Current Affairs

DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS (02 APRIL 2025)

by | Apr 2, 2025

Bombay HC on illegal crematorium, TADA court on Tiger Memon’s property transfer.

Bombay HC on illegal crematorium, TADA court on Tiger Memon’s property transfer.
Bombay HC orders demolition of an illegal crematorium, while TADA court transfers Tiger Memon’s seized properties to the government.

DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS (02 APRIL 2025)

BOMBAY HIGH COURT RULES AGAINST ILLEGAL CREMATORIUM IN NAVI MUMBAI

CASE: Lakhani’s Blue Waves CHS & Anr. vs. The Chairman, CIDCO

The Bombay High Court ruled that citizens cannot demand cremation or burial at a specific site, ordering the demolition of an illegal crematorium in Navi Mumbai’s Ulwe. The Court emphasized adherence to CIDCO’s approved development plan, citing environmental concerns and the impact on nearby residential areas, schools, and playgrounds.

LEGAL PROVISION 
  • City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd. (CIDCO) Development Plan
  • Environmental Protection Act, 1986
  • Municipal laws governing land use and zoning regulations

SOURCE: Bombay High Court

TADA COURT ORDERS TRANSFER OF TIGER MEMON’S SEIZED PROPERTIES TO CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

CASE: The Competent Authority, SAFEMA vs. CBI and Ors.

A TADA court ordered the release of 14 properties linked to 1993 Mumbai blasts accused Tiger Memon to the Central government. These properties, seized under SAFEMA, had been attached for nearly three decades. The ruling clears the way for government possession and lifts previous attachment orders.

LEGAL PROVISION 
  • Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA), 1987
  • Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act (SAFEMA), 1976

SOURCE: Special Court, Bomaby 

 SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS HC ORDER ON SAMBHAL MASJID WHITEWASHING COSTS

CASE: Satish Kumar Aggarwal vs. Committee of Management, Shahi Jama Masjid, Sambhal & Ors. (Diary No. 14755-2025)

The Supreme Court dismissed an appeal against the Allahabad High Court’s order directing the ASI to whitewash Sambhal Jama Masjid, with costs reimbursed by the mosque committee. The court ruled that preserving the structure is the authorities’ duty but upheld the cost burden on the mosque committee.

LEGAL PROVISION 
  • Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958
  • Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991

SOURCE: Supreme Court of India

Also Read:  DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS (01 APRIL 2025)

 

 

 

 

 

Written By Vishakha Khatri

My name is Vishakha Khatri. I am an engineering graduate and a civil service aspirant with a passion for spreading knowledge about Indian polity. I believe that understanding our political system is crucial for every citizen, and I am committed to making this information accessible to everyone in my own easy way. Through my experiences in civil service preparation and my unique perspective as an engineering graduate, I hope to inspire and educate others on the importance of Indian polity.

Related Posts