Hyderabad: New Trend in State Laws Opposing Parliament
In recent times, some State Assemblies have started passing laws that oppose those made by Parliament. States like West Bengal and Telangana, which are ruled by opposition parties, have passed laws against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens (NRC), both of which were approved by Parliament.
Similarly, certain states are working on passing bills that oppose three new laws: Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), and Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA). These laws have already been enacted by Parliament.
It seems odd that a State can pass a law that contradicts a law made by Parliament, which represents all political parties. If a political party cannot stop a bill in Parliament, it tries to do so in the state it controls. However, the Constitution and its laws do not allow this.
States are allowed to make laws on subjects specifically reserved for them or on subjects in the concurrent list. If there is a conflict between a state law and a parliamentary law on a concurrent list subject, the parliamentary law prevails. Both the Union and the States must follow the Constitution when making laws.
Therefore, any state law that contradicts a parliamentary law is automatically invalid. Parliament can take action against such state laws and the authorities responsible for them. The High Court or the Supreme Court can also intervene, declare the state law unconstitutional, and punish the concerned authorities.
Clearly, this issue needs to be addressed firmly to prevent states from passing laws against those made by Parliament.
Supreme Court on Cheque Signatories
The Supreme Court recently ruled that an authorized signatory of a company who signs a cheque is not considered the drawer of the cheque. Therefore, this person is not liable to make interim payments under Section 143 A of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
Gujarat High Court Chief Justice on Delayed Proceedings
Chief Justice Sunita Agrawal of the Gujarat High Court expressed concern over the frequent delays in court proceedings, known as “Tarikh Pe Tarikh.” She urged the legal community to stop seeking frequent adjournments, which benefit no one. She made these remarks while launching the website of the Gujarat Bar Council and Gujarat Law Herald. The new website will help lawyers across the state resolve practice-related issues online, without visiting the Bar Council office.
Tamil Nadu Consumer Commission Awards Compensation
The Tamil Nadu State Consumer Commission awarded Rs 35,000 in compensation to C Arokiasamy, who complained about a hotel not supplying pickle with 25 meal parcels he ordered for his mother’s death anniversary. The complainant argued that the absence of pickle amounted to deficient service and mental cruelty. The commission found Balumurugan Hotel guilty and awarded Rs 35,000 in compensation and Rs 5,000 for litigation expenses.
Kerala High Court Quashes POCSO and Rape Case
Justice Badhruddin of the Kerala High Court recently quashed a 2021 POCSO and rape case on humanitarian grounds. The victim informed the court that she had married the accused and had two children with him. She stated that she was happily living with the accused. The court decided that punishing the accused would harm the family and, therefore, quashed the case.
