A Division Bench headed by Chief Justice Abhay Oka will consider the aspect whether a farmer can be prosecuted when he transports his cattle from one place to another under the ordinance.
Bench: If proviso was not there in section 5 of the ordinance, there would have be no problem. Here, intent of legislature is clear. We will tell you how it will create a problem
Bench: A farmer has a cattle shed next to his house. So to take his cattle to his farm, he needs to take a certificate every time?
AG Navadgi: The first 15 kms is exempted, milords.
Bench: It will create a problem. This will be up to the discretion of the police.
A farmer will not be prosecuted if he is taking cattle for bonafide agricultural purposes, Bench.
Adv Clifton Rozario: As per section 10, as a farmer, I may be arrested with ot without an FIR and my cattle will be seized.
Senior Adv Jayna Kothari: Milords, there should be no course of action arising out of Section 5.
Bench: We will pass an order today on this farmers' aspect and we can straight away go to the validity of the ordinance.
If all of you agree, we can skip the interim relief part. It will save time. As a court, we also have a limitation.
Court is passing order now
Bench orally observes: Does provisio actually take away a farmer's right to transport cattle for bonafide purposes? That is the question here.
Bench records AG's statement that till rules are brought into force, no course of action will initiated by state for violation of section 5 of the ordinance.
Bench: Till the Rules are brought into force, which will be framed by excercising powers under proviso to section 5 of impugned ordinance, no coercive action shall be initiated by the State government for section for violation of Section 5.
AG states that after rules are framed and before the same is brought into force, the State will move the Court so that petitioners are put to notice, Bench.
Bench: Considering the statement made by the AG, at this stage, it is not necessary to consider the prayer for grant of interim relief.
State to file objections by Feb 20.
The Court will next hear main prayer in the two petitions on Feb 26, at 2:30 pm.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Karnataka HC is hearing two petitions moved by Amazon and flipkart seeking to quash the probe ordered by the Competition Commission of India (CCI) against them for alleged violations of Competition Law.
Bench: Mr, Gopal Subramanium, your written submissions is bigger than the Writ petition. I only want bullet points.
Snr Advocate Gopal Subramanium appearing for Amazon: That can be kept aside for now, your lordships.
Subramanium: My villainy is on the basis of one document- one email. This email is me giving a rebate for a seller, it is on the referral fee and not the price.
Delhi High Court begins hearing appeal to its order staying the termination of Mohit Saraf from L&L partnership.
At the outset, Justice Sanjeev Narula discloses that he knows someone at L&L Partners. Counsel on both sides take no objection to his hearing the case
Court asking how much time counsel will take. Senior Advocate @DrAMSinghvi Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing Luthra, says he will take 1 hour 30 mins. Senior Advocate Parag Tripathi, who will argue for Saraf, says he will take 45 mins.
#BombayHighCourt will continue hearing the plea filed by #bhimakoregaon accused Dr. Varavara Rao’s wife seeking court’s intervention in violation of his fundamental right to health by the State and jail authorities with the application for bail on medical grounds.
Justice SS Shinde: What heavens are going to fall if the petitioner is given protection for few days.
We have always believed that judiciary, agencies like RBI, CBI, ED should act independently.
Justice SS Shinde: There is threat to the very democracy if these agencies don't act independently.
Why should there be so much insistence on protection not being granted?
Bench presided by Justice Shinde were hearing the plea filed by NCP MLA Eknath Khadse for quashing a complaint filed by ED in connection to land case of Pune.
Supreme Court is scheduled to take up for hearing shortly, petition filed by @Facebook India chief Ajit Mohan challenging the summons issued to him by Delhi Assembly's Committee in relation to #DelhiRiots2020.
Senior Advocate Harish Salve appears for Petitioner: You can only summon those who is a party. If at all one is summoned is it limited to questions of evidence or fact. I may have strong opinions which I may not want to express
Senior Adv Salve: This is not a summon by the Parliament. The genesis of privilege is privilege against the crown. When the house of commons assemble they petition a ground. These are privileges by the crowm against the crown.