Need to know: Your Lordship address | Madras HC controversial judges recos | TRAI encroaches CCI | CAG can audit telcos | Morality of premarital sex

Tuesday, 7 January 2014 By Legally India Legally Wired

Dismissing a 75-year-old’s petition seeking a ban on the “your lordship” address of judges – which he asserted was a “relic of the colonial era” – the Supreme Court yesterday said: “Don’t address us as lordship. We don’t say anything. We only say address us respectfully.” [PTI]

Madras HC senior R Gandhi has petitioned against the 12 names recommended for judgeships in the HC on the ground of under-representation of competent lawyers from certain communities and over representation of certain other communities, beyond merit, due to a regional bias among the judges forwarding the names [TOI]

The Competition Commission of India is seeing red as the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) attempts to end its status as India’s only competition watchdog, by proposing a parallel TRAI regime. The CCI has warned the corporate affairs ministry in writing that the TRAI’s plans are not supported by statute [Business Standard]

Delhi HC has confirmed that the Comptroller and Auditor General has power to audit the accounts of telecom companies, and not just central and state governments. But the audit has to be restricted to the companies’ receipts [The Hindu]

In a bid to protect unmarried boys from false rape charges the Delhi HC ruled that every act of sexual intercourse between consenting adults on the promise of marriage does not become rape. However the judge went to add that pre-marital sex is “immoral” and “against the tenets of every religion”. The observation, on cue, sparked outrage. Legally India previously wondered whether it was within judges to restrain themselves from shrouding progressive judgments in bizarre wording [DNA India/Judgment]

wired

Comments

midhunraja 7 Jan 2014, 12:31
+0 -0
The judgment of the Delhi Additional Sessions Judge which caused so much uproar all because of two lines is here :

http://www.scribd.com/doc/196534122/State-v-Ashish-Kumar-ASJ-Virender-Bhat-Dwarka-Courts-New-Delhi-Premarital-Sex

Personally, the judgment is fine except for the two specific lines which I wonder how they made it. I have read through few other judgments of the Judge and they are very much top notch.

In the current judgment too based on the facts and evidence the end decision is what any reasonable judge would find.

One can read the judgment and decide.
2 cents 9 Jan 2014, 09:59
+0 -0
The judgement speaks well of the quality of the judge, who has written the judgement pretty well. While we are prone to shout ourselves hoarse if any politically incorrect statement is made, it is definitely acceptable if judges state certain things in certain circumstances. Anyone who reads the judgement will perhaps understand that the judge had a right to question the moral standards of the prosecutrix who had made a false complaint after repeatedly trying to seduce the accused. The decision to have per-marital sex and the moral quality of such decisions have been raised even by the Supreme Court in their judgements, which the judge has cited. The social realities of this country need to be kept in mind when decrying the judges and the full judgement should be read before passing comments.
Commenting is closed for this article.