On Wednesday, the Kerala High Court declared that it had to adhere to Supreme Court precedent in stating that a Muslim woman can not be the guardian of her minor child and the property. The Quran or the Hadith does not prohibit the right of a Muslim woman to be a child’s guardian, but the Court said that it must respect the law as the Supreme Court defined it under Article 141 of the Constitution.

Reports state that the court was deliberating on the appeal made by C Abdul Aziz of Kallai, Kozhikode, and 12 other people, who were represented by attorney KM Firoz. The court of Justices PB Suresh and CS Sudha recognised that although Muslim personal law forbids Muslim women from acting as guardians for their minor children, it is invalid when compared with articles 14 (equality) and 15 (discrimination) of the Indian Constitution. It was emphasised again that the Court must abide by the precedents established by the Supreme Court. The Apex Court has previously ruled in several cases that a Muslim woman could not serve as a guardian for her underage children, stated the court. “It is undeniably true that women have ascended to new heights and slowly but surely stormed a number of male strongholds in the contemporary era.” As was mentioned, many Muslim-majority or Islamic nations have female heads of state. Additionally, women have taken part in space missions. However, this court is obligated to follow the Supreme Court’s rulings, “stated the Court. The appellant, meanwhile, argued by referring to the Hadith and said that the woman was recognised as the guardian of her husband’s property as well. They said that there was nothing in the Quran or Hadith that prohibited a woman from being a guardian of her son or his property. They also added that Hadiths were never considered in any of the judgments of the Supreme Court in this regard.

In contrast, the responses claimed that neither the Quran nor the Hadith endorses the concept that a mother can serve as a guardian and that several verses of the Quran explicitly support the opposite view. The Court upheld that even while the Quran did not expressly indicate that a mother could not serve as a guardian, it was not for the Court to interpret this in light of the Supreme Court’s decision. Furthermore, citing the Shayara Bano case, the Shariat Act is the only law that applies to Muslims in the situations listed in Section 2 of the act, which includes guardianship, according to the Court. The petition was filed over a partition deed in which a Muslim mother acted as a legal guardian of her son’s property. The Kerala High Court noted that the partition agreement was obligatory on the parties but disregarded the mother’s status as legal guardian.

Khushi Thapa, Mumbai Uncensored, 7th July 2022:

The Bombay High Court on Monday ordered the Maharashtra government to respond to a PIL that asks for the renaming of the Dindoshi metro train station to Pathanwadi within two weeks.

The high court ordered the petitioner to deposit Rs. 1 lakh before the hearing on June 9.

A PIL was filed by Naee Roshni social organisation by advocate Sahood Anwar Naqvi against MMRDA and others, claiming that MMRDA breached its own policies in 2019 when it renamed the station to Dindoshi under political influence. The Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA), which tried to subvert the station names on Mumbai Metro lines 2A and 7, was the subject of the appeal filed on July 18, 2019.

In spite of RTI responses noting that Dindoshi is a “revenue village” and not the “closest wadi,” the petitioner claimed that the name “Pathanwadi” was changed to “Dindoshi” under excessive political pressure and demands from two MLAs, Atul Bhatkhalkar and Sunil Prabhu. The complaint alleged that the name was “arbitrary,” hurt the citizens’ feelings, and violated their fundamental rights.

Kamaljeet Singh – Mumbai Uncensored, 22^th June 2022

On July 1, the tax-deductible At Source (TDS) will involve the advantage companies welcome to promote sales, social media influencers, and physicians. The Central  Direct Tax Commission (CBDT) has published directions on the applicability of the new provisions. 

 Social media influencers are required to pay a 10% TDS  if the product given to promote is held by the influencer. If you return the device to the company after work is complete, TDS will not apply to the product. 

 “Whether this (a product offered for social media promotion) is beneficial or accidental depends on the facts of the case. If the benefit or benefit is a product such as a car, mobile phone, costume, cosmetics, etc., used for the purpose of providing the service, and then returned to the manufacturer, it will not be treated as a benefit. Or benefit for the purposes of Section 194R (TDS Rule) of the Law, “CBDT said. 

Co-Treasurer Kamresh C. Burshney explained the benefits of free drug samples for doctors, international flights, and free  Indian Premier League (IPL) tickets for transactions.

He highlighted that these items will not be sold and should not be disclosed and hidden when filing an income tax return. 

Section 194R applies to sellers who offer cash or all kinds of incentives such as cars, computers, gold coins, mobile phones, etc. in addition to discounts. 

CBDT clarifies that Section 194R applies to the distribution of free samples to hospitals for doctors who receive free samples of medicines while employed in ṣthe hospital. As an employer, the hospital can treat such a sample as a taxable employee benefit and deduct the tax in Section 192. In such cases, a point of 20,000 will be pictured across from the hospital. 

For doctors operating as hospital consultants who receive free samples, TDS  ideally involves the hospital first and then requires a section tax deduction. 194R related to a self-subsistent doctor.