Read Time: 01 hours
1. [Ayushman Bharat Scheme] The Delhi High Court has dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking directions to include the Indian healthcare system, viz., Ayurveda, Yoga, and Naturopathy, in the Ayushman Bharat scheme. Noting that no counsel appeared for either side, a division bench dismissed the plea. "The petition is dismissed in default on account of non-prosecution," the bench ordered. In November 2022, the predecessor bench issued notice to the Ministry of Ayush, the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, and the Delhi Government.
Bench: Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora
Case Title: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India & Ors.
Click here to read more
2. [Amanatullah Khan] Amanatullah Khan, an MLA from the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), filed a petition before the Delhi High Court challenging the Enforcement Directorate's (ED) summons requiring his presence in connection with a money laundering case. The case is related to suspected irregularities in the recruitment process of the Delhi Waqf Board. The bench scheduled the hearing for Thursday and refrained from issuing any immediate orders. The ED's investigation revolves around allegations of illegal recruitment during Khan's tenure as the chairman of the Delhi Waqf Board. The court emphasized that the summons had been delivered a week earlier, suggesting Khan comply with the requirement for a day or submit a response. Additionally, the AAP leader's senior counsel contested the constitutional validity of specific provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.
Bench: Justice Rekha Palli and Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar
Case Title: Amanatullah Khan v. UOI
3. [Sanjay Singh] The Delhi High Court has 'reserved order' in AAP MP Sanjay Singh's bail plea in connection with a money laundering case related to the alleged Delhi excise policy scam. The bench reserved the order after hearing submissions of both sides. Senior Advocate Mohit Mathur appeared for Singh and Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju appeared for ED. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) asserted before the Court on Tuesday that Singh played a role in establishing a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) to launder "proceeds of crime" associated with an alleged liquor scam, resulting from changes in the excise policy. Sanjay Singh had approached the high court seeking bail on January 4, following the dismissal of his plea by Special Judge M.K. Nagpal of Rouse Avenue Court on December 22.
Bench: Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma
Case Title: Sanjay Singh v. Directorate of Enforcement
4. [Lokshahi News channel] The Delhi High Court has permitted the Mumbai-based news channel Lokshahi Marathi to operate. The Information and Broadcasting Ministry had suspended the channel's license for 30 days, effectively halting its broadcast. The I&B Ministry has shut down the channel, citing the non-submission of certain documents relating to the company. The license had been suspended by the government for 30 days on the grounds that the operators of the channel were not the same as those in whose name the licence was issued As per Clause 32 of the Uplinking and Downlinking Guidelines-2022, a TV channel or a teleport can be transferred by a company or LLP, granted permission under the Guidelines, to another company or LLP only with the prior approval of the I&B Ministry. The bench said, "This Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and keeping in view the satisfaction arrived at by the Respondents, is of the opinion that the Petitioners must be permitted to commence the operation of channel."
Bench: Justice Subramonium Prasad
Case Title: Zora Traders Limited & Ors. v. Union of India & Anr.
5. [Health Infrastructure] The Delhi High Court expressed serious apprehensions regarding the inadequate health infrastructure in the capital's hospitals and reprimanded the government for its failure to ensure the operational status of facilities such as MRI and CT scans. The division bench suggested the possibility of constituting a committee of doctors to assess Delhi's hospitals and propose measures for enhancing the infrastructure. Acting Chief Justice Manmohan expressed surprise upon learning that nearly 78 percent of radiologist positions in Delhi government hospitals were vacant. The bench was informed that a hospital in Dwarka, with a sanctioned strength of 450 nurses, had almost 300 vacant positions. Due to the shortage of staff, the 1,200-bed hospital was functioning with only 250 beds.
Case Title: Court on its own motion v. Union of India & Ors.
6. [Digital Arrest] The Delhi High Court has issued notices to the Central government, Delhi government, Delhi police, and the Reserve Bank of India in a public interest litigation (PIL) expressing concerns about the rise of "new age" cyber crimes, specifically addressing the issue of "digital arrests." The bench called for responses from the concerned authorities on the PIL, which seeks directions for creating awareness and simplifying procedures to report cyber crimes. The matter is scheduled for further hearing on March 19, 2024. Advocates Akshya and Urvashi Bhatia, the petitioners, highlighted the evolving tactics employed by cyber criminals, emphasizing the misuse of court orders, including those from the Supreme Court, FIRs, and arrest warrants. The PIL draws attention to the growing threat of "digital arrest" cyber scams, where perpetrators fabricate warrants of arrest to extort money from unsuspecting citizens.
Case Title: Akshya & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.
7. [Hate Speech against Rohingyas] The Delhi High Court has declined to instruct the Centre to restrain social media giant Facebook from purportedly promoting hate speech against the Rohingyas on its platform. The order was released on Wednesday. The division bench emphasized the existing provisions of the Information Technology (IT) Act for grievance redressal. The court rejected the public interest litigation filed by Rohingya refugees Mohammad Hamim and Kawsar Mohammed, represented by Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves. The bench held that the IT Act already offers a comprehensive mechanism for addressing grievances related to objectionable content on social media platforms. The order stated, "This court is of the opinion that the petitioners’ suggestion during the hearing that there should be prior censorship of any publication of Rohingyas on Facebook is an example of ‘a treatment that is worse than the disease."
Case Title: Mohammad Hamim and Anr. v. Facebook India Online Services Pvt Ltd and Ors.
8. [Delhi Waqf Board Case] The Delhi High Court has refused to stay the summons issued by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) requiring AAP MLA Amanatullah Khan's presence in connection with a money laundering case. The case is related to suspected irregularities in the recruitment process of the Delhi Waqf Board. During the hearing, the counsel for the AAP leader sought adjournment as the senior counsel appearing for him was not available today. While adjourning the matter to February 7, the court clarified that, at this stage, it has neither issued notice in the petition nor has granted any interim order in favour of Khan. The bench also questioned the maintainability of the plea. The matter is scheduled for further hearing on February 7.
Case Title: Amanatullah Khan v. Union of India & Ors.
9. [Ashneer Grover] Ashneer Grover, the co-founder and former Managing Director of BharatPe, along with his wife Madhuri Jain Grover, has approached the Delhi High Court challenging the Look Out Circulars (LOC) issued against them. The matter came before a single-judge bench that adjourned the case till May 8, citing the "nascent stage" of the investigation. During the hearing, Justice Prasad remarked orally, "It is too hot in the day for this Court to intervene now. Wait for some time. They [Delhi Police] will take some time to investigate. We will have it in May. By that time, you may also make amends; your friends may be back." The court noted that the Grovers' plea challenging the Economic Offences Wing's (EOW) FIR is also pending before the High Court. Justice Prasad, however, indicated that the Grovers' request to travel abroad for two days could be considered by the concerned authorities.
Case Title: Ashneer Grover v. Union of India & Ors. (another connected matter)
10. [Visually Impaired Individuals] The Delhi High Court has directed the Railways to offer free human assistance to visually impaired individuals at major stations. The directive stems from a petition initiated by the high court itself, aiming to enhance the accessibility of rail travel for persons with disabilities. Senior Advocate SK Rungta, serving as amicus curiae to assist the court, highlighted that while the Railways has equipped stations with wheelchairs, it has declined to provide free escort services to the visually impaired. The court, therefore, urged the Railways to explore the possibility of implementing this service either independently or through a Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) initiative. Addressing the concern of unemployment, the bench suggested, "There is so much unemployment. Sahayaks will push the wheelchair. (If there is a shortage of funds), you can start some CSR (corporate social responsibility) initiatives." The division bench emphasized the need for practical solutions.
11. [Plea for Holistic Integrated Medicinal Approach] The Delhi High Court has allowed the Indian Medical Association (IMA), a body of practitioners of modern medicine and Patanjali, to intervene in a public interest litigation seeking the introduction of a holistic healthcare system that includes yoga and a clutch of ancient prophylactic and curative treatments offered by Ayurveda and Unani medicine. The division bench was hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by a practicing lawyer, Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, seeking directions to the Centre to adopt an Indian holistic integrated medicinal approach rather than a colonial segregated way of Allopathy, Ayurveda, Yoga, Naturopathy, Unani, Sidda, and Homeopathy to secure the right to health. The bench allowed an impleadment application by the IMA and Patanjali after the petitioner, lawyer Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, said he had no objections. "The present application is allowed. Respondents, including the newly impleaded respondent, will file their replies,” the bench ordered.
12. [PMLA] The Delhi High Court has ruled that if the investigation under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) extends beyond 365 days without resulting in a prosecution complaint, the seizure of the property must be deemed lapsed, and it should be returned to the individual from whom it was confiscated. The bench clarified that the phrase "pendency of the proceedings relating to any offence under this Act [PMLA] before a Court" in Section 8(3) of the PMLA specifically refers to a complaint pending before a PMLA Court concerning the person from whom the property was seized. "Therefore, the natural consequence of the investigation for a period beyond three hundred and sixty-five days not resulting in any proceedings relating to any offence under the Act, in terms of Section 8(3) of the Act, is that such seizure lapses and the property so seized must be returned to the person from whom it was so seized," the court observed in its order dated January 31.
Bench: Justice Navin Chawla
Case Title: Mr. Mahender Kumar Khandelwal v. Directorate of Enforcement & Anr.
13. [Mahua Moitra] The Delhi High Court has allowed expelled Lok Sabha member and TMC leader Mahua Moitra to withdraw her plea seeking a stay on her eviction from the government-allotted bungalow. At the outset, the counsel for Moitra apprised the court that the plea has become infructuous as she has already vacated the premises. "The petitioner is already stated to have vacated the accommodation in question. The petition is dismissed as withdrawn," said the court. On January 16, Moitra had been instructed by the Directorate of Estates (DOE) to immediately vacate the government-allotted bungalow, which was allocated to her as a Member of Parliament.
Bench: Justice Sachin Datta
Case Title: Mahua Moitra v. Directorate of Estate & Anr.
14. [Minors' Organ Donation] The Delhi High Court has directed the Central government to formulate guidelines specifying the exceptional circumstances under which a minor can donate organs. The directive came as the court granted permission to a 17-year-old girl to donate a portion of her liver to her father, who is suffering from end-stage liver disease. The bench acknowledging Rule 5(3)(g) of the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Rules, 2014, which permits minors to donate live tissues and organs in exceptional medical circumstances, emphasized the need for clear guidelines on these circumstances. The court, while allowing the organ donation in the present case, cited a report from AIIMS confirming the petitioner's physical fitness for the donation and the urgent need for her father's liver transplant.
Case Title: Siya Omar Through Her Mother & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.
15. [Mental cruelty] The Delhi High Court has held that persistent taunts by a wife regarding her husband's financial capacity and unreasonable pressure to fulfill unattainable dreams amount to mental cruelty, justifying a divorce. The division bench emphasized that a spouse should not serve as a constant reminder of financial limitations, and pressuring a partner to meet impractical aspirations beyond their financial means can cause persistent dissatisfaction and mental strain. The court stated, "A wife should not be a constant reminder of one’s financial limitations. Pressurizing a spouse to fulfil distant and whimsical dreams clearly not within his financial reach may create a sense of persistent dissatisfaction, which would be sufficient mental strain to drain the contentment and tranquility out of any married life. One must tread carefully between needs, wants, and desires." Highlighting the impact of constant conflicts on mental well-being, the court noted that continuous bickering and fights can lead to stress, affecting one's mental equilibrium.
Bench: Justices Suresh Kumar Kait and Neena Bansal Krishna
Case Title: SA v. VD
16. [Yasin Malik] Jailed Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF) terrorist Yasin Malik has moved the Delhi High Court seeking medical treatment for cardiac and kidney ailments. Malik is seeking physical treatment at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS). The bench asked Malik's counsel to clarify whether he is willing to be treated by the AIIMS medical board or doctors of his own choice. The case is scheduled for further consideration on February 14, 2024. Malik has sought directions to the Central Government to be referred to AIIMS or any other super-specialty hospital for his medical treatment. During the hearing today, the Central government opposed the petition, challenged its maintainability, and argued that Malik only needs outpatient department (OPD) treatment and does not require admission to the hospital. Advocate Rajat Nair, representing the government, informed the bench that AIIMS had constituted a medical board to examine Malik through video conference, but he declined to meet them. Nair emphasized that Malik, considered a "very high-risk prisoner," would receive all necessary medical facilities in jail.
Bench: Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta
Case Title: Mohammad Yasin Malik v. Union of India & Ors.
Please Login or Register
