Thursday, March 30, 2017

Right To Privacy A Fundamental Right-Uidai Violative of Individuals Right To Privacy

Right To Privacy A Fundamental Right-Uidai Violative of Individuals Right To Privacy
Over the period of time, the meaning of privacy has changed; but that does not mean it is a dynamic term, just that it needs a dynamic interpretation of law. Many countries have recognised the Right to Privacy as their constitutional right. The scope of Privacy is limited.

The U.S. Supreme Court claims that there are two different dimensions to privacy: both control over information about oneself and control over one’s ability to make certain important type of decisions. The scope of privacy is ever changing and can never be brought under a curtain at any point of time as the human concepts differ even within our own homes, and this is the challenge faced by the legislation and the courts. Over the ages, the Supreme Court of India has articulated an implicit right to privacy derived from the language set out in Article 21 of the Constitution. However, India does not have a separate and specific legislation that explicitly recognizes the right to privacy and sets out the contours of its applicability.

Aadhaar, which is now made mandatory for availing social benefits, has been controversial since its very inception. For the common citizen, privacy was already put at stake when they submitted their identity information to the UIDAI. However, it may be granted that the bill does attempt to address some of the concerns that had arisen about privacy.

How NRIs Send PoA from Abroad and Use its Attested Copy in India?

How NRIs Send PoA from Abroad and Use its Attested Copy in India?

What if you are in urgent need of selling your Indian property but unable to visit India? What if you want to exchange your Indian currency notes from abroad? What if you as an NRI want to name your property in Sydney to your relative?

Like above asked questions, there are many queries of NRIs especially that remain unsolved. They go into overdrive to resolve their dilemma. But eventually, they find no solution. It’s actually the play of authority. Your own or any competent one’s presence can be approved as an authority. And once it is proven, you can effortlessly sell your property while being in foreign or get visa as well.

Representation of Women in the Legal Profession In India

Representation of Women in the Legal Profession In India
Starting with the induction of Cornelia Sorabji into the High Court of Allahabad in 1921 to practice as an Advocate, the legal profession had thrown open its doors to the female population of India. Formally, after the passing of the Legal Practitioners' (Women) Act, XXIII of 1923 abolishing the bar on women from practising Law, Indian women were granted the right to take up the legal profession and practice as Advocates in the Courts of Law.

Working of Capital Market In India

Working of Capital Market In India

Indian Securities Market

This market refers to the market which deals in equities and debentures of the corporates. This market consist of PRIMARY MARKET and SECONDARY MARKET.

Primary Market: It deals with new securities i.e securities which were not previously available and are offered to the investing public for the first time. It is the market for raising the fresh capital in the form of the shares and debentures. It provides the issuing company with additional funds for starting the a new enterprise or for the other expansion of diversification of an existing one and thus its contribution to compant financing is direct. This new offering by the companies are made either as an initial public offering or rights issue

Formation of Special Courts in Rape Cases for Speedy Trial: A Necessity

Formation of Special Courts in Rape Cases for Speedy Trial: A Necessity
Justice delayed is justice denied is the corner stone in delivering justice, speedy trial is the essence of the criminal justice. If legal redress is available for a party that has suffered some injury, but is not forthcoming in a timely fashion, it is effectively the same as having no redress at all. Rape is a heinous crime which gives pain and suffering to the victim both physically and mentally. It is a violative of Article 21 of the constitution, Article 21 of the constitution guarantees

Quashing of False FIR registered under 498A and 406 of the Indian Penal Code

Quashing of False FIR registered under 498A and 406 of the Indian Penal Code

Harsh Vardhan Arora v. Smt Kavita Arora,

The Court can exercise extraordinary jurisdiction vested under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 primarily to prevent the abuse of the process of the court or otherwise secure the ends of justice. Basically it would depend on fact situation of each case which would enable the court after reading the complaint as a whole whether allegations made therein at their face value bring out the ingredients made therein at their face value bring out the ingredients of the offence or whether these do not constitute the offence for which cognizance was taken by the magistrate and in the later case the court would be justified in quashing the complaint.

Unsophisticated Arena of Criminal Investigation: Loopholes and Repercussions

Unsophisticated Arena of Criminal Investigation: Loopholes and Repercussions
 not playing active role in quest for truth like in inquisitorial system –
playing just the role like that of an umpirOurs being an adversarial system of
criminal justice, role of police in arena of criminal investigation and
marshalling of evidence for trial is active one. With area of investigation and
collection of evidence left to investigating officers and prosecution at
pre-trial stage and judiciary being itself hands-off in such matterse in a
football game at pre-trial stage, question is how much adherence is shown by
police and investigating agencies toward procedure and how effectively
investigation is conducted and how much modern technology and its probative
value in trials is appreciated or is it just undermined?

Tuesday, March 28, 2017

Hidden factors that slow our courts and delay justice

Study shows why merely increasing the number of judges may not be enough to clear the alarming backlog of cases

Much popular attention pertaining to the judiciary has been on the vexed question of judicial appointments, a power struggle between the government and judges for determining who has the final word on the judiciary’s ideological tra
jectory and the careers of individuals manning it.

This has meant that the core issue — unacceptable delays in the judicial system — is sidelined. Delay is mainly seen as an HR issue — appoint more judges and delay will automatically reduce. By blaming delay solely on inadequate capacity, neither the judiciary nor the government is asking the hard questions: What are the mindsets within the judiciary that allow a culture of delay to fester?

As of September 30, 2016, the Supreme Court has nearly 61,000 pending cases, official figures say. The high courts have a backlog of more than 40 lakh cases, and all subordinate courts together are yet to dispose of around 2.85 crore cases. At all three levels, courts dispose of fewer cases than are filed. The number of pending cases keeps growing, litigants face even dimmer prospects of their cases being disposed of quickly.

This is the trend across the country. In high courts, 94% of cases have been pending for 5-15 years. In Alla- habad, the country’s largest and by many accounts, an inefficient court, 925,084 cases are pending. On an average, cases take three years and nine months to get disposed. In Delhi HC, considered publicly as one of the best, 66,281 are pending. It takes an average of two years and eight months to give its verdict in a case. To be fair, delays are not a peculiarly Indian phenomenon. Many advanced countries struggle to provide quick, high-quality justice to citizens. But in India the scale of the problem is unprecedented.

Focusing on capacity alone won’t reduce delays. A pervasive reason for delays is adjournments. A study by the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy (VCLP) conducted on Delhi HC found that in 91% of cases delayed over two years, adjournments were sought and granted. Merely increasing the number of judges won’t help because adjournments are acceptable in our judicial system. These encourage delaying tactics, block judicial time, prevent effective case ma n a g e me n t and impoverish litigants. They deter many from seeking access to formal justice. Apart from the lawyers, who often charge per hearing, none benefits.

An initiative by VCLP — Justice, Access and Lowering Delays in India (Jaldi) — seeks to address the problem. It talks of reducing government litigation, compulsory use of mediation and other alternative dispute resolution mechanisms. It mentions simplifying procedures, recommending precise capacity reinforcements and use of technology. The goal is to find a way to clear all backlog in the courts within six years
This isn’t unrealistic. In Singapore, the implementation of similar reforms in the 1990s led to astonishing results, 95% of civil and 99% of criminal cases were disposed of in 1999. The average length of commercial cases fell from around six years in the 1980s to 1.25 years in 2000. The pending cases count hasn’t grown substantially since.

While implementing such reforms will present challenges, it is critical that the public narrative around delays changes. Delay in courts is not an HR issue — it is a question of the growth of a culture that has made delays acceptable. It impacts our ease of doing business rankings and hinders access to justice to the mazdoor whose employment has been unlawfully terminated.

Scarcely has there been an issue that cries out louder for the government and the judiciary to secure the constitutional mandate of speedy and effective access to justice.

By Arghya Sengupta is research director, Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy


Sunday, March 26, 2017

Sound Registration in India - Trademark Office

Jingles and chimes can make trademark noise

Did you know that the National Stock Exchange's theme song is registered as a sound mark in India? The Trade Mark Rules, 2017, which were notified recently, have revised the procedures and made it easier for companies to file applications for registration of sound marks, by appending an MP3 file in the application.

Over the years, there have been only a handful of registrations of sound marks in India—the first being the 'Yahoo Yodel' of Yahoo Inc, which applied in 2004 for registration of the sound of a human voice yodelling the word 'Yahoo'. For a sound mark to be registered, the applicant needs to prove factual distinctiveness of the sound—in other words, there must be a recall of the sound with the product or service.

Sounds can be a corporate jingle (ICICI Bank) or the sound heard on logging into a device (Nokia).

"In today's world, where people have access to various technologies, sound plays an important role in the marketing process. People associate goods or services with the sound which represents it," points out Vikrant Rana, managing partner, SS Rana & Co, an IP law firm.

Shwetasree Majumder, co-founder, Fidus Law Chambers, agrees: "It takes brand recognition to another level. It paves the way for asserting a trademark even when you can't use a word or a logo in a setting. In businesses that are largely intangible, registration of sound marks is certainly of value".

Traditionally, companies registered words, names, labels, acronyms, signatures with the trademark registry. Procedural challenges deterred many companies from registering sound marks. "Prior to notification of the revised rules on March 6, an application for registration of a sound mark required the applicant to submit its graphical representation, viz: musical notations and written description. As not many people can read music, this itself was an obstacle at all stages involved in the registration process—be it examination by the trade mark registrar or opposition to its registration," points out Rana.

The sound mark was published in the trademark journal as a graphical representation which not many people would understand and the registration certificate also consisted of the sound mark as a graphical representation, he adds.

"The new rules permit applicants to attach an MP3 sound track, together with graphical representation of the musical notation, this will be helpful and will encourage companies to come forward and protect their sound marks," says Raja Selvam, managing attorney at law firm, Selvam and Selvam.

This small but crucial change in the application procedures could see a renewed interest in registration of sound marks.

Monday, March 06, 2017

Ram Jethmalani Cross-examins Arun Jaitley in Delhi High Court

Ram Jethmalani Cross-examins Arun Jaitley in Delhi High Court
Union finance minister Arun Jaitley on Monday appeared in Delhi high court to face a pugnacious Ram Jethmalani who cross-examined him in connection with his defamation suit against chief minister Arvind Kejriwal and other AAP functionaries.
Appearing for Kejriwal, Jethmalani fired a salvo of 52 questions at Jaitley in the nearly daylong proceedings in a jam-packed court, but 11 of these were "disallowed" by joint registrar Amit Kumar for either being a "matter of record and irrelevant to the case", or for being "questions of law and not fact" that could be argued later.
At one stage, Jethmalani brought out a dictionary and asked Jaitley the difference between "goodwill" and "reputation", but the query was shot down by the court.
During the cross-examination, Jethmalani tried to corner Jaitley on why he felt his reputation had been damaged in a manner that was "irreparable and unquantifiable", but the senior BJP functionary remained unruffled, calmly answering the queries. Jethmalani, a former BJP functionary who was expelled, wondered if Jaitley's "personal feelings of greatness" were behind the defamation suit where he says his reputation has been damaged. But the finance minister explained that "my view about my own reputation was based on what my friends, well-wishers and other people both privately and in media, had expressed an opinion on this subject."
The two men covered several issues in the question-answer-style cross-examination — from the CBI raid on Delhi government's senior bureaucrat Rajendra Kumar in December 2015 to another official Chetan Sanghi's report on DDCA affairs. Jethmalani also demanded from the senior minister if he made any serious effort to reverse the alleged damage before coming to the court, since as per Jaitley's statement, the damage continued for five consecutive days. To this, Jaitley replied: "I contradicted the allegations in the media and also in Parliament where echoes of these allegations were raised."
On the amount of Rs10 crore demanded as damages by Jaitley, Kejriwal's counsel Ram Jethmalani pointed out that the minister didn't seem to have suffered any monetary damage. "What is the meaning of the term 'unquantifiable damage' used by you in the plaint?" the veteran lawyer asked, adding, "in other words, you are telling that you cannot assign any objective rational reason, but it depends on where you place yourself? What do you have to say?"
The minister responded: "The value I placed, towards loss of my reputation was only a small part of the enormous damage done", also pointing out that "the loss of my reputation has been partly quantified in terms of money. Loss of reputation causes mental distress to the person defamed, which it did in my case". He added that "considering my stature, background and reputation, the loss caused to me and my reputation was so enormous that it was considered unquantifiable".
Jaitley, facing a barrage of questions from his former BJP colleague, also referred to the CBI raid to highlight that immediately after it, AAP functionaries began issuing defamatory statements "to deflect attention from this raid and to link me somehow to a controversy with which I had no connection".
Jethmalani, on his part, asked the minister if he knew that the CBI search was in the expectation that some DDCA documents may be found. But Jaitley refuted the claim, making it clear he had no prior knowledge of the raid, nor had he even been privy to the facts of the raid. Jaitley also denied accusations that he tried to influence Chetan Sanghi, Delhi government's vigilance chief who handled the DDCA case, and tried to lean upon him to go back on his report.
The Union minister, who had headed DDCA for 13 years, told Jethmalani that he cannot recollect that he had ever met the officer. He said he got to know only through the media that Delhi government appointed a commission of inquiry into DDCA headed by a bureaucrat. "I read in the media that bureaucrat Mr Sanghi had written to the home secretary, government of India, seeking posting in the Centre since the Delhi government felt offended by him for his having refused to name certain VIP in the DDCA inquiry," Jaitley said.
He answered in the negative a suggestion by Jethmalani that he and the Centre befriended Sanghi and asked him to go back on his report.
The joint registrar court is hearing a suit seeking Rs10 crore in damages filed by Jaitley against the Kejriwal and other AAP functionaries over alleged irregularities and financial bungling in the cricket body during his tenure its president. The finance minister has already tendered evidence in support of his civil defamation suit that also names Raghav Chadha, Kumar Vishwas, Ashutosh, Sanjay Singh and Deepak Bajpai.
Jaitley entered court around 11:45am, accompanied by senior advocates Rajiv Nayar, Sandeep Sethi and Pratibha M Singh, even as Jethmalani prepared to cross-examine him in open court. The hearing will continue on Tuesday.

Fast Track mergers

Fast Track mergers

Step No. Procedure Timeline Forms B
1. Convene a Board Meeting
Convene a Board Meeting and pass the following

a)    Approval of the scheme;

b)    Fixing date, time and place for convening of shareholders meeting;

c)     Fixing date, time and place for convening of creditors meeting.
Both (Transferor and Transferee Companies)
2. Notice of the proposed scheme
The notice of the proposed scheme inviting
objections or suggestions, if any, shall be sent to the Registrar of
Companies (“ROC”) and Official Liquidators where registered office of the

companies are situated or persons affected by the scheme along with a copy
of the Scheme.
After holding the Board meeting CAA.9 Both (Transferor and Transferee Companies)
3. Filing a declaration of solvency with the ROC
  Each of the companies involved merger files a
declaration of solvency, in the prescribed form, with the ROC where the
registered office of the company is situated, before convening the meeting
of members and creditors for approval of the scheme.
CAA.10 Both (Transferor and Transferee Companies)
4. Convening a meeting of members
The notice of the meeting sent to the
creditors shall be accompanied by –

a)    a statement, disclosing the details of the compromise or
arrangement, as far as applicable, as referred to in sub-section 230 (3)
of the Act read with sub-rule (3) of rule 6 of the Rules.

b)     the declaration of solvency made in Form No. CAA.10;

c)      a copy of the scheme.

The objections and suggestions received by the ROC, Official Liquidator
and persons affected by the scheme are considered by the companies in
their respective general meetings and the scheme is approved by the
respective members or class of members at a general meeting holding at 90%
of the total number of shares.
Clear 21 days before the date of the meeting Both (Transferor and Transferee Companies)
5. Convening a meeting of creditors
The notice of the meeting sent to the members
shall be accompanied by –

a)    a statement, disclosing the details of the compromise or
arrangement, as far as applicable, as referred to in sub-section 230 (3)
of the Act read with sub-rule (3) of rule 6 of the Rules.

b)    the declaration of solvency made in Form No. CAA.10;

c)      a copy of the scheme.

The scheme is to be approved by majority representing nine-tenths in value
of the creditors or class of creditors of respective companies indicated
in a meeting.
Clear 21 days before the date of the meeting Both (Transferor and Transferee Companies)
6. Filing of the Scheme
a)    File a copy of Scheme and report of the
result of each of the meetings with the Regional Director.

b)    A copy of the scheme along with Form CAA. 11 shall also be filed
with :

·   the ROC in Form GNL 1;

·   the Official Liquidator through hand delivery or by registered post or
speed post.
a)    Within seven days from the conclusion of
the meeting of members or creditors.
a)    CAA.11

b)    GNL 1
Transferee Company
7. Approval of the Scheme by the Regional Director
1.     On the receipt of the
scheme, if the ROC or the Official Liquidator has no objections or
suggestions to the scheme, the Regional Director shall register the same
and issue a confirmation thereof to the companies.

2.     If the ROC or Official Liquidator has any objections or
suggestions, he may communicate the same in writing to Regional Director
within a period of thirty days. If no such communication is made, it shall
be presumed that he has no objection to the scheme.

3.     If the Regional Director after receiving the objections or
suggestions or for any reason is of the opinion that such a scheme is not
in public interest or in the interest of the creditors, it may file an
application before the Tribunal in Form No. CAA.13 within a period of
sixty days of the receipt of the scheme under sub-section (2) stating its
objections and requesting that the Tribunal may consider the scheme under
section 232.

4.     On receipt of an application from the Regional Director or from any
person, if the Tribunal, for reasons to be recorded in writing, is of the
opinion that the scheme should be considered as per the procedure laid
down in section 232, the Tribunal may direct accordingly or it may confirm
the scheme by passing such order as it deems fit.

5.     If the Regional Director does not have any objection to the scheme
or it does not file any application under this section before the
Tribunal, it shall be deemed that it has no objection to the scheme.

6.     Where no objection or suggestion is received to the scheme from the
ROC and Official Liquidator or where the objection or suggestion of ROC
and Official Liquidator is deemed to be not sustainable and the Regional
Director is of the opinion that the scheme is in the public interest or in
the interest of creditors, the Regional Director shall issue a
confirmation order of such scheme of merger or amalgamation in Form No.
CAA. 12.
8. Filing of confirmation order with the ROC
  A copy of the order confirming the scheme by
the Tribunal or Regional Director shall be communicated to the ROC having
jurisdiction over the transferee company and the persons concerned and the
ROC shall register the scheme and issue a confirmation to the companies
and such confirmation shall be communicated to the ROC where transferor
company or companies were situated.
Within 30 days of the receipt of the order of
confirmation of the scheme.
Form INC-28 Both (Transferor and Transferee Companies)

Freedom of Business, Trade and Profession

Freedom of Business, Trade and Profession
“ Bonafide usage of this freedom will help to foster a healthy relationship among everyone in the society. But on the contrary malafide usage will lead to havoc as well as cause a disturbance in the working of the democracy, which in turn will act as a hindrance to the growth and development of the economy.”

Sunday, March 05, 2017

Debate over Sitting or Standing at Cinema Hall Whether Violation of Right to freedom of Speech and Expression

Debate over Sitting or Standing at Cinema Hall Whether Violation of Right to freedom of Speech and Expression
Abstract: This article focuses attention on the directions of the Supreme Court in “Shyam Narayan Chouksey v. Union of India that “all the cinema halls in India shall play the national anthem before the feature film starts and all present in the hall are obliged to stand up to show respect to the national anthem as a part of their “sacred obligation”.

Terrorist and their Tactics:-Need of Creative Criminology

Terrorist and their Tactics:-Need of Creative Criminology
The Mumbai attack was planned in Pakistan and directed by Lashkar-e-Taiba militants with only ten people horrify the whole India (total population near to 125 crore) tactics shooting and bombing with AK-47, RDX, IEDs, Grenades and latest use mobile phones and VOIP. Terrorist Ajmal Kasab and his associates came in India through the ocean, here question is arising where was the surveillance system went when terrorist were crossing you good self ocean under your nose or terrorist were enough intelligent that they stopped your good self every surveillances system, so that you were not able to look on them, means we all are totally depending on the machine not the power that every human have i.e. creativity, helping every time somewhere in life when problem occurring. In this attack nearly 164 people were killed by the terrorist and unnumbered wound victim. Even though after some days, there was a news in T.V that international investigator already warned the India surveillance regarding the probably threat from the terrorist attack.

Friday, March 03, 2017

Jurisdictional Challenges in Online Transactions

Jurisdictional Challenges in Online Transactions
The advancement in technology has brought with it a new wave of advanced communication, and transactions through virtual mediums have replaced face to face transactions. Today, e- commerce plays a vital role in nearly every sphere of life- with simply just a click of the mouse we can pay our electricity/telephone bills, do online shopping, transfer money to persons in different parts of the globe, conduct business deals etc.