Delhi High Court Monthly Digest: October 2022 [Citations 926 - 1026]
Live LawCitations 2022 LiveLaw 926 TO 2022 LiveLaw 1026 NOMINAL INDEX Satyendra Kumar Jain v. ED 2022 LiveLaw 926 MICROMAX MEDIA PVT LTD v. M/S HEWLETT PACKARD INDIA SALES PVT LTD & ORS. Delhi Govt Yet To Constitute State Mental Health Authority Under 2017 Act, Existing Panel Cannot Continue: High Court Title: ABC v. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS Citation: 2022 LiveLaw 930 Rejecting Delhi government's stand that the State Authority for Mental Health Services constituted under the Mental Health Act, 1987, can continue to function as it is under the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017, the Delhi High Court has said Section 45 of the new enactment required respective state governments to constitute a new body - the State Mental Health Authority, within a period of nine months. Armed Forces Tribunal Exercising Similar Jurisdiction As High Court, No Appeal 'Can/Should' Lie Before HCs: Delhi High Court Title: IC-76585M MAJOR NISHANT KAUSHIK vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS Citation: 2022 LiveLaw 980 Months after a division bench of Delhi High Court said the jurisdiction of High Courts under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution cannot be bypassed merely by making a provision for direct appeal to the Supreme Court, a co-ordinate bench has said that ordinarily, no appeal from a final decision or order of the Armed Forces Tribunal can lie before the High Court. Umar Khalid's Name Finds A Recurring Mention In Conspiracy Behind Delhi Riots, Protests Were Geared Towards Grave Consequences: Delhi High Court Case Title: Umar Khalid v. State Citation: 2022 LiveLaw 982 Denying bail to activist Umar Khalid in Delhi riots larger conspiracy case, the Delhi High Court observed that the protests against Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019 and 2020 North-East Delhi riots were prima-facie orchestrated at various "conspiratorial meetings" held from December 2019 till February 2020, some of which were also attended by Khalid. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw 1011 The Delhi High Court has said the Central Administrative Tribunal "ordinarily should" endeavour to examine a case on merits rather than dismissing the same on technicalities.