Online news channel!

Tag: advocate

Sharad Yadav moves Delhi HC against disqualification from Rajya Sabha

Former JD(U) President Sharad Yadav today moved the Delhi High Court seeking setting aside of his disqualification from the Rajya Sabha.Yadav, in his plea, said he was not given any chance by the authorities before passing an order against him. Yadav, along with another MP Ali Anwar, was disqualified from the Rajya Sabha on December 4. Yadav had joined hands with the opposition after JD(U) president and Bihar chief minister Nitish Kumar dumped the Grand Alliance with RJD and Congress in Bihar and tied up with the BJP in July this year.The Rajya Sabha chairman had agreed to the JD(U)’s contention that the two senior leaders had “voluntarily given up” their membership by defying the party’s directives and attending events of opposition parties. The JD(U) had sought their disqualification on the grounds that they had attended a rally of opposition parties in Patna in violation of its direction.Also readOut of Rajya Sabha, Sharad Yadav to move courtYadav was elected to the House last year and his term was scheduled to end in 2022. Anwar’s term was to expire early next year. Advocate Nizam Pasha, who filed the plea on the behalf of the leader, said the matter regarding which faction is the real Janta Dal was sub-judice and a final decision is yet to be passed.

Join the discussion<!–end of artlbotbor–>

Delhi High Court pulls up DDA, MCDs over land for Mohalla Clinics

The Delhi High Court on Monday admonished the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) and other civic bodies for failing to provide land for the construction of Mohalla Clinics in the national Capital.A bench of Acting Chief Justice Gita Mittal and Justice C Hari Shankar warned the DDA of initiating contempt proceedings against its counsel for his failure to inform the court about the location of 245 sites proposed by the AAP government for Mohalla (locality) Clinics.“We had passed a specific direction on the last date of hearing to examine the feasibility of sorting out the difficulties with regard to the Mohalla Clinics on the proposed sites. It seems the authorities concerned are not proceeding in the matter,” the bench observed.The court directed the Principal Secretary of the Delhi government to convene a meeting with all bodies – DDA and all MCDs – to examine the feasibility of the land identified for these clinics. It also asked the agencies to submit a status report in this matter, thereby fixing the next date of hearing to January 5. During the proceedings, the Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board (DUSIB) and Delhi Metro informed the court that they have identified 107 and around 20 sites respectively, for which no objection certificate has also been obtained from the authorities. Appearing for the AAP government, its counsel Sanjoy Ghosh informed the court that they have undertaken a massive exercise and identified possible sites where local clinics can be located.The court was hearing NGO Justice for All’s plea for direction to the authorities to allot adequate number of plots for construction of these clinics with permission to raise the appropriate temporary structures to run them. Advocate Khagesh B Jha, appearing for the petitioner had alleged that the LG has now approved the scheme of Mohalla Clinics but the multiplicity of agencies and difference of opinion among them has led to the scheme working at a slow pace.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consecwq tetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore
Yogi Adityanath

–>

Join the discussion<!–end of artlbotbor–>

Want police protection in Maharashtra ? You must foot the bill

The Maharashtra government today told the Bombay High Court that it has revised its police protection policy wherein only those private citizens would be provided security who have a real threat to their life and they would have to foot the bill for it.Appearing for the state government, Advocate General Ashutosh Kumbhakoni told a bench of Chief Justice Manjula Chellur and Justice MS Sonak that citizens could not make a claim to receive police protection as a matter of “right”.”They must also not think that police protection is a service provided by the state that they can avail simply by paying the service charge,” he said.As per the new policy submitted by Kumbhakoni today, all private citizens, including celebrities, would henceforth receive police protection only if a real threat to their lives was perceived.”And all those private persons, whose applications for such protection is approved by the state authorities, will have to pay fees for the same in advance, or deposit a bank guarantee in lieu of the same,” the top legal officer said.He said the revised fees for such protection would be computed on a new formula that would take into account several considerations, including the salaries of the police personnel deployed as bodyguards.”Such fees, however, will not exceed 15 per cent of the total monthly income of the person receiving police protection,” he told the High Court.Also, people, with monthly income less than Rs 50,000, need not pay any fees if their applications for police protection were approved.”Politicians who get bodyguards to accompany them while on official duty, and government and semi-government staff, who get police protection to help discharge public duties, however, will not have to pay any fees for such protection,” the advocate general said.The revisions in the policy were made in compliance with a previous order of the high court directing the state government to streamline its process of providing police protection to politicians as well as private persons.Earlier this week, the bench headed by the chief justice had directed the government to recover dues from all such private persons who enjoyed police protection for years but failed to pay for it.The bench had also directed the state to ensure a periodic review of the status of each applicant to ensure that one was not given police protection indefinitely irrespective of any threat perception to his life.The bench was hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by a lawyer seeking directions to the state police to recover dues from VIPs, including politicians and film actors, who were provided security cover, but did not pay the charges for the same.Stressing that the government would ensure that all pending dues for police protection were recovered, Kumbhakoni said a state-level committee headed by the director general of police would henceforth review the status of all such persons every six months.He said the state had also amended its decision to not grant any protection to people with a criminal record.”Such applications will be scrutinised on a case to case basis and the deserving applicants will be given protection,” he said.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consecwq tetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore
Yogi Adityanath

–>

Join the discussion<!–end of artlbotbor–>

SC rejects woman’s plea claiming to be Jayalalithaa’s biological daughter

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Supreme Court today refused to entertain the plea of a woman who claimed to be the biological daughter of late Tamil Nadu Chief Minister J Jayalalithaa.A bench of Justices M B Lokur and Deepak Gupta refused to allow her prayer for DNA test to know her parentage as she claimed to have been given in adoption to Jaya’s sister and her husband. Senior Advocate Indira Jaising, who appeared for the woman, also sought cremation of Jayalalithaa as per Hindu rites on the grounds that she was an Iyengar Brahmin. She said there were two witnesses when the child was given for adoption and the petitioner had come to know about her real parentage only when her adopted father was on his death bed.”There is a politically charged-up atmosphere in Tamil Nadu and this case should be transferred outside the state as infighting is going on in the ruling political party,” she said. Jaising said in order to establish her real parentage, DNA test should be allowed to be conducted on the woman as she has the right to know about her biological parents.”In this society, it is very difficult for an unwed mother to keep the child. Therefore (she) was given to Jaya’s sister who resided in Bangalore and there were two eyewitnesses to the incident,” the senior lawyer said. The court, however, said the petitioner is at liberty to approach the high court.

Noted jurist Habibullah Basha passes away at 84

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Veteran lawyer Habibullah Basha, one of the finest jurists of the Madras Bar, passed away here on Wednesday after a prolonged illness.A philanthropist and founder-director of the Apollo Hospitals, 84-year old Basha died at his house, the Madras Bar Association said.Basha is survived by wife Shyamala Basha, his college-mate, a son and two daughters.During his more than five-decade long career, Basha had held various law officers post such as the central government standing counsel and Tamil Nadu Advocate General and public prosecutor.A junior of legendary lawyer Govind Swaminathan, Basha turned down a high court judgeship offered to him when he was aged just 37.In 1986, he declined a offer for direct appointment as a Supreme Court Judge.Born into an affluent family on March 8, 1933, Basha after schooling at convents here did his graduation and post-graduation in Islamic studies.Later he obtained Law degree from the Madras Law College and enrolled himself as an advocate in 1957.Basha become senior central government standing counsel ten years later and was appointed Tamil Nadu State Public Prosecutor in 1974 and went on to become the Advocate General in 1991.He had represented DMK President M Karunanidhi in a case registered against him for burning a copy of the Constitution.The veteran lawyer had appeared for late chief minister Jayalalithaa when she was involved in a bitter factional wrangle to get possession of the AIADMK headquarters here in late 1980s.Basha had moved the Madras High Court against obstructions put up in connection with the infamous wedding of Jayalalitha’s then foster son V N Sudhagaran in 1995 and argued as party in person.Three of his juniors became judges of the Madras High Court. Among them is present judge Justice N Kirubakaran.

Sharad Yadav faction of JD(U) moves Delhi HC against EC verdict on party symbol

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –> An MLA from the Sharad Yadav faction of Janata Dal (United) on Tuesday approached the Delhi High Court challenging the Election Commission order rejecting its petition staking claim to party symbol ‘Arrow’ and recognising Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar-led faction as the real JD (U).Gujarat legislator Chottubhai Vasava, who is the acting president of Yadav’s faction, mentioned the matter before a bench headed by the acting Chief Justice Gita Mittal for urgent hearing on the issue in view of Gujarat Assembly polls. Advocate Nizam Pasha, appearing for Vasava, told the bench also comprising Justice C Hari Shankar, that Election Commission’s November 17 order should be quashed as it has “gravely erred” in granting JD(U)’s official symbol, Arrow, to the Nitish Kumar faction.After a brief hearing, the bench listed the matter for urgent hearing tomorrow. Advocate Gopal Singh, appearing for Nitish Kumar’s faction, opposed the plea saying the Election Commission of India has heard the matter on different occasions and has rightly passed its directions.Kumar and Yadav parted ways after the former decided to join hands with the BJP in July, triggering a battle for the control of the party. The EC, in its order, had said that the group led by Kumar “has demonstrated overwhelming majority support” in the legislature wing as well as the majority in the national council of the party, which is the apex organisational body of the JD(U).

Can’t give parole to consummate marriage: HC to convict’s wife

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Bombay High Court recently rejected an application filed by a woman seeking her husband to be released on parole for 90 days to consummate their marriage. The court rejected the plea since parole rules don’t acknowledge conjugal rights as reason for leave from prison.A division bench of Justices V K Tahilramani and M S Karnik turned down the plea of a wife, who had submitted that her husband, a convict under Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA), be released from prison on parole. The court, relying on Rule 19 of the Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959, said, “The ground on which the parole is being sought is not one on which the prisoner can be released on parole. Hence, we cannot entertain this petition.”Advocate Apeksha Vora, appearing for the woman, argued that the accused, who is sentenced to life imprisonment, had been released on temporary bail by the High Court in 2014 to get married. After attending post-marriage functions, he was brought back to prison on June 2, 2014. Thereafter, he has been lodged at the Kolhapur prison.Further, it was argued that if the convict can be allowed to get married after conviction, then he should be allowed to consummate his marriage. Convict Abhijit Babar is co-accused in a case filed under various sections of MCOCA.

Chennai floods: Following electrocution of two girls, HC orders Rs 10 lakh compensation each to next of kin

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Madras High Court on Saturday took a serious view of the electrocution of two minor girls after they stepped on a live wire submerged in rain water and directed the Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation (TANGEDCO) to pay Rs 10 lakh compensation each to next of kin.”Keeping live wires open smacks of criminal negligence. The respondents shall ensure that all naked wires in the city are sealed and that adequate steps are taken to ensure that such incidents do not take place in future,” the court said.The bench headed by Chief Justice Indira Banerjee and Justice M Sundar, took suo motu notice of the incident after a mention was made by Advocate George Williams yesterday.Additional Advocate General Manishankar submitted that already Rs two lakh each were paid to the bereaved families while Advocate Williams sought a compensation of Rs 25 lakh.The negligence on the part of TANGEDCO to maintain the electricity supply boxes and wires in a good condition had scattered the dreams of their parents to make them engineers or doctors, Williams told the bench.After hearing their submissions, the bench said Rs 10 lakh shall be paid to the respective families within seven days after deducting the amount of Rs 2 lakh which was already paid.The two girls were electrocuted when they stepped on a live wire submerged in water while playing at Kondungaiyur area in the city on November 1.

Journalist J Dey murder case: Prosecution’s prime witness becomes untraceable

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The prosecution on Wednesday had informed the MCOCA court that the prime witness in the journalist Jyotirmoy Dey’s murder case, an eye witness had become untraceable. The court has directed the prosecution to find the witness till the time the prosecution does not complete providing its evidence, however if not found till then, then the court would not waste its time searching him, but would proceed with the case ahead.The prosecution also held that if the agency fails to find him in next 15-20 days, which is the estimated time to complete the evidence, then the prosecution would drop his name from examination.Special public prosecutor, Pradeep Gharat while speaking to DNA confirmed the fact, but added that his team is still searching for the witness. “Our officers had been to the house of the witness to serve summons, when they were informed by the witnesses’ family members that the identity of the witness has been allegedly leaked to the accused and who have allegedly threatened him with consequences. Thus, the witness is afraid to come on record and has gone missing and even the family is not in a position to inform us about his address.”Advocate Gharat further added that till date the prosecution has examined 145 witnesses in the matter and is yet to examine eight to ten more witnesses. “I have informed the cops that they have still 15-20 days to find the witness and if they fail in tracing him, then we shall drop his name,”Gharat added.Dey, a veteran crime reporter, was shot dead near his residence at Hiranandani Gardens in Powai on June 11, 2011, by motorcycle-borne shooters allegedly at Rajan’s command. Four persons on two bikes fired at Dey, who was also riding a bike. After the attack, he was rushed to a nearby hospital where he was declared brought dead.

Junaid lynching: Trial court judge says senior govt lawyer helping accused, seeks action

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Additional District and Sessions Judge who is hearing Junaid Khan lynching case has said that a senior government lawyer was helping accused and sought an action.Seventeen-year-old Junaid was stabbed to death when he, along with his brothers, was returning home to Khandwali village after shopping for Eid in Delhi on June 22.YS Rathore, in an interim order on October 25 said that Additional Advocate General Naveen Kaushik was assisting the counsel of the main accused, Naresh Kumar, in cross-examination of prosecution witnesses, reported Indian Express.Citing court record, the report says that the judge said Kaushik was ‘suggesting questions to be put to the witnesses’ at two hearings.He also added that in case Naveen Kaushik appears along with the defence counsel, it will create a feeling of insecurity amongst the victim party. Kaushik’s act amounts to professional misconduct and is against legal ethics, the judge said. However, Kaushik told the daily that he has no connection with the case and was there as counsel appearing for one of the accused is known to him.“It is a wrong impression. I was giving him the provisions of law regarding Hindi language, said Kaushik when asked about the judge specifically mentioning that he was suggesting questions to the defence counselHe added that it was relevant to court proceedings since the evidence was being recorded and there is no provision for translation of evidence in English. It can only be translated when both the parties agree to it.”The Junaid case is being tried as ‘State of Haryana Vs Naresh Kumar’.The accused, Naresh Kumar has ‘confessed’ to having stabbed the victim but insisted that the murder was not related to the beef issue.Naresh Kumar, a resident of Palwal in Haryana, was working as a security guard in a Delhi firm.The fight between the victim and his brothers and the accused in the train started at Okhla railway station in Delhi while the stabbing took place at a station Ballabgarh onwards.Junaid was stabbed to death while his brothers, Hashim and Sakir, were injured by a mob which also allegedly hurled communal slurs against them.His brothers had claimed the attackers had taunted and repeatedly called them ‘anti-nationals’ and ‘beef eaters’.

Amit Shah targets CPM over political violence in Kerala

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Trying to make deep inroads in Left bastion of Kerala, the BJP managed to create a flutter in the State capital on Tuesday by carrying out a procession of about 10,000 people.BJP chief Amit Shah who led the six kilometer-long foot march on the culmination of 15 days long Janaraksha Yathra lashed out at the CPM government led by Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan for fueling the violence against RSS and BJP workers.Adressing an enthusiastic crowd at Putharikkandam grounds in the heart of state capital, Shah accused CPM of going on a murdering spree whenever in power.”Even after 70 years of independence, if the CPM thinks that it can suppress ideology through violence I challenge them they cannot stop BJP’s ideology,” said Shah amid applause. Though Shah spoke in Hindi with the help of an interpreter, he managed to have audience’s rapt attention.Taking a dig at CPM general secretary Sitaram Yechury who accused BJP for laying a siege of CPM’s headquarters in Delhi, Shah asked, “He calls it’s unprecedented and undemocratic but I want to ask him is bombing our offices democracy?”Shah also asked Vijayan to talk to the BJP on development issues saying that it was under Prime Minister Modi’s government Kerala got a share of Rs1,03, 848 crore by the 14 th finance commission. Under the UPA-I government Kerala got paltry sum of Rs14,393 crore.In the build up to Shah’s speech, several state BJP leaders addressed the rally including state chief Kumbhana Rajshekharan, district president of Thiruvananthapuram, Advocate Suresh and Tushar Vellapally.”Today’s rally strength has shown that the BJP is number one party in Thiruvananthapuram. It’s going to win hands down in the next elections,” said Advocate Suresh in a fiery speech.Rajshekharan, the BJP’s tallest leader in Kerala questioned Vijayan for not taking any action against Transport minister Thomas Chandy whose name came up in amassing huge land tracts. He also raised question mark on why the person responsible for burning two people alive in Palaghat was made the block President by Vijayan.Several leaders of BJP including general secretary Ramlal, ministers KJ Alphonse, Ashwani Choubey were also present at the rally.

Watch: Never-seen-before look of Sushma Swaraj on Karwa Chauth

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Married Hindu women in various parts of the country observed a day long fast on Sunday. Marking the day as Karwa Chauth women were on a fast and prayed for the long lives and well being of their husbands. External affairs minister Sushma Swaraj also observed the fast for her husband on Karwa Chauth. Like a typical Indian wife she was draped in a red saree and was seen performing all the rituals with great devotion. Sushma Swaraj well known for her prompt replies and rescue operations was all dressed best for the day and celebrated the festival with other married women in Delhi. Married to former Mizoram Governor Swaraj Kaushal, both of them tied a knot during the times of emergency on 13th July 1975. Swaraj Kaushal is an Indian criminal lawyer practising in New Delhi. He was designated Senior Advocate by the Supreme Court of IndiaThe couple have a daughter, Bansuri, who is a graduate from Oxford University and a Barrister at Law from Inner Temple.

Supreme Court order on firecracker ban expected Monday

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Days before Diwali, the Supreme Court reserved its order on a plea seeking a restoration of the ban on the sale of firecrackers in the Delhi-National Capital Region. In the 2016 order, the apex court had suspended all licences that permitted the wholesale and retail sale of firecrackers within the territory of NCR.However, last month, the top court modified its order, which though allowing the sale of firecrackers, imposed conditions and restricted the number of licenses issued. The Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) also supported the plea before a bench headed by Justice AK Sikri.”It is farcical for the top court to ban fireworks after Diwali, but to restore it before the next Diwali. The ban has not been tested for even one season,” Advocate Gopal Sankarnarayan said.Appearing for the petitioner, Arjun Gopal, Sankarnarayan submitted that extensive use of firecrackers was one of the reasons for the rise in air pollution during Diwali last year.However, counsels appearing for the permanent licencees selling crackers, opposed the plea and said that the September 12 order lifting the ban was “well-reasoned” and passed after hearing all the parties, including the CPCB.Firecrackers were not the main culprit resulting in the exponential rise of air pollution, the counsels submitted.The bench, while reserving the order, said it would try to deliver the verdict on Monday.The first petition regarding the matter was filed in 1985 by MC Mehta. The September 12 order came on the heels of a 2016 petition, filed on behalf of three toddlers. The petition had stated: “Our lungs have not yet fully developed and we cannot take further pollution through the bursting of crackers.”

Ryan International murder case: CEO Ryan Pinto, kin get interim bail till October 7

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Punjab and Haryana High Court on Thursday granted bail till October 7 to the founders of Ryan International School in connection to the brutal murder of seven-year-old student inside the Gurugram campus on September 8.Earlier, the Punjab and Haryana High Court refused to stay the order of Augustine F Pinto, his wife Grace and their son Ryan.The CBI on September 22 took over the probe into the killing of Pradyuman after his father threatened to move the Supreme Court if the investigation does not start.Maharashtra government also opposed the plea considering the seriousness of the crime.Barun Thakur, father of the 7-year-old victim, who had opposed grant of relief, argued that the case would fall under the category of rarest of rare.Ryan Pinto was also served a notice by Gurugram police which sought answers from him about security lapses in the school and names of those responsible for those lapses.Senior Advocate Niteen Pradhan appearing for suspects argued that it was only transit bail that was sought and court should allow relief till September 18, for the applicants to approach the appropriate court. However, the court rejected the pleas, with reasons to be recorded separately.The suspects had in their plea stated that it was most unfortunate and the management cannot be held culpable, as sought by protesting parents. The death of the child has caused deep pain and grief not only to the parents and family of the child but also to trustees, management, staff and students of the school.The petition sought to defend the school reputation by saying that such an incident has taken place for the first time in the past four decades since the institution was set up. Despite, taking all necessary steps for security and well being of students as required under law.Pradhumam Thakur, a class II student, was found murdered in the toilet on September 8. A bus conductor of the school was arrested for the alleged murder.The police had also arrested two other persons attached to the school management under various charges of the Juvenile Justice Act.

No Blue Whale-linked suicide in Delhi: Cops

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Delhi Police on Tuesday informed the Delhi High Court (HC) that no incident linked to the online game Blue Whale Challenge has taken place in the city.”There is no reported case of suicide linked to the Blue Whale Challenge in Delhi. Likewise, there are no such complaints with the Cyber Cell, Crime Branch, and Delhi Police,” the report stated.The HC had sought responses from the Delhi Police and the Centre on a plea seeking directions to social networking sites such as Facebook, Google, and Yahoo to remove the links to the game. The petition was filed by Advocate Gurmeet Singh.The police also informed the court that the game was not a freely downloadable application and children could not access it on their phones through app stores.”As per the available information, the game is shared among secret groups on the social media or on chat networks. The creators seek their players or victims and send them an online invitation link to join in,” the report added.The police further said that the death of a 19-year-old boy, who fell from the terrace of a Hauz Khas eatery, as mentioned in the petition, could not be linked to the game as there was no such evidence, so far.Also, according to the report, an advisory has been sent to parents on Twitter, mentioning various steps that can be taken to keep children out of harm’s way.A Bench of Acting Chief Justice Gita Mittal and Justice C Harishankar fixed the next date of hearing on October 12, after the counsel appearing for the Centre said a similar matter will be heard by the Apex Court on October 9.Meanwhile, the Centre has filed a status report in this regard, following which the court directed them to mention the steps taken to comply with the Madras High Court direction to ban the Blue Whale Challenge.On September 4, the Madras HC had directed the Centre and the Tamil Nadu government to explore the possibility of banning the game.

Calcutta HC adjourns hearing till Wednesday on Durga idol immersion plea

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>he Calcutta High Court today adjourned till Wednesday hearing of petitions for extension of immersion schedule for Durga puja that has been restricted by the West Bengal government in view of Muharram.A division bench presided by Acting Chief Justice Nishita Mhatre took the decision to allow a comprehensive hearing of the three petitions later because there was paucity of time as Mhatre was retiring today. State Advocate General Kishore Dutta submitted before the bench, which also comprised Justice T Chakraborty, that the government will allow immersion of all Durga idols that reach the designated sites on the banks of rivers and other water bodies till 10 pm on Vijaya Dashami at the end of the five-day festival.The state had on Friday told the court that it has decided to extend the deadline for immersion from 6 pm to 10 pm on Vijaya Dashami that falls on September 30. Immersion of idols would again be allowed from October two, the state had informed the court. No immersion of idols would be allowed on October one, when Muharram is scheduled to be observed. Counsel for one of the petitioners Smarajit Roy Chowdhury today reiterated his prayer before the court that immersion of idols in rivers and other water bodies in the state be allowed till 1.36 am on Vijaya Dashami in accordance with the ‘Vishuddha Siddhanta’, one of the three almanacs followed by Durga puja organisers in the state.
ALSO READ Don’t disturb peace during Durga Puja, no idol immersion on Muharram: Mamata Banerjee warns RSS, VHPAnother petitioner claimed that there was no bar on immersion if the date coincided with Muharram till a few years ago and prayed that it be allowed this year too on October one. When the third petitioner’s counsel rose to make submissions, the division bench said that since there were diverse prayers by petitioners and all of them wanted to be heard, it was adjourning the petitions till Wednesday. The bench said it would be difficult to hear all the parties as also the submissions of the Advocate General during the course of the day and with the Acting Chief Justice Mhatre retiring today, it was adjourning the matters for hearing on Wednesday. The petitions are likely to be taken up for hearing by a division bench presided by Mhatre’s successor.

HC halts metro work near J N Petit Instt for 2 weeks

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Bombay High Court on Friday stayed excavation work for the Metro-3 project outside the J N Petit Institute on D N Road for two weeks, considering that it is damaging the 119-year-old building.It also appointed a three-member committee comprising a structural engineer from IIT, an expert nominated by the institute and another by Mumbai Metro Rail Corporation Limited (MMRCL) to survey the structure. A division bench of Chief Justice Manjula Chellur and Justice N M Jamdar has asked the committee to submit its report within two weeks. The direction was given while hearing a petition filed by two trustees of the institute, with regard to the tunneling work for Metro-3.The petition seeks a stay on the ongoing work on the proposed Hutatma Chowk station, on the grounds that it was causing damage to old buildings.According to the petition, on August 25, a heavy limestone finial adorning a portion of the J N Petit Institute’s ceiling fell down due to the constant vibrations caused by the tunneling work for the Metro.The court had, on Thursday, indicated that it would appoint structural engineers to conduct a survey of the heritage building. Senior Advocate Fredun DeVitre, appearing for the institute, said the stay on the excavation work is temporary, and limited to the J N Petit premises and garden area, and not the entire D N Road stretch.The Metro-3 line between Colaba and SEEPZ has been in the news for many reasons as citizens have been approaching the High Court raising grievances such as trees being cut for constructing underground stations, alleged violations of noise pollution rules by work being carried out during night hours, or adequate space for movement of emergency vehicles not being provided.”In view of today’s Honorable High Court of Bombay’s order,” said a spokesperson for the MMRCL, “MMRC will not undertake construction activity work in front of the JN Petit Institute building in south Mumbai. Further, a committee will be formed which will give its report within two weeks. Being a responsible organization, MMRC has taken all the necessary protocols and precautions to prevent any damage to the buildings. We will take any further measures required to avoid damage due to our construction activities in close vicinity of the building. MMRC has already deployed monitoring instruments which will be further augmented based upon the outcome of the committee’s recommendations.”

CBI starts probe in to Rs 25K-cr chit fund scam in Jharkhand

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Central Bureau of Investigation has registered 20 cases related to chit fund scam believed to be involving funds of over Rs 25,000 crore in Jharkhand. The agency has registered case on directions of state High Court.The agency has registered 20 FIRs pertaining to 193 accused, which includes individuals and companies. The offences committed by chit fund firms involves violation of many enactments, rules and regulations of RBI, SEBI and Chit Funds Act of 1982.These cases were investigated by the Jharkhand Police so far. As per High Court order, “It is submitted by the Additional Advocate General that a detailed counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent, who has brought on record several facts including the amount involved in one company being approximately of Rs 1,600 crore and total figure may even cross Rs 25,000 crore.”The court was submitted a list of 27 chit fund companies operating in the state which were under the scanner of the state police. “Over and above the aforesaid offences, similarly situated other First Information Reports, registered at various other police stations about chit fund companies are also handed over to the CBI for further investigation. These cases shall be identified by the CBI with the help of the State of Jharkhand,” it had said.The court observed that these companies were running chit fund business in Jharkhand, of which some had been exposed. The state government had approved handing over the investigation to CBI.The state government had stated that the offence are specialised and technical in nature and it would be best when CBI’s economic offences wing probe the case. “Government agencies do not have the same expertise as the CBI’s economic offences wing,” the government advocate had stated . The government also furnished a list of 27 blacklisted companies.

Ryan student murder: School founders Pintos face arrest as Bombay High Court rejects anticipatory bail plea

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>In a big setback for the founders of Ryan group of education, the Bombay High Court on Thursday turned down the anticipatory bail application filed by the owners in the Gurugram student murder case.Justice Ajey Gadkari while rejecting the applications by Ryan founders — Augustine, Grace and Ryan Pinto — directed them to deposit their passports with the Mumbai Police Commissioner by 9 pm on Thursday. If the Pintos move for regular anticipatory bail before a Haryana court, their personal presence would be required.Barun Thakur, father of the 7-year-old victim, who had opposed grant of relief, argued that the case would fall under the category of rarest of rare.The suspects by not cooperating in the probe done by the Haryana police are adopting a spineless approach.Further the suspects should have moved the Punjab and Haryana Court for seeking relief and Bombay High Court had no jurisdiction to hear their pleas.Maharashtra government also opposed the plea stating that considering the seriousness of the crime.Senior Advocate Niteen Pradhan appearing for suspects argued that it was only transit bail that was sought and court should allow relief till September 18, for the applicants to approach the appropriate court. However, the court rejected the pleas, with reasons to be recorded separately.The suspects had in their plea stated that it was most unfortunate and the management cannot be held culpable, as sought by protesting parents. The death of the child has caused deep pain and grief not only to the parents and family of the child but also to trustees, management, staff and students of the school.The petition sought to defend the school reputation by saying that such an incident has taken place for the first time in the past four decades since the institution was set up. Despite, taking all necessary steps for security and well being of students as required under law.Pradhumam Thakur, a class II student, was found murdered in the toilet last week. A bus conductor of the school has been arrested for the alleged murder.The police have also arrested two other persons attached to the school management under various charges of the Juvenile Justice Act.

Tamil Nadu: Dhinakaran meets Governor, seeks removal of CM Palaniswami, deputy OPS

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Sidelined AIADMK (Amma) deputy chief TTV Dhinakaran on Thursday said he has sought the removal of Chief Minister K Palaniswami and his deputy O Panneerselvam during his meeting with Tamil Nadu Governor Ch Vidyasagar Rao even as he asserted that he didn’t want the state government to fall.At his first meeting with the governor after 19 MLAs loyal to him expressed lack of confidence in the chief minister last month, he accused the government of exerting pressure on his camp to woo the MLAs back to their fold.”It is evident he (Palaniswami) has no majority. Therefore, he should be asked (by the governor) to prove majority,” Dhinakaran told reporters outside his residence after the meeting at the Raj Bhavan.He said he had sought “action” on the August 22 demand of his camp MLAs, who had earlier told the governor that they had lost confidence in the chief minister and that he should be removed.”Our intention is to change the chief minister and (Deputy CM) O Panneerselvam,” he said.The governor told the delegation that “he is watching everything. He said he will soon take a good decision and do his duty”, Dhinakaran said.Asked about MLA SDK Jakkaiyan reportedly switching over to the Palaniswami camp, Dhinakaran merely said he had spoken to him this morning and that it was natural for people to get jittery when pressurised.On August 22, 19 pro-Dhinakaran MLAs had met Rao and told him they had lost confidence in Palaniswami and wanted him to be removed as chief minister.The number of dissident MLAs has since grown to 21.The Dhinakaran camp MLAs had met Rao a day after the formal merger of the two factions of ruling AIADMK led by Palaniswami and then rebel leader and present Deputy Chief Minister O Panneerselvam on August 21.The revolt in the ruling party had sparked demands for the governor to order the government to face a floor test in the assembly.The DMK, Congress and Left parties had even knocked the doors of President Ram Nath Kovind in this regard.The governor had earlier told a delegation of Left and VCK leaders that the issue was the AIADMK’s internal matter and that he cannot intervene.Earlier, during the hearing of a PIL seeking a floor test in the Madras High Court, the state Advocate General had also contended that the revolt by 19 MLAs was the AIADMK’s internal affair and that the Governor cannot interfere in it.Palaniswami and Dhinakaran have been at loggerheads ever since the merger, with the unified AIADMK declaring that the latter had been removed from the deputy general secretary post on August 10 itself and questioning his authority to make changes in the party set up.In the 234-member house, the AIADMK has a strength of 135, including the Speaker.The opposition has a total strength of 98, including 89 of the DMK, eight of the Congress and an IUML member.

Court warns advocate: Don’t mix Ramjas, JNU incidents

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>A Delhi Court on Tuesday warned an advocate, who sought the lodging of an FIR alleging “anti-national sloganeering” at the Ramjas College in February, against mixing this incident with the JNU case in which sedition charges were slapped against some students.”These are two different cases. Do not mix JNU matter with the DU case,” the court said.The court’s remarks were aimed at advocate Vivek Garg, who sought a direction to the police to supply him a copy of the chargesheet filed in the JNU matter.Garg submitted before the court that he needed the JNU chargesheet “as it is not available on the internet. We need a copy of the FIR also to argue in this case.”The present case going on in the court is related to a complaint filed by Garg seeking lodging of an FIR against those who allegedly raised anti-national slogans at Delhi University’s Ramjas College on February 21 and 22.Garg has alleged in his plea that the slogans were raised at the college by members of students groups — All India Students Association (AISA) and Students’ Federation of India (SFI).The court has posted the matter for September 14.Earlier, the court had on August 29 observed that sedition charges cannot be pressed on the basis of an unauthenticated and unreliable video, after it was shown a footage of alleged “anti-national” sloganeering held on February 21 this year at the Ramjas College here.‘NEED JNU CHARGESHEET’Advocate Vivek Garg sought a direction to the police to supply him a copy of the chargesheet filed in the JNU matter. Garg submitted before the court that he needed the JNU chargesheet “as it is not available on the internet. We need a copy of the FIR also to argue in this case.”

Results will reach colleges by next week: MU to HC

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Mumbai University on Thursday informed the Bombay High Court that in the coming week, a majority of the students will be able to collect physical results from their colleges. Advocate Rui Rodrigues appearing for the University said results for BA, BCom, BSc, Management, Technology and Law streams have been declared, and marksheets will be sent to colleges within five days.Further, admission deadline for Law CET, which was August 31 is being extended until midnight on September 5.A division bench of justices Anoop Mohta and Bharati Dangre, however, directed that the admission process for law entrance exam be extended till September 6. HC said: “Students should not suffer while trying to get admission for qualifying exams.”HC was hearing a series of petitions filed by students and the Bombay University & College Teachers Union. The court has posted the matter for further hearing on September 6.Meanwhile…Over a hundred students from the Government Law College in Churchgate found that they have been reportedly marked absent or their results were withheld by the university when the results were declared on Wednesday. “I was shocked to see that I was marked absent in a paper which I attended,” said an LLB student.

Maharashtra govt withdraws bias charge against Judge Oka, Bombay HC asks them to ‘show remorse’

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –> The Bombay High Court on Monday took to task the Maharashtra government for the manner it was withdrawing its charges of bias against Judge AS Oka in the noise pollution matter, saying it should “show remorse” through an affidavit.The direction was given after the Maharashtra government said it was “withdrawing unconditionally” the charges made against Justice Oka, with the court terming the state’s move as “frivolous”. Advocate General Ashutosh Kumbhakoni submitted a two-page communication in the HC, saying the state’s allegations that Justice Oka harboured a serious bias against the state machinery in the noise pollution matter “was not raised as an allegation against the judge personally, but was limited only to the subject matter involved.””The state only requested the Chief Justice (of Bombay HC) to consolidate all noise pollution matters, and to place them before a bench of which Justice Oka is not a member,” Kumbhakoni said. A bench of Justices Oka and Riyaz Chagla accepted Kumbhakoni’s explanation, saying it wanted to “uphold the dignity of the AG’s office,” but added if the state wished to apologise, it would have to do so through an affidavit. “A mere statement by the AG doesn’t translate into the state’s apology,” the bench said.”It must submit an affidavit explaining its application before the Chief Justice. The state should show remorse. Also, such an affidavit must be signed by a senior state official, and it must identify the person who gave the AG’s office the direction to seek the transfer,” the bench said. Kumbhakoni said the state will file an affidavit to the effect tomorrow. The court also said it was not bothered by the fact that allegations had been made against a particular judge.”We are not touchy about the allegations against a particular judge. Our anxiety is about the consequences of the state’s frivolous action. The state’s action affects the dignity of the judiciary, and of the 155-year old institution of this High Court,” the bench said. “Your allegations mean that the Maharashtra government doesn’t want the high court to exist. It means that the state does not trust the high court and it says so in as many words,” it said.The bench also said the state, in getting the noise pollution cases transferred to another bench, had “misled” the Chief Justice.”The AG sought that this bench recuse itself from the hearing. However, when we passed an order refusing to do so, you failed to inform the Chief Justice of our order. As a result, the CJ was forced to pass the transfer order, and then later, she was compelled to withdraw it,” the bench said. “The consequence of the state’s action is now irreparable. It has damaged the judiciary reputation,” Justice Oka said. “The state must get a clear signal hereafter that in future it can’t play with the institution. The state must understand the consequences of its frivolous actions,” the bench said.

Speak up: Is notifying silence zones need of the hour?

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Anti-noise pollution activists were in for a rude shock earlier this month when the city’s silence zones lost their tag. They protested against the high-handedness by the state government which had informed the Bombay High Court, after an amendment, that there will be no “silence zones” in the entire state as it was yet to begin the process of notifying them. DNA speaks to a cross section of Mumbaikars on whether there is an urgent need to notify silence zones in the city.Residents’ speakIt is very important for the state government to allocate silence zones to ensure peace. Patients and senior citizens will be affected the most while people will continue to violate noise pollution norms. Lack of such precautionary measures will further worsen the quality of life in the city.—Rekha Daswani, resident of ThaneThe court’s earlier stance was correct. Noisepollution is increasing day-by- day and is only causing problems. There should be certain spots in the city which are completely void of any noise pollution. Silence zones need to be notified at the earliest.—Suraj Shinde, resident of KandivliSilence zones need to be brought in, they are the need of the hour. However, I do think music should be allowed post 10 pm during fetisvals. There should be a balance. Silence zones near hospitals, schools and other places should be reinstated by the state government.—Advocate Tushar Mahale, resident of WorliThe festival season has just begun. Despite knowing the elaborate manner in which Mumbaikars like to celebrate the festival, how can we not have silence zones or decibel restrictions? This means loud noise would certainly hamper our sleep and will lead to irritation and uncomfortable situations this year. Without a good night sleep, it may cause health problems especially among the elderly.—Nidhi Pant, resident of ChemburState government needs to notify the silence zones again at the earliest. This situation emerged because of the high-handedness by the state government. However, even before the court’s decision, the sound pollution norm was hardly being implemented across the city.—Asit Singh, resident of BorivliThe government should definitely notify silence zones near schools, hospitals and other such places. Over the years, with festivals becoming bigger, loud music is played which has a huge impact on children, senior citizens and pregnant women. Strict rules regarding noise can only be made if silence zones are identified and notified.—Durga Gudilu, city-based activistI live in a Gaothan area and we face issues during processions. The noise is so much that it disturbs our peace all the time. Last year, if a procession would pass through a silence zone, people adhered to the rules. Now, that the ban is out, it will be back to square one. It will affect children’s studying, hospitals and lives of people in general. Past few days everyone has been talking about it. People are not happy. May be those who are happy are not ordinary citizens.—Anita Shetty, resident of KurlaWhat constitutes a silence zone, itself, is an ambiguity for a regular citizen. There needs to be an awareness campaign through various mediums about its meaning, rules and regulations. But yes, in the light of frequent changes in the urban development rules and construction density of various establishments around there needs to be a silence zone. There is definitely an urgent requirement of notifying the silence zones again and certainly the deemed ones.—Advocate Ranjeet Sangle, resident of Byculla

Police complaint filed against Rishi Kapoor for posting ‘pornographic image of a child’ on Twitter

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –> A police complaint was filed against Rishi Kapoor for allegedly sharing an offensive picture of a child from his social media handle. The complaint was lodged by Advocate Adil Khatri of a Mumbai-based NGO.According to the Indian Express, the complaint was filed because the veteran actor had posted a ‘nude and pornographic image of a child on Twitter handle’.Khatri said that he wanted to teach Kapoor a lesson because he ‘played with cyber laws’. Khatri told Indian Express: “We have filed a complaint with Mumbai Police Commissioner, Mumbai Cyber Cell and Ministry of Woman and Child Development against actor Rishi Kapoor for posting nude and pornographic image of a child on his Twitter account @chintskap.”He added: “We don’t know who the child in the picture is, but it is offensive as the child is naked and a headphone has been stuck into his private parts.”Kapoor often gets in trouble for his tweets, and the last time he caused outrage was when he made sexist joke about Team India captain Mithali Raj during the Women’s World Cup final.

HC pulls up Haryana govt

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>A day after the Punjab and Haryana High Court slammed the Haryana government for its apparent inability to implement Section 144 in the district, despite the order, Advocate General told the court that there was a ‘clerical mistake’ in the order passed by DC, Panchkula.As the Dera followers laid siege to Panchkula after the hearing, Punjab and Haryana High Court came down heavily on the Haryana government asserting that there had been a “complete collusion” between people moving into the city and state government.”

Speak up: Right to privacy remains protected

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>For the second time in a week, the Supreme Court of India delivered a judgement that will directly touch the lives of millions of Indian citizens. After its ruling invalidating instant triple talaq on Tuesday, the apex court on Thursday overturned two earlier rulings to hold that the right to privacy is, in fact, a fundamental right of a citizen. The ruling, while far-reaching, is also bound to generate its share of legal imbroglios in the weeks, months, perhaps even years to come. For now, though, the verdict has been welcomed almost across the board, given that it is seen as likely to touch almost every part of a citizen’s life, particularly those that relate to his/her relationship with the State.Given the recent debate about Aadhaar and the security of biometric data, gay rights, abortion rights, consumer technology such as apps and SIM card purchases, the decision undoubtedly has ramifications that go far beyond the mere judgement.Not surprisingly, the debate over the SC’s verdict has already broken out on social media. The government has also come in for criticism, considering it took a position against the right to privacy.DNA spoke to a cross-section of citizens to gauge their mood after the historic judgement.Right to Privacy is a basic human right which forms a part of Article 21 of the Indian constitution. Whatever new laws that the government is going to come up with — the encryption of WhatsApp messages, surveillance in various forms — this judgement will be important for the enrichment of the public sphere.—Mrudul Nile, Associate Professor, Department of civics and politics, University of MumbaiIt is a landmark judgment considering privacy is now a right guaranteed to us by the Constitution. Every citizen, even celebrities, have the right to keep their personal lives and information to themselves and the SC’s stamp on it has made it official. I think every individual knows the best for himself or herself.—Shreya Shailendra, student, Class XI of Notre Dame Academy, PatnaThis judgement for the first time provides protection of personal privacy as a fundamental right. Social media network companies sharing of persons’ data for any other use may not be possible. It will directly affect WhatsApp sharing of personal data with Facebook. For law enforcement agencies, surveillance unless it is “fair just and reasonable ” may not be possible.—Sanjay Pandey, Additional Director General of Police, MaharashtraLack of awareness is the biggest concern, even among companies. Almost 60% of our clients are not willing to spend on data security protection. Search engines have loads of users’ data. If a hacker is able to breach, he can access personal data. Youngsters are uploading personal data on social sites without realising the implications of its misuse.—Krinal Mehta, digital marketer, AhmedabadIt is remarkable that Justice Chandrachud has mentioned section 377 and its invasiveness with regards to right to privacy. Being homosexual is a part of being me. The state cannot deny that I am gay, that I love men and would love to make love to men. When they say they respect me as an individual and my right to my body and my privacy, it is awfully shameful to stand against right to privacy.—Harrish Iyer, LGBT activistI have no problem with the Aadhaar. It won’t divulge what you do in your bedroom but only your holdings, bank details and income tax. What’s the harm in that? What I do not agree to is the poor who have been denied benefits under MNREGA and other schemes because they do not have Aadhaar cards. That I think this should be addressed.—Julio Rebeiro, former Mumbai Police CommissionerLEGAL SPEAKThe acknowledgement of the Right to Privacy is not a ‘stand alone’ situation. In real terms, it casts an unforeseen burden on the state to undertake a legislative tightrope walk to implement social welfare legislations that intrude on privacy rights while seeking to protect the right itself.—Senior Advocate Shrihari Aney, former Advocate General of MaharashtraIt is good that ‘privacy’ has been held to be a Fundamental Right. But just as one man’s food can be another’s poison,one man’s privacy may hamper another one’s policy. It will all boil down to formulating a broadly acceptable definition of ‘Privacy’. The State can insert such a definition by a legislative route and seek to confine it’s application.—Advocate Raju Moray, Bombay High CourtBy concluding that Right to Privacy is a fundamental right, citizens’ privacy, to a great extent, has been protected but there is nothing such as absolute privacy as it is subjected to reasonable restrictions for reasons such as national interest, state security, and relations with neigbouring countries.—Nikhil Kariel, CounselWe have some of the greatest legal minds heading our judiciary and the last two days have proven that. It was just a matter of time that an essential right such as ‘privacy’ would be recognised. Now it remains to be seen as to the applications that follow such as Aadhaar.—Adv Nishant Tripathi, Bombay High CourtThe judgement has set the principal that Right to Privacy is a Fundamental Rights. Now the minor bench will have to decide to what extent it will be absolute, that will make the picture more clear.—Asim Pandya, President of Gujarat High Court Advocates AssociationThe Judgment of the SC holding that Right to Privacy is a fundamental right is historic, cautioning the legislature that laws cannot invade upon privacy, unless it can withstand the shine of other fundamental rights. The Judgment will have significant impact on issue of Aadhaar and validity of section 377, pending before smaller benches.—Advocate Kunal Cheema, Supreme Court

Metro commuter has no right to free drinking water: HC

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>A commuter on the metro does not have a right to free drinking water, the Delhi High Court today said while disposing of a lawyer’s plea seeking toilets, drinking water and dustbins at all the stations here. Justice Vibhu Bakhru said the petitioner has a right to drinking water, but not free drinking water. The order came after the court noted the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation’s (DMRC) submissions on affidavit that there were 128 water dispensing kiosks and over 200 shops in the stations where water was available, but at a price. DMRC, represented by advocate Jatan Singh, said there were ‘PILO’ mobile outlets outside 35 stations where drinking water is sold at Rs 2 for 250 ml and Rs 5 for one litre. It said it proposed to award contracts for setting up 64 more ‘PILO’ mobile outlets and it was only the newly constructed stations, numbering around 15, where drinking water was not available. Regarding toilet facilities, the DMRC said it was available at 130 stations and where the facility was not available, commuters could use the staff toilets in case of an emergency. The court directed the DMRC to put up appropriate signages in this regard to inform commuters. On the issue of dustbins, the Delhi metro said it was earlier not installing them due to security concerns, but now it was proposing to put in place transparent bins at the stations. The court said dustbins have to be provided as it was a necessity in public places like the metro stations. It directed the DMRC to install the dustbins immediately outside the stations if it was not possible inside. With these directions and observations, the court disposed of the plea by lawyer Kush Kalra. Advocate Kush Sharma, appearing for the petitioner, had earlier argued that water should be provided free of cost.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

BJP leader, Kejriwal put an end to civil defamation case

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>A bitterly-fought defamation suit filed by BJP leader Avtar Singh Bhadana against Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal for latter’s alleged remarks, today came to an end as the leaders decided not to pursue it in a court here. Bhadana, then Congress Member of Parliament from Faridabad in Haryana, said that since Kejriwal has retracted his alleged defamatory statements, he and the Chief Minister together have decided not to contest the civil defamation suit. Additional District Judge Surinder S Rathi considered the submission on behalf of both the leaders and disposed of the matter, a court source said. Advocate Surat Singh, who appeared for Bhadana, said that Kejriwal withdrew his earlier statement saying that he was misinformed by his former colleagues and he had no intention to malign the reputation of the BJP leader. The former Congress MP had filed the civil defamation suit against Kejriwal alleging that the AAP leader had tarnished his image by branding him as “corrupt”. He had sought Rs one crore in damages from the AAP leader. In his petition, Bhadana had contended that Kejriwal had publicly made the defamatory statement on January 31, 2014. He had contended in his plea that despite sending a legal notice to Kejriwal, the AAP leader has neither withdrawn his comments, nor apologised for the same.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Gorakhpur deaths: Allahabad HC demands answers from Yogi govt

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>After the Supreme Court refused to intervene in the Gorakhpur hospital tragedy in which 31 children died due to shortage of oxygen over unpaid bills, the Allahabad High Court on Friday rapped the Yogi Adityanath-led government and sought its reply on the cause of children’s deaths.Admitting a writ petition, a two-member bench comprising Chief Justice DB Bhosle and Justice Yashwant Varma observed that “The tragedy was unfortunate, it is necessary to seek reply from the state government behind cause of deaths before the court passes any order.””It is necessary that the real reasons behind the cause of children’s deaths should come out so that such tragedy does not occur again in future,” the bench said.State Advocate General RP Singh has sought time to reply, saying the state government is awaiting the report of an inquiry headed by the Chief Secretary. The court has fixed August 29, 2017, as the next hearing date.In another PIL, petitioner Njutan Thakur, wife of Amitabh Thakur, a serving IPS officer, alleged that the despite such large numbers of deaths, no post mortem was performed. The High Court has issued notices to the state government and State Medical Education department and fixed October 9 as the next date of hearing.

HC seeks UP govt’s response on Gorakhpur deaths

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Allahabad High Court today directed the UP government and the state’s director general of medical education to file a detailed counter affidavit within six weeks on a PIL on the death of children in a state-run hospital in Gorakhpur. The Lucknow bench of the high court fixed October 9 as the next date of hearing. The bench of justices Vikram Nath and Daya Shankar Tiwari passed the order on the Public Interest Litigation filed by activist Nutan Thakur after hearing her, Advocate General Raghavendra Pratap Singh and Medical Education Counsel Sanjay Bhasin. The Advocate General opposed the petition, saying the state government has taken every possible measure in the matter and shall take all possible action as per the report submitted by the chief secretary. Thakur contended that the action of the state government so far gave a message that it was trying to hide facts and shield the guilty. Till yesterday, the death toll in the BRD hospital since August 7 was 71 due to various causes including encephalitis. Some of the deaths were alleged to have been caused by shortage of oxygen, a claim dismissed by the Uttar Pradesh government.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

SC bars lawyer from practising before it for a month

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>In a stern message to a lawyer for pointing fingers towards the apex court Registry on listing of cases, the Supreme Court today restrained him from practising as an Advocate On Record (AOR) for a month. A bench headed by Chief Justice J S Khehar said contemnor Mohit Chaudhary has abused the privilege of being an AOR under the 2013 Supreme Court Rules and his conduct was “unbecoming” of an advocate. It said the listing of cases was based on judicial directions and not determined by the Registry of the court. “We are thus of the view that the appropriate course of action would be that the contemnor is not permitted to practice as an Advocate-on-Record, for a period of one month from the date of the order. A painful task had to be performed and is performed. “We hope that both for the petitioner and other advocates who may consider the interest of the client paramount even to breach the ethical practice of the court, this would be a caution. We say no more,” the bench, also comprising Justices D Y Chandrachud and Sanjay Kishan Kaul, said. Justice Kaul, writing the judgement for the bench, said the contemnor has been practising since 2009 and was not a “novice” as he has been representing prestigious institutions, state governments and authorities, which proved that he was quite familiar with the practices of the court. “He cannot be said to be oblivious to the fact that no bench is constituted by the Registry, but by the Chief Justice of this Court. Thus, in an indirect manner, an imputation was impliedly made even against the Chief Justice, though in the garb of a virulent attack on the Registry,” the court said. It said the contemnor took a conscious decision to be a “pawn” in the hands of the litigant, to “scandalise” the court and its Registry with the sole objective of achieving a bench shifting. “It was clearly a commercial decision to sub-serve the interest of his client, even though, it would amount to false allegations and be unbecoming of an advocate,” the bench said. The court also said that it is the duty of an advocate to put his best case for the litigant before the Court. However, this does not absolve him of the responsibility as an officer of the court as this is a “dual responsibility.” The top court said the fundamentals of the profession required an advocate not to be immersed in a “blind quest” of relief for his client. “The dignity of the institution cannot be violated in this quest as law is no trade, briefs no merchandise,” it said. Chaudhary on April 7 had mentioned a matter before a bench headed by the CJI and alleged that it was directed to be listed on that day itself but in a “manipulated way”, it was listed before a special bench. He was appearing for a firm in a slum redevelopment case and his matter was listed before a special bench of Justices Arun Mishra and S Abdul Nazeer.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

SC restrains lawyer from practising for a month

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Supreme Court today restrained a lawyer from practising as an Advocate On Record (AOR) for a month. A bench headed by Chief Justice J S Khehar passed the verdict against the lawyer for allegedly casting aspersions on the apex court Registry in listing of a case. “We are not inclined to proceed with contempt notice but the contemnor is not allowed to practise for a month as an AOR,” the bench, also comprising Justices D Y Chandrachud and S K Kaul, said. The lawyer had made the allegations against the apex court Registry in listing of a case. Advocate Mohit Chaudhary on April 7 had mentioned the matter before a bench headed by the CJI and alleged that it was directed to be listed on that day itself but in a “manipulated way”, it was listed before a special bench. The lawyer had on April 7 told the bench that the matter was to be listed before a regular bench but the registry had listed it before a special bench for which there was no need. Chaudhary was appearing for a firm in a slum redevelopment case and his matter was listed on April 7 before a special bench of Justices Arun Mishra and S Abdul Nazeer. The matter was listed on April 6 for regular hearing but later put in the supplementary list before the special bench headed by Justice Mishra as there was judicial order of March 31 to list the matter before the bench which had heard it.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Excess fee case: HC questions govt plan to take over 449 private schools

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Delhi High Court (HC) on Wednesday raised concerns about the Delhi government’s proposal to take over the management of as many as 449 private schools, after the latter informed the court that it has already processed the proposal and sent it Lieutenant Governor (L-G) Anil Baijal for approval. The case pertains to charging of excess fee by 544 private schools.In an affidavit, Principal Secretary Punya Salila Shrivastava said the proposal was sent to the L-G on August 14 and his approval is still pending. The court had summoned the Principal Secretary of the Education Department and Deputy Directorate of Education for filing a misleading affidavit earlier.A Bench of Justices Siddharth Mridul and Najmi Waziri then raised concern that the move might jeopardise the interests of the students.”Who is going to head these schools, if they are brought under the government? Make sure that you secure the interests of the students and not jeopardise the future of the school,” the Bench stated.On the suggestion that the schools would be headed by government school principals, the court asked the Principal Secretary to give a list of at least 50 such officials who can take on this duty. “Do you have enough officials? Give us the names of at least 50 such officials,” it said.The Bench also came down heavily upon the Directorate of Education (DoE) for the delay in the refund of excess fees, after the HC passed the order in 2011. “This delay is criminal. What are you doing? This is people’s money. The parents have been waiting for long years now. A regulatory mechanism has also not been set up, as ordered by the court in 2011. If the DoE needs any assistance, it can ask the court,” the Bench stated.The Delhi government further informed the court that while 15 schools have fully refunded the fees, to the tune of Rs 14.5 crore, to parents, 136 schools have partially refunded the fees, amounting to Rs 8.2 crore. As many as 13 schools have been shut while one of them has been taken over.NGO Social Jurists had filed a petition through Advocate Ashok Agarwal, which had alleged that schools hiked the fees “unreasonably” while failing to pay salaries of the teaching and non-teaching staffers, as per the pay panel recommendations. The HC had then directed nearly 500 private schools to refund this excess fees. When it did not happen, calling it a contempt of court, Advocate Ashok Agarwal moved the court.The court has now given two weeks to the Delhi government to file a status reports on all the steps taken in accordance with the law, and fixed the next date of hearing on September 6.SHORTLIST STAFFOn the suggestion that the schools would be headed by government school principals, the court asked the Principal Secretary to give a list of at least 50 such officials who can take on this duty.
“Do you have enough officials? Give us the names of at least 50 such officials,” it said.

No bullock cart races until further notice: Bombay High Court

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Bombay High Court has stayed, until further orders, all bullock cart races in Maharashtra. The races were allowed after the government had amended a section in the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act.A division bench of Chief Justice Manjula Chellur and Justice NM Jamdar said, “No one will give permission unless it is approved by us.” It has also directed the government to frame rules to be followed by District Collectors before granting permission, and also place on record the process followed by them while granting such permissions.Bullock cart races were allowed after an amendment was carried in section 3 of the Act, which stated that prior permission can be granted by the District Collector, subject to ‘no pain’ or ‘suffering’ caused to the animal.The Act also says that anyone who is found inflicting cruelty on animals would be subjected to a maximum fine of Rs 5 lakh or a jail term of three years.The stay was granted while hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by Ajay Marathe, who has challenged the amendment. Advocate Kalyani Tulankar, appearing for the petitioner, argued that no rules have been framed under which permission can be granted. The petition also took opposition to a race being held in Pune on August 17.The court, after going through the records, noted that conducting races without rules in place would mean inflicting pain. Further, it also took into consideration the fact that bulls are not anatomically designed to run like horses. The bench thus considering that the state has not introduced steps to overcome pain and suffering of animals, no races will be allowed until further orders. The petition had claimed that the amendment was arbitrary and illegal and sought it to be struck down.To race or notIn April, the state passed a legislation in the Assembly unanimously to resume bullock cart races across the stateAnimal Husbandry Minister Mahadev Jankar said the amendment was being made in view of the vital role bullock cart races play in preserving and promoting the state’s tradition and culture

Jailed MLA threat to Byculla prison administration and inmates: Report

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Jailed MLA Ramesh Kadam, lodged in Byculla prison, is forming a “group” and “influencing other inmates”, that poses a threat to inmates and jail administration. This was noted in a report by a judge, who visited the prison recently.The report was submitted as per the directions of the HC.A division bench of Justice Abhay Oka and Riyaz Chagla, on Monday, expressed displeasure after reading about the ongoings inside the prison, and have asked Advocate General Ashutosh Kumbhakoni to appear before it and put forth the explanation.On the aspect of safety and security of inmates, the report states: Over crowding poses a major security threat to inmates. Convicts of political background and white collar crimes are to be kept away from first-time accused in petty cases. It reads: “But it has been found that one inmate, Ramesh Kadam (politician) is kept with many under-trial prisoners. He is influencing other inmates and forming a group in jail.”The report also states that there is a lack of sufficient jail staff for maintenance, security, and discipline. Further, the prison wall height needs to be raised from the present 15 feet to around 20 to 21 feet. Advocate Uday Warunjikar, appearing for petitioner Jan Adalat, a legal-aid organisation, in a public interest litigation on poor living conditions in prisons, argued: “An earlier report mentioned that a person can easily enter the prison from an adjoining building as the wall height is low. This is yet to be corrected.”

Duty of every institution to help disabled persons: SC

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>It is the duty of every institution to extend a helping hand to disabled persons, the Supreme Court today said. The observation by the apex court came while hearing a thalassaemia patient’s plea claiming that she falls under the category of persons with benchmark disability as prescribed under the provisions of the Right of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016. A bench of Justices Dipak Misra and A M Khanwilkar directed the Chhattisgarh government to constitute a medical board to ascertain whether the petitioner, Sruchi Rathore, would fall under the the ambit of the Act. “It is directed that the State of Chhattisgarh shall instruct the competent authorities to constitute the requisite medical board within two days and the petitioner shall be examined on August 16, 2017. “The result of her examination shall be produced before this Court on August 18, 2017. It has to be borne in mind that it is the duty of every institution to extend helping hand in its command to the disabled persons. In case the petitioner passes the benchmark as per the 2016 Act, her case may be considered,” the bench said. Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the petitioner, said that her case should be considered as a person with disability for the purpose of admission to any medical stream. He also contended that under the Act, five per cent of the seats for the persons with benchmark disability, someone with not less than 40 per cent disability, are required to be reserved. The bench said that the “statutory command” of five per cent reservation for benchmark disability, “has to be followed in letter and spirit”. Thalassaemia, an inherited blood disorder, falls under the category of benchmark disability subsequent to the 2016 amended Act. The other newly added types of benchmark disability include mental illnesses, autism spectrum disorder, cerebral palsy, muscular dystrophy, chronic neurological conditions, specific learning disabilities, multiple sclerosis, speech and language disability, hemophilia, sickle cell disease, multiple disabilities, including deaf blindness, acid attack victims and Parkinsons disease.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Martial rape not penal offence, Parliament debated it: SC

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The raging issue whether to make forced martial intercourse and sexual acts part of offence of rape in penal law has been extensively debated and now it cannot be considered as a criminal act, the Supreme Court today said. Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which defines the offence of rape, has an exception clause that says the intercourse or sexual act by a man with his wife, not below 15 years, is not a rape. The apex court, however, sought to know as to whether Parliament debated the aspect of protecting married girls, between the age group of 15-18 years, from the forced sexual acts by their spouses. It also asked whether the court could intervene to protect the rights of such married girls who may be sexually exploited by their spouses. “Parliament has extensively debated the issue of marital rape and considered that it was not an offence of rape. Therefore, it cannot be considered as a criminal offence,” a bench of justices M B Lokur and Deepak Gupta said. The apex court also said that marriage of a girl, who is below the age of 15 years, was “illegal”. “There are cases when college-going teens, below 18 years of age, engage in sexual activities consensually and get booked under the law. Who is going to suffer? The boy is not at fault. The punishment of seven years is too harsh,” the bench observed. It said, similarly, problem arises when a girl, under 18 years of age, elopes and engages in consensual sexual activity, the male gets booked for rape. “In these cases, we do have problem if look at various aspects,” the bench said as it asked the Centre to apprise it about the number of prosecutions under the Child Marriage Act for past three years in three weeks. It also asked Centre to apprise it about appointment of the Child Marriage Prohibition Officers (CMPO) under statutory provisions in the country and posted the matter for hearing after four weeks. The bench was hearing a plea questioning the constitutionality of a provision permitting a man to have physical relationship with his wife even if she is aged between 15 and 18. The apex court said according to prevailing law, if a man has physical intercourse with a girl under 15 years of age, it is termed as rape irrespective of “consent or no consent” and if she is below 18 years of age, but more than 15 and married, then no offence of rape is made out. Advocate Gaurav Agarwal appearing for NGO Independent Thought said that distinction made in between 18 and 15 is illegal and unconstitutional. “Parliament cannot impinge upon Article 21 by allowing the girl to marry under 18 years of age and allowing her to get pregnant or have intercourse. The Parliament should have considered various reports of the United Nations,” he said. He said that a girl in the age group of 15-18 is not that physically developed and she is not capable of taking an informed decision or consent. “The State has failed to protect her as there is no protection for her is she is below 18. Above 18 years of age she is developed and can think of coming out of abusive relationship,” the lawyer said. Senior advocate Gopal Subramaniam, who was part of the Justice J S Verma Committee constituted in the aftermath of the December 16 gangrape in Delhi and was present in the courtroom said, they had considered various aspects and after that, suggestion to criminalise marital rape was made. The committee was headed by former Chief Justice J S Verma and comprised former judge Leila Seth and Subramaniam. “Without any renumeration we have submitted the report to the government and that too without any extension. It was an exhaustive work,” he said. Advocate Binu Tamta appearing for Centre said that keeping the social and economic conditions of the country in mind, the Parliament has kept the age of 15 as threshold. “It has been considered pragmatically and every aspect was considered by the Parliament,” she said, adding that keeping the child marriage prevalent in some societies it has been done. Earlier, the apex court had in 2015, made National Commission for Women (NCW) party to explain how the offence of rape in the Indian Penal Code (IPC) afforded an exception to a man to have physical relationship with his minor wife and still not qualify it as crime. The NGO in its petition sought direction to declare exception 2 to Section 375 of the IPC as “violative of Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution to the extent that it permits intrusive sexual intercourse with a girl child aged between 15 and 18 years, only on the ground that she has been married.” It has also referred to the provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO), 2012, and said these provisions were contrary to the IPC provision. The POCSO provision provides that physical relationship with a minor constitutes the offence of rape and it does not exclude such relationship between a man and his minor wife.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Rape case: Complainant demands narco test on Rohit Tilak

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The 41-year-old woman who has filed a rape case against Rohit Tilak, the gread grandson of freedom fighter Bal Gangadhar Tilak, today demanded that he be subjected to a narco test. Speaking to reporters, she claimed to possess the record of around 2,000 calls and messages purportedly sent to her by Tilak. Advocate Tausif Shaikh, representing the complainant, said they have submitted the details of the call records and messages in the court. The woman lodged a complaint against Tilak (38) on July 17 accusing him of forcing her to have sex with him since March 2015 under the pretext of marriage. She said even on July 5, when she and Tilak met last, the latter attempted to sexually assault her. “However, I foild his bid and bit him on his hand and shoulder. Police should conduct his medical examination. I demand that he (Tilak) be subjected to a narco test so that truth will surface and at the same time, I am also ready to undergo the test,” the woman told reporters. Meanwhile, a police protection was provided to the complainant who had claimed to have received “acid attack” threats from two unidentified persons who asked her to withdraw the case against Tilak. In the FIR registered by the Vishrambaug Police, the woman had alleged that Tilak repeatedly raped her on the pretext of marrying her and also forced her into “unnatural sex”. The police had slapped charges of rape, unnatural offences, voluntarily causing hurt, insult with an intent to provoke breach of peace and criminal intimidation under the Indian Penal Code against Tilak. A local court in Pune on July 21 granted protection from arrest to Tilak. Earlier, the complainant had claimed before the media that she was under great pressure as she received “death threats” from Tilak’s family.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Will have to test applicability of RERA, says Bombay HC

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Bombay High Court today directed the central and Maharashtra governments to file replies to petitions challenging constitutional validity of some of the provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act (RERA) saying its applicability will have to be tested. A division bench headed by Justice Anoop Mohta was hearing petitions filed by DB Realty, MIG (Bandra) Realtors and Builders and others, questioning the “extreme and unreasonable” provision that requires ongoing projects to be registered with the authority set up under the new act. After hearing brief arguments, the court asked the Centre and the state to file reply affidavits in four weeks. “We will have to consider and test the applicability of the act,” Justice Mohta said. The court also asked the Maharashtra government to file reply to a petition filed by some plot owners, challenging a circular issued by the state authority under the RERA which says plot owners are covered under the definition of ‘promoter’ in the act, if they take part in construction and sale of flats. The May 11 order of the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority notified that any owner or organisation signing development agreement with a builder will also have to register under the RERA, and will be treated as a co-promoter. This is because such owner/organisation will be getting a share of revenue from the sale of flats, it said. Maharashtra Advocate General Ashutosh Kumbhakoni today told the court that RERA was aimed at regulating construction activity and also the sale of flats to third parties. “If the owner is part of the construction and also sale of flats, then he is a promoter,” Kumbhakoni said. The judges, while asking the government to file reply, noted that they would have to examine the definition of ‘promoter’ under the act.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

HC dismisses petitions against new Nitish govt formation

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Patna High Court today dismissed two petitions challenging formation of the new government by Nitish Kumar’s JD(U) along with the BJP, saying no intervention of the court is required after floor test in the state Assembly. The two PILs had challenged the formation of the new government on the ground that it had violated the judgement in the S R Bommai case. After hearing all parties, a division bench comprising Chief Justice Rajendra Menon and Justice A K Upadhyay dismissed the two PILs saying, after floor test in the state Assembly, no intervention of the court is required. While one PIL was filed by RJD MLAs Saroj Yadav and Chandan Verma, the second PIL was filed by Jitendra Kumar who is a member of the Samajwadi Party. On Friday last, the court had adjourned the matter for today. The new Nitish Kumar government, in which NDA is a coalition partner, had comfortably won the trust vote on Friday last. While the ruling alliance got 131 votes, the opposition had secured 108 votes in the vote of confidence. B C Pandey and Bhupendra Kumar Singh, lawyers on behalf of the petitioners, argued before the court that RJD, the single largest party, was not given a chance for government formation in violation of the Supreme Court judgement in the S R Bommai case and hence the oath of office and secrecy taken by ministers of the new government should be cancelled. While Advocate General Lalit Kishore appeared on behalf of the state government, Y V Giri was the governor’s counsel and the Union government was represented by S D Sanjay. Y V Giri argued before the court that once the floor test is conducted, nothing else remains as the party clearly proved its majority on the floor of the House. The new government had furnished a list of 131 MLAs in support of the new government and they acquired the same number of votes during the confidence vote on Friday last which justified the governor’s decision to call them for forming a government, Giri said. He told the court that the same procedure was followed recently in formation of government in Goa. After hearing all the parties, the bench observed that no intervention was required. On Friday last, lawyers of the petitioners had mentioned the two cases ahead of the crucial confidence vote and had prayed to the judge to cancel the trust vote since it violated the judgement in the S R Bommai case. The lawyers had also prayed to the court to issue a directive to invite the leader of the single largest party to form the government. Principal Additional Advocate General Lalit Kishore and Additional Solicitor General S D Sanjay had termed the PILs on July 28 last as “frivolous”.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Orissa HC fixes July 27 to hear Ganjam DEO’s petition

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>On a special mention by Advocate General (AG) S P Mishra for an urgent hearing on a miscellaneous petition filed by the Ganjam district electoral officer and district magistrate, the Orissa High Court today fixed July 27 for next hearing on the matter. Ganjam District Magistrate Prem Chand Chaudhary had yesterday filed the petition in the high court to recall its July 18 notice issued to the Election Commission (EC) on a writ petition filed by social activist Subash Mohapatra. Mohapatra in his petition had sought judicial intervention for quick disposal of his representation pending before the EC since June 2016. In his representation to the EC, he had alleged gross discrepancies in the sworn statements of Naveen Patnaik about his election expenses in 2014. Supreme Court advocate Narendra Hooda and Mohapatra’s counsel Siddharth P Das, appearing before the bench of Justice S K Mishra, sought time to file a counter to the Ganjam district electoral officer’s petition following which, the court fixed July 27 for next hearing of the case.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Madras HC makes Vande Mataram mandatory in TN schools, says can sing in Tamil if Bengali or Sanskrit is difficult

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Madras High Court today made singing of the national song Vande Mataram mandatory in schools across Tamil Nadu, at least twice a week.Private and government schools in the state should ensure that their students sing the national song at least twice a week preferably on Monday and Friday, Justice M V Muralidharan said in the order.Noting that the song can also be played in other government and private establishments at least once in a month, the judge said, “If people feel it is difficult to sing the song in Bengali or in Sanskrit, steps can be taken to translate the song in Tamil.”However, the judge said in the event, any person or organisation has difficulty in singing or playing the song, they shall not be compelled or forced to sing it, provided there are valid reasons for not doing so.The judge said “the youth of this country are the future of tomorrow and the court hopes and trusts that this order shall be taken in the right spirit and also implemented in letter and spirit by the citizenry of this great nation.” The matter relates to a petition moved by K Veeramani, who failed to clear the written test for the post of BT Assistant as he answered that the song was written in Bengali.He had moved the court after his answer ‘Bengali’ to the objective type question was declared wrong by the board. He was awarded 89 marks against the minimum 90 to be eligible for appointment.Claiming that he had missed recruitment to the post by one mark due to the ‘wrong’ evaluation, the petitioner had sought award of the extra mark, treating his answer to the ‘Vande Mataram’ question as correct.When the matter first came up on July 7, the petitioner’s counsel had submitted that Bankim Chandra Chatterjee wrote the national song in both Bengali and Sanskrit.The additional government pleader, on the other hand, had argued that it was written only in Sanskrit and was later translated to Bengali.The petitioner had contended that in all the books he had studied, Bengali was mentioned as the first language in which the national song was written.Following this, the judge had directed the AG to appear before him and apprise the court of the correct answer, to settle the dispute over the linguistic origin of the song raised by the BEd graduate.When the case came up on July 13, Tamil Nadu Advocate General R Muthukumaraswamy informed the court that the national song was of Sanskrit origin, but had originally been penned in Bengali by Chatterjee.

Defamation Case: Arvind Kejriwal denies ‘instructing’ Ram Jethmalani to call Arun Jaitley a ‘crook’

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Facing a Rs 10 crore defamation suit, Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal on Tuesday denied instructing senior counsel Ram Jethmalani to call Union Minister Arun Jaitley a ‘crook’. Kejriwal filed an affidavit in the Delhi High Court washing his hands off the incident. Ram Jethmalani had called Jaitley a crook during cross examination in the trial of the defamation suit filed by the minister.Union Finance Minister Arun Jaitley filed a second civil defamation suit amounting to Rs 10 crore against Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal in the Delhi High Court.During a heated conversation between Senior Advocate Ram Jethmalani and Arun Jaitley, he asked if Jethmalani had used the word as per his client’s instructions. “If this is so, I would aggravate the charges against the defendant (Kejriwal),” Jaitley had said, adding that there was a limit to personal malice.
ALSO READ Delhi court to consider on July 26 defamation plea against Arvind KejriwalKejriwal in an affidavit submitted to the Delhi High Court brushed away the allegations stating that Jethmalani was not instructed by him to use objectionable words against the minister. “With due respect, it is submitted that neither Kejriwal nor the counsel briefing the senior counsel Jethmalani gave instructions to the senior counsel to use the objectionable words on May 17, 2017,” the affidavit read.
ALSO READ Delhi High Court issues notice to Arun Jaitley over Arvind Kejriwal’s pleaDuring the proceedings on May 17, Mr Jethmalani had said, “He (Arun Jaitley) is a crook and I will show this”. After Mr Jaitley objected, he said, “Let the court note that I am doing this with my client’s consent”. In response, Mr Jaitley had said he would seek “aggravated damages”.

Singing of Vande Mataram made mandatory in TN schools

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Madras High Court today made singing of the national song Vande Mataram mandatory in schools across Tamil Nadu, at least twice a week. Private and government schools in the state should ensure that their students sing the national song at least twice a week preferably on Monday and Friday, Justice M V Muralidharan said in the order. Noting that the song can also be played in other government and private establishments at least once in a month, the judge said, “If people feel it is difficult to sing the song in Bengali or in Sanskrit, steps can be taken to translate the song in Tamil.” However, the judge said in the event, any person or organisation has difficulty in singing or playing the song, they shall not be compelled or forced to sing it, provided there are valid reasons for not doing so. The judge said “the youth of this country are the future of tomorrow and the court hopes and trusts that this order shall be taken in the right spirit and also implemented in letter and spirit by the citizenry of this great nation.” The matter relates to a petition moved by K Veeramani, who failed to clear the written test for the post of BT Assistant as he answered that the song was written in Bengali. He had moved the court after his answer ‘Bengali’ to the objective type question was declared wrong by the board. He was awarded 89 marks against the minimum 90 to be eligible for appointment. Claiming that he had missed recruitment to the post by one mark due to the ‘wrong’ evaluation, the petitioner had sought award of the extra mark, treating his answer to the ‘Vande Mataram’ question as correct. When the matter first came up on July 7, the petitioner’s counsel had submitted that Bankim Chandra Chatterjee wrote the national song in both Bengali and Sanskrit. The additional government pleader, on the other hand, had argued that it was written only in Sanskrit and was later translated to Bengali. The petitioner had contended that in all the books he had studied, Bengali was mentioned as the first language in which the national song was written. Following this, the judge had directed the AG to appear before him and apprise the court of the correct answer, to settle the dispute over the linguistic origin of the song raised by the BEd graduate. When the case came up on July 13, Tamil Nadu Advocate General R Muthukumaraswamy informed the court that the national song was of Sanskrit origin, but had originally been penned in Bengali by Chatterjee.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Bombay High Court upholds termination of Rajdhani train caterer

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Bombay High Court recently upheld an order passed by Western Railway, canceling a catering contract on the prestigious Swarn Jayanti Rajdhani Express, which plies between Ahmedabad and New Delhi.A division bench of Justice Anoop Mohta and Justice Anuja Prabhudessai rejected the petition filed by Ambuj Hotel and Real Estate Private Limited, challenging the termination order issued in March. The court observed, “No merit is made out in the petition filed, thus it is dismissed.”The railways through Advocate Suresh Kumar and Advocate Priyanka Tiwari, argued that several complaints from general public, MPs, MLAs and through social media were received against the poor catering service, less quantity of food served, and misbehaviour by catering staff. To protect the image of the railways, the order of termination was passed. As per the petition filed by the caterer, the order was illegal and arbitrary, should be quashed and set aside.The order of the railways stated that it received 133 complaints, on an average of 13 to 14 per month, from the time of the contract in 2015. However, a reply by the contractor stated that complaints are about 0.02 per cent of the total passengers served, and therefore not a big issue. The railways refuted that even 0.02 per cent of dissatisfaction of passengers traveling by such a prestigious is not acceptable.Among the list of deficiencies listed by the railways include serving frozen dessert in place of ice cream; sweets in evening snacks replaced with muffins; paneer in vegetables found to be in less quantity; no welcome drinks served to passengers; tea and coffee served along with breakfast but served on demand, without stirrer. The complaint also mentioned that even rice with meals was less in weight. And, the caterer was not fire compliant.Complaints galoreThe order of the railways stated that it received 133 complaints, and an average of 13 to 14 per month, from the time of the contract in 2015

You can access A-G’s opinion through RTI

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>You may now be able to access the Advocate General’s (A-G) opinion given to the government on matters of public interest such as reservation, dance bar, metro fare hike, and dahi handi under the Right to Information Act (RTI).The Maharashtra State Information commission (SIC) has set aside a blanket ban of the state government to not provide information about the A-G’s opinion to applicants. The State had cited a Bombay High Court (HC) order to deny such information under RTI. Though not binding on other SICs or Central Information Commission (CIC), orders of any SIC are often used as case studies to argue for a judgment in one’s favour.In an order dated July 11, 2017, Ajit Kumar Jain, state information commissioner (Brihanmumbai Bench) asked the government to provide one such opinion that was given to the government. The opinion was on a minister’s office coming under RTI. State government had sought the A-G’s opinion on it after the former chief commissioner, Ratnakar Gaikwad, had passed an order last year that a minister’s office comes under RTI.Opinions of lawyers or A-Gs are also denied by public authorities, citing section 8 (1) (e) of the act that pertains to fiduciary relationship. “I remember a decision I had given when a university refused to give a lawyer’s opinion saying it was in fiduciary capacity,” said Shailesh Gandhi, former central information commissioner. “I had asked for the information to be released. A lawyer is obligated to not give out information about his customer, but that cannot be the case with the customer.”DNA had sought information on the A-G’s opinion, along with other details, before the SIC order of appointing a Public Information Officer (PIO) and First Appellate Authority (FAA) was implemented by the government. The request was refused by the government.Recently, the issue of A-GI was in news for being under the ambit of RTI. “The CIC decided in our favor that the A-GI office is a public authority as it is constituted under RTI. Even single bench of Delhi HC ruled in our favour but division bench over turned it. We have now approached SC,” said Delhi based Subhash Chandra Agarwal, the applicant in A-GI case.The 2015 Bombay HC order that the General Administration Department (GAD) cited, stated that: “We are of the considered view that unless it is required to be disclosed considering the overwhelming public interest, the legal opinion of the learned Advocate General must be kept confidential.” It went on to state that “Apart from circulating a copy of the order to all the departments, a copy thereof be forwarded to the chief secretary of the state government to enable him to issue the appropriate directions.”GAD, to which the chief minister’s office passed the RTI application, stated that HC has barred AG’s opinion to be given. GAD did not mention any section of the RTI Act while denying such information. During the hearing, it also cited an opinion of law and judiciary department which was sought to deny AG’s opinion in another matter.The commission observed: “As per section 2(f) of the RTI Act, opinions that are part of record, is part of definition of information (under RTI). The court order that the PIO has cited states that besides matters of overwhelming public interest, opinion of the A-G should be kept secret.” It further observed that appointing of PIO and FAA in ministers’ office is a matter of public interest and providing such information also does not violate section 8 (1) (h) of the RTI Act which states “information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders”.

SC ruling of CBI probe in alleged extra-judicial killings `a positive step` Advocate @ 7/15/2017 5:05:26 AM

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –> Senior advocate for the petitioner in the alleged extra-judicial killings by the Army, the Assam Rifles and the Manipur Police case, on Wednesday hailed the Supreme Court?s ruling of ordering a CBI probe in the matter. Advocate Colin Gonzalvis said that the Justice Hegde committee constituted in the regard investigated six sample cases and asserted that all the cases, where the government said that genuine encounter, were carried out it was found that all of them were fake. ?We are very happy to learn the court?s order in the regard. The organisations of Manipur, the people of Manipur are very happy to get the judgment where CBI inquiry has been ordered in certain cases of fake encounters. We are very happy with the court?s approach, the court had appointed a committee headed by Justice Hegde who was a former Supreme Court judge and Justice Hegde investigated six sample cases and found that all the six cases where the government said they were dreaded terrorists who were killed in a genuine encounter, Justice Hegde committee held that they were all fake encounters and the committee also held that all the six people did not even have a criminal record, so we are happy to know today?s judgment,? said Gonzalvis. ?We must say, you can see the effect in Manipur immediately, earlier there used to be 300 deaths every year, and ever since the matter is pending in the SC, the deaths have come down to two or three. Peace has returned to Manipur. More over we have also made it clear that we are not against the Indian Army but we are against certain rouge elements who don?t abide by the principles of the Indian army,? he added. A bench of Justices M.B. Lokur and U.U. Lalit asked the CBI director to appoint a team of officers to conduct the probe into the alleged killings. The court was hearing a PIL seeking probe and compensation in the alleged 1,528 extra-judicial killings in Manipur from 2000 to 2012 by security forces and police.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

SC ruling of CBI probe in alleged extra-judicial killings `a positive step` Advocate

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –> Senior advocate for the petitioner in the alleged extra-judicial killings by the Army, the Assam Rifles and the Manipur Police case, on Wednesday hailed the Supreme Court?s ruling of ordering a CBI probe in the matter. Advocate Colin Gonzalvis said that the Justice Hegde committee constituted in the regard investigated six sample cases and asserted that all the cases, where the government said that genuine encounter, were carried out it was found that all of them were fake. ?We are very happy to learn the court?s order in the regard. The organisations of Manipur, the people of Manipur are very happy to get the judgment where CBI inquiry has been ordered in certain cases of fake encounters. We are very happy with the court?s approach, the court had appointed a committee headed by Justice Hegde who was a former Supreme Court judge and Justice Hegde investigated six sample cases and found that all the six cases where the government said they were dreaded terrorists who were killed in a genuine encounter, Justice Hegde committee held that they were all fake encounters and the committee also held that all the six people did not even have a criminal record, so we are happy to know today?s judgment,? said Gonzalvis. ?We must say, you can see the effect in Manipur immediately, earlier there used to be 300 deaths every year, and ever since the matter is pending in the SC, the deaths have come down to two or three. Peace has returned to Manipur. More over we have also made it clear that we are not against the Indian Army but we are against certain rouge elements who don?t abide by the principles of the Indian army,? he added. A bench of Justices M.B. Lokur and U.U. Lalit asked the CBI director to appoint a team of officers to conduct the probe into the alleged killings. The court was hearing a PIL seeking probe and compensation in the alleged 1,528 extra-judicial killings in Manipur from 2000 to 2012 by security forces and police.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Court to hear Satyendar Jain’s plea against Mishra on July 28

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>A city court today decided to record pre-summoning evidence in two criminal defamation complaints filed by Delhi Health Minister Satyendar Jain against sacked minister Kapil Mishra and a BJP MLA for allegedly defaming him by levelling graft charges. The matter was listed for July 28 as Metropolitan Magistrate Shefali Barnala Tandon is attending a training session. The court had earlier taken cognisance of the complaints filed against Mishra and BJP MLA Manjinder Singh Sirsa. Advocate Gautam Dhamija, appearing for Jain, had then argued that Mishra had allegedly made defamatory statements before the national media. He had alleged that Mishra used his official Twitter handle also to defame Jain and, instead of going to any probe agency, he had levelled the allegations before the media to defame the Health Minister. The plea claimed Sirsa had alleged that the minister was circulating huge amounts of illegitimate money within the party. Jain has also accused a media house for publishing the alleged “libellous and slanderous statements” made by Sirsa. The counsel had argued that the allegations were made in front of the national media but only one newspaper published it, which, he said, showed they were hand in glove with each other. Jain had on May 19 filed two criminal defamation complaints against Mishra and Sirsa for allegedly defaming him by levelling graft charges against him. If convicted, the offence of defamation entails a maximum punishment of two years. Jain in his plea against Mishra, who was earlier heading the water department, submitted that on May 7, he had made a statement before the media accusing him of handing a bribe of Rs two crore to Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal on May five. He said his family members and people from his constituency had questioned him about the incident which had caused irreparable damage to his reputation. Regarding Sirsa, Jain said that on May 9, the MLA had made libellous statements by levelling corruption allegation against him. He said that making a statement on the basis of “hearsay” without any proof or evidence supporting it, is not only unbecoming of an MLA, but also a crime of defaming a person.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Calcutta HC asks Centre to send 4 CRPF companies in Darjeeling

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Calcutta High Court today directed the Centre to provide four additional companies of CRPF within 48 hours in Darjeeling to quell violence in the hills. A division bench comprising acting Chief Justice Nishita Mhatre and Justice T Chakraborty directed the Centre to provide the forces from the CRPF in addition to 11 companies of the Central Armed Police Force (CAPF) already deployed there. The court also directed the state government to provide additional forces from its own resources in order to bring back normalcy in the hills, where an indefinite bandh demanding separate statehood has been going on for the last one month. The bench has repeatedly expressed concern over the sufferings of the people in the stir-hit Darjeeling hills amid the ongoing tussle over replacement of forces, sought by the state for ‘operational reasons.’ The Centre, in reply to the state’s request for replacement of three Mahila companies of CRPF, today said through an affidavit that the women members of the force could not be discriminated against. On the state’s request for replacing three companies of SSB from the restive Darjeeling hills claiming that they were familiar with the local people, the Centre submitted that it was not a cogent reason to replace the SSB companies as they worked without bias. Hearing both the Advocate General for the state and the Additional Solicitor General for the Centre, the division bench directed the deployment of four companies of CRPF in addition to the 11 companies already deployed in Darjeeling and Kalimpong districts in the hills. Out of the 11 companies of CAPF, there are three from SSB, three Mahila CRPF companies and the rest are CRPF companies comprising men.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Chief Justice to hear plea for Constitution bench on Aadhaar

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Senior Advocate Shyam Divan, supported by Attorney General KK Venugopal, will request the Chief Justice of India JS Khehar to constitute a five-judge bench, or a larger one, to hear privacy issues connected with the Aadhaar matter.In 2015, a five-judge bench led by the then Chief Justice of India, HL Dattu, had directed all matters pertaining to the privacy issue related to Aadhaar to a Constitution bench.The oft-made request comes on the heels of an observation made by Justice Jasti Chelameshwar, who had said that a Constitution bench should dispose of all matters arising out of the Aadhaar issue once and for all.Justice Chelameshwar’s observation was made last week when the Aadhaar matter came up for hearing in front of the full bench in pursuance of a June 27 order delivered by a vacation bench. Divan, representing the petitioners, and Venugopal agreed with the court’s suggestion and agreed to jointly mention the matter before the Chief Justice of India the next week.”My opinion is that once a matter has been referred to a Constitution bench, then all the issues arising out of it should be with the constitution bench. I can only say that a matter can be disposed of by a nine-judge bench. You two can decide the possibility of nine judges hearing it,” Justice Chelameswar, heading the three-judge bench also comprising Justices AM Khanwilkar and Navin Sinha, had said.

Plea seeks junking of recruitment rules for HC readers

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Madras High Court today sought the stand of its registry on a plea for declaring null and void its rule for filling up the posts of assistants and reader in the court. The bench of Chief Justice Indira Banerjee and Justice M Sundar sought the stand of the high court’s registrar general issuing notice to his office. The notice was accepted by Advocate P K Rajagopal on behalf of the RG’s office. The plea was filed by one P Pugalenthi, seeking to declare as null and void Rule 14A of the Madras High Court Service Rules, 2015 relating to the appointment of assistants and readers/examiners in the high court. The petitioner submitted that the high court had in 2012 ordered that 50 per cent of the vacant posts be filled through promotion and the balance through direct recruitment. As 56 vacant posts were filled up without issuing any public notification despite court orders, the petitioner challenged the same, which is still pending. The high court had framed the Madras High Court Service Rules, 2015 in suppression of the then existing service rules which were considered by it while deciding the petitioner’s case in 2012, the petitioner submitted. As per the Rules, all posts of assistants and readers/ examiners were required to be filled only by promotion by considering even the last grade employees working in the high court, which led to unemployed graduates losing a valuable opportunity of being considered for public employment in the high court, the petitioner contended in his plea. In January 2016, about 100 persons holding the post of office assistant in the high court were directly promoted as assistants, the petitioner said.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

50K may lose govt jobs after SC verdict against fake caste certificates

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>A Supreme Court verdict passed on Thursday, which held that those using fake caste certificates to avail quota for admissions to educational institutions or getting government jobs must lose the benefit even if their forgery is discovered after years, is likely to have huge social and political ramification in Maharashtra and elsewhere.According to a government report, over 10 lakh people in Maharashtra are estimated to have obtained bogus caste certificates over the past four decades. The report cites the nexus of collectorates, caste scrutiny committees, touts, and politicians as facilitators. Of these 10 lakh, nearly 50,000 belonging to General and OBC categories have reportedly bagged government jobs including civil services and seats in premier institutions across Maharashtra under various quotas designated for underprivileged scheduled castes, tribes, and denotified communities, say government officials.All these fake quota beneficiaries will have to give up their offices if the state government shows the political will to do so.Supreme Court Advocate Ravindra Adsure, who was associated with the case, explained, “All those employees, professionals, and students across India whose caste certificates have been pronounced fake by the caste scrutiny committee and have not been granted relief by the judiciary so far, are set to lose their jobs and degrees now. The cases which are pending before the caste scrutiny committee and might be termed fake would also lose their entitlements.”Despite clear directions from the SC in 1994 to expel the impostors who illegally usurp quota benefits, respective governments, and the HCs have permitted many of them to continue with their jobs because they had put in “several years” in service. They were merely transferred to their original category (General, OBC, or SC) and stripped of promotions as ‘punishment’. Fake quota students were allowed to complete their course after paying a fine.”Since the Thursday verdict is applicable with prospective effect, people who already got HC or SC relief will be unaffected,” says Adsure. Many bogus beneficiaries have retired and passed away also….& ANALYSISThe Supreme Court in its September 2, 1994 verdict had stated (for a case pertaining to Maharashtra) that the employees must be expelled from their jobs if their caste certificates were found to be bogus.
Even as the SC judgment has been the hottest gossip among polity and bureaucracy since Thursday, there is complete silence over its implementation.

NGT notice to Delhi government on garbage in Seelampur

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The National Green Tribunal today took note of a drain clogged with garbage and municipal solid waste near a residential colony in North East Delhi and sought reply from the Delhi government on the issue. A bench headed by NGT Chairperson Justice Swatanter Kumar issued notices to the AAP government, the East Delhi Municipal Corporation (EDMC) and the Public Works Department and sought their reply before July 11. The tribunal asked the authorities to show-cause why appropriate action should not be taken against them for violating the orders of the NGT. Advocate Balendu Shekhar, appearing for EDMC, said that although the area falls under the jurisdiction of the corporation, however, the responsibility of cleaning the drains is with the Irrigation & Flood Control Department of the Delhi government. The order came after the NGT took suo motu cognisance of a media report and picture showing a drain clogged with municipal solid waste near a residential area in Seelampur here. The tribunal had earlier said that municipal solid waste is one of the most serious pollutants in the country specially in Delhi and announced a fine of Rs 10,000 on those found throwing waste at public places. The green panel had said that all authorities are under “statutory” obligation to ensure that waste is “collected, transported and disposed” of in accordance with Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016 so that it does not cause public health hazards.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

TN local body polls: HC adjourns hearing to July 14

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Madras High Court today adjourned till July 14 all petitions and appeals filed in connection with local body elections in Tamil Nadu as an SLP in this connection is scheduled to come up in the Supreme Court on July 12. The first bench comprising Chief Justice Indira Banerjee and Justice M Sundar, before which the petition filed by one A Narayanan of NGO Change of India came up, adjourned the case after hearing submissions by Advocate General Muthukumaraswamy and the counsel of DMK, which has filed an SLP in the apex court, challenging constitutional validity of extending tenure of special officers. The NGO had in its petition challenged the extension of tenure of special officers for local bodies. The Advocate General submitted that the SLP with regard to conduct of the elections filed by DMK is scheduled to come up in the SC on July 12, to which senior advocate P Wilson, appearing on behalf of DMK, said there was no bar on the High Court in hearing cases before it in the above connection. Senior counsel B Kumar, who appeared on behalf of State Election Commission, on his part submitted that as per the order passed by the single judge amendments have to be brought by the state government to prevent the candidates with criminal background from contesting elections and with regard to reservation for SC and ST communities in local bodies. Without all these amendments if the elections were announced again another round of litigations would follow, for which the bench said the court would be slow in entertaining such petitions. The bench also allowed an impleading petition filed by advocate M Palanimuthu for a direction to the government to finalise a decision with regard to reserving posts of deputy mayors to village panchayat vice presidents and providing adequate representation/ reservation in all local body standing committees to SC/STs or women before announcement of elections.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Stray dog menace: HC asks Punjab, Haryana, Chandigarh policy

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Taking a serious note of stray dog menace, the Punjab and Haryana High Court here today asked governments of the two states and the Chandigarh civic body to produce before it their schemes to tackle the problem. The court also directed Punjab, Haryana and Chandigarh municipal corporation to show it their policy for giving compensation to the dog bite victims, dying or suffering injuries, or to their families. Hearing a plea by Ram Kumar of Samana who sought compensation from the Punjab government and the municipal council of Samana for the death of his 12-year-old son Ankit due to dog bite on March 5, 2014, the bench of Justice Rakesh Jain issued notice for July 12 to Punjab and Haryana governments and Chandigarh administration and local bodies director of the twin states. The court also asked the Advocate General of Punjab and Haryana and senior standing counsel of UT Chandigarh administration to appear before it on July 12 for assisting the court. Justice Jain also directed the respondents to produce before it their respective policies framed, not only for preventing the menace of stray dog bite, but also on the issue of grant of compensation to the victims of such stray dog bites, or their families. Kumar had prayed for directions to State of Punjab and municipal council of Samana to pay compensation of Rs 10 lakh to him for their failure to end the stray dog menace, leading to death of his son who was bitten while he was playing outside his house in Samana. After about six weeks, when he took his son to Civil Hospital in Samana, for the 5th dose of anti-rabies injection, his son became unconscious after injection was administered and died on the spot. He held MC, Samana responsible for the death of his son, and contended that the State of Punjab was also vicariously liable for the death of Ankit.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Encounter killings: SC asks states to reply to NHRC plea

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Supreme Court today directed various states to file their replies on a plea of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) seeking direction for mandatorily giving information about any encounter killings in their respective jurisdiction for purposes of enquiry. A bench of Justices A M Sapre and R Banumathi directed the states should file their replies within eight weeks. Advocate Shobha appearing for NHRC said some states have filed their replies but many of them were yet to do so. She urged the bench to give these states the last opportunity to file their replies saying that the notices to state governments on the petition were issued in 2014. The NHRC in its plea has sought direction that the state governments and police authorities should continue to provide the information asked for by it in accordance with the guidelines and provisions of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, for probing the cases of encounter killings. It has also sought direction that the state governments should not refuse to comply with the recommendations made by Commission. The Commission said that due to apex court verdict of 2014 by which certain guidelines were framed, its role in such enquiries has virtually been nullified. “The said guidelines which are made in sub-silentio, having not considered various mandatory provisions of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, circumscribe and completely abrogate the power conferred on NHRC by the Act, to enquire suo motu or on a petition presented to it by a victim or any person on his behalf into any complaint of violation of human rights by a public servant,” the plea said. It said that Section 12(a) of the Act makes a mandatory obligation upon the NHRC to inquire suo motu or on a petition presented to it by a victim, into the complaints of violation of human rights by a public servant. It said the Commission has issued guidelines from time to time regarding the procedure to be adopted in cases of encounter killings. “The latest guidelines were issued by the Commission in May 2010 which provided that an information of encounter killing should be given to NHRC within 48 hours after the incident and a second report along with the post-mortem report, Magisterial Enquiry Report and forensic report should be submitted to the Commission within three months,” it said. It said such provisions cannot be rendered redundant by the guidelines framed in the PUCL case.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Resolve differences over CAPF deployment in Darj: HC to WB,

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Empathising with the sufferings of people in and around Darjeeling under indefinite shutdown, the Calcutta High Court today asked the Centre and the West Bengal government to resolve their differences over need and and deployment of Central Armed Police Force in the hills. A division of Acting Chief Justice Nishita Mhatre and Justice T Chakraborty asked the Centre and the state government to resolve the issue of CAPF’s requisition and deployment in the hills immediately and inform it tomorrow. Appearing for the Centre during the hearing of plea for restoration of normalcy in Darjeeling hills, Additional Solicitor General Kaushik Chanda submitted that the state’s requisition is under examination. The state government through a communique on June 30 had requested the Centre for replacement of three women companies of the CRPF with three male CRPF companies and replacement of three companies of SSB with those CRPF or RAF. Chanda submitted that the state government was requested to provide details of availability and deployment of state armed police in Darjeeling and Kalimpong districts. This was disputed by Advocate General Kishore Dutta who submitted that the state government was yet to receive any such request. There are at present 11 companies of CAPF in Darjeeling hills, comprising the districts of Darjeeling and Kalimpong, along with state police force to tackle the disturbances there. The matter will be taken up for hearing again tomorrow.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

HC junks ACI plea against eviction from Safadarjung Airport

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Delhi High Court today dismissed a plea of the Aero Club of India (ACI) challenging its eviction from land belonging to the Safdarjung Airport here, saying it had already “overstayed” for four years. Justice Vibhu Bakhru denied any relief to ACI, the apex body of all Flying Clubs/Institutions engaged in Flying Training and Aero-Sports in the country, after the Airports Authority of India (AAI) submitted that it needed the land for its own use. “Your (ACI) license expired in 2013. You have overstayed for four years. They are right to ask you for eviction. What is your legal right to occupy the land,” the court asked. The ACI had claimed that AAI had acted in an arbitrary manner in cancelling the lease. Advocate Digvijay Rai, appearing for AAI, opposed the petition, saying that the licence for the 17,400 square feet land opposite Jor Bagh colony in South Delhi, located opposite the airport, was given to the ACI in 1983 for 30 years and it had expired in 2013. As the ACI did not agree to pay the revised fee for the license, the lease was cancelled, he said. The ACI had moved the high court against the eviction order passed by Eviction Officer on June 16 asking it to vacate the premises within 15 days. Its petition claimed that the eviction order was arbitrary, discriminatory, unconstitutional and erroneous in law as well as on facts.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)