Supreme Court Removes Blanket Ban Imposed on Social Functions in Sisodia Rani ka Bagh by the NGT in 2014

Must Read

UK Supreme Court Rules in Favour of Policyholders in the COVID-19 Business Interruption Case

The United Kingdom’s Supreme Court finally concluded the long-awaited COVID-19 business interruption case brought by the Financial Conduct Authority...

Kerala High Court Disposes of Writ Petition on Grounds That Reliefs Sought Are Already in Process of Being Granted, Directs State to Complete the...

Excerpt A single-judge bench consisting of Hon’ble Justice Shircy V. gave orders on the writ petition filed by the Petitioner....

Supreme Court Directs Government To Provide Free Education To Minor Children of Rape Victims

The Deputy Commissioner of Ranchi was directed by the Supreme Court on Wednesday to make sure that minor children of rape victims are ensured free education till they attain the age of 14 years. The Court made the observation while hearing a plea filed by a woman who claimed that she belonged to the SC/ST group from Jharkhand. She was forced by a man after which her father lodged a complaint.

Aadhar Review Plea Rejected in a 4:1 Verdict by Supreme Court

The petition seeking the re-examination of the 2018 Aadhar Verdict which declares the Aadhar act constitutional and valid was dismissed by a 5-judge bench in a 4:1 verdict. In January the petitions were considered by a bench of Justices A M Khanwilkar, D Y Chandrachud, S Abdul Nazeer, Ashok Bhushan, and B R Gavai in the chamber and the order was up on the website on Wednesday.

New Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) Amendments Are Valid Says Supreme Court

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court upheld the amendments in the insolvency and bankruptcy code which makes it mandatory for a minimum of 100 or 10% of home buyers of a project to initiate insolvency proceedings against a builder for not delivering flats or commercial shops on time.

[HUL – Sebamed Ad War] Bombay High Court Passed Injunction; Permits Sebamed Ad Against HUL’s Dove

The ad war between the German personal care brand Sebamed and the consumer goods giant Hindustan Unilever Ltd (HUL) has come to an end. On January 19th, Bombay High Court passed an injunction order permitting the Sebamed ad against Hindustan Unilever’s Dove without any changes. It was observed that Sebamed ads were backed with evidence-based data. However, Sebamed was ordered to put an end to its advertisement that compared HUL soap bars Lux, Pears, and Santoor with Rin and detergent category.

Follow us

On 11.05,2020, the Supreme Court ordered the removal of the blanket ban on conducting any event in the Sisodia Rani ka Bagh. The National Green Tribunal, Central Zone, Bhopal had earlier banned the conduction of event in 2014.

Facts of the Case

The “Sisodia Rani ka Bagh” is a Historical Monument. The monument was used for ceremonial purposes like marriage. Subsequently, in 2012, the Department of Art, Literature, Culture, and Archaeology declared it as a ‘protected monument’. Thus, supervision was transferred from the Rajasthan General Development Department to the Department of Archaeological and Museums. Later, on 7.6.2012, the Department issued a notification. It contained restrictions on the conduct of the ceremonies.

Aggrieved thereby, the respondents filed a writ petition in the Rajasthan High Court. The High Court of Rajasthan transferred the matter to the NGT. The petition was for the restrain imposed on the use of the monument for ceremonial purposes. However, the Tribunal declared the monument is part of the forest area. Further, it denied permission for organizing any special functions. It also denied permission for the use of fireworks, loud music in the Monument. Implidely, there is a blanket ban on the usage of the monument.

Therefore, the appeal has been filed before the Supreme Court against the order of the Tribunal.

Arguments of the Appellant

The counsel for the appellants argued that a blanket ban on ceremonies in the monument was not justified. He submitted the following reasons:

Prohibition would adversely affect the state’s tourism. It would render the monument useless affecting its upkeep. Further, the location of the monument was ideal for holding such ceremonies. The monument’s history of holding such ceremonies attracted tourists. Moreover, it earned significant revenue for the state’s exchequer in the process.

The original application only asked for restrictions that would avoid disturbance to wildlife. Further, specific guidelines were already in place. Hence, more restrictions could be issued instead of a blanket ban.

Arguments of the Respondents

The respondent no.1- Ashish Gautam filed a writ before the High Court of Rajasthan. This Public Interest Litigation asked the Court to issue directions to protect wildlife in the area. Since this is a reserve forest area, it asked for restrictions on the use of laser lights, loud music, and fireworks in the monument.

He supported the order of the Tribunal, arguing that the restrained activities were not allowed in the forest area. Further, it was listed with the Forest Department. He stated that the notification issued on 05.02.2012 declared it as a protected monument. He submitted that conservation and restoration were bound by the same.

Observations of the Court 

The Court observed the following:

  1. The monument is open for use between 8:00 A.M to 8:00 P.M. No activity after 8:00 P.M.
  2. The use of laser lights, loud music, and fireworks is not allowed.
  3. Staff to maintain musical and other fountains in working order.
  4. Follow the conditions imposed by the Department.
  5. Appoint supervisory staff and gardeners to maintain the area.
  6. Further, prepare and place on record a beautification and horticulture development project.

Court’s Decision

The bench of Justice Arun Mishra and Justice S. Ravindra Bhat partly allowed the appeal. They proposed to supervise the beautification process themselves. The Court directed the consultant to submit a plan within one month from the date of order.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

Latest News

UK Supreme Court Rules in Favour of Policyholders in the COVID-19 Business Interruption Case

The United Kingdom’s Supreme Court finally concluded the long-awaited COVID-19 business interruption case brought by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and the Hiscox Action...

Kerala High Court Disposes of Writ Petition on Grounds That Reliefs Sought Are Already in Process of Being Granted, Directs State to Complete the...

Excerpt A single-judge bench consisting of Hon’ble Justice Shircy V. gave orders on the writ petition filed by the Petitioner. This writ is filed by...

Supreme Court Directs Government To Provide Free Education To Minor Children of Rape Victims

The Deputy Commissioner of Ranchi was directed by the Supreme Court on Wednesday to make sure that minor children of rape victims are ensured free education till they attain the age of 14 years. The Court made the observation while hearing a plea filed by a woman who claimed that she belonged to the SC/ST group from Jharkhand. She was forced by a man after which her father lodged a complaint.

Aadhar Review Plea Rejected in a 4:1 Verdict by Supreme Court

The petition seeking the re-examination of the 2018 Aadhar Verdict which declares the Aadhar act constitutional and valid was dismissed by a 5-judge bench in a 4:1 verdict. In January the petitions were considered by a bench of Justices A M Khanwilkar, D Y Chandrachud, S Abdul Nazeer, Ashok Bhushan, and B R Gavai in the chamber and the order was up on the website on Wednesday.

New Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) Amendments Are Valid Says Supreme Court

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court upheld the amendments in the insolvency and bankruptcy code which makes it mandatory for a minimum of 100 or 10% of home buyers of a project to initiate insolvency proceedings against a builder for not delivering flats or commercial shops on time.

[HUL – Sebamed Ad War] Bombay High Court Passed Injunction; Permits Sebamed Ad Against HUL’s Dove

The ad war between the German personal care brand Sebamed and the consumer goods giant Hindustan Unilever Ltd (HUL) has come to an end. On January 19th, Bombay High Court passed an injunction order permitting the Sebamed ad against Hindustan Unilever’s Dove without any changes. It was observed that Sebamed ads were backed with evidence-based data. However, Sebamed was ordered to put an end to its advertisement that compared HUL soap bars Lux, Pears, and Santoor with Rin and detergent category.

Bombay High Court Says White Collar Crimes Are More Dangerous Than Murder and Dacoity

The Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court rejected 4 petitions of 4 businessmen after observing that white-collar crimes are more serious than murder and dacoity. The businesspersons were booked for fraud of evading GST by producing fake invoices.

Right To Protection Can’t Be Granted To Married Woman Involved in Live-in Relationship: Allahabad High Court

The Bench of Allahabad High Court dismissed a petition of a live-in couple, observing that a married woman in a live-in relationship is not entitled to any sort of legal protection whatsoever. The Court remarked that they are adults and should live as ‘husband and wife’ if they want no one to interfere in their lives.

Police To Decide on the Entry of Farmers To Delhi on Republic Day Says Supreme Court

While the Supreme Court heard a plea seeking an injunction against the tractor rally that is scheduled for January 26th, it held that it is the decision of the Delhi Police officers to see whether the protesting farmers should get entry into Delhi on Republic Day.

[Sushant Singh Rajput Case]: Republic TV & Times Now Hindered Investigation Probe Says Bombay HC

In November last year, the Court had reserved its judgement on the PILs that came from 8 former police officers from Maharashtra, lawyers, activists and NGOs, seeking restraining orders against the media trial in the Sushant Singh Rajput case.

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -