Presumption Of Correctness Of Judicial Records Not Absolute And Can Be Rebutted By Direct Evidence: Kerala High Court on Married Daughter Cannot Challenge Partition After 21-Year Slumber If She Had Knowledge: Madhya Pradesh High Court Kerala High Court Orders Immediate Suspension Of Lakshadweep CJM For Allegedly Forging Witness Deposition To Convict Accused Supreme Court Bars Post-Divorce Maintenance Claims When Wife Voluntarily Waived Maintenance In Settlement Agreement Advocate Is An Officer Of Court, Not Mere Agent Of Client: Allahabad High Court Distinguishes Between Active Concealment & Statement In Ignorance, Slaps Cost On Litigants For Misleading Bench Cannot Summon Accused Mechanically On Protest Petition Without Assigning Justifiable Reasons: Andhra Pradesh High Court Increment Not A Bounty: Allahabad High Court Rules Public Holiday Cannot Delay Pay Hike For Teachers Joining Next Working Day Paying Taxes Or Utility Connections Confer No Legal Ownership Over Govt Land': Andhra Pradesh High Court Orders Demolition Of Encroachment 'Cannot Compel Public Authority To Collect Data From Private Bodies': Bombay High Court Quashes CIC Orders Directing SEBI To Procure BSE Records Under RTI Act Section 10 CPC Cannot Stay Previously Instituted Title Suit Pending Subsequent Probate Case; Inherent Powers Under Section 151 Inapplicable When Probate Dismissed: Calcutta High Court Mere Phone Calls Without Transcripts No Ground For Murder Conspiracy: Delhi High Court Clear Violation Of Section 42 NDPS Act': Gujarat High Court Holds Failure To Record Secret Info In Writing Fatal When Police Officer Had Time To Act JK High Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Cop Accused Of Threatening Advocate Over Phone Call Without Prior Sanction Under Section 197 CrPC Custody Unwarranted For Mere Formalities Once Weapon Is Recovered: Kerala High Court Grants Regular Bail In BNS Axe Attack Case Circumstances Of Crime Can Be Assessed During Trial: High Court Upholds Trial Of Minor As Adult Under JJ Act In Murder Case Statutory Deposit Under Order 21 Rule 89 CPC Is A Sine Qua Non; Litigant Cannot Stall Auction Sale By Merely Blaming Counsel: Madras High Court Ban Junk Food Within 50 Metres Of Schools: Rajasthan High Court Takes Suo Moto Cognizance To Enforce FSSAI Norms, Protect Children From Obesity

Judiciary cannot transgress into the domain of policy making by re-writing a statute - SC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Appeal arises from an interim order dated 2 August 2021 of a Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Madras in a batch of petitions.  The writ petitions have been instituted before the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution to challenge the validity of Rule 29(4) of the Copyright Rules 2013. The High Court has directed that no copyrighted work may be broadcast in terms of Rule 29 without issuing a prior notice. Details pertaining to the broadcast, particularly the duration, time slots and the like, including the quantum of royalty payable, must be furnished within 15 days of the broadcast or performance.  Appellants challenge the interim order of the High Court ,on the ground , has the effect of re-writing Rule 29(4) of the Rules framed in pursuance of the provisions of Section 31D and Section 78(2)(CD) of the Copyright Act 1957. Apex court observed that A judge's responsibility is to interpret and apply the law, not to change it to conform to his or her interpretation of what justice requires. A judge may not rewrite a statute, nor may he or she increase or decrease its scope. Interpolation and evisceration must be avoided in construction. The court cannot read anything into a statutory provision which is not plain and unambiguous. A statute is an edict of the legislature. The first and primary rule of construction is that the intention of the legislation must be found in the words used by the legislature itself. In the interim order, the High Court has re-written a piece of legislation. Draftsman ship is a function entrusted to the legislature. Craftsmanship on the judicial side cannot transgress into the legislative domain by re-writing the words of a statute. In this case, the court has done so at the interlocutory stage. Supreme court held that an exercise of judicial re-drafting of Rule 29(4) was unwarranted. Accordingly allow the appeals by setting aside the interim order of the High Court dated 2 August 2021. 

September 27, 2021  

Saregama India Limited  Versus  Next Radio Limited & Ors  

Latest Legal News