Animal rights

The Supreme Court has stayed the bull taming festival jallikattu and bullock cart races that take place in the harvest festival in many states. These are customary practices and hearing petitions by various animal rights groups, the court has imposed interim stay on the practices. The four year ban on the practices had ended with a government notification on January 8. The order has given rise to protests in the political circles. The parties claim the customary nature of the tradition to justify its perpetuation.

Section 144 CrPC

Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure deals with the imposition of emergency steps to maintain public order. The application of Section 144 is commonly known as the imposition of curfew.
(1) an order restraining any person or persons residing in a particular area or general public from visiting a particular area maybe passed under this section;
(2) the order maybe passed by the district magistrate, the sub-divisional magistrate or an executive magistrate specially empowered by the state government in this regard, who is of the opinion that such act may cause public disorder, riots or affray.
(3) in cases of emergency the order maybe passed ex parte
(4) no order under this section shall remain in force for more than two months, except if the state government deems it necessary to prevent danger to public health, or riots or affray, it may, by notification extend it for up to six months;
(5) any magistrate or the state government may on its accord or on application by any person aggrieved, rescind or alter this order subject to the conditions of public health and order.

Territorial jurisdiction in motor accident claims

The Supreme Court has upholding its previous decision in Mantoo Sarkar v Oriental insurance company limited (2009) recently observed in Malati Sardar v National insurance company limited that in the absence of prejudice, the objection on the territorial jurisdiction of motor accident claims tribunal shall not be entertained. The court observed that since the insurance company is a party of the case, the claim can be filed where it has its office. In the present case, the accident victim was neither a resident of Kolkata nor the accident happened there but the insurance company had its office there. Section 166(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act states that an application can be made at the option of the claimant in the tribunal either having jurisdiction in the area where the accident took place or jurisdiction of the place where the parties are resident or carry business. Claim petition may be filed where the insurance company has its office. In the absence of prejudice to the parties, there is no failure of Justice.