Top Legal Headlines - 10th March, 2021

NATIONAL NEWS SUMMARIES

1.    Daughter killed by father despite orders of police protection from Rajasthan HC

•    In Rajasthan’s Dausa district, one Shankar Lal Saini murdered his daughter by strangulation.
•    The biggest shock is that this happened despite the orders of the Rajasthan High Court to provide police protection.
•    The 18 year old daughter had approached the Court for protection after having eloped with a Dalit man.

2.    Fed up of ‘cut-copy-paste’ orders: Justice Chandrachud

•    “One of the problems of the computer-age is copying and pasting of orders! I am fed up of seeing cut-copy-paste orders of High Courts,” said Justice D.Y. Chandrachud.
•    He made this remark while a Special Leave Petition arising out of the Orissa High Court. 
•    “There is no independent application of mind by the High Court!” remarked Justice D.Y. Chandrachud.

3.    Husband liable for wife’s injuries: SC

•    The man accused for assaulting the spouse had applied for anticipatory bail.
•    His wife had filed a case against the husband and the in- laws for assaulting her.
•    The Supreme Court denied bail to him stating that the husband is liable for the assault inflicted upon the wife in the matrimonial home.

4.    Suo moto cognizance of reluctance to wear masks on flight: Delhi HC

•    The Delhi High Court recently took suo moto cognizance of the ‘reluctance of wearing masks properly’ in the Air India flight which was going from Delhi to Kolkata on the 5th of March.
•    While the passengers were wearing masks, most of them were wearing below their chins.•    The Delhi HC has now issued guidelines to the DGCA with respect to in-flight protocols.

5.    Burden of proof to show that cheque was not issued for discharge of debt on the accused: SC

•    In the case of Sumeti Vij v. Paramount Tech Fab Industries, the Supreme Court has held that the burden of proof of showing that the cheque was not issued for discharge of liability under the Negotiable Instruments Act is on the accused.
•    “There is a mandate of presumption of consideration in terms of the provisions of the Act and the onus shifts to the accused on proof of issuance of cheque, to rebut the presumption that the cheque was issued for discharge of any debt or liability in terms of Section 138 of the Act,” the Court opined.