This article is written by Janhvi Shirsat, a student of NLU, Nagpur.
Lawyers are unable to access virtual court: Plea filed in Kerala HC
The commencement of virtual court because of lockdown is making it difficult to prevail justice as lawyers are finding it difficult to ingress the virtual court. On 8 May Kerala High Court will hear steps seeking for physical court functioning after COVID-19 lockdown is over.
Lawyers are not well versed with the technology and find it difficult to access the virtual court, said petitioner counsel, Advocate K Arjun Venugopal presented before Justices Shajy P Chaly and Ashok Menon. Supporting the fact, the representative of Kerala High court Advocate Association (KHCAA), advocate Hariraj MR added that the physical court must resume.
The matter held on video conference the Bench observed that the matter must be heard on Friday that is on 8 May as there was no representative present on behalf of HC administration.
SC says Co-operative banks come under SARFAESI Act, 2002
The Bench of 5 Judges headed by Justice Mishra after several conflicting decisions on the matter if Co-operative banks come under the definition of “banks” under Section 2 (1) (c) of Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Act, 2002 (SARFAESI) has held finally.
Justices Arun Mishra, Indira Banerjee, Vineet Saran, MR Shah, and Aniruddha Bose states that co-operative banks registered under the Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002 concerning ‘banking’ as governed by legislation are relatable to Entry 45 of List of 7th Schedule.
The HC bench of Bombay, Andhra Pradesh has also enlarged the definition of banks in several Acts. Therefore, SC noted the facts and pronounced the decision.
FIRs filed for lockdown violation quashed by SC
It was observed in virtual court that over 75,000 FIRs are registered under Section 188 of IPC for violating the rules of lockdown as imposed for the pandemic of COVID-19 against people must be revoked.
The petitioner representative Senior Counsel Gopal Sankaranarayanan submitted that rule of law is not selective as people step out of their house to withdraw money from ATMs and not letting them out for this purpose is violating their fundamental rights.
Supreme Court noting the arguments accordingly dismissed the plea by stating that “We are not inclined to entertain this petition under Article 32 of the Constitution”.
SC warned Lawyers to not file pleas related to COVID-19 as they are not the person on the field
The Bench of Justices Ashok Bhushan, Sanjay Kishan Kaul, and BR Gavai dismissed the petition filed by Advocate Pawan Prakash Pathak and a student Abhijeet Pandey to evict the tenant from the property due to non- payment of rent to the landlord and stated that lawyers cannot file pleas as petitioner-in-person.
The petitioner emphasized that this plea is to enforce the fundamental rights of students at large who live as paying guests and added that Abhijeet’s father is blind and due to lockdown have financial breakdown.
The court dismissed the plea and Justice Ashok Bhushan added that “there is a helpline to monitor these situations, therefore, the court will not entertain such kind of cases”.