``What's in a name...'' The famous Shakespearean line from Romeo and Juliet popped up during an acrimonious divorce case on Wednesday. ``A lot,'' said an aggrieved man, ``especially when my ex-wife is misusing it''. The Bombay high court concurred and in a rare order that might make divorced men smile, directed the divorced woman to stop using her former husband's name and surname.
The HC further clarified: ``ex-wife cannot use the husband's name anywhere, including in her bank account''. The landmark judgment was passed by Justice Roshan Dalvi as she dismissed a petition filed by a woman challenging an interim order of the family court in Bandra...
Friday, February 19, 2010
Law Minister cautions police against short circuiting law
Citing omissions in developing ‘a new police system’ for an independent India, Law and Justice Minister M Veerappa Moily stressed reforms that he said ‘are still continuing.’ ‘At the dawn of independence there was no demand for a new police system for the country,’ Dr Moily told a conference on quality in governance. ‘The reason for not insisting on a new police for a new society are not yet known.’ ‘No serious search has been made as to why the police and their functions are usually relegated,’ the Law Minister acknowledged at the 5th National Conclave on Leveraging Quality for Good Governance.
Its significance was clear, he pointed out, ‘when it is widely accepted that no development is possible without order and the fruits of development would not reach the intended beneficiaries in the absence of order.’ ‘It would appear the founding fathers laid emphasis on continuity and change rather than on any violent departure from the past and demolishing the existing administrative structure... When the five year plans were introduced the police was not made a plan subject.’ The conference sponsored by Quality Council of India is to discuss issues and ideas aimed at improving ‘the quality of life of the average Indian.’ Experts say sooner or later it all boils down to the quality of governance at work. The event attended among others by former Chief Justice of India J S Verma centred on Effective Governance - Judiciary and Policing.
But as Dr Moily put it, India in its long history saw governance of all kinds, proportions and dimensions and survived through them.
‘It saw the worst and the best in its 2500 years of recorded history. The governance in India now is based on this long experience. It is the collective will for good governance that is lacking in India.’ The Law Minister renewed pledges to bring in reforms in electoral laws as well as in judiciary, which he called the ‘best in the world.’ ‘In addition to the judiciary, another institution which plays an equally or perhaps an even more important role in implementation of good governance standards is the police,’ Dr Moily remarked.
‘However, it has been seen that when discussing the inputs for good governance in any society, the police is not generally prominent or even important.’ In contrast, Dr Moily cited the handling in Britain where police ‘are the instrument for enforcing the rule of law. They are the means by which civilised society maintains order that people may live safely in their homes and go freely about their lawful business.’ Quoting from the 1962 Royal Commission on the Police, Dr Moily said ‘policemen, like everybody else, are accountable to the law.
They are also the laws agents. And the uniformed policemen have for many years been recognised and accepted as the embodiment of the laws authority.’ Dr Moily quoted Anglo-Saxon police historian Charles Reith to assert that the ‘British love for order and respect for law is the result of model behaviour on the part of the British police.’ ‘The point,’ he said, ‘is that good policing plays as equally an important role as the judiciary for the attainment of the objectives of good governance.’ In India, it was not until January 1959 that the States began police reform.
As the Kerala Police Reorganisation Committee observed, the people of independent India ‘expect a different approach by the police towards the maintenance of law and order and want them to play a new role in a progressive and enlightened democracy.’ Dr Moily counted an honest and efficient judicial and police service-- not one that ‘short circuits’ law-- among the imperatives of good governance.
‘It is quite obvious and self-evident that the foundations of good governance can be laid only on a well disciplined, accountable, efficient, honest judicial and police service.
He said ‘it is futile to expect’ good governance with a police or judicial system that does not respect human rights, violates and short circuits the law, is not accountable, lacks professionalism, is high handed, corrupt and poorly trained.
‘It is thus essential that all the institutions of the government-- and the judiciary and police most prominent among them-- must pool their energies to force a good governance for the country. Only such a collective will can devolve truly good governance for the country.’
Its significance was clear, he pointed out, ‘when it is widely accepted that no development is possible without order and the fruits of development would not reach the intended beneficiaries in the absence of order.’ ‘It would appear the founding fathers laid emphasis on continuity and change rather than on any violent departure from the past and demolishing the existing administrative structure... When the five year plans were introduced the police was not made a plan subject.’ The conference sponsored by Quality Council of India is to discuss issues and ideas aimed at improving ‘the quality of life of the average Indian.’ Experts say sooner or later it all boils down to the quality of governance at work. The event attended among others by former Chief Justice of India J S Verma centred on Effective Governance - Judiciary and Policing.
But as Dr Moily put it, India in its long history saw governance of all kinds, proportions and dimensions and survived through them.
‘It saw the worst and the best in its 2500 years of recorded history. The governance in India now is based on this long experience. It is the collective will for good governance that is lacking in India.’ The Law Minister renewed pledges to bring in reforms in electoral laws as well as in judiciary, which he called the ‘best in the world.’ ‘In addition to the judiciary, another institution which plays an equally or perhaps an even more important role in implementation of good governance standards is the police,’ Dr Moily remarked.
‘However, it has been seen that when discussing the inputs for good governance in any society, the police is not generally prominent or even important.’ In contrast, Dr Moily cited the handling in Britain where police ‘are the instrument for enforcing the rule of law. They are the means by which civilised society maintains order that people may live safely in their homes and go freely about their lawful business.’ Quoting from the 1962 Royal Commission on the Police, Dr Moily said ‘policemen, like everybody else, are accountable to the law.
They are also the laws agents. And the uniformed policemen have for many years been recognised and accepted as the embodiment of the laws authority.’ Dr Moily quoted Anglo-Saxon police historian Charles Reith to assert that the ‘British love for order and respect for law is the result of model behaviour on the part of the British police.’ ‘The point,’ he said, ‘is that good policing plays as equally an important role as the judiciary for the attainment of the objectives of good governance.’ In India, it was not until January 1959 that the States began police reform.
As the Kerala Police Reorganisation Committee observed, the people of independent India ‘expect a different approach by the police towards the maintenance of law and order and want them to play a new role in a progressive and enlightened democracy.’ Dr Moily counted an honest and efficient judicial and police service-- not one that ‘short circuits’ law-- among the imperatives of good governance.
‘It is quite obvious and self-evident that the foundations of good governance can be laid only on a well disciplined, accountable, efficient, honest judicial and police service.
He said ‘it is futile to expect’ good governance with a police or judicial system that does not respect human rights, violates and short circuits the law, is not accountable, lacks professionalism, is high handed, corrupt and poorly trained.
‘It is thus essential that all the institutions of the government-- and the judiciary and police most prominent among them-- must pool their energies to force a good governance for the country. Only such a collective will can devolve truly good governance for the country.’
IOC, ONGC, SAIL, NTPC to be country’s first Maharatna companies
Four public sector behemoths--Indian Oil Corporation, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation, Steel Authority of India Limited and National Thermal Power Corporation-- are likely to become the country’s first Maharatna companies by April-May this year.
‘My department is in possession of applications from IOL, ONGC, SAIL and NTPC for Maharatna status. The papers are being scrutinised at present. The status is expected to be conferred on them in the next 60 to 90 days,’ Heavy Industries and Public Enterprises Secretary Bhaskar Chatterjee today said.
Talking to reporters on the sidelines of a programme here, Mr Chatterjee said the four PSEs who had so far been in the category of Navaratna were the only eligible companies right now to be in the exclusive club of elites.
Coal India, another public sector leader going neck to neck with the four others, would become the fifth Maharatna only after getting listed in the stock exchange, he said.
The Government had earlier decided to award the status to top state-owned companies to give them more freedom to negotiate joint ventures, investments and grow capacity.
The eligibility criteria set for Maharatna status call for a turnover of at least Rs 25,000 crore, net worth of Rs 15,000 crore and net profit of Rs. 5,000 crore for consecutive three years. A Maharatna aspirant must also be listed on the stock exchange.
‘My department is in possession of applications from IOL, ONGC, SAIL and NTPC for Maharatna status. The papers are being scrutinised at present. The status is expected to be conferred on them in the next 60 to 90 days,’ Heavy Industries and Public Enterprises Secretary Bhaskar Chatterjee today said.
Talking to reporters on the sidelines of a programme here, Mr Chatterjee said the four PSEs who had so far been in the category of Navaratna were the only eligible companies right now to be in the exclusive club of elites.
Coal India, another public sector leader going neck to neck with the four others, would become the fifth Maharatna only after getting listed in the stock exchange, he said.
The Government had earlier decided to award the status to top state-owned companies to give them more freedom to negotiate joint ventures, investments and grow capacity.
The eligibility criteria set for Maharatna status call for a turnover of at least Rs 25,000 crore, net worth of Rs 15,000 crore and net profit of Rs. 5,000 crore for consecutive three years. A Maharatna aspirant must also be listed on the stock exchange.
Allahabad HC raps CBI in Ayodhya title suit case
The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court, hearing the Ayodhya title suit, today rapped the CBI over its probe into the missing files of the Ayodhya case and disposed of the application on the matter.
A special full bench expressed its annoyance on the CBI being unable to locate all the missing files in the Ayodhya case and pointed out that it proved their inefficiency.
The court, however, maintained that the evidence, which had come up till now was enough in the case.
The bench comprising Justices S U Khan, Sudhir Agarwal and D V Sharma gave the observation on an application filed by Sunni Central Waqf Board.
The petition demanded that seven documents of the year 1949, which were in the government custody, be produced in the court for the hearing into the title suit of Ayodhya.
The court, earlier, had ordered the CBI to find the missing files after the state government said the files concerned were missing.
Later, during the investigation the agency had found some missing files.
The bench had reserved its judgement way back and today it disposed of the plea by saying that there was enough evidence in the case.
A special full bench expressed its annoyance on the CBI being unable to locate all the missing files in the Ayodhya case and pointed out that it proved their inefficiency.
The court, however, maintained that the evidence, which had come up till now was enough in the case.
The bench comprising Justices S U Khan, Sudhir Agarwal and D V Sharma gave the observation on an application filed by Sunni Central Waqf Board.
The petition demanded that seven documents of the year 1949, which were in the government custody, be produced in the court for the hearing into the title suit of Ayodhya.
The court, earlier, had ordered the CBI to find the missing files after the state government said the files concerned were missing.
Later, during the investigation the agency had found some missing files.
The bench had reserved its judgement way back and today it disposed of the plea by saying that there was enough evidence in the case.
Special court likely to fix date for argument in 26/11 case
Special Court Judge M L Tahaliyani is likely to fix the date tomorrow for argument on the evidence recorded during the trial against lone Pakistani terrorist Ajmal Amir Kasab and two other co-accused in 26/11 Mumbai terror attack.
The court would resume tomorrow, nearly a month after it concluded recording of evidence.
Special public prosecutor Ujjwal Nikam and Kasab's lawyer K P Pawar have stated that they were ready to put forth their arguments.
However, co-accused Faheem Ansari is likely to seek time to engage another lawyer following the gunning down of his counsel Shahid Azmi recently.
During the trial proceeding 610 witnesses deposed before the court and at least 40 eyewitnesses, including the injured, had identified Kasab in the court.
In the blast, more than 160 people were killed and over 250 injured on November 26, 2008 by 10 terrorists.
The court would resume tomorrow, nearly a month after it concluded recording of evidence.
Special public prosecutor Ujjwal Nikam and Kasab's lawyer K P Pawar have stated that they were ready to put forth their arguments.
However, co-accused Faheem Ansari is likely to seek time to engage another lawyer following the gunning down of his counsel Shahid Azmi recently.
During the trial proceeding 610 witnesses deposed before the court and at least 40 eyewitnesses, including the injured, had identified Kasab in the court.
In the blast, more than 160 people were killed and over 250 injured on November 26, 2008 by 10 terrorists.
Thursday, February 18, 2010
Telgi sentenced to 10 years RI
The Special Court hearing the multi-crore stamp paper racket cases on Wednesday ordered Abdul Kareem Telgi to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and pay a fine of Rs. 2 lakh. The remaining 19 persons have been ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and pay fine of Rs. 40,000.
The court on February 10 convicted Telgi and 19 others for printing and selling fake stamp papers. They were found to have indulged in counterfeiting government stamps by designing, printing, possessing, and selling such stamps as genuine stamps in Bangalore and other parts of the State.
Bangalore’s Upparpet police arrested Badruddin and Vittal Maruthi in August 2000 and recovered Rs. 53.12 lakh worth fake stamp papers from them.
The court on February 10 convicted Telgi and 19 others for printing and selling fake stamp papers. They were found to have indulged in counterfeiting government stamps by designing, printing, possessing, and selling such stamps as genuine stamps in Bangalore and other parts of the State.
Bangalore’s Upparpet police arrested Badruddin and Vittal Maruthi in August 2000 and recovered Rs. 53.12 lakh worth fake stamp papers from them.
23 prisoners escape from Chittorgarh jail
As many as 23 prisoners escaped from the district jail after snatching the service rifles of two jailers here this morning, police sources said.
The inmates fled from the jail after over powering the two jailers, who had gone in the prisoners barrack to distribute breakfast.
The prisoners beat up the two jailers and ran away after snatching their service rifles.
The inmates fled from the jail after over powering the two jailers, who had gone in the prisoners barrack to distribute breakfast.
The prisoners beat up the two jailers and ran away after snatching their service rifles.
HC declines interim relief to Sajjan Kumar in 1984 riot cases
The Delhi High Court today refused to give interim relief to former Congress MP Sajjan Kumar who is facing threat of arrest by the CBI in 1984 anti-Sikh riots cases.
It deferred the anticipatory bail application of Sajjan Kumar till Monday.
Justice A K Pathak, hearing Kumar's anticipatory bail plea, refused to restrain the CBI from arresting him till Monday.s The former MP's lawyer Amrender Sharan said Kumar was accused of the same offence earlier but was never arrested for the last 25 years.
He has faced trial in the case and was acquitted. Filing an FIR of the same offence is bad in law and should be quashed, he said.
''My client's right to life cannot be taken away by a procedure which is not sanctioned by law,'' Mr Sharan argued.
It is the violation of Article 21 of the constitution as his fundamental rights are being infringed and his liberty to life is being taken away by a procedure which is not sanctioned by law, Mr Sharan stated.
He was not arrested for the last 25 years as there was nothing against him, he added.
A battery of lawyers appearing for Kumar have filed a writ petition in the court to quash the FIR filed against him as he has already faced trial in the cases for 25 long years. A person cannot be charged twice for the same offence, Advocate I U Khan, appearing for Kumar said.
Mr Khan pleaded that the court should restrain the CBI from arresting Kumar as he has never violated any legal condition laid down in the earlier bail applications and had participated in the trial without influencing any witnesses or tampering with any evidence whatsoever, Mr Khan said.
The court, however , refused to grant any interim relief and posted the matter, of hearing the anticipatory bail application, till Monday.
It deferred the anticipatory bail application of Sajjan Kumar till Monday.
Justice A K Pathak, hearing Kumar's anticipatory bail plea, refused to restrain the CBI from arresting him till Monday.s The former MP's lawyer Amrender Sharan said Kumar was accused of the same offence earlier but was never arrested for the last 25 years.
He has faced trial in the case and was acquitted. Filing an FIR of the same offence is bad in law and should be quashed, he said.
''My client's right to life cannot be taken away by a procedure which is not sanctioned by law,'' Mr Sharan argued.
It is the violation of Article 21 of the constitution as his fundamental rights are being infringed and his liberty to life is being taken away by a procedure which is not sanctioned by law, Mr Sharan stated.
He was not arrested for the last 25 years as there was nothing against him, he added.
A battery of lawyers appearing for Kumar have filed a writ petition in the court to quash the FIR filed against him as he has already faced trial in the cases for 25 long years. A person cannot be charged twice for the same offence, Advocate I U Khan, appearing for Kumar said.
Mr Khan pleaded that the court should restrain the CBI from arresting Kumar as he has never violated any legal condition laid down in the earlier bail applications and had participated in the trial without influencing any witnesses or tampering with any evidence whatsoever, Mr Khan said.
The court, however , refused to grant any interim relief and posted the matter, of hearing the anticipatory bail application, till Monday.
Defence Ministry expects 15-20% rise in budget allocation
Defence Ministry is expecting a 15 to 20 per cent increase in its budget allocation for the next fiscal due to rise in expenditure on its modernisation drive and commitments following pay review.
Minister of State for Defence M M Pallam Raju said he expects an increase in the budgetary allocation this fiscal from 2009-10 figure of Rs Rs 1,41,703 crore.
"Certainly we are expecting an increase because of the increase in revenue expenditure, implementation of 6th Pay Commission Report. Apart from that, there is an emphasis on modernisation and new acquisitions," he said.
Keeping this in mind, Raju said, the Ministry expects an increase in the budget, which "might be 10-15 per cent or 15-20 per cent".
Minister of State for Defence M M Pallam Raju said he expects an increase in the budgetary allocation this fiscal from 2009-10 figure of Rs Rs 1,41,703 crore.
"Certainly we are expecting an increase because of the increase in revenue expenditure, implementation of 6th Pay Commission Report. Apart from that, there is an emphasis on modernisation and new acquisitions," he said.
Keeping this in mind, Raju said, the Ministry expects an increase in the budget, which "might be 10-15 per cent or 15-20 per cent".
No extra time in jail for teens who attacked Indians: Oz court
Two teenage brothers, who spent less than a year in youth detention for a brutal racial attack on a group of Indians which left one of the victims with permanent brain injuries, will not spend any further time in custody, an Australian court ruled on Wednesday.
Victorian county court judge Christine Thornton said the 12-month detention order for the brothers, now aged 17 and 18 respectively, by the Children's Court last year over the 2008 incident, was lenient but should stand because of the delay in bringing an appeal against the sentence, AAP reported.
Victorian county court judge Christine Thornton said the 12-month detention order for the brothers, now aged 17 and 18 respectively, by the Children's Court last year over the 2008 incident, was lenient but should stand because of the delay in bringing an appeal against the sentence, AAP reported.
IMF to start sales of 191.3 tonnes of gold soon
The International Monetary Fund on Wednesday said it will shortly begin selling 191.3 tonnes of gold in the open market under a program approved last year to boost its resources for lending.
To avoid disruptions of the gold market, the IMF said the sales "will be conducted in a phased manner over time." The fund left the door open for central banks to keep buying the gold directly from the IMF.
The IMF announced last year it would sell a total of 403.3 tonnes of gold, about one-eighth of its total stock, to diversify its sources of income and increase low-cost lending to poor countries.
To avoid disruptions of the gold market, the IMF said the sales "will be conducted in a phased manner over time." The fund left the door open for central banks to keep buying the gold directly from the IMF.
The IMF announced last year it would sell a total of 403.3 tonnes of gold, about one-eighth of its total stock, to diversify its sources of income and increase low-cost lending to poor countries.
New Blog for Indian Legal Research
I would like to highlight the Legal Research India blog recently started by Arjun Sheoran, student at the National Law School of India University. Essentially, the blog allows readers/users to search the web for relevant legal materials. The search is a Google custom search; with the advantage that it is restricted to some selected websites, listed here – so the results are likely to be more relevant for those engaged in Indian legal research than a general Google search. According to the homepage of the blog, “Legal Research India provides customized search engines for legal research for Indian and foreign law as it searches relevant websites only. It can be used searching for judgments, legislations, articles, journals, reports or any other legal information/material from India, UK, USA or any other jurisdiction…” I have not used it too much yet; but in the couple of instances when I did use it, I found it extremely helpful. I hope the readers of this blog find it useful too.
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Court-martial Proceedings and Article 33 of the Constitution
With reports that Lt.-Gen. Avadesh Prakash will be court-martialled; it might be an appropriate time to visit some of the legal provisions in this connection. The allegations against the officer are (going by a recent NDTV report) that “Lieutenant General Avadesh Prakash was indicted by an army inquiry of using his position to help a businessman in Siliguri in West Bengal . The internal investigation found that Prakash influenced officers to permit a real estate developer to acquire 71 acres next to the Army's 33 Corps Headquarters in Siliguri in West Bengal . The Army, which had earlier told the government that this land could not be sold to any commercial developer for security reasons, okayed the transfer of the land to Agarwal.”
”45. Unbecoming conduct. Any officer, junior commissioned officer or warrant officer who behaves in a manner unbecoming his position and the character expected of him shall, on conviction by court-martial, if he is an officer, be liable to be cashiered or to suffer such less punishment as is in this Act mentioned; and, if he is a junior commissioned officer or a warrant officer, be liable to be dismissed or to suffer such less punishment as is in this Act mentioned.”
This Section was recently considered by the Supreme Court in M.M. Malhotra v. Union of India, AIR 2006 SC 80; and the words “manner unbecoming his position and the character expected of him” appear to be of very wide import. The scheme of the Act and the procedure to be followed in a court-martial has been explained in Lt.-Col. P.P.S. Bedi v. Union of India,AIR 1982 SC 1413. Other Sections which might have a possible application include Sections 52, 53 etc. The procedure in relation to a court-martial is found in Chapter X of the Army Act. The power to convene a general court-martial may be exercised by the chief of army staff under Section 109. The question of to what extent these (and other) provisions of the Act are consistent with Part III of the Constitution of India, 1950 has also been considered by the Courts. A challenge to provisions of the Act will be extremely difficult, if not impossible, due to Article 33 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court explained the position thus in Lt.-Col. P.P.S. Bedi v. Union of India, AIR 1982 SC 1413:
“… Article 33 confers power on the Parliament to determine to what extent any of the rights conferred by Part III shall, in their application to the members of the Armed Forces, be restricted or abrogated so as to ensure the proper discharge of duties and maintenance of discipline amongst them. Article 33 does not obligate that Parliament must specifically adumbrate each fundamental right enshrined in Part III and to specify in the law enacted in exercise of the power conferred by Article 33 the degree of restriction or total abrogation of each right. That would be reading into Article 33 a requirement which it does not enjoin. In fact, after the Constitution came into force, the power to legislate in respect of any item must be referrable to an entry in the relevant list. Entry 2 in list I: Naval, Military and Air Force and any other Armed Forces of the Union, would enable Parliament to enact the Army Act and armed with this power the Act was enacted in July, 1950. It has to be enacted by the Parliament subject to the requirements of Part III of the Constitution read with Article 33 which itself forms part of Part III . Therefore, every provision of the Army Act enacted by the Parliament, if in conflict with the fundamental rights conferred by Part III , shall have to be read subject to Article 33 as being enacted with a view to either restricting or abrogating other fundamental rights to the extent of inconsistency or repugnancy between Part III of the Constitution and the Army Act…”
All 13 chargesheeted in Shopian case granted bail in Kashmir
All the 13 people, including doctors and lawyers, who were chargesheeted by the Central Bureau of Investigation in Shopian double rape and murder case, were granted bail by a local court here today.
Hearing the case, the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM), Srinagar, granted bail to all the accused on a surety of Rs 10,000 each.
The next date of hearing has been fixed for April 17.
The CBI in its chargesheet has alleged that the accused, including former public prosecutor in the Shopian case, had threatened and forced the witnesses to make false statement against the police.
It said doctors were accused of having fudged the reports in the case.
People of the area alleged that both the women Neelofar and Asiya were murdered after their rape.
However, the CBI in its report has said that the women had died due to drowning in the river.
The recovery of bodies had evoked massive protests in the Kashmir valley for about a week. However, Shopian observed about 45 day-strike which was called off following assurance by Justice Gosh that culprits would not be spared.
Hearing the case, the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM), Srinagar, granted bail to all the accused on a surety of Rs 10,000 each.
The next date of hearing has been fixed for April 17.
The CBI in its chargesheet has alleged that the accused, including former public prosecutor in the Shopian case, had threatened and forced the witnesses to make false statement against the police.
It said doctors were accused of having fudged the reports in the case.
People of the area alleged that both the women Neelofar and Asiya were murdered after their rape.
However, the CBI in its report has said that the women had died due to drowning in the river.
The recovery of bodies had evoked massive protests in the Kashmir valley for about a week. However, Shopian observed about 45 day-strike which was called off following assurance by Justice Gosh that culprits would not be spared.
Life sentence to 1993 blast convicts means 60 yrs in jail: Maharashtra govt
The 1993 serial bomb blasts convicts, who have been awarded life imprisonment by the designated TADA court, will have to serve at least 60 years in jail and they cannot get the same concession as the other TADA convicts undergoing life sentence, the Maharashtra government told the Bombay High Court recently.
Four convicts in the 1993 blasts case - Niyaz Mohammad, Moin Qureshi, Ali Shaikh Umar and Salim Mira Shaikh alias Salim Kutta - had moved the High Court, seeking release. All of them have served the mandatory 14 years of their life sentence.
Advocate N N Gawankar, their lawyer, argued that according to the 1992 prison guidelines, they should be released after serving 30 years. But the government recently issued a notification saying that they would have to serve at least 60 years in jail.
Four convicts in the 1993 blasts case - Niyaz Mohammad, Moin Qureshi, Ali Shaikh Umar and Salim Mira Shaikh alias Salim Kutta - had moved the High Court, seeking release. All of them have served the mandatory 14 years of their life sentence.
Advocate N N Gawankar, their lawyer, argued that according to the 1992 prison guidelines, they should be released after serving 30 years. But the government recently issued a notification saying that they would have to serve at least 60 years in jail.
Jharkhand HC directs ED to file affidavit against Madu Koda and associates
The Jharkhand High Court directed the Enforcement Director (ED) to file an affidavit by February 23 mentioning the action taken against former chief minister Madhu Koda and three other former ministers’ chargesheeted in connection with the Disproportionate Assets case.
A division bench of Chief Justice Gyan Sudha Mishra and Justice R R Prasad passed the order while hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by one Durga Oraon.
During the course of argument the court also directed the vigilance department to file an affidavit stating the grounds on which the former ministers and Koda were chargesheeted.
Koda and the former ministers Kamlesh Singh, Anosh Ekka and Harinarayan Rai, facing charges in the DA case, are at present lodged in the Birsa Munda jail.
A division bench of Chief Justice Gyan Sudha Mishra and Justice R R Prasad passed the order while hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by one Durga Oraon.
During the course of argument the court also directed the vigilance department to file an affidavit stating the grounds on which the former ministers and Koda were chargesheeted.
Koda and the former ministers Kamlesh Singh, Anosh Ekka and Harinarayan Rai, facing charges in the DA case, are at present lodged in the Birsa Munda jail.
SC Directs to file amended petition in Bofors gun case
The Supreme Court directed the petitioner in Bofors Guns scandal case to file within two weeks the amended petition.
A bench headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan adjourned the hearing of the case till March 23.
The petitioner, Ajay Kumar Agarwal had sought directions to the Union Government not to permit the release of Ottavio Quattrocchi, a family friend of Gandhi family who is the main suspect in Rs 64 crore Bofors Gun scandal.
The apex court directed the petitioner to amend the prayer as Quattrocchi has already been released.
The Union Government has already decide to close the case against Quattrocchi, and the CBI has filed an application for closure of the case in the court of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate of Delhi as there was no evidence against Quattrocchi.
A bench headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan adjourned the hearing of the case till March 23.
The petitioner, Ajay Kumar Agarwal had sought directions to the Union Government not to permit the release of Ottavio Quattrocchi, a family friend of Gandhi family who is the main suspect in Rs 64 crore Bofors Gun scandal.
The apex court directed the petitioner to amend the prayer as Quattrocchi has already been released.
The Union Government has already decide to close the case against Quattrocchi, and the CBI has filed an application for closure of the case in the court of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate of Delhi as there was no evidence against Quattrocchi.
Delhi HC granted one day anticipatory bail to Sajjan Kumar
The Delhi High Court granted one day anticipatory bail to Congress leader and former MP Sajjan Kumar in two 1984 anti-Sikh riot cases.
Justice SL Bhayana granted the bail till tomorrow when the case will come up for hearing before the regular bench.
The Congress leader, who was facing arrest following the lower court denying him bail, had moved the High Court yesterday for the anticipatory bail.
His petition mentioned him pleading how the lower court had wrongly rejected his plea on the ground that only the court, which had issued summons, can grant him bail.
The CBI had chargesheeted 13 people, including Kumar, on January 13 in two separate 84 riots cases for allegedly making provocative speeches, leading to the killing of 12 people in the riots in the aftermath of assassination of then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi.
Justice SL Bhayana granted the bail till tomorrow when the case will come up for hearing before the regular bench.
The Congress leader, who was facing arrest following the lower court denying him bail, had moved the High Court yesterday for the anticipatory bail.
His petition mentioned him pleading how the lower court had wrongly rejected his plea on the ground that only the court, which had issued summons, can grant him bail.
The CBI had chargesheeted 13 people, including Kumar, on January 13 in two separate 84 riots cases for allegedly making provocative speeches, leading to the killing of 12 people in the riots in the aftermath of assassination of then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi.
SC adjourns disproportionate assets case against Lalu, Rabri
The Supreme Court adjourned till February 25 the hearing of the disproportionate assets case against former Railway Minister Lalu Prasad Yadav and his wife Rabri Devi, a former Chief Minister of Bihar.
Mr Yadav, his wife and the CBI have challenged the decision of the Patna High Court to entertain the petition filed by the Bihar government against the order of the trial court discharging both RJD leaders in the case. According to the petitioner, since the cbi was a prosecuting agency, the state government had no locus standi to challenge the order of the trial court. Only the CBI could challenge it.
The State government went in appeal to the High Court when the CBI decided not to challenge the acquittal orders. Mr Yadav was Railway Minister in the UPA government at that time.
Mr Yadav, his wife and the CBI have challenged the decision of the Patna High Court to entertain the petition filed by the Bihar government against the order of the trial court discharging both RJD leaders in the case. According to the petitioner, since the cbi was a prosecuting agency, the state government had no locus standi to challenge the order of the trial court. Only the CBI could challenge it.
The State government went in appeal to the High Court when the CBI decided not to challenge the acquittal orders. Mr Yadav was Railway Minister in the UPA government at that time.
SC, HC’s can order CBI probe without centre’s consent
The Supreme Court held that it and the High Courts can order CBI investigation even without prior consent of the Centre or the concerned state governments.
A constitution bench comprising Chief Justice of India K G Balakrishnan , Justices R V Raveendran, D K Jain, P Sathasivam and J M Panchal delivered the judgement.
The main contention of the petition was that court cannot order CBI investigation in a case unless and until the concerned state government agreed to hand over the probe to the agency.
The apex court, rejecting the contention, noted that the High Courts and the Supreme Court are custodians and protectors of fundamental rights of the citizens. As every citizen is entitled to free and fair investigation, the State cannot be permitted to deprive the victims of a crime or malicious prosecution of their rights to get justice through such a probe.
The operative portion of the judgement was read out by Justice Jain.
A constitution bench comprising Chief Justice of India K G Balakrishnan , Justices R V Raveendran, D K Jain, P Sathasivam and J M Panchal delivered the judgement.
The main contention of the petition was that court cannot order CBI investigation in a case unless and until the concerned state government agreed to hand over the probe to the agency.
The apex court, rejecting the contention, noted that the High Courts and the Supreme Court are custodians and protectors of fundamental rights of the citizens. As every citizen is entitled to free and fair investigation, the State cannot be permitted to deprive the victims of a crime or malicious prosecution of their rights to get justice through such a probe.
The operative portion of the judgement was read out by Justice Jain.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)