Category: news

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has issued an order mandating Illumina, a leading producer of next-generation sequencing platforms, to divest GRAIL, which provides a Multi-Cancer Early Detection test (MCED). The next-generation sequencing platforms are used in analyzing genetic material from blood samples for MCED tests. According to the FTC, this acquisition would have a negative effect on prices, options and competition for MCED tests in the United States.

The Karnataka High Court (KHC) rejecting a bail plea, of a accused charged under Sec. 4 & 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act), stated that minor girl’s consent cannot be taken as a gospel truth. The main contention of the accused was that the victim, minor girl, is a consenting party & thus, there is absence of element of force. However, the KHC said “taking note of the object sought to be achieved by enacting POCSO Act, the Court is of considered opinion that the grounds urged in the petition are hardly sufficient” to grant him bail.

The Delhi High Court (DHC) sets aside the order of the Revenue Department that withheld the refund of around Rs. 33 Crore due to the Assessee, OYO Hotels, after refund intimation had been received, because the Assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment and a notice had been issued by the Assessing Officer (AO). The Court noted that the AO failed to provide compelling reasons as to why releasing the refund will adversely affect the interest of the Revenue and observed that mere issuance of scrutiny notice is not a sufficient ground to withhold the refund under the Income Tax Act, 1961.

The Bombay High Court (BHC) dismissed an appeal filed by an insurance company contending that if a widow remarries, she should be denied compensation for the death of her first husband under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Denying the contention, the BHC held that, “One cannot expect that for getting compensation of deceased husband, the widow has to remain widow for life time or till getting compensation. Considering her age, and at the time of accident, she was wife of deceased, is sufficient ground that she is entitled for the compensation. Moreover after death of husband remarriage cannot be a taboo to get a compensation.”

The Supreme Court (SC) dismissed a batch of Public Interest Litigations that sought the adoption of gender neutral and religion neutral legislations in matters regarding the divorce, adoption, guardianship, inheritance and maintenance rules across the country. The SC refused to grant relief to the petitioners and stated “The grant of relief in these proceedings would necessitate a direction for the enactment of law. This lies exclusively within the domain of the legislature. It is a well settled position that a mandamus cannot be issued to legislative to enact law.”

The Bombay High Court (BHC), in a review petition, quashed the order of a Sessions Court, which awarded maintenance to the wife in a complaint initiated under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DVA) despite observing that there was no domestic violence involved in the matter, and treating the matter as if it was an application under Sec. 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC). The BHC further stated that the refusal and neglect to maintain a wife cannot be tested under the DVA and an application under Sec. 125 of the CrPC must be filed.

The Supreme Court (“SC”) dismissed a Public Interest Litigation challenging the provisions of the Conduct of Electoral Rules, 1961, that mandates MLAs and MPs to show the ballot paper to a polling agent of a political party in the polls for Rajya Sabha and State Legislative Councils to make their vote valid, as being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The SC dismissing the plea stated that the provisions are not per se discriminatory and an open ballot is needed to prevent cross voting and maintain party discipline.

The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLAT) upheld the order of the Competition Commission of India (CCI), imposing a penalty of Rs. 1337.76 crore on Google LLC for abusing its dominant position in the market for licensable smart mobile Operating Systems (OS). The NCLAT stated that the investigation conducted by the CCI was not violative of the principles of natural justice, as contended by Google, and confirmed its anti-competitive behaviour. However, the NCLAT set aside certain directions issued by CCI against Google, to ensure that it altered its conduct to make the market more competitive.

The Supreme Court (SC), dealing with the issue of what should be the parameters available to the Caste Scrutiny Committee (CSC) for verification of caste certificate held that the Affinity Test, used to ascertain whether a person follows the traditional cultural traits of a community, cannot be a litmus test and must only be used as a corroborative exercise. The SC further said that CSC ought to be given some discretion to accept or reject the caste certificates and primary importance must be given to the documentary evidence as is evident from the scheme of relevant statutes and rules.