VAKALATGIRI

In  Bhadar Ram vs Jassa Ram   the Supreme Court ruled that a person declared as Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe in one state cannot claim benefit of his status for employment, education or land allotment in any other state on migration. A bench of Justice M.R. Shah and Justice A.S. Bopanna said: "A person belonging to Scheduled Caste /Scheduled Tribe in relation to his original state of which he is permanent or an ordinarily resident cannot be deemed to be so in relation to any other state on his migration to that state for the purpose of employment, education etc." The Division Bench relied upon the decision of Action Committee on Issue of Caste Certificate to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the State of Maharashtra and Another v. Union of India and Another. In Action Committee, the question that arose for consideration was  whether a person belonging to caste or tribe specified for the purpose of Constitution to be Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe i...

The Madurai bench of Madras High Court recently granted relief to an administrator of a WhatsApp group in an FIR registered over offensive messages posted in the group by a member.  The High Court has reiterated that WhatsApp group admin cannot be held liable for objectionable content posted by members.  The court added, however, that if additional evidence is collected that demonstrates the administrator was engaged in the crime, he can be convicted according to the law.  The Madurai Bench referred to the Kishore v. State Maharashtra of the Bombay High Court which ruled that a WhatsApp group admin must be deleted from the list of accused if he did not play any part in the crime committed by group members other than being an admin. However, the Court also held that if another material is gathered that shows the admin being involved in the crime, he may be tried according to the law. In Kishor v. State of Maharashtra an application under Section 482 of the Code of Crimin...