victim. We should remember that rape is a crime beyond the control of a victim. This tragedy can strike any family. It is not something for which the victim has to be blamed. The whole society should come forward in defence and help of the poor traumatized victim of rape. The society will have to learn to manage their response towards a victim without forgetting that tragedy can befall on one’s own head. When women are respected and promoted by the society as a whole only then a society can be called truly free and liberated. The question of rehabilitation of a rape victim can best be answered by the people and the masses and not by the courts alone. We, therefore, leave this question of rehabilitation of “A” open to the masses whose love and affection can save two normal lives from becoming two negative characters of the society in future. They should be accepted; not haunted by the society. The court has played its role within the parameters of law. Now it is the turn of the seekers of justice from the courts i.e. people of India to see and show their response to the victims of their society. “

Delhi HC requests new district court to ‘videograph’ 1984 riots trial, as transfers case for ‘avoidable controversy’

elencvhoThe Delhi high court requested Delhi’s Patiala House district court to video-record the trial in the 1984 riots case, in a case transfer order won by senior advocates Colin Gonsalves and HS Phoolka for riot victim Joginder Singh.

Read more: Delhi HC requests new district court to ‘videograph’ 1984 riots trial, as transfers case for...

SCOI Social to re-examine 'biased' dowry law

The Social Justice bench of the Supreme Court has agreed to examine the existing administrative and judicial guidelines relating to dowry cases, allegedly biased against females, reported The Indian Express.

A petition by NGO ‘Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar’ (SAFMA), through advocate Jyotika Kalra, has alleged that the high courts have diluted the anti dowry harassment law by changing the conditions of mandatory FIR and arrest provisions in the law and compelling women to settle such cases.

SAFMA submitted a draft guideline related to FIR, arrest and grant of bail in cases lodged under Section 498-A to the bench of justices Madan B Lokur and Uday U Lalit for review. The court issued notice to the government and sought its reply in the matter.

Focusing on the unequal bargaining capacity of women in India who fear societal pressure and depend on others for financial stability, the draft regulations vouch for not forcing the woman to compromise and helping her to form a uniformed decision. It has also sought police be made to give written reasons for not arresting accused in such cases.

Trilegal, Dua, Nishith Desai on Mitsui's $52m infusion in Naaptol

Trilegal advised Japan based company Mitsui in investing Rs 343 crores ($51.6 m) in online shopping portal Naaptol which was advised by Dua Associates.

Nishith Desai Associates advised other existing shareholders of Naaptol, NEA FVCI, NEA FDI , CMDB II, ICP Holdings I and SVB India Capital 2006. With this deal the stake of Mitsui in Naaptol increased from 5 per cent to 20 per cent.

Trilegal partner Kunal Chandra, senior associate Kabeer Mathur and associates Aditi Jain and Rahil Pereira acted for Mitsui.

Dua Mumbai partner Anish Ghoshal, senior associate Natasha Buhariwalla and Rajat Agarwal acted for Naaptol.

Nishith senior associate Parag Srivastava and associate Aishwarya H acted for the existing shareholders of Naaptol.

Naaptol valued at Rs 2000 crores ($302 m) post investment, claims to reach about 160 million TV households in India on a daily basis, while processing about 20,000 orders a day and offers it’s goods and services across multiple channels, including, print, television, web, mobile and direct marketing reported The Economic Times.

#Tolerance for lack of enthusiasm for Jan Gan Man, 'diluted'?

Remaining seated while the Indian national anthem is being sung or played is not punishable under Indian statutory or case law or by any order of the Indian government, argues the Express in light of the recent alleged incident in a Mumbai theatre where, according to a viral video online, audience members were asked to leave because they remained seated while the anthem was being played.

Section 3 of the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act 1971 – the statutory law on the subject – only penalises the offence of disrupting the singing or playing of the national anthem. It does not make it mandatory to sing or play the anthem.

Government of India orders issued on 5 January 2015 make it mandatory to stand up when the anthem is being sung or played, but prescribe no punishment for not obeying this order.

The Supreme Court in 1987 ruled in favour of three students who were expelled from a school in Kerala because they were standing up but not participating in singing the national anthem when it was being played. The students had asserted that they were against singing anything other than what their Jehovian religion prescribed. The two judge SC bench had, in its order, observed: “Our tradition teaches tolerance; our philosophy preaches tolerance; our Constitution practises tolerance; let us not dilute it.”

5 reasons why Bhushans want debate over ‘Jokepal’ Bill

Senior advocate Shanti Bhushan and advocate Prashant Bhushan have dubbed the proposed draft Jan Lokpal Bill 2015 as the “Jokepal Bill”, and have alleged that it is a ‘maliciously’ weakened draft of the original Lokpal Bill of 2011 by Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal and his Aam Aadmi Party (AAP). If at all the centre passes the bill it will be an instrument in the hands of the Delhi government to save its own legislative assembly members, allege the Bhushans.

Read more: 5 reasons why Bhushans want debate over ‘Jokepal’ Bill

SCOI Report: Should CJI Dattu become NHRC chief?

As the Chief Justice of India (CJI) HL Dattu retires on 2 December, the Government is apparently preparing red carpet for him at the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) according to several reports, as the post of the chairperson of the NHRC has been vacant since May this year, and only former CJIs are eligible for this high office.

Read more: SCOI Report: Should CJI Dattu become NHRC chief?

SAM, CAM, MoFo, Themis, Gunderson on Grofers $120m round

Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas (SAM) advised Singapore based hyperlocal delivery startup Grofers Group in the $120m (Rs 800 crore) investment in it by SoftBank Group, Tiger Global, Apoletto Asia and Sequoia Capital in a series D round of investment. The investors were advised by Morrison & Foerster, Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas (CAM), Gunderson Dettmer Stough Villeneuve Franklin & Hachigian and Themis Associates.

SAM Delhi partner Puja Sondhi, senior associate Sumeet Singh and senior associate designate Vasundhara Garg acted for Grofers.

CAM Mumbai partners Ashwath Rau and Shishir Vayttaden and consultant Nirmal Vathani, and Morrison & Foerster of counsel Amit Kataria acted for Softbank.

Themis senior associate Dheeraj Khanna acted as the legal advisor to Sequoia Capital.

Gunderson Dettmer senior partner Steven L Baglio and New York lawyers Salil Gandhi and Suneela Jain acted for Tiger Global.

DST Global’s in house legal team advised Apoletto Asia.

Grofers is now valued at about $400 m (Rs 2,664 crore) reported Economic Times. It was valued to be $33m in February this year. The money will be used to expand the company’s business and to build its supply chain, its CEO Albinder Dhindsa was quoted as saying.

SC dumps ML Sharma PIL questioning citizenship of Rahul Gandhi

The Supreme Court on Monday rejected a PIL seeking a CBI probe into the citizenship row of Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi.

Chief Justice HL Dattu and Justice Amitava Roy dismissed the PIL filed by lawyer ML Sharma, saying PILs cannot be individual-centric.

The court also questioned the petitioner about the authenticity of the documents he had placed before the court.

Vodafone goes to Delhi HC over reduced Moolah from incoming calls

Vodafone has, through senior advocate K Vishwanathan, challenged the telecom authority’s new rules which deprive it of charges paid to it by other operators on outgoing calls from their network to the Vodafone network, reported The Indian Express.

In its challenge to the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India’s (TRAI) Telecommunication Interconnection Usage Charges Regulations 2015, at the Delhi high court, Vodafone has argued that the TRAI has arbitrarily decreased Interconnection Usage Charges (IUC), and that this is illegal and beyond the TRAI’s functions.

Interconnection Usage Charge (IUC) is the amount payable by one telecom service provider whose user makes the call to the other whose user receives it. While smaller and newer telecom operators welcomed the move, bigger operators like Vodafone are unhappy with this because they earn through these charges.

The TRAI had notified the regulations in February this year.

A bench of Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw refused to give interim relief to Vodafone without hearing TRAI’s reply. The case will be heard next on 19 January 2016.

Vishwanathan reportedly submitted to the court that even when TRAI agrees that costs are incurred for terminating a call, it has grossly erred and acted in an illegal manner while fixing the termination charges for wireline to wireless as zero and wireless to wireless from Rs 0.20 per minute to Rs 0.14 per minute.


All the latest news
Law students

News for Indian law students.

The latest deals involving Indian companies and law firms.
Legal opinions
Do you have an opinion about something legal? Share it with others.

Get in touch with us here or via to discuss your idea for a Legal Opinion article to get featured on Legally India.
Our newsletter condenses the week's events into a handy newsletter every Friday.

Join thousand of subscribers all over the world for all the latest Indian legal market news for free. Sign up now:

Subscribe to Legally India's newsletter!

Context, analysis & more straight to your email inbox every week, unsubscribe any time.

It's a must-read for every lawyer in or near India.

Mooting Premier League 6

Latest comments

view more comments...