Yuva Sai Sagar

Online news channel!

Tag: misra

Supreme Court refuses to stay Karnataka High Court order on tobacco warning

On Friday, the Supreme Court refused to stay an order passed by the Karnataka High Court that quashed the government regulation requiring tobacco products to display pictorial warnings covering 85 per cent of the packaging space.The Karnataka HC had last week quashed the government regulation —which increased the size of the pictorial warning on tobacco products from 40 per cent to 85 per cent — that was introduced in a bid to inform the general public about the health hazards of tobacco products and to dissuade them from consuming it. Since then, several petitions — including one filed by NGO Health for Millions — have been filed challenging the HC’s order.A vacation bench led by Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul refused to stay the order and directed Karnataka HC to upload the judgment online.The matter will next be heard on January 8 for further arguments on this appeal.On December 15, a two-judge bench at the HC had observed that the Union health ministry did not have jurisdictional powers to pass such a rule. The HC further found that the rule violated constitutional norms as it put “unreasonable” restrictions on the right to do business.However, the HC reverted the surface area for pictorial warnings to 40 per cent, that existed before the 85 per cent stipulation come in.

Join the discussion<!–end of artlbotbor–>

Aadhaar linking mandatory: SC reserves order for tomorrow

The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its interim order for tomorrow on pleas seeking a stay on the government’s decision of mandatory linking of Aadhaar with various welfare schemes.A five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra said the final hearing on the petitions challenging the Aadhaar scheme itself would commence from January 17 next year.The central government had yesterday attempted to convince the court not to interfere with its deadlines, promising to extend it for another three months till 31 March 2018 for those who do not have Aadhaar.Earlier on October 25, the Supreme court had said that the deadline for compulsory linking of Aadhaar to receive benefits of government schemes has been extended till March 31, 2018 for those who do not have the 12-digit unique biometric identification number.Earlier the court had tagged 22 cases to be heard by a smaller bench.The cases challenge several aspects of Aadhaar, including the use of data collected under the unique identification programme.As of now, the 12-digit Aadhaar number is compulsory to be linked to bank accounts, PAN cards, government services and cell phone services.

Join the discussion<!–end of artlbotbor–>

‘After humiliating end to Delhi case,’ SC lawyer Rajeev Dhavan quits court practice

After a showdown with the Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra, senior Supreme Court lawyer Rajeev Dhavan has decided to quit court practice. In a letter addressed to CJI Misra, he said: “After the humiliating end to the Delhi (vs Centre) case, I have decided to give up court practice. You are entitled to take away the Senior Gown conferred on me, though I would like to keep it for memory and services rendered”. Two recent run-ins of Dhavan with the Chief Justice were widely reported in the media. During the Ayodhya case, Dhawan, Kapil Sibal, and Dushyant Dave pleaded that the Supreme Court defer hearing in the Babri-Ram Janambhoomi case until after the 2019 Lok Sabha election.According to reports, Dhavan shouted at CJI Misra during the arguments. In another matter of Centre vs Delhi, Dhawan while representing the Arvind Kejriwal government, wanted to further a few more arguments even though Supreme Court had reserved its order in the case. Also readPM Modi, Kapil Sibal take digs at each other over Ayodhya caseAfter these two instances, CJI Misara said the trend of lawyers raising their voices showed their “inadequacy, incompetence and the fact that they are not even eligible to become seniors”.CJI Misra said: “If the Supreme Court Bar Association does not regulate such members, we will be forced to regulate them”.CJI further said: “When lawyers argue in a manner, not in tune with Constitutional language, we will tolerate it, but for how long? ”

Join the discussion<!–end of artlbotbor–>

Marriage does not mortgage woman to man: Supreme Court

On Thursday, Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra observed that a woman does not mortgage herself to a man by marrying him. She retains her identity, including her religious identity, even after she exercises her right to marry outside her community under the Special Marriage Act.The top court’s observation came when a five-judge bench was hearing the matter of a Parsi woman who was barred from entering the Tower of Silence to offer prayers for her dead relatives because she married outside her faith.”Special Marriage Act confers in her the right of choice. Her choice is sacred. I ask myself a question: Who can take away the religious identity of a woman? The answer is only a woman can choose to curtail her own identity,” Chief Justice Misra said on the first day of the hearing.Couples from different faiths who wish to retain their individual religious identities may opt for a marriage under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, which ensures religious protection.Nobody can presume that a woman has changed her faith or religion just because she chose to change her name after marrying outside her community, the CJI observed.The bench — also comprising Justices AK Sikri, AM Khanwilkar, DY Chandrachud and Ashok Bhushan — then asked senior advocate Gopal Subramanium who is representing the Valsad Parsi Anjuman Trust whether it would allow petitioner Goolrukh Gupta time to respond by next week.Should the trust respond in the negative, the court will then have to decide whether a Parsi woman can hold on to her religious identity if she chooses to marry someone outside her faith.Prima facie, the top court observed that it did not adhere to the principle of merger relied upon by the Gujarat High Court in denying Gupta the right to practice her faith. Gupta has challenged the high court’s order which essentially suggested that by the principle of merger, Gupta became a Hindu when she married one and thus ceased to be a Parsi.Representing Gupta, Senior Advocate Indira Jaising sought the court’s indulgence to treat this case as an endorsement of inter-faith marriages. Those who marry outside their faith should be saddled with any disabilities, she added. Government data suggests that the Special Marriages Act is not used as often as it should be, she said.Every custom, usage, customary and statutory laws must stand the test of the Fundamental Rights principle, Jaising said. Article 372 (continuance of existing laws) of the Constitution is subject to Article 13, which mandates that laws should not violate the fundamental rights of an individual, she added.Suggesting that excommunicating Parsi women for marrying outside the faith tantamount to gender discrimination, CJI Misra asked: “How can you (Parsi elders) distinguish between a man and woman singularly by a biological phenomenon… If a woman says she has not changed her religion, by what philosophy do you say that she cannot go to the Tower of Silence? No law debars a woman from retaining her religious identity.””If a woman’s identity is merged, then Special Marriage Act is not required, is it not?” Justice Sikri pointed out.”The Tower of Silence is not a mutt or a citadel of a cult. It is a place to offer prayers to the dead. Can such a right of a woman be guillotined? It is part of her Constitutional identity,” CJI Misra further observed.The court’s decision favouring the Parsi woman’s right will create a paradigm shift for women within the minority community. Earlier this year, the top court recently ruled in favour of Muslim women by striking down instant triple talaq as unconstitutional.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consecwq tetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore
Yogi Adityanath

–>

Join the discussion<!–end of artlbotbor–>

PM Modi bats for cooperation after CJI Misra, RS Prasad spar over judicial activism

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Prime Minister Narendra Modi today stressed that the legislature, the judiciary and the executive were part of the same family and should work to strengthen each other, even as the Chief Justice and the law minister sparred over the issue of judicial activism.The prime minister also said that the three wings — the legislature, the judiciary and the executive — need to brainstorm on how to move forward in the changed scenario.”They are members of the same family…we do not have to prove anyone right or wrong. We know our strengths, we know our weaknesses,” he said at a gathering of judges and advocates at the National Law Day event here.
ALSO READ Bar and bench need to work together to bring down number of pending cases: CJI Misra Modi pointed out that while fighting for rights, one should not forget about duties.He emphasised that the balance between the executive, the legislature and the judiciary has been the backbone of the Constitution and it has helped the country during the Emergency.
ALSO READ New India will lead the world in the 21st century: PM ModiModi also pitched for self-regulation and a system of checks and balances for the good health of any institution and quoted B R Ambedkar to state that there should be a limit for any authority.Before the prime minister addressed the gathering, Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad reminded the judiciary of the principle of separation of powers between the judiciary, the legislature and the executive.He said the concept of separation of power is as binding on the judiciary as it is on the executive.Responding to the remarks of the law minister, Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Misra said that “there should be mutual respect and there cannot be any claim for supremacy by any of the wings”.The CJI said that the dream of the Prime Minister is a literate, educated and digitally-enabled India and the judiciary is “playing the role of a constitutional catalyst” to achieve the goal.Referring to the issue of judicial over-reach, Prasad said law-making must be left in the realm of those elected to make the law.”The founding fathers clearly meant that governance must remain in the realm of those elected to govern by the people of India and accountable to the people of India,” he said.While independence of the judiciary was “important”, judicial accountability, probity and propriety were “equally” necessary, he said.Justice Misra hit back by saying that, “We are not really interested to bring any kind of policy.””But the moment the policies are formed, we are allowed to interpret and see that they are implemented,” he said.Misra said the judiciary follows the principle of ‘judicially manageable standards’ under which it does not get into realms where it can’t do much. “If we can’t do it, we will not get into it,” he asserted.Misra rejected the suggestion that PILs were being used as a means to formulate policies and to govern the country.He said there had been several writs and PILs which the Supreme Court has turned down. He also said that the apex court has been going “slow” on economic matters, particularly tenders and especially global tenders.Prasad said while the government accepts the Supreme Court decision to strike down the National Judicial Appointments Commission which sought to overturn the system of judges appointing judges, it is important to appreciate the suggestion of an audit of judicial appointments.He referred to the contempt of court proceedings by the apex court against Justice C S Karnan.Prasad said his records show that the then collegium had described him as an expert in all fields of law. Perhaps, he was not an expert on contempt of court, the minister said, without naming Karnan.The CJI said whenever the law minister writes to the collegium, his observations are not ignored. The recommendations once rejected by the government are not reiterated out of mutual respect.Earlier in the day too, the two had countered each other’s assertions.

If we think future generations will take all risks, then history will not forgive us: PM Modi on National Law Day

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>On National Law Day, which was on Sunday, PM Modi gave the valedictory address at Vigyan Bhawan in Delhi with Chief Justice Dipak Misra also present.Praising the Constitution, he said it wasn’t easy to make historical document which bound a country of a dozen sects, more than 100 languages and 1700 dialects and people living in places with various beliefs together.He said: “Baba Saheb said that Constitution is workable, flexible & has power to unite the nation in times of war & peace. He also said if a wrong is done, it will not be the fault of constitution but the institution which is making people abide by constitution.”Speaking further, he said India is a young nation and to strengthen it all constitutional bodies will have to come together and work towards it. He asked: “If we think that coming generations will take all risks and work, then history will not forgive us. We will have to start working now. We may or may not be there but the system which will be brought here will stay.”He asked: “As members of the same family are we working together to strengthen one another, in support of each other?”He added: “Unfortunately we have not been able to remove our internal weaknesses, so many years after independence. We need to think about it at all levels.”Speaking about elections he said: “There are nations where date of election is fixed. People know when will it be held. This is beneficial, the country does not always stay in election mode, policy planning process & its implementation are more efficient & nation’s resources do not face unnecessary burden.”

Corruption claims on CJI derogatory, but not initiating contempt proceeding hoping ‘goodwill will prevail’: SC

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed the allegations made by Kamini Jaiswal and Prashant Bhushan against Chief Justice Dipak Mishra, saying that the claims were ‘derogatory and contemptuous’.However, the apex court said that it would not initiate contempt proceedings in the hope that ‘goodwill will prevail’A three-judge bench dismissed the plea seeking SIT probe into possible role of sitting HC and SC judges calling it “forum shopping” and contempt.Earlier on Monday, the bench headed by Justice R K Agrawal questioned Bhushan, appearing for Jaiswal, whether filing of two identically-worded petition was not a matter of propriety and would it not tantamount to forum shopping if it is sought to be listed before a particular bench.A bench of Justices J Chelameswar and S Abdul Nazeer had ordered on November 9 that the plea should be heard by a five-judge constitution bench of the senior-most judges of the apex court. However, on November 10, in an unprecedented hearing, a five-judge constitution bench headed by CJI Dipak Misra had ruled that “no judge can take up a matter on his own, unless allocated by the chief justice of India, as he is the master of the roster”.Justice Chelameswar, who is the senior-most judge after the CJI, had termed as “disturbing” the allegations levelled in a CBI FIR and ordered setting up a bench of five top judges of the court as a petition by Jaiswal had alleged there were allegations against Justice Misra. The CBI, in its FIR, lodged on September 19, has named several persons, including former Orissa High Court judge Ishrat Masroor Quddusi, as accused in an alleged corruption case.

Medical college owners worked the system

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>A five-judge bench of the Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra yesterday annulled the decision of a two-judge bench headed by Justice Jasti Chelameswar to form a Constitution bench to hear the plea for court-monitored probe by a Special Investigation Team (SIT) into the alleged bribery case involving retired Orissa High Court judge IM Quddusi and others.The issue that became the subject matter of heated argument between the counsel for the petitioners and the CJI himself was whether CJI Misra ought to have recused from being part of the five-judge bench.Behind the demand for the CJI’s recusal was the fact that another bench headed by him had earlier heard the case involving the erring medical colleges. The PIL alleges that the retired high court judge who was arrested by the CBI had used his influence in the judiciary to get favourable orders for a college.The college in question set up by the Prasad Education Trust was one of the 46 colleges barred by the Government from admitting medical students for the forthcoming 1 or 2 years because of substandard facilities and non fulfilment of the required criteria.Here is what happened thereafter: In August first week, a bench comprising the CJI and Justices Amitava Roy and AM Khanwilkar directed the Health Ministry to conduct a fresh inspection “to obviate the possibility of any injustice in the process.” The ministry gave the college a fresh hearing but found nothing in its arguments to make it change its earlier decision.This is where the rot set in, according to the CBI. The college management got in touch with Justice Quddusi, who allegedly advised them to withdraw the petition from the Supreme Court, which they did.They then filed a petition in the Allahabad High Court, making, basically, the same prayer.In a curious turn of events, the High Court allowed the medical college to be on the list of colleges notified for counselling. The HC also stayed the ministry’s order to encash the bank guarantee.The MCI challenged the HC’s decision in the apex court, which, on August 29, disposed of the appeal after the college submitted that it would not claim any benefit from the order passed by the High Court.Two days later, on August 31, Prasad Education Trust filed a writ petition, which was admitted for hearing by a bench headed by the CJI.On September 18, a bench headed by CJI Misra ruled that there would be no renewal for the academic session 2017-18. It further stated that the bank guarantee that was deposited shall not be encashed and be kept alive. The bench also directed the MCI to send inspecting teams to the Institution as per the schedule to re-evaluate and consider granting the college leave of permission for the academic year 2018-2019.The very next day, on September 19, the CBI filed an FIR accusing Justice Quddusi and fixer Bhawana Pandey and other in a case of corruption.

High drama in Supreme Court, CJI Misra overturns order to hear graft case involving judges

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The tussle within top judiciary today came to the fore with the Supreme Court overturning the order of a two-judge bench to set up a larger bench to hear a graft case allegedly involving judges, asserting that Chief Justice of India was the “master of the roster”.The showdown was over the issue of supremacy of constituting a bench in which the authority of Chief Justice Dipak Misra was allegedly undermined by a bench of Justices J Chelameswar and S Abdul Nazeer, which had yesterday set up a five-judge bench to hear a case of alleged bribery of judges in which a retired judge of Orissa High Court, Justice Ishrat Masroor Quddusi, is an accused.Justice Chelameswar, who is the senior-most judge after the CJI, had ordered setting up of the five-judge bench of top judges of the apex court as a petition by an NGO and an advocate had claimed there were allegations against Justice Misra.However, in a dramatic development, the CJI today set up a five-judge bench headed by him and overturned yesterday’s order of the two-judge bench, saying the Chief Justice had the sole prerogative of setting up a bench and allocating matters.In fast-paced events, the five-judge bench, also comprising Justices R K Agrawal, Arun Mishra, Amitava Roy and A M Khanwilkar, assembled at 3 PM and commenced an urgent hearing on the question as to who can direct the setting up of a bench of specific judges to hear a particular matter.”There cannot be a command or an order directing the CJI to constitute a bench of specific strength,” the bench said while making it clear that neither a two-judge, nor a three- judge bench can direct the CJI to constitute a specific bench.”Needless to emphasis that no judge can take up a matter on its own unless allocated by the CJI as the CJI is master of the court,” the bench said and annulled the decision of the two-judge bench, in the hearing which witnessed heated exchange of words between the judges and advocate Prashant Bhushan, representing the petitioners.”Any order passed contrary to this order (by the constitution bench) should not hold the field and shall be treated to be annulled,” the CJI said in hard-hitting remarks while refusing the request of a lawyer to bar the media from reporting the case, saying he believed in “freedom of speech, freedom of expression and freedom of press”.The bench said if the principle of law, judicial discipline and decorum of the court was not followed, there would be “anarchy” and “chaos” in the administration of justice as well as the functioning of the institution.Perturbed by yesterday’s order, the CJI, without taking names of the concerned judges, said there were hundreds of matters listed in the court daily and if the orders were passed like this, then the court cannot function.Members of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), including its President R S Suri, vice-president Ajit Sinha, Secretary Gaurav Bhatia and several senior advocates including Ashok Bhan, Aman Sinha and others strongly countered the allegations levelled in the petitions and said strong action should be taken against any attempt to “browbeat” the judges.”Getting orders by terrorism should not be tolerated by this court. Strong action needs to be taken against any such attempt,” SCBA members said while requesting the bench to initiate contempt proceedings in the matter.The hearing in the jampacked courtroom saw allegations flying thick and fast with Bhushan even raising his pitch while asking the CJI to recuse himself from hearing the matter as his name has allegedly figured in the CBI’s FIR.The CJI retorted by asking Bhushan, who was accompanied by advocate Kamini Jaiswal, one of the petitioners, to read the contents of the FIR and warned against losing his temper.”We have been giving you indulgence and you cannot deny that, despite you levelling wild allegations against me. You can afford to lose your temper but we cannot”, the CJI said.Bhushan, who was representing an NGO ‘Campaign for Judicial Accountability’ and Jaiswal, seeking constitution of an SIT to probe the corruption case allegedly involving judges, said the CJI’s name features in it.”What FIR against me? It is nonsense. There is not a word in the FIR naming me. Read our orders first. I feel sorry. You are liable for contempt now,” the CJI said.Bhushan dared the bench to issue a contempt notice to him and said the hearing cannot be conducted in this manner without allowing him to speak.The activist advocate was also rebuked by Justice Arun Mishra, who observed that FIR cannot be lodged against sitting judicial officer of lower courts, judges of the higher judiciary, the Vice President of India or the President of India because they have immunity.He said the contents of the petition filed before it was per se contemptuous.Bhushan left the court in a huff midway during the hearing, alleging that he was not being allowed to speak while the court has heard “all and sundry”. He was seen apparently being pushed and jostled while he was leaving the courtroom.The CJI also said he had set up the five-judge constitution bench as a two-judge bench comprising Justices A K Sikri and Ashok Bhushan, while hearing a separate plea with similar allegations of bribery earlier in the day, had said that the matter should be placed before the CJI for passing an appropriate order.At the fag end of the hearing, one of the bar members requested the bench to pass an order gagging the media from reporting the case, claiming it would tarnish the image of the institution which is a “temple of justice”.The CJI refused to accept the oral submission, saying “I believe in freedom of speech, freedom of expression and freedom of press”.”Prime facie, I am always of the view that freedom of speech and expression should be respected. I am not going to pass any order restraining the press,” CJI Misra said.The constitution bench also made it clear that the pleas regarding alleged bribes taken in the names of judges would be taken up by an appropriate bench after two weeks.The CBI, in its FIR, has named several persons, including former Orissa High Court judge Ishrat Masroor Quddusi, as accused in the alleged corruption case.

Prashant Bhushan storms out of SC, tweets accusing CJI of ‘conflict of interest’

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>In an action-packed day at the Supreme Court, senior advocate Prashant Bhushan stormed out of court.Bhushan expressed his displeasure at the refusal of the Bench headed by CJI Dipak Misra to hear him. The 5-judge bench of CJI Misra was hearing a petition filed by Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Judicial Reforms (CJAR).Bhushan was quoted saying by BarandBench.com: “You have heard persons who are not even parties to the case for an hour. If Your Lordships want to pass an order without hearing me, then do it.”He reportedly stormed out with marshalls escorting him.A bemused Bhushan tweeted after the proceedings: “Extraordinary proceedings in SC today in the case seeking SIT Investigation in medical college bribery case involving the CJI! CJI presided over a hand picked bench to override yesterday’s order referring this case to top 5 judges. This despite having a direct conflict of interest.The court proceedings were extraordinary in that the CJI was asking all kinds of lawyers who were not parties to say things against the order of Court 2, w/o hearing petitioner. He tried to justify his role in the medical college case & speak against ‘impropriety’ of Court 2.”On Thursday, Justice Chelameswar had ordered setting up a 5-judge bench excluding the CJI to probe allegations of bribery to allegedly influence outcome of cases.Another petition on the same issue came up for hearing and were set to be heard on Monday.However, at 3 PM today, CJI Misra constituted a seven-judge bench to review the decision of Justice Chelameswar’s order for a probe yesterday. But, two judges recused themselves, making it a five-man panel.Around 4PM, the 5-member bench panel headed by CJI Misra took the decision to annul the order passed by Justice Chelameswar ordering a probe into allegations of judicial corruption.A five-judge bench declares CJI to be the master of the roster. Any judicial order passed by any other judge to set up a bench will be “ineffective and not binding,” rules the Constitution Bench.Order passed a day ago by Justice J Chelameswar’s bench indirectly annulled.The bench by the CJI didn’t include Justice Chelameswar who is the second senior-most judge in the Supreme Court.The CJI, meanwhile, deemed that he was the only one who could set up benches to look into cases, and no other judge, no matter how senior, could order a formation of a constitutional bench.With inputs from agencies

CJI Dipak Misra’s bench annuls order passed by Justice Chelameswar into PIL regarding judicial accountability

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>In an unprecedented move, a 5-judge panel headed by Chief Justice of India Dipak Mishra annulled an order passed by Justice Jasti Chelameswar into allegations of judicial corruption.On Thursday, Justice Chelameswar had ordered setting up a 5-judge bench excluding the CJI to probe allegations of bribery to allegedly influence outcome of cases.Another petition on the same issue came up for hearing and were set to be heard on Monday.However, at 3 PM today, CJI Misra constituted a seven-judge bench to review the decision of Justice Chelameswar’s order for a probe yesterday. But, two judges recused themselves, making it a five-man panel.Around 4PM, the 5-member bench panel headed by CJI Misra took the decision to annul the order passed by Justice Chelameswar ordering a probe into allegations of judicial corruption. A five-judge bench declares CJI to be the master of the roster. Any judicial order passed by any other judge to set up a bench will be “ineffective and not binding,” rules the Constitution Bench.Order passed a day ago by Justice J Chelameswar’s bench indirectly annulled.The bench by the CJI didn’t include Justice Chelameswar who is the second senior-most judge in the Supreme Court.The CJI, meanwhile, deemed that he was the only one who can set up benches to look into cases, and no other judge, no matter how senior, could order a formation of a constitutional bench.Senior advocate Prashant Bhushan reportedly stormed out of the court of CJI after he refused to hear his plea. Bhushan claimed he had not been allowed to speak by the bench headed by CJI Misra.HOW IT ALL STARTEDIt all began on Thursday when the Supreme Court on Thursday referred to a constitution bench, comprising five senior-most judges, a plea claiming that alleged bribes were being taken using the names of apex court judges promising to secure favourable settlement of a case.Terming as “disturbing” the allegations levelled in CBI’s FIR that also made former Orissa High Court judge Ishrat Masroor Quddusi as one of the accused, the top court said the plea would come up for hearing before the constitution bench on November 13.The decision that the five senior-most judges would be part of the constitution bench assumes significance in the wake of senior advocate Dushyant Dave’s submission that the medical admission matter, the genesis of CBI FIR, was being heard by the bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra, and hence, he should not be involved with it either on the judicial or on the administrative side.A bench of Justices J Chelameswar and S Abdul Nazeer issued notices to the Centre and the CBI on the plea seeking setting up of a special investigation team (SIT), to be headed by a retired Chief Justice of India, to probe the matter.”Having regard to the totality of the circumstances, we deem it appropriate that this matter be heard by the constitution bench of the first five judges in the order of seniority of this court,” the court said in its order.Dave, appearing for petitioner lawyer Kamini Jaiswal, referred to the CBI FIR on the basis of which Justice (Retd) Quddusi was arrested and subsequently granted bail.He argued that the facts of the case as alleged by CBI were “disturbing”, as according to the probe agency, a conspiracy was hatched and huge illegal gratification demanded for procuring a favourable order in a matter relating to medical college admissions pending before the top court.Asserting that the matter relates to the “integrity” of the highest judicial fora in the country, Dave told the bench that several incriminating documents were seized by CBI during investigation in the graft case and there was apprehension that these materials could be misused.He sought the passage of an interim order to direct the CBI to hand over these documents, including the case diary, in a sealed cover to the registrar of the court.”We deem it appropriate to direct the second respondent (CBI) to produce the entire material collected by the CBI in the course of investigation of the crime and keep it in a sealed cover and produce the same before the constitution bench on Monday, the November 13,” the bench said.Dave said the medical admission matter, on which the case was lodged by the CBI, was being heard in the apex court by a bench headed by Chief Justice Misra and hence the CJI should not be a part of the constitution bench.The bench was, however, non-committal on this submission.”This matter cannot be heard by the CJI, neither in administrative side, nor in judicial side,” Dave said while urging the apex court to mention in its order that the constitution bench would not comprise the CJI.He said Quddusi, along with some other accused, was arrested in connection with the case and granted bail but the CBI has not appealed against the order enlarging him on bail.Dave also said that besides the six accused named in the FIR, CBI has also mentioned other unknown public servants and private persons alleging they had demanded huge gratification to induce public functionaries by corrupt and illegal means.He claimed that the CBI had allegedly seized Rs two crore cash from an alleged aide of the retired judge and the money was to be given to a hawala operator.”My first concern is that, has the CBI deliberately filed a false case so as to discredit and pressurise this great institution or is there something more to it? This needs a thorough and detailed investigation and truth needs to come out. I pray to the almighty that allegations levelled against this great institution are false,” the senior lawyer said.”People are arrested. They get bail in next 48 hours and then you (CBI) forget about it,” he said.Regarding the materials seized by CBI, Dave said an order should be passed for preservation and protection of these “extremely incriminating materials” and the court could direct the CBI Director to ensure its safe custody or hand it over in a sealed cover to the apex court registrar.Initially, the matter was mentioned in the morning before the bench headed by Justice Chelameswar for an urgent listing of the petition today itself.The court said the matter would come up for hearing before it at 12.45 pm after Dave said it should be heard today itself as the FIR contained serious allegations.”The FIR contained certain allegations which are disturbing. The allegations pertain to the functioning of this court. On perusal of the FIR which was placed before us in the morning, we thought it necessary and proper to take up the matter immediately,” the bench observed.During the hearing, an officer of the apex court registry was spotted in the court room by Justice Chelameswar who asked him about the purpose of his visit.The registry official handed to the bench a photocopy of a note purportedly issued by the CJI’s office which was taken on record by the bench as annexure of its order.”At the same time, we are also duty bound to place the developments that when the hearing of the matter was in progress, the officer of the Registry placed a xerox copy of the proceedings purportedly issued by the Chief Justice of India, a copy of which is annexed to this order,” it noted.Quddusi, who had also served as a judge in Chhattisgarh High Court, was arrested along with Lucknow-based Prasad Institute of Medical Sciences’ chairman B P Yadav, his son Palash Yadav and three others, for allegedly trying to settle a matter relating to a medical college barred from admitting new students.With inputs from PTI

‘What is the effect of Paracetamol?’: SC grills doctor-turned-law student on his knowledge of medicine

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>A doctor-turned-law student who has sought audio-video recording of court proceedings of ‘cases of public importance’ and ‘legally educative cases’ was today grilled by the Supreme Court over his knowledge of medicine.The apex court which appreciated the drafting of petition by the doctor-turned-law student said several pleas were being filed regarding audio-video recording of the cases and it would entertain the matters.A bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud refused to entertain the petition filed by Dr Subhash Vijayran, who is now a second year law student at the Campus Law Centre in Delhi University, and asked him to withdraw the plea.Chief Justice Dipak Misra, when he learnt that Vijayran who was appearing in-person was a doctor, asked him questions about medicine.”What is the effect of Paracetamol tablet on the body? How does it react,” the CJI asked the petitioner.Replying to the question, Vijayran said it lowered the temperature of the body by reacting to the liver and mitochondria.This prompted the CJI to ask further questions including how does the body react to kidney transplant and what are the effects of antibiotics on the body.Justice Misra said research has been conducted about neural reaction on the human body which undergoes kidney transplant and asked Vijayran to go through these research papers.In his plea, Vijayran has sought directions from the apex court to make available to law students the audio-video recordings and complete case files claiming it would be a big step in providing them with holistic and practical knowledge of law and bridging the gap between theory and practice.”It is aptly said that law colleges in India produce law graduates and not lawyers. It takes years for a law graduate to become a lawyer. To become a good lawyer, apart from hard work, it is equally important to work under the guidance of an able and learned senior. This is a real challenge for me,” Vijayran said in his plea.He also urged the court to take the aid of modern technology to perpetually preserve its proceedings and make them ‘open courts’ in word and spirit as has been the practice in western countries like USA and United Kingdom.”Drafting skills are very important for any lawyer. If the entire case file is available on the website, I shall, apart from reading the case documents and gaining knowledge therefrom, also develop good drafting skills. By granting my prayer of having entire case file in PDF format available online, this Court will help in sculpturing an excellent draftsman out of me. Therefore, my prayers should be granted,” he said.He also said that because of lack of space and other practical difficulties, hardly a hundred people at the most can be physically present in any court room at a given time.

Supreme Court: Run Blue Whale warning film

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Supreme Court on Friday directed state-run television network Doordarshan to use it prime time slot to broadcast programming warning viewers of the dangers of the so-called Blue Whale Challenge that has claimed a number of lives across the country.A bench led by Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra has given the national broadcaster a week’s time in which to prepare its material. The next hearing has been set for November 20.The Blue Whale Challenge essentially goads players into carrying out a series of tasks, the final one being suicide.”The idea behind the programme is to make parents and children aware of the dangers of online games like Blue Whale. The message of the programme should be that children should not be trapped by the game. There are children who are lonely and frustrated. Definitely, visuals will have more impact,” Chief Justice Misra noted.The court made its observations while hearing a petition filed by advocate Sneha Kalita who sought immediate measures to ban/block all sites linked to the Blue Whale online game and other similar games.The apex court has also asked DD to consult with the Ministry of Women and Child Development, Human Resource Development, and the Information and Broadcasting Ministry while preparing its programming.In a bid to increase the reach of the programming, the bench, which included Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud, directed the “competent authority” to explore the possibility of doing so on private channels, as well as on other platforms.While explaining the dangers of the game, Senior Advocate Vijay Hansaria outlined the various steps – 50 in all – that culminate in the player’s suicide.

Cow vigilantism: States need to compensate victims, says SC

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –> The Supreme Court on Friday asked the Chief Secretaries of 22 states to file compliance reports in pursuance of its order on laying down a mechanism to sternly deal with cow vigilante groups, saying “nobody can wash off their hands”.The division bench headed by CJI Dipak Misra also mentioned that victims of cow vigilance violence needs to be compensated by the respective states. ” We do not have to say that. All states are under an obligation to compensate victims of cow vigilante violence. At the same time, law and order has to have primacy and anyone violating must be dealt with sternly”, says SC according to Live Law report. SC said it after Indira Jaisingh appearing for Tushar Gandhi argued for a compensation scheme for the victims, where the entire process is automated. The top court, on September 6, had directed all 29 states and seven union territories (UTs) to take steps to stop violence in the name of cow protection and asked them to appoint a senior police officer as the nodal officer in every district within a week to check such vigilante groups. A bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra said, “let the compliance reports be filed…nobody can wash off their hands (from their duty). We will give directions to all the states.”The bench, also comprising Justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud, was informed during the brief hearing that five states — Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka, Jharkhand, Rajasthan and Gujarat, have already filed their compliance affidavits and Bihar and Maharashtra would be filing it during the day. It then asked the counsel for the remaining 22 states to file compliance reports by October 13 and fixed PILs, including one filed by Tushar Gandhi, the great grandson of Mahatma Gandhi on the issue, for hearing on October 31.At the outset, senior advocate Indira Jaising, appearing for Gandhi, said the central government be directed to frame a national policy on preventing incidents of cow vigilantism. She also said there were several judgements, which make mandatory the award of compensation to the victims of such crimes, but unfortunately, the money was not being paid. Jaising then raised the issue of Junaid, who was killed by a group of fellow passengers while returning to his Ballabhgarh home with his brothers after Eid shopping in Delhi on June 23 and said his family members were not paid any compensation and now, his father is ill and undergoing treatment at a hospital in Noida in Uttar Pradesh.”I am asking for the formulation of a scheme on compensation,” she said. “Don’t mix up the issues,” the bench said. Earlier, the apex court had passed a slew of directions to stop violence in the name of cow protection and asked the states to appoint a senior police officer as nodal officer in every district to act promptly to check cow vigilantes from behaving like they are “law unto themselves”. t had asked the states to form a dedicated task force in every district to stop such acts and directed their chief secretaries to file a status report giving details of actions taken to prevent incidents of cow vigilantism.The court had also asked the states to ensure highway patrolling after it was pointed out that such incidents took place on highways on the pretext that vehicles are carrying beef. Besides Gandhi, Congress leader Tehseen Poonawalla has also filed a similar petition. With PTI inputs

Y C Modi appointed new chief of National Investigation Agency

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Senior IPS officer Y C Modi, who was part of the Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigation Team that probed the 2002 Gujarat riot cases, was today named chief of the National Investigation Agency.The federal probe agency is tasked with probing terrorism and terror-financing related cases.The Appointments Committee of the Cabinet (ACC) approved Modi’s appointment as director general of the NIA, an order issued by the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) said.Another senior IPS officer, Rajni Kant Misra, has been appointed director general of the Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB).Modi will hold the post till his superannuation, i.e. May 31, 2021, the order said.ACC has also approved the appointment of Modi as officer on special duty (OSD) in NIA with immediate effect to ensure a smooth takeover.Modi, a 1984 batch IPS officer of the Assam-Meghalaya cadre, is at present special director in the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).He will take over from Sharad Kumar after he completes his tenure on October 30, the order said.Kumar, who was appointed DG NIA in July 2013, has been given two extensions.In October last year, he was given a one-year extension, apparently to help the agency complete some important probes, including the Pathankot terror case, terror strikes in Kashmir, Burdwan blast case and the Samjhauta blast cases Misra has been appointed director general of the SSB till the date of his superannuation, i.e. August 31, 2019, the DoPT order said.​

Acid attack on India gang-rape victim by ‘same men’

Two men accused of raping a woman in India “attacked her with acid” after being released on bail.

Justice Dipak Misra sworn in as the 45th Chief Justice of India

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Justice Dipak Misra was on Monday sworn-in as the new Chief Justice of India and will remain at the helm till October 2, 2018, a tenure of almost 14 months.Outgoing CJI JS Khehar had recommended his name as his successor last month.64-year-old Justice Misra has practised in Constitutional, Civil, Criminal, Revenue, Service and Sales Tax matters in the Orissa High Court and the Service Tribunal.Justice Misra became the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court on May 24, 2010 and got promoted as a Judge in the Supreme Court of India on October 10, 2011.Justice Misra helmed the bench which upheld the death penalty of the four convicts accused in the December 2012 Delhi gangrape. He was also on the bench that rejected the appeal by 1993 serial blast convict Yakub Menon, seeking a stay on his death sentence.Justice Misra was also the head of the bench that had made it mandatory for all cinema halls to play the national anthem before start of every movie show.Justice Misra enrolled as an Advocate on February 14, 1977. In 1996, he was appointed as an Additional Judge of the Orissa High Court and a year later was transferred to the Madhya Pradesh High Court where he became a permanent judge.In 2009, Justice Misra was appointed as the Chief Justice of Patna High Court and in 2010 became the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court. He was appointed as a Supreme Court judge on October 10, 2011.

SC stays execution of man on death row

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Supreme Court has stayed the execution of a man sentenced to death in a case related to election rivalry in which six persons were murdered after panchayat polls in Uttar Pradesh in 2003. A bench comprising Justices Dipak Misra, Amitava Roy and A M Khanwilkar admitted the appeal filed by convict Madan and called for the trial court’s records of the case lodged in Muzaffarnagar district. “Leave granted. Let the lower court’s records be called for. There shall be a stay on the execution of the death sentence,” it said. Madan was awarded the capital punishment by the trial court in July 2015 and the sentence was confirmed by the Allahabad High Court in February this year. The high court, while confirming his death sentence, had observed that he was one of the main assailants in the crime in which six persons had died. The high court had commuted to life term the death penalty awarded by the trial court to another convict in the case. According to the prosecution, Madan, along with his associates, had fired at the family members and supporters of the successful candidates, who were elected as members of a village panchayat. It had alleged that Madan and others were supporting the other candidate, who had lost the election, due to which he had a grudge against them. The prosecution had said that on October 14, 2003, when the relatives and supporters of the successful candidates were going to the house of deputy pradhan of the village, Madan and his associates attacked them and in the firing six people had died. During the trial, Madan and others had denied the allegations levelled against them and had claimed that they were falsely implicated in the case due to election rivalry. In its judgement, the high court had held that Madan and his associates had indiscriminately fired upon the victims and considering the gravity of offence, it was covered under the category of thhe rarest of rare cases warranting death penalty.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Justice Dipak Misra is the next CJI

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The senior-most judge of the Supreme Court Justice Dipak Misra was on Tuesday appointed the 45th Chief Justice of India (CJI). The formal notification about his appointment was issued by the Justice Department on Monday after receving the assent of the President. He will take oath on August 28 and will remain at the helm till October 2, 2018, a tenure of almost 14 months.As reported by DNA, outgoing CJI JS Khehar had recommended his name as his successor last month.Justice Misra helmed the bench which upheld the death penalty of the four convicts accused in the December 2012 Delhi gangrape. He was also on the bench that rejected the appeal by 1993 serial blast convict Yakub Menon, seeking a stay on his death sentence.Justice Misra was also the head of the bench that had made it mandatory for all cinema halls to play the national anthem before start of every movie show.Justice Misra enrolled as an Advocate on February 14, 1977. In 1996, he was appointed as an Additional Judge of the Orissa High Court and a year later was transferred to the Madhya Pradesh High Court where he became a permanent judge.In 2009, Justice Misra was appointed as the Chief Justice of Patna High Court and in 2010 became the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court. He was appointed as a Supreme Court judge on October 10, 2011.

DDA report on Yamuna floodplain restoration biased: Petitioner

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Delhi Development Authority (DDA)-led three-member panel’s report on restoring Yamuna floodplains, that were damaged due to the Art of Living Foundation’s mega-event in March 2016, was not unbiased and contrary to the directions of the National Green Tribunal (NGT), petitioner Manoj Misra said in his objections on Friday.The petitioner has sought the constitution of an independent expert agency to prepare an action plan to restore the floodplains.A two-member bench headed by Justice Swatanter Kumar was hearing the matter on Friday. The bench agreed to hear the matter next on August 10.Last week, on the orders of the NGT’s principal bench, a DDA-led panel had submitted an action plan to restore the Yamuna floodplains. The NGT had directed DDA to prepare the action plan in consonance with the recommendations of an expert committee it had appointed earlier to assess the damage made to the floodplains.The petitioner claimed in his objections that the committee failed to comply with the directions of the NGT. It added that the observations of its report were contrary to the findings of the expert committee appointed by the NGT and not in accordance with the mandate of the NGT.During a brief hearing on Friday, the DDA informed the bench on Friday that it had complied with the orders of the tribunal and submitted an action plan. The bench said that the action plan was supposed to be on the basis of the expert committee.The petitioner’s objections pointed out that in the Tribunal’s March 9, 2016, order had also imposed a fine of Rs 5 lakh on DDA for its defaults and non-performance of statutory functions. Further, the order also said that the cost of floodplain restoration would be in proportion, as would be directed finally by the Tribunal.The DDA-led panel’s report, submitted last week, was in direct contradiction to the NGT-appointed expert committee’s report. While the NGT appointed committee said that wetlands were filled during the preparation of the event, the DDA report said there were no wetlands.The NGT had said that preparations for the Art of Living Foundation’s event to celebrate its 35th anniversary had damaged Yamuna floodplains. The expert committee it appointed has said that Rs 42 crore would be required to restore the floodplains.THE CASEPetitioner Manoj Misra claimed that the expert committee appointed by NGT failed to comply with its directions on probes on the damage caused to Yamuna floodplains by Art of Living’s programme.
He sought the constitution of an independent expert agency to prepare a plan to restore the floodplains

Hearing on Cauvery water dispute case to continue in Supreme Court

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –> The Supreme Court will today continue the hearing on the Cauvery water issue involving Tamil Nadu and Karnataka state over water sharing dispute. The apex court on July 11 commenced final hearing on the appeals filed by Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Kerala against the 2007 Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal (CWDT) final award. A bench of the apex court, headed by Justice Dipak Misra, had earlier directed the Karnataka Government to provide 200 cusecs of Cauvery water to Tamil Nadu till its further order. The top court, earlier in January, dismissed the plea seeking compensation from both Karnataka and Tamil Nadu Governments for the loss of property during the Cauvery water related dispute between both the states. Siva Kumar, a Tamil Nadu based activist, had earlier filed the petition in the apex court on the same. On January 9, the Tamil Nadu Government sought a compensation of Rs. 2,480 crore from Karnataka for not releasing water to the state despite getting the Supreme Court directive to do so. A bench of the apex court, headed by Justice Dipak Misra and comprising Justice Amitava Roy and Justice A.M. Khanwilkar, extended the interim order in the water issue, directing Karnataka to release 2,000 cusecs of Cauvery water per day to Tamil Nadu. The lawyer from the side of Tamil Nadu, Shekhar Naphade, urged the three-judge bench to bring the matter to a logical end for which there should be a continuous hearing. On December 9 last year, the apex court upheld its constitutional power and right to hear appeals filed by Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Kerala.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

International Council of Jurists seeks in-house probe against SC judge

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Even as Chief Justice of India (CJI) JS Khehar has recommended the name of senior-most Supreme Court judge Justice Dipak Mishra as his successor, the International Council of Jurists (ICJ) has sought an in-house probe against Justice Mishra for alleged irregularities.Since the CJI has already recommended Justice Mishra’s name as his successor despite the charges against him, ICJ plans to approach the President and the Prime Minister seeking their intervention.Lok Sabha MP Harinder Singh Khalsa has also written a letter to the Prime Minister’s Office expressing his concern over the CJI’s recommendation of Justice Misra.”I feel very strongly about what is going on at the moment. Allegations of impropriety and the incident with Justice CS Karnan prompted me to write to the Prime Minister,” Khalsa told DNA.In his letter, Khalsa referred to late Arunachal Chief Minister Kalikho Pul’s suicide letter which accused several judges of the higher judiciary of corruption. Khalsa wrote: “The people of this country who certainly expect the next CJI to be not merely a Caeser’s wife above suspicion but a judicial statesman, a tall figure whose integrity and probity is beyond doubt.”As first reported by DNA, an in-house probe headed by Punjab and Haryana High Court Chief Justice SJ Vazifdar and two other Hgh Court judges against two Orissa High Court judges was abruptly stopped when the name of a sitting Supreme Court Justice cropped up. The committee wrote to CJI Khehar and stated that it could not conduct any enquiry against a sitting Supreme Court judge.The ICJ wrote a letter to CJI Khehar on July 24 and sought an internal probe against Justice Misra since its own enquiries had “revealed that the Supreme Court judge in question is Justice Dipak Misra, who is the senior-most after the CJI.””We seek your indulgence to immediately appoint an in-house committee consisting of Judges of Supreme Court of India to look into the allegations against Mr Justice Dipak Misra, Judge, Supreme Court of India, to ensure transparency in the functioning and independence of Indian judiciary,” the letter sent by ICJ president Adish Aggarwala reads.The ICJ letter also refers to a September 2016 complaint filed by one Jayanta Kumar Das, alleging that Justice Misra was involved in the illegal transfer of large tracts of government land in Bidanasi and other areas of Cuttack when he was a lawyer. According to ICJ Aggarwala, Justice Misra was allotted land in 1979 when he was an advocate there and there is a court order with adverse remarks in the matter pertaining to the land.”Your Lordship, since institutional integrity is involved in the whole episode and that the allegations are against a sitting apex court judge, who may be considered for appointment as next Chief Justice of India, it is incumbent on you to clear the doubts in the minds of the public and lawyers about your successor,” the letter says.It also points out that when allegations of impropriety were made against Justice Soumitra Sen of the Calcutta High Court, “allegations, which were much less serious than those against Mr. Justice Dipak Mishra, the then CJI immediately constituted an in-house committee to look into the allegations against him”.”Once the veracity of allegations against him (as an advocate) was established, the then CJI recommended his impeachment. Unless a similar procedure of enquiry is followed in case of Mr Justice Dipak Misra, the high name of Indian judiciary may be smirked,” it says.

Rapist to be tried as per bio age, not mental age, of survivor: SC

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Supreme Court has ruled that the Protection of Child against Sexual Offences Act 2012 (POCSO) cannot be invoked to prosecute a man for raping a mentally-challenged adult victim, whose under-developed brain is akin to a child’s.A victim’s plea to prosecute her rapist under the stringent act was denied by the top court on Friday.Taking a stand contrary to its March ruling, the court also abated proceedings against the sole accused — Santosh Yadav — who died during trial court proceedings. Taking a humanitarian view, the SC had then ruled that proceedings in a case involving rape of a woman with mental disability would continue despite the sole accused being dead.The top court judgment came while deciding on a case where a 38-year-old woman, suffering from cerebral palsy, who was allegedly raped by Yadav. Nina (name changed) wanted her case transferred from the trial court to a special court hearing POCSO cases. Nina, though biologically an adult, is mentally eight years old. After the incident in 2010, Nina further regressed to the mental age of a three year old.”As regards the quantum, I am of the convinced opinion that it is a fit case where the victim should be granted the maximum compensation as envisaged under the scheme. I clarify that it is so directed regard being had to the special features of the case,” Justice Misra said in a direction to the Delhi Legal Services Authority (DLSA).The bench comprising Justices Dipak Misra and Rohinton Nariman ruled that, “A reading of the Objects and Reasons of the aforesaid Act together, with the provisions contained therein, would show that whatever is the physical age of the person affected, such person would be a “person with disability” who would be governed by the provisions of the said Act. Conspicuous by its absence is the reference to any age when it comes to protecting persons with disabilities under the said Act.”According to Section 2 (d) of the POCSO Act, the term ‘age’ cannot include ‘mental’ age as the intent of the Parliament was to focus on children, i.e persons who are physically under the age of 18 years, the top court observed.Parliament, when it made the 2012 Act, was fully aware of this distinction, and yet chose to protect only children whose physical age was below 18 years, Justice Nariman observed in a separate concurring judgment. He said the interpretation of Section 2(1)(d) of the POCSO Act, 2012 cannot include “mental” age as such an interpretation would be beyond the “Lakshman Rekha”.”Thus, it is clear that viewed with the lens of the legislator, we would be doing violence both to the intent and the language of Parliament if we were to read the word ‘mental’ into Section 2(1)(d) of the 2012 Act,” Justice Nariman said in the 165-page judgment.The court said stretching of the words ‘age’ and ‘year’ would be encroaching upon the legislative function.”Needless to emphasize that courts sometimes expand or stretch the meaning of a phrase by taking recourse to purposive interpretation. A judge can have a constructionist approach but there is a limitation to his sense of creativity. In the instant case, I am obliged to state that stretching of the words ‘age’ and ‘year’ would be encroaching upon the legislative function. There is no necessity,” the bench said.

Rajya Sabha wants Mayawati to withdraw resignation:Dy Chairman

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Rajya Sabha wants Mayawati to withdraw her resignation, Deputy Chairman P J Kurien said today, a day after the BSP chief quit as a member of the House, saying she was not allowed to speak on dalit issue. Kurien, with whom Mayawati had got angry when he asked her to conclude her speech after the prescribed three minutes, said the episode was a result of a “misunderstanding” and that he has “utmost respect” for the BSP leader. “None of us are happy about her resigning. I have utmost respect for her. It was just a misunderstanding. We all have a lot of respect for her and regard her as a senior leader. The House will ask her to reconsider her decision,” Kurien said. “… It is the decision of the House that she (Mayawati) should take back her resignation,” Kurien said. He sought to set the record straight about yesterday’s developments, saying he had “nothing against anybody”. The Deputy Chairman said there was no notice by Mayawati (about raising any issue). He said when he came to the House, he had a list of 8-9 speakers under Rule 267 and Mayawati’s name was not there. “…I want to set the record straight… When I came, I saw her standing and gave her three minutes (to speak)… I bypassed the Leader of Opposition and allowed her to speak,” he said. Leader of Opposition Ghulam Nabi Azad joined Kurien and said, “we should request her to reconsider her resignation”. The Deputy Chairman then asked Minister of State for Parliamentary Affairs Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi about government’s view on this. Naqvi indicated that the government had no objection if all the parties wanted so. Yesterday, Mayawati had got angry and stormed out of the House after being told to conclude after three minutes her speech on violence in Saharanpur in UP some time back. Mayawati, whose term in the Upper House was till April next year, had said that she would resign as there was no point to be a member when she was not allowed to speak. Satish Chandra Misra of the BSP said today that the entire Treasury bench had been instructed to stand when Mayawati stood up to speak. “They did not allow her to speak. She spoke for 2 minutes and nine seconds in breaks and would have even finished in 3 minutes,” Misra said.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Hearing in Cauvery water dispute to continue in Supreme Court

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –> The Supreme Court will on Thursday continue hearing the Cauvery water dispute involving the tussle between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. The apex court on July 11 commenced final hearing on the appeals filed by Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Kerala against the 2007 Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal (CWDT) final award. A bench of the apex court, headed by Justice Dipak Misra, had earlier directed the Karnataka Government to provide 200 cusecs of Cauvery water to Tamil Nadu till its further order. The top court, earlier in January, dismissed the plea seeking compensation from both Karnataka and Tamil Nadu Governments for the loss of property during the Cauvery water related dispute between both the states. Siva Kumar, a Tamil Nadu based activist, had earlier filed the petition in the apex court on the same. On January 9, the Tamil Nadu Government sought a compensation of Rs. 2,480 crores from Karnataka for not releasing water to the state despite getting the Supreme Court directive to do so. A bench of the apex court, headed by Justice Dipak Misra and comprising Justice Amitava Roy and Justice A. M. Khanwilkar, extended the interim order in the water issue, directing Karnataka to release 2,000 cusecs of Cauvery water per day to Tamil Nadu. The lawyer from the side of Tamil Nadu, Shekhar Naphade, urged the three-judge bench to bring the matter to a logical end for which there should be a continuous hearing. On December 9 last year, the apex court upheld its constitutional power and right to hear appeals filed by Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Kerala.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Mayawati asks MLAs to raise law and order issues in Assembly

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>BSP president Mayawati today charged the Yogi Adityanath government with failing to do justice in the recent killing of five Brahmins in Rae Bareli and asked her MLAs to raise the matter along with other law and order issues effectively in the Budget session beginning tomorrow. “The killing of five Brahmins is like a step towards jungle raj… the Yogi government appears to have totally failed in doing justice with the bereaved families,” the BSP chief said in a press release. Stressing that party leader Satish Misra has been asked to personally meet the families to help them get justice, she instructed her party MLAs to raise the issue as well as dismal law and order and failure on crime control effectively in the budget session beginning tomorrow. Claiming that people’s lives have been hit hard due to bad law and order and crime against women, Mayawati said the Rae Bareli incident was being regarded as ‘massacre’ also by BJP ministers. She also flayed the Adityanath government for “doing politics” in such issues as well. “This incident has agitated Brahmins and they are on warpath to seek justice whereas Adityanath government’s attitude towards it is just like the one it had at the time of Saharanpur caste clash,” she said. She also lashed out at the government for its lackadaisical attitude towards people hit by flood-like situation in some parts of the state and said that both the union and state governments have forgotten all their promises on important issues of people’s welfare.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Legal assistance establishment centre set up at Panchkula

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Supreme Court judge Justice Dipak Misra, who is also Executive Chairman, National Legal Services Authority, today inaugurated the legal assistance establishment centre at Panchkula. The centre will facilitate litigants, who are in jail, to interact with their counsels placed at far off stations. Justice Misra also launched a facility for video conferencing and spoke to officials of the jail administration in Hisar and Sirsa, an official release said. He directed them to prepare a list of appeals made by all prisoners and send it to the Haryana State Legal Services Authority (HSLSA) so that it could follow-up on these. In addition, Justice Misra also enquired about the number of jail inmates who are above 60 years of age in these jails. Later, Justice Misra said the purpose of opening such centers was to provide free legal services to the undertrials and convicted persons in jails as well as to provide them complete information about their cases. This centre will serve as a master centre, he said adding that a similar centre called ‘Kanoon Sarthi’, had also been set up in Mohali, Punjab. Chief Justice, Punjab and Haryana High Court, Justice Shiavax Jal Vazifdar, Judge Punjab and Haryana High Court and Executive Chairman, Haryana State Legal Services Authority Justice Ajay Kumar Mittal, Judge Punjab and Haryana High Court Jaishree Thakur, were also present on the occasion.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Legal assistance for poor jail inmates in 600 distts by July

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Over 600 districts in the country will have Legal Assistance Establishments (LAE) to provide free legal aid and video-conferencing facility to poor undertrials and convicted prisoners by July this year. Supreme court judge Justice Dipak Misra, who is the Executive Chairman of National Legal Services Authority (NALSA), said the LAEs, equipped with video-conferencing facility, have become operational in 13 states including Delhi, Gujarat and Bihar where relatives can hold consultations with the inmates and panel lawyers to seek redressal of the grievances. He also said that the present strength of 54,000 para legal volunteers, engaged to provide legal assistance to poor jailed inmates, would be raised to 79,574. Elaborating further, Justice Misra said NALSA, with the help of National Informatics System (NIC), has developed a master software in which State Legal Services Authorities and District Legal Services Authorities would feed data of each individual prisoner within their jurisdiction, with regard to their being represented through a counsel in the court. The software would contain details including name of the jail, prisoners, date from which he or she is in custody, the offence and important fact whether the inmates are represented by a lawyer or not. If an inmate is unrepresented, then the district legal services authority would provide him a panel lawyer, he said. “The purpose behind this is sacrosant that no under trial or convicted prisoners shall remain in jail without getting legal aid. He or she must have a lawyer to represent him and he or she must be aware of the status of his or her case,” Justice Misra said. The software will also contain the details such as the status of the case, next date of hearing and the fact as to whether the udnertrial is entitled to get bail under the CrPC provision which provides for grant of statutory bail if he or she has completed half of the jail term provided for the offences alleged. He said details are being collated after taking informations from each jails in the country and they may be put in public domain later. So far, over 500 persons have visited LAE centre in New Delhi “to seek legal aid and general information”, he said, adding, similarly, 126 persons have visited LAE centre in Gujarat to enquire about the cases of their inmates and seek legal advise. NALSA would inaugurate LAE centres on July 4 in states and union territories like Haryana, Punjab, Maharashtra, Chandigarh, Goa, Daman and Diu and Dadra and Nagar Haveli. LAE centres would become operational by July 15 in seven states including Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Karnataka, Rajasthan and Telengana, Justice Misra said, adding LAE at Tripura would be operational by July 31. NALSA had on June 28 launched a web application for providing free legal services to prisoners so as to ensure that no inmate goes unrepresented in court. “The application shall make the legal services system more transparent, will be universally useful for all the relevant authorities to monitor the grant of legal aid to the prisoners in order to ensure that absolutely no prisoner goes unrepresented right from the first day of his production in the court,” NALSA had said. “All the information can be generated state-wise, district-wise and also in respect of each jail,” it had said.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Autos charge double as hosp waterlogged

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The pre-monsoon showers left the country’s premier facility, the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), waterlogged on Wednesday. So much so that the auto-rickshaw drivers charged double the fare to ferry patients from one flooded building to the other. On Wednesday, many corridors on the ground floor of the Out Patient Department (OPD) became waterlogged and caused inconvenience to patients and medical staffers alike. Transporting necessary equipment and material from one place to another became a Herculean task.“This happens every year and we are used to it now,” a nurse said, requesting anonymity. Patients, however, were far from this equanimity. “I have been sitting here for the last 10 minutes, wondering how to get out of here without spoiling the plaster,” said Pradeep, a patient on a wheelchair, with a plaster on his left foot.Meanwhile, taking advantage of the situation, auto-rickshaw drivers inside the AIIMS premises were charging double the fare from people who just wanted to move between the buildings or go to the main gate. It also led to major traffic snarls in the area.“I had to go from the OPD block to the parking area, hardly a kilometre away. The auto driver charged Rs 40. This is madness,” said Poonam Misra, an attendant to a patient.

Opp leaders meet to discuss Prez poll, no names discussed

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Opposition leaders today met to chalk out a strategy for the upcoming presidential poll but no names were discussed in the first round of talks of a nine- party sub-group set up for the purpose, members said. As the process for the filing of nominations for the July 17 election started, 10 opposition leaders met in the Parliament chamber of the Leader of Opposition in Rajya Sabha, Ghulam Nabi Azad. The leaders including Azad and Mallikarjun Kharge from the Congress, JD-U’s Sharad Yadav, RJD’s Lalu Prasad, CPI-M’s Sitaram Yechury and NCP’s Praful Patel. Derek O’Brien of the TMC, R S Bharathi of the DMK, Ram Gopal Yadav of the SP and Satish Chandra Misra from the BSP were also present at the 10 -member group’s meeting. Azad said leaders of 17 opposition parties had met at a lunch hosted by Congress President Sonia Gandhi last month, where it was decided a sub committee would be set up to take forward discussions on the issue. “A sub committee was formed in which leaders of nine parties were included, as there was need for a smaller committee,” he said. This was the first meeting of the group today. “The nitty gritty details were not discussed. No names have been short-listed yet,” he said after the 30-minute meeting. The ruling party has formed a three-member committee to discuss the possibility of a consensus candidate with allies and opposition parties. Azad said it had started contacting opposition leaders. “The process has just started. In such conditions, the selection of a final candidate is impossible. In the next few days this sub committee will meet again and probably we will hold detailed discussions then,” he said. The BJP panel comprising Union ministers Rajnath Singh, Arun Jaitley and M Venkaiah Naidu has reached out to Congress president Sonia Gandhi, Yechury, BSP’s Misra and NCP’s Patel and would be meeting the leaders of these parties separately to discuss the issue of a joint candidate. The panel would meet Gandhi on Friday. Azad said by the time the 10-member group meets, the ruling party would have consulted opposition leaders, who would then be in a better position to discuss candidates. Asked if the government was trying to break opposition unity, he said, “The government is going to talk to opposition leaders separately and not collectively. All opposition parties are totally united.” RJD’s Lalu Prasad stressed the election was not just for choosing the President and the Vice President. “It is a preparation for the next election. The aim is to remove the BJP,” he said after the meeting. Asked about the Shiv Sena throwing up BJP leader L K Advani’s name as a possible candidate, he said, “You wait and see what happens.” Patel said Venkaiah Naidu had called him and wanted to have formal talks with him and NCP strongman Sharad Pawar. “The government will come out with their name and then we will evolve our strategy in the next few days,” he said. Misra of the BSP said Naidu had called him, too, and asked for a meeting with party leader Mayawati. “They will talk and we will see. They have expressed the desire to meet my leader in the next few days,” he said. Sources said the opposition committee is likely to meet next week again to decide on a suitable presidential nominee. While the ruling party is holding its cards close to its chest, the opposition has already mooted the names of possible candidates and has even held talks with one — former West Bengal Governor Gopalkrishna Gandhi. A retired bureaucrat and a scholar, he is one of Mahatma Gandhi’s grandsons. Former Lok Sabha Speaker Meira Kumar’s name is also doing the rounds, as is that of former Union minister Sharad Pawar. The NCP leader, however, has denied being in the race. The official notification for the presidential poll was issued today, starting the process for filing of nominations for the July 17 poll. Counting will take place on July 20. The term of incumbent Pranab Mukherjee ends on July 24.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Legal Assistance Establishment launched in Gujarat

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Supreme Court judge Justice Dipak Misra today inaugurated the Legal Assistance Establishment here to provide free legal aid and services to the weaker and marginalised sections of society. Inaugurating the facility, called “Nyay Sampark” under the Gujarat State Legal Services Authority, Justice Misra said the LAE is a “social service” which seeks to ensure that the poor and marginalised people get justice. The establishment will help the poor people avail legal assistance through advocates on its panel who can also know about the status of pending cases in courts across the state. “When you have courage, ethics and spirituality, you get impelled to do things which you call social service. Legal Assistance Establishment is a social service. The whole purpose is to ensure that the poor and marginalised people get justice,” Justice Misra said at the function held at the Gujarat High Court. The LAE provides facilities like a toll-free helpline number for those seeking legal aid, a video conferencing facility to connect undertrials in jails to lawyers, a team of volunteers to help people seeking legal aid. Through the establishment, people can also know about the aid being provided by the Central and state legal services authorities. Speaking on the occasion, Gujarat high court chief justice R Subhash Reddy said the initiatives taken by the Legal Services Authority such as Lok Adalat have helped reduce pendency of cases. “Our major problem is pendency of cases. I am of the strong view that this is the only piece of legislation (Legal Services Authorities Act) which we can make use to reduce pendency,” he said. While holding that this service is yet to be used to its optimal level, Reddy underlined a need to make people in rural areas aware about Lok Adalat. “Many rural people do not know about Lok Adalat. They always think about courts because of the credibility of the institution, without knowing that cases in courts are growing leaps and bounds. Cases being filed in a court is a big problem as they will go on for many years,” Justice Reddy said. State Law and Justice minister Pradipsinh Jadeja said the government is committed towards making justice accessible to all. “This is not charity but the responsibility of the welfare state,” he said. Listing various measures initiated by his government to ensure speedy justice, the minister said his government has increased the fees of lawyers on the Legal Assistance Establishment panel by 250 per cent and has set up courts in seven districts in the last one year. “Our government is committed to set up courts in 14 out of 249 talukas in the state,” he added.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Dec 16 gangrape: CCTV footage not tampered with, says SC

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Supreme Court today held that the CCTV footage, which gave the initial clue about the bus in which the barbaric December 16, 2012 crime was committed, was not tampered with by the police. A bench headed by Justice Dipak Misra, which appreciated the way in which the probe was conducted in the case with the help of modern and scientific techniques, said the aspect of CCTV footage was quite relevant in the prosecution’s case. “Once it is proved before the court through the testimony of the experts that the photographs and the CCTV footage are not tampered with, there is no reason or justification to perceive the same with the lens of doubt,” the bench said. The apex court, which upheld the death penalty awarded to the four convicts in the gangrape and murder case, rejected the contentions of the defence counsel that the CCTV footage was tampered with to falsely implicated the accused. “There is no reason or justification to disregard the CCTV footage, for the same has been duly proved and it clearly establishes the description and movement of the bus,” the bench said.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Convicts committed rape, murder in concert with each other: SC

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Supreme Court today relied on the dying declaration of the December 16 gangrape victim besides the testimony of a carpenter to bring home the charge of criminal conspiracy against four convicts. A three-judge bench headed by Justice Dipak Misra said that “the chain of events described by the prosecutrix in her dying declarations, coupled with the testimonies of the other witnesses (carpenter and owner of bus) clearly establish that as soon as the informant (victim’s male friend) and the victim boarded the bus, the accused persons formed an agreement to commit heinous offences against the victim”. The carpenter, who was robbed by the four convicts ahead of committing gangrape and murder of the victim, was produced by the police to prove their presence in the bus. The bench, also comprising Justices R Banumathi and Ashok Bhushan, said the acts of “forcefully having sexual intercourse with the victim, one after the other, inserting iron rod in her private parts, dragging her by her hair and then throwing her out of the bus all establish the common intent of the accused to rape and murder the victim”. The apex court said the woman has also maintained in her dying declaration that the accused persons were shouting that she had died and her body should be thrown out of the bus. “Ultimately, both the prosecutrix as well as informant were thrown out of the moving bus through the front door by the accused after having failed to throw them through the rear door. “The conduct of the accused in committing heinous offences with the prosecutrix in concert with each other and thereafter throwing her out of the bus in an unconscious state alongwith her friend unequivocally bring home the charge under Section 120B (criminal conspiracy) in case of each of them”, it said. The court said the criminal acts done in furtherance of the conspiracy is evident from the acts and also the words uttered during the commission of the offence. “Therefore, we do not have the slightest hesitation in holding that the trial court and the High Court have correctly considered the entire case on the touchstone of well- recognised principles for arriving at the conclusion of criminal conspiracy,” it said. The apex court further said the prosecution has been able to “unfurl the case” relating to criminal conspiracy by materials on record and connecting the chain of circumstances. “The relevant evidence on record lead to a singular conclusion that the accused persons are liable for criminal conspiracy and their confessions to counter the same deserve to be repelled,” it said.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

centre hails SC verdict, says Nirbhaya will rest in peace now

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –> As the Supreme Court upheld the earlier order of the death sentence to the four convicts in the brutal Nirbhaya gangrape case, Union Minister Ravishankar Prasad on Friday hailed the verdict, while saying that it was a big day for the Indian judiciary system. ?This is a big day for the Indian judiciary system. I know this was a serious and sensitive issue for the entire nation. I am very happy and satisfied with the court?s verdict. I wish her soul will rest in peace,? Prasad told ANI. He further said that not only Nirbhaya?s family but the entire nation was waiting for this verdict. Earlier in the day, the apex court upheld the earlier order of death sentence to four convicts in the December 16, 2012 gang rape case. The matter was heard by the apex court bench headed by Justice Dipak Misra and consisting of Justices R. Banumathi and Ashok Bhushan. Justice Dipak Misra observed in its order that ?it?s a story of some different world?. ?Taking the serious injuries, the severe nature of offence committed by the convicts, we are upholding the sentence,? the order said. The next option for the convicts is to appeal against their death sentence to President Pranab Mukherjee. The convicts – Akshay, Pawan, Vinay Sharma and Mukesh had challenged the Delhi High Court order which had sentenced them to the gallows. Earlier, the trial court had also sentenced all the four convicts to death penalty. In December 16, 2012, six people gang raped a 23-year-old physiotherapy intern in a moving bus. The woman succumbed to her injuries in a Singapore hospital on December 29, 2012. One of the accused, Ram Singh hanged himself in prison, while another person, who was a juvenile at the time of the crime, was convicted in August last year and will serve the maximum sentence of three years in a reform home.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

CPI(M) hails Nirbhaya verdict, but frowns over selective justice

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –> Expressing dissent over the Supreme Court?s verdict in the brutal Nirbhaya gangrape case, Communist Party of India (Marxist) leader Brinda Karat on Friday said she is against the selective nature of judicial process. ?I am against death penalty in principle because of the selective nature of judicial process in our country. The court is diluting the maximum punishment and therefore the maximum punishment which has been given according to statured books is as it should be,? CPI (M) leader Brinda Karat told ANI. However, she hailed the apex court?s decision for the heinous crime saying that she has no issue with the maximum punishment. ?In principle, I am against death penalty but as far as the heinous crime is concerned the maximum punishment was needed. Certainly there was no issue at all,? she added. Earlier in the day, the apex court upheld the earlier order of death sentence to four convicts in the December 16, 2012 gang rape case. The matter was heard by the apex court bench headed by Justice Dipak Misra and consisting of Justices R. Banumathi and Ashok Bhushan. Justice Dipak Misra observed in its order that ?it?s a story of some different world?. ?Taking the serious injuries, the severe nature of offence committed by th3e convicts, we are upholding the sentence,? the order said. The next option for the convicts is to appeal against their death sentence to President Pranab Mukherjee. The convicts – Akshay, Pawan, Vinay Sharma and Mukesh had challenged the Delhi High Court order which had sentenced them to the gallows. Earlier, the trial court had also sentenced all the four convicts to death penalty. In December 16, 2012, six people gang raped a 23-year-old physiotherapy intern in a moving bus. The woman succumbed to her injuries in a Singapore hospital on December 29, 2012. One of the accused, Ram Singh hanged himself in prison, while another person, who was a juvenile at the time of the crime, was convicted in August last year and will serve the maximum sentence of three years in a reform home.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Father of Nirbhaya’s friend expresses content, hails SC’s verdict

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –> With the Supreme Court upholding its earlier order of death sentence to four convicts in the December 16, 2012 Nirbhaya gang rape case today, father of Nirbhaya?s friend (who was there in the bus) Bhanu Pandey gave a sigh of relief saying his son, Abhishek, seems content with the decision as it will warn others before committing such crimes. ?We all are very satisfied with the verdict. My son seems content now. This decision will prohibit people from committing such heinous crimes,? Pandey told ANI. He further said the apex court has given justice and he appreciates it. The matter was heard by the apex court bench headed by Justice Dipak Misra and consisting of Justices R. Banumathi and Ashok Bhushan. The convicts – Akshay, Pawan, Vinay Sharma and Mukesh – challenged the Delhi High Court order which had sentenced them to the gallows. Earlier, the trial court had also sentenced all the four convicts to death penalty. Jsutice Misra upheld rape as depravity and not curable and recently passed a woman friendly judgment saying that “no woman can be compelled to love; she always has right to say no”. In December, 2012, six people gang raped a 23-year-old physiotherapy intern in a moving bus. The woman succumbed to her injuries in a Singapore hospital on December 29, 2012. One of the accused, Ram Singh hanged himself in prison, while another person, who was a juvenile at the time of the crime, was convicted in August last year and will serve the maximum sentence of three years in a reform home.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Nirbhaya gangrape and murder case: ‘We lost our daughter, but justice finally delivered,’ say parents

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The December 16, 2012 gangrape victim’s mother on Friday said she was satisfied that the perpetrators have been awarded the death penalty by the Supreme Court.The victim’s mother, Asha Devi, who was present in the jam-packed court room when the verdict was pronounced, said justice has finally been done, despite the delay due to the lengthy legal procedure.”We thank all who supported us in the difficult times. Though we have lost our daughter, we are satisfied that the court has awarded death sentence to her perpetrators,” she said.From now on, she and her husband will fight for justice for other girls against whom criminal acts are committed, Asha Devi said while coming out of the court room.Asha Devi was present along with her husband Badri Singh when Justice Dipak Misra, who headed the bench pronounced the verdict in English. Some lawyers were seen translating the verdict in Hindi to them.As soon as the verdict was pronounced, the victim’s parents, lawyers and some other litigants present in the court room, stood up and clapped.

Nirbhaya verdict a ‘tight slap’ to rapists on the prowl DCW Chief

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –> Moments after the Supreme Court upheld the earlier death sentence order to four convicts in the Nirbhaya gang rape case, Delhi Commission for Women (DCW) chairperson Swati Maliwal has asserted that the verdict has emboldened all the women in the country. ?This is not just the fight of one ?Nirbhaya? but many others in the country. The Delhi Commission for Women (DCW) welcomes this particular verdict which was very important. The Supreme Court today, by giving death sentence to all the rapists of Nirbhaya, has in a way emboldened all the women in the country. This verdict is compared to a tight slap to the rapists who thinks that they can let go even after a heinous crime,? Maliwal told ANI. Maliwal further stated that the apex court should fast track all such rape cases in the country. ?This verdict was something which was needed, not just for her family and relatives, but us all. Though I think that the five years time which was taken by the Court on this decision was delayed but today it has made all women proud. After this the Supreme Court should fast track all such rape cases and provide justice to other Nirbhaya?s in the country who still await justice,? said Maliwal. Resonating similar views, Lawyer and Social activist Abha Singh stated that Justice Dipak Misra has brought justice to the country and a smile on every woman?s face. ?Nirbhaya?s gangrape and murder is the most heinous offence which has happened in the history of India. Today, the way Supreme Court has upheld death penalty meted out to the rapist clearly shows that the judiciary is with the women of this country and the government is sending a strong message, that criminal law is for deterrence. Justice Dipak Misra has brought justice to the country and a smile on every woman?s face. In future any criminal who thinks that he will get away after the crime will fear of the consequence. This death penalty will go a long way in protecting the women not just in the state but country.? Singh told ANI. Earlier in the day, the Apex Court upheld the earlier order of death sentence to four convicts in the December 16, 2012 Nirbhaya gang rape case. Justice Dipak Misra observed in its order that it’s a story of ‘some different world’. “Taking the serious injuries, the severe nature of offence committed by the convicts, we are upholding the sentence,” the order said. The next option for the convicts is to appeal against their death sentence to President Pranab Mukherjee. On December 16, 2012, six men, including the 17-year-old juvenile, gang raped a 23-year-old physiotherapy intern in a moving bus on December 16, 2012. The girl and her friend were returning home after watching a movie when they were coaxed into the bus by the accused, who then beat up her friend before taking turns in raping her. The girl succumbed to her injuries in a Singapore hospital on December 29, 2012. The convicts – Akshay, Pawan, Vinay Sharma and Mukesh – challenged the Delhi High Court order which had sentenced them to the gallows.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Nirbhaya gangrape case | Mukesh will be acquitted, no case against him: Lawyer ML Sharma

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>With the Supreme Court set to deliver the much-awaited verdict in the December 16 Nirbhaya gang rape case, advocate ML Sharma, who is representing the accused convict Mukesh, has expressed confidence of his client’s acquittal.”We are expecting that Mukesh should be acquitted because there is no case against him. There is no evidence that he was even in the bus. We are waiting for the verdict which will come out at 2 PM today,” Sharma said.The matter is being heard by the apex court bench headed by Justice Dipak Misra and consisting of Justices R Banumathi and Ashok Bhushan. The convicts – Akshay, Pawan, Vinay Sharma and Mukesh – challenged the Delhi High Court order which had sentenced them to the gallows.
ALSO READ Full faith in judicial system, confident that SC will announce death sentence: Nirbhaya’s parentsEarlier, the trial court also had sentenced all the four convicts to death penalty. It is being expected that the apex court would not grant relief to the accused as Justice Dipak Misra doesn’t hesitate to give a death sentence and is exceedingly sensitive to women’s rights and liberties.He has upheld rape as depravity and not curable and recently, passed a woman friendly judgement saying that “no woman can be compelled to love; she always has right to say no”.
ALSO READ SC to deliver verdict in Nirbhaya gangrape case tomorrowIn December, 2012, six people gang raped a 23-year-old physiotherapy intern in a moving bus. The woman succumbed to her injuries in a Singapore hospital on December 29, 2012.One of the accused, Ram Singh hanged himself in prison, while another person, who was a juvenile at the time of the crime, was convicted in August last year and will serve the maximum sentence of three years in a reform home.

Full faith in judicial system, confident that SC will announce death sentence: Nirbhaya’s parents

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Supreme Court will deliver the much-awaited verdict in the December 16 Nirbhaya gang rape at around 2 PM on Friday.Though the four death row convicts have filed appeals against the death penalty, the parents of the victim said they are sure that the apex court will award death sentence to the guilty.Nirbhaya’s mother said that she has full faith in the judiciary and is sure that the apex court, through its ruling, will give justice to her daughter. “We have full faith in the judicial system and I am sure that the Supreme Court will announce death sentence in its verdict for the guilty. I am sure the Supreme Court will give justice to my daughter. This will set an example for the world,” said Nirbhaya’s mother.Nirbhaya’s father also said that he is sure of the fact that the apex court will award death sentence to the convicts. “They will be awarded death sentence. Leave Supreme Court, even God will not forgive such people,” said Nirbhaya’s father .The matter is being heard by the apex court bench headed by Justice Dipak Misra and consisting of Justices R Banumathi and Ashok Bhushan. The convicts – Akshay, Pawan, Vinay Sharma and Mukesh – challenged the Delhi High Court order which had sentenced them to the gallows.
ALSO READ Use her real name for museum, Nirbhaya’s parents urge MayorEarlier, the trial court also had sentenced all the four convicts to death penalty. It is being expected that the Supreme Court would not grant relief to the accused as Justice Dipak Misra doesn’t hesitate to give a death sentence and is exceedingly sensitive to women’s rights and liberties. He has upheld rape as depravity and not curable and recently, passed a woman friendly judgement saying that “no woman can be compelled to love; she always has right to say no”.One of the accused, Ram Singh hanged himself in prison, while another person, who was a juvenile at the time of the crime, was convicted in August last year and will serve the maximum sentence of three years in a reform home.The brutal crime against Nirbhaya had created public furore for a more stringent law to deal with sex crimes against women. The 23-year-old physiotherapy intern was brutally assaulted and raped by six persons on a moving bus in South Delhi and thrown out of the vehicle with her male friend on the night of December 16, 2012. She died days later in a Singapore hospital on December 29, 2012.

No notice whatsoever has been issued by the NGT to AOL or Sri Sri: Art of Living

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Art of Living has said that neither their organisation nor Sri Sri Ravi Shankar have been given contempt notice by the NGT. “No notice whatsoever has been issued by the NGT to AOL or Sri Sri. Media reports to the contrary are absolutely false and baseless,” said the organisation.AOL also said that activist Manoj Misra was verbally reprimanded for going to the media before filing his application.Earlier today there were reports which said that the National Green Tribunal issued contempt notice to the Art of Living foundation’s Sri Sri Ravi Shankar on a plea against him for blaming the Centre and the panel for damaging Yamuna floodplains by allowing his NGO to hold a cultural extravaganza.A bench headed by NGT Chairperson Justice Swatanter Kumar issued notice to Ravi Shankar while seeking his reply before May 9, the next date of hearing. The plea filed by activist Manoj Misra has sought action against Ravi Shankar and said his remarks interfered with with free and fair dispensation of justice.In a statement published on the AOL’s website, Ravi Shankar had blamed the government and the NGT for permitting AOL to hold the function and said his foundation had obtained all necessary permissions, including from the green panel, and the event could have been stopped in the beginning itself if the river was so “fragile and pure”.In the plea filed through advocates Ritwick Dutta and Rahul Choudhary, Misra said the AOL head was “in the habit” of making statements to “denigrate the dignity and status of this tribunal, which was an interference in the fair dispensation of justice”, that is the bedrock of the rule of law.With PTI inputs.

NGT issues notice to Sri Sri Ravi Shankar on contempt plea

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The National Green Tribunal today issued notice to spiritual figure Sri Sri Ravi Shankar on a contempt plea against him for blaming the Centre and the panel for damaging Yamuna floodplains by allowing his NGO’s cultural extravaganza held there. “Notice to the respondent,” a bench headed by NGT Chairperson Justice Swatanter Kumar said while seeking his reply before May 9, the next date of hearing. However, Art of Living (AOL) spokesperson and legal adviser Kedar Desai said “No such order has been passed. It is factually incorrect to report that any notice has been issued. The matter has been simply adjourned to May 9.” Desai’s stand was contradicted by petitioner’s counsel Rahul Choudhary who said the bench has issued notice to the AOL founder and sought his reply by May 9. During the hearing, the bench also pulled up petitioner Manoj Misra over his plea, asking him “how this has come in the press before coming to us.” Misra has sought action against Ravi Shankar alleging that his remarks on social media had interfered with free and fair dispensation of justice. AOL’s World Cultural Festival was held on the Yamuna floodplains from March 11-13, 2016, to celebrate 35 years of its service. In a statement published on the AOL’s website, Ravi Shankar had blamed the government and the NGT for permitting AOL to hold the function and said his foundation had obtained all necessary permissions, including from the green panel, and the event could have been stopped in the beginning itself if the river was so “fragile and pure”. In a Facebook post, Ravi Shankar had said, “If, at all, any fine has to be levied, it should be levied on the Central and state governments and the NGT itself, for giving the permission. If the Yamuna was so fragile and pure, they should have stopped the World Culture Festival”. In the plea filed through advocates Ritwick Dutta and Rahul Choudhary, Misra had said the AOL head’s statements “denigrated the dignity and status of this tribunal, which was an interference in the fair dispensation of justice”. He had asked NGT to take appropriate action against Ravi Shankar for making the statements which “on the face of it, scandalises/tends to scandalise and interferes/tends to interfere with the free and fair dispensation of justice by the apex green tribunal.” The NGT had earlier termed as “shocking” the charge levelled by Ravi Shankar and the AOL against the government and the green panel for the damage to the Yamuna floodplains, saying they had “no sense of responsibility”. An expert committee had told the NGT that a whopping Rs 42.02 crore would be required to restore the floodplains which was ravaged due to the cultural extravaganza last year. The expert panel had suggested that there would be two components of rehabilitation plan — physical and biological, which would cost Rs 28.73 crore and Rs l3.29 crore respectively, besides additional ancillary expenses. The AOL had alleged that the findings of the panel were “biased” and made allegations against Prof C R Babu, a member of the expert panel which had quantified the damage to the floodplains. “The Art of Living is a responsible and environment- sensitive NGO. We have never caused any damage to the environment but have in fact worked for preserving and reviving it through various environment-related projects over the years,” it had said.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Take decisions fast, don’t fear consequences: PM

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Urging the country’s top officials to “think out of the box” and take collective ownership to bring change, Prime Minister Narendra Modi told them to become “enablers” rather than “regulators”. Deviating from the prepared text while addressing bureaucrats on Civil Services Day here on Friday, Modi regaled them with nuggets of governance, and allayed their apprehensions about getting booked in corruption cases.His assertion assumes significance as some bureaucrats have referred to the three Cs — the CAG, CBI and the CVC — as stumbling blocks in decision-making. He asked civil servants to weigh their decisions from an outcome point of view and not from an output point of view.A legislation proposed way back in 2013 to amend the Prevention of Corruption Act to protect “honest” officials to differentiate between a corrupt decision and a genuine error is pending before Parliament. Over the years, this ‘fear factor’ have led bureaucrats to defer decisions, either referring them to their respective ministers or to the PMO.”If a decision is taken with honest intention, truthfulness and for the welfare of public, nobody can raise a finger at you. Something momentary may happen but I am with you,” the Prime Minister said.”Aankado se badlav aata hai kya (Do we get change through numbers)? We need to weigh decisions from an outcome point of view. Output is okay for the CAG. If we see the output with the CAG, there won’t be any change. But if we see things from ‘CAG+1’, there would be changes,” the Prime Minister said, referring to the outcome- and output- based decision-making.He said that people clap when army saves lives during flood in Kashmir. “The same people may pelt stones at them later. But for a moment, this deed (of army saving lives) touch them,” he said. Bureaucrats need to work together as a team, but it is a matter of concern when two departments of the same government give divergent views in courts over the same matter, he said.He also asked civil servants to use social media, e-governance and mobile governance for the welfare of the people rather than for their own publicity.While sharing nuggets of governance, he stressed on the merits of anonymity. Being faceless is a “big strength”, advised the PM. “Many officers would have had vision, implemented something and the entire country would have benefited from the idea. But if you go looking for who came up with the idea, you will not be able to find them. This is the best quality of the Indian Civil Service,” he said.Of late, he complained, this has changed. “If I post my picture administering two polio drops on Facebook, a question arises about the anonymity of officials,” he commented, implying that while publicity of a scheme was welcome, individual publicity was not.He explained his decision to ban mobile phones during meetings, including cabinet meetings. He lamented that officials are busy with mobile phones rather that spending quality time during meetings. “These days… I see district officials so busy, busy, busy (with their mobiles)…so I banned mobiles during meetings,” he said. “People have moved from e-governance to mobile governance, it is a reality today.”Turning to Nripendra Misra, Principal Secretary in the PMO, who was sitting on the dais, Modi said he did not get the chance “to attend coaching”, referring to tuition classes that help students qualify for the civil services. He then asked Misra: “After 16 years of public service, where would I have been? So I should have come in the director, deputy secretary category.” Misra nodded in agreement.Modi added that there had been several committees and commissions on administrative reforms. “But those who prepared these reports must not have read them completely,” he said. “I feel that those working in this system have enormous experience. No reform can be bigger than the kind of suggestions you have. But we don’t value this (experience),” the Prime Minister said.

Use social media for public welfare, not for self-praise: PM

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Prime Minister Narendra Modi today said that mobile phones were banned from his meetings because he often found officers checking social media sites in the midst of official discussions. “I see these days that district-level officers are so busy, busy, that most of their time goes into it (social media). I have stopped the entry (of mobile phones) in my meetings as they (officers) would take them out and start (checking out social media sites),” he said. The social media should be used for the welfare of the people and not for self-praise, he told bureaucrats at a meeting here to mark Civil Services Day. The world was moving from e-governance to mobile- governance and the best equipment needed to be used for the welfare of people, he added. Social media sites were helpful when they were used for spreading information about the good work being done. “If I am informing the people about dates of polio vaccination through social media, saying that they should come out on a particular date for the vaccination, then it (social media) is helpful. But if during vaccination-related work, I am praising my own photograph on facebook, then it puts a question mark (on the work done by civil servants),” he said. Modi, whose speech was often met with cheers and laughter, said that he was not a part of the bureaucracy because he did not get the chance “to attend coaching”. The reference was to tuition classes which many would-be bureaucrats join to be able to qualify for the civil services. If he had, he said, he would have become a bureaucrat of the rank of a director after serving the people for 16 years. “It is my good luck that I am in public service for the past 16 years…I did not get the chance to attend coaching,” he said. As his audience applauded, he turned to Nripendra Misra, Principal Secretary in the PMO–who was sitting on the dais– and asked him what rank he would have reached after 16 years in service. “Deputy Secretary? Director,” he said, after consulting Misra. “So I should have come in the director category.” Modi added that there had been several committees and commissions on administrative reforms, comprising officers from central and state governments. “But all those who made all these reports, they must not have read them completely,” he said. “I feel that those working in this system have enormous experience. What you (bureaucrats) have, the kind of suggestions you have, no reform can be bigger than that. But we don’t value this (experience),” the Prime Minister said.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

SC seeks Centre’s reply on plea for policy on anthem, Song

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Supreme Court today sought response from the Centre in four weeks on a plea seeking framing of a policy for promoting the national anthem and the national song. A bench headed by Justice Dipak Misra issued notice and asked the Centre to file its reply on the plea which also sought to ascertain the feasibility of singing the national anthem and the national song in Parliament, assemblies, courts, schools and colleges on working days. The petition filed by advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay sought directions for taking steps to promote brotherhood and national integrity in the country. On February 17, the apex court had refused to go into the debate for making singing of the national song mandatory in schools and clarified that it has “kept alive” such a plea only for the national anthem without expressing any view on it. The apex court had on November 30 last year ordered cinema halls across the nation to mandatorily play the national anthem before screening of a movie when the audience must stand and show respect. The order had come on a PIL filed by one Shyam Narayan Chouksey seeking directions that the national anthem should be played in cinema halls across the country before a film begins and proper norms and protocol be fixed regarding its playing and singing at official functions and programmes where those holding constitutional office are present. The apex court, while passing a slew of directions, had also observed that “time has come when citizens must realise they live in a nation and are duty-bound to show respect to the national anthem which is a symbol of constitutional patriotism and inherent national quality”. The apex court had in February clarified that the audience need not stand when the national anthem is sung or played in the storyline of a feature film or part of a newsreel or documentary.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Medical bodies urge govt to hike tax on unhealthy food

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Arguing that South Asians are more susceptible to diabetes and cardiovascular diseases, doctors from All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi, and National Diabetes, Obesity and Cholesterol Foundation, India, along with Diabetes Foundation, have urged the government to increase taxes on unhealthy food items.Mentioning that Kerala recently announced a ‘fat tax’ on pizzas, burgers, sandwiches, and tacos sold through branded food outlets, Anoop Misra, Director, Diabetes and Metabolic Diseases, Diabetes Foundation, said, “A 20 per cent tax on sugar-sweetened drinks in India is projected to reduce the prevalence of overweight and obesity by three per cent and the incidence of type 2 diabetes by 1.6 per cent over the period 2014-23, assuming that consumption increases at par with current trends.”Doctors said that a 20 per cent tax on palm oil purchase in India is projected to avert approximately 3,63,000 deaths from myocardial infarctions and strokes between the period of 2014-23.”Palm oil is consumed widely in India and low and middle-income countries. It is high in saturated fat and can increase cholesterol concentration in the body. Data shows a reduction of 1 mmol/L in cholesterol concentration due to substitution of palm oil with soya oil. This reduction in cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol would equate to a 22 per cent lower risk of cardiovascular disease,” said Dr Nikhil Tandon, Professor, Department of Endocrinology, AIIMS.Doctors have called for an urgent action to provide screening and treatment, complemented by lifestyle modifications. “School health programmes have been hindered by low budgets and poor infrastructure. There are no restrictions on advertising unhealthy food to minors. Such legislation must be complemented with multi-sectoral action,” said Dr Misra.

Do not bank on Centre, rise up to the occasion: Supreme Court to TN

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Supreme Court on Thursday took exception to Tamil Nadu’s (TN) lack of “humanitarian concern” and initiative to save its farmers who are reeling under severe drought conditions and preventing them from committing suicide.A Bench led by Justice Dipak Misra said it was the state’s duty to protect its farmers, many of whom, seeking relief, have been protesting in the national capital since the past one month.”It is alarming to see that the State is still silent on this issue as farmers commit suicide,” Justice Misra observed on a petition filed by the TN Centre for Public Interest Litigation highlighting the plight of farmers and the increasing number of suicides among them.The court observed that it was both shocked and alarmed at how TN had remained silent and not even “extended a finger” to help the starving farmers. The bench further added that the state could not keep banking on the Centre for help and need to “rise up to the occasion” instead of blaming other elements like drought or loan sharks.The bench then directed TN to produce and submit all records and files by May 2 which would then be open for judicial inspection. This was ascertain what steps were taken by the authorities to alleviate the farmers’ misery.Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, who is serving as an amicus curiae, observed that farmers from other States including Maharashtra were suffering from the same plight. However, Justice Misra dismissed the observation by saying that the Bench did not want to “dilute” the issue and wanted to exclusively focus on TN. “This is not one among the hundred cases filed here. This issue raises serious humanitarian concerns,” the Bench observed.Farmers from TN have been protesting in the national capital since Mid-march. A group of farmers stripped in protest after they were denied a meeting with Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

Make parties accountable for implementing manifestos: CJI

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Chief Justice of India (CJI), JS Khehar on Saturday slammed political parties for treating manifestos as mere pieces of paper, and called for making them accountable.”Electoral promises routinely remain unfulfilled. The reason for this gap between electoral promise and its fulfillment does not become an electoral issue,” the CJI said at a seminar on ‘Economic Reforms With Reference To Electoral Issues’ here.Taking a strong stand against the current practice of electioneering by major political parties, the CJI said that religion instead of social reforms has taken centre stage during poll campaigning. Mentioning the electoral manifestos released by two major political parties during the 2014 general elections, the CJI said though promises were made for a strong economic growth, they lacked “constitutional goal of socio-economic justice.””Caste issues are projected in different ways, to ensure a majority in each constituency. No consequences occur, whether promises are fulfilled or not. Every political party brazenly finds an excuse for not reaching consensus amongst allied partners,” he added in his most scathing attack since he assumed office earlier this year.The CJI said that “even our legal system, provides for no consequences to be suffered by political parties, if promises made in manifestos are not fulfilled.”According to the guidelines issues by the Election Commission, parties are urged to avoid making promises that cannot be fulfilled to seek votes.Chief Justice Khehar said that in a democratic system based on political parties, it was “difficult to uphold the principle of free and fair elections if the financing and economy of political parties, are not known to the voters.”The CJI also spoke at length on social issues plaguing our society. He spoke of the plight of Dalits, scheduled castes and scheduled tribes, women as well as children who are forced to work due to financial compulsions. He added that it was necessary to bring about a synergy between the social, economic and political measures with the ground realities of life.Echoing the sentiments of the CJI, Justice Dipak Misra called for decriminalisation of politics. He underlined the need for “free and fair elections” since it was “imperative for the growth of a healthy democracy.” Justice Misra also called for the need for “economic unity.”Invoking Winston Churchill’s quote, “At the bottom of all tributes paid to democracy is the little man, walking into a little booth, with a little pencil, making a little cross, on a little bit of paper – no amount of rhetoric or voluminous discussion can possibly diminish the overwhelming importance of the point,” Justice Misra and the CJI spoke off the “power of the little voter.”President Pranab Mukherjee and Senior Advocate Harish Salve also spoke on day one of the two-day seminar organised by the Confederation of the Bar at the Vigyan Bhavan in the national capital.President Mukherjee advocated the need for strong electoral reforms to strengthen the democratic process. He said, it was time the country relooked at legal provisions to increase the number of parliamentary seats.”Chief Justice of India very emphatically and relevantly pointed out accountability, but the system of parliamentary governance is such that if somebody gets 51 (majority) out of 100, 51 has all the rights and authority and in our electoral process, less than 51 have all the rights and authorities but no responsibility,” President Mukherjee said.Talking about the inadequacies of the parliamentary system, the President said though political parties with less number of seats enjoyed equal rights and authority with those in power, they had “no responsibility”.”A strong electoral system and timely reforms are necessary to strengthen the democratic structure of India. Timely reforms are necessary which not only would give justice to people but also to the ideals enshrined in the Constitution of India,” the President added stressing on reforms.

Poll promises routinely unfulfilled, parties must be held

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Electoral promises routinely remain unfulfilled and manifestos turn out to be mere pieces of paper, for which political parties must be held accountable, Chief Justice of India J S Khehar said today. “Now a days manifestos have become a mere piece of paper, for this political parties have to be made accountable,” the CJI said at a seminar titled ‘Economic Reforms with Reference to Electoral issues’. The CJI, speaking in the presence of President Pranab Mukherjee, said political parties give “brazen” excuses like lack of consensus amongst their members to justify non- fulfilment of their poll promises. He said manifestos remain pieces of paper due to short term memory of citizens but political parties must be held accountable. On the manifestos released by political parties during the 2014 general elections, the CJI said none of them indicated any link between electoral reforms and Constitutional goal of ensuring economic-social justice to the marginalised section. He said pursuant to Supreme Court’s directions to the Election Commission of India to formulate guidelines against freebies, the poll panel has been taking action against parties for violation of the model code of conduct. Justice Dipak Misra, the next senior-most judge, also stressed upon the need for electoral reforms saying that “purchasing power has no room in elections” and a candidate must bear in mind that “contesting elections is not an investment”. He said that holding of elections has to be “bereft of or sans criminalisation” and people should vote for candidates based on their high moral and ethical values and “not on their competitive demerits”. “Candidates and voters must remember that out of debt is out of danger,” Justice Misra said, adding the day a voter goes to vote without being tempted “would be a glorious day for democracy”.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Honour killing case: SC upholds bail cancellation of accused

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Supreme Court upheld today the Karnataka High Court’s order dismissing bail of two persons in a case of “honour killing” of a youth in 2015. A bench headed by Justice Dipak Misra said that the trial judge had granted them bail without following the established parameters of law and the high court had rightly cancelled the relief. The bench observed that the victim, along with his wife, was “staying in peace away from the acrimonious community” but due to some kind of “misconceived class honour”, the incident had taken place. “They (accused) thought that their perception mattered and as alleged, they put an end to the life spark of the young man. The choice of the daughter was allowed no space. Her identity was crushed and her thinking was crucified by parental dominance which has roots in an unfathomable sense of community honour,” the bench noted. “Though the lovers became fugitive, the anger founded on anachronistic values prompted the accused persons to annihilate the life of a young man. In such a situation, the factors that have been highlighted by this court from time to time were required to be adverted to and the accused persons should not have been granted liberty on the grounds that have been thought appropriate by the trial judge,” it said. The apex court also said that “perversity of approach by the additional sessions judge, who has enlarged the appellants on bail, is totally unacceptable” and was “reflective of sanctuary of errors”. The apex court’s order came while dismissing the appeal filed by the accused challenging the high court’s order cancelling their bail.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

SC to decide whether to refer Sabarimala issue to larger bench

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Supreme Court today reserved its order on whether to refer the matter pertaining to ban on the entry of women at Kerala’s Sabrimala temple to a constitution bench. A three-judge bench headed by Justice Dipak Misra asked the parties, including the amicus curiae, to furnish the questions which are likely to be referred to the larger bench. “Judgement reserved on the question whether the matter should go to a larger bench or not,” the bench said. “Counsel for the parties shall file written submissions/ questions which should fall under the constitutional framework, that is likely to be referred to the larger bench,” the bench said. The apex court also allowed several applications, filed in support as well as against the ban on entry of women in the temple, seeking impleadment in the matter. (More)(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

SC to hear PIL seeking policy to promote national anthem, song and flag

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –> The Supreme Court on Friday will hear a plea seeking directions to the Centre for issuing a policy to promote and propagate the national anthem, national flag and national song. The plea, which is filed by advocate Ashwini Upadhyay, says that India is a Union of States and not an association or confederation of States. Earlier on February 10, the top court had declined to give an urgent hearing on the plea. The petition sought a direction to frame a national policy to promote and propagate the national anthem, national song and national flag in spirit of the Article 51A. On November 30, a bench headed by Justice Dipak Misra, in a separate plea, had ordered all cinema halls to play the national anthem before the screening of a movie. However, later the court made an amendment saying that there is no need to compulsorily stand up when the national anthem is sung or played as part of a film or documentary. In its earlier order, the apex court had invoked what it called “constitutional patriotism” to say that people need to stand up when the national anthem was played before screening of a film.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

DJB recommends law change to provide water to JJ colonies

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The DJB has pitched for amendments in the Delhi Water Board Act to enable it to provide water connections in JJ clusters and unauthorised floors across the national capital. The proposal was moved at the the 130th Board meeting of the DJB (Delhi Jal Board) attended by Water Minister Kapil Misra, who is the chairman of the body. “The Board has recommended suitable amendment to be made in The Delhi Water Board Act, 1998, to Govt of NCT of Delhi, to allow Delhi Jal Board to give water connections to consumers of Jhuggi Jhopri (JJ) clusters and unauthorised floors all over Delhi,” an official statement said. The move comes ahead of the MCD polls, which is to be held tentatively by May. At the meeting, decision was also taken to extend two schemes, waiving late surcharges on bill payment and reduced rates of sewer and water development charges of unauthorised and regularised colonies, till April 30. “The benefits of the rebate scheme have been availed by approximately 5 lakh consumers which translates into Rs 743 crore,” it said. As part of its efforts to convert intermittent supply of water into round-the-clock, two colonies of South Delhi — Geetanjali and Navjeevan Vihar– have been taken up in the pilot phase, DJB added.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Manish Sisodia files RTI seeking info on PM Modi’s pet projects

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Facing investigation into alleged irregularities in social media campaign of ‘Talk to AK’, the Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia filed an RTI application with Prime Minister Office’s informational cell seeking information related to social media campaigns like ‘Make in India’ and ‘Digital India’.The Central Bureau of Investigation had registered a case against Sisodia and other government officers under the Prevention of Corruption Act in ‘Talk to AK’ social media campaign scam last month. The agency is trying to establish 11 violations and irregularities made during awarding the contract to a private company — Perfect Relations.When Sisodia filed RTI, Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal sitting in Bengaluru tweeted, “Manish awarded contracts like the PMO did for digital campaign. Modi ji, if you’re getting Manish probed by the CBI, a CBI investigation should also be ordered into this issue.” (sic)Sisodia reached Rail Bhavan around 12 pm and filed the application on Friday. The Deputy Chief Minister said, “I want to know what process Centre govt follows in advertising its campaigns like ‘Make in India’, ‘Narendra Modi App’, ‘Start Up India’ and ‘Digital India’. Whose credit limit has been used in putting up these advertisements? Because, when we connect with people it is dubbed corruption but when Modiji does Mann Ki Baat it’s projected as patriotism.”Asked whether he was hopeful of getting any response, Sisodia claimed that “everyone is aware” why information on Modi’s higher education degrees has not been shared yet.Sisodia had earlier written to the Prime Minister’s Principal Secretary Nripendra Misra seeking details of the process of payments made for social media campaigns for various Centre-run schemes.Through the RTI, he also sought information on action taken on his letter addressed to Misra and copies of file noting, correspondence and other documents relating to the handling of the letter dated January 27.Interestingly, the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) ministers have started attacking Central Government, after they have returned from recently concluded Punjab and Goa Assembly elections.

SC declines urgent hearing on plea to promote national anthem

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Supreme Court today refused to give an urgent hearing on a plea seeking direction for framing of a policy to promote and propagate the national anthem, national flag and national song. A bench headed by Chief Justice J S Khehar declined the prayer for urgent hearing. Advocate Ashwini Upadhaya, who mentioned the matter before the bench, urged that the plea be tagged with the matter pending with the apex court and scheduled for hearing on February 14. The apex court had on November 30 last year ordered cinema halls across the nation to mandatorily play the National Anthem before screening of a movie and the audience must stand and show respect. A bench of Justices Dipak Misra and Amitava Roy had observed that the “time has come when citizens must realise they live in a nation and are duty-bound to show respect to National Anthem which is a symbol of constitutional patriotism and inherent national quality.” It had said that “love and respect for the motherland is reflected when one shows respect to the National Anthem as well as to the National Flag”. The court had barred printing of the anthem or part of it on any object and displaying it in such a manner at places which may be “disgraceful to its status and tantamount to disrespect”. It had also barred playing or displaying an “abridged version” of the anthem.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

SC crack downs on Sahahra, attaches Aamby Valley

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Supreme Court on Monday attached Sahara’s Aamby Valley—valued at approximately Rs 39,000 crore – in inorder to expedite the recovery of Rs 14,779 crore the company owes its duped investors.At the insistence of market regulator Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), the SC also ordered Sahara to submit a list of properties “free from any encumbrance” that would be put up for auction to help recover the money.So far, Sahara has managed to repay a little over Rs 11,000 crore. Pursuant to an earlier order, Sahara deposited approximately Rs 600 crore with SEBI on Monday. Kapil Sibal, representing Sahara, sought time till July 2019 to deposit the balance of Rs 14,779 crore with SEBI.However, this simply takes care of the principal amount. “The issue of amount of interest shall be adverted to after deposit of the principal amount,” a special bench led by Justice Dipak Misra said.The SC attached Sahara’s prime real estate — situated a little over 100 kms from Mumbai, after it felt that the company’s proposed plan to replay the principal amount extending till 2019 was too long.Sibal, however, urged the bench to hear his submissions before passing any order. “What is the hurry? There is no bank asking for money. There are no investors asking for money,” Sibal said, submitting the income-tax appellate tribunal order that claimed the company had already refunded 85 per cent of the investors.Sahara has been directed to submit its list of properties by January 20 and the court will take up the matter a week later.On January 12, the apex court threatened to cancel Sahara chief Subrata Roy’s bail and ordered him to deposit Rs 600 crore with market regulator SEBI before February 6 as directed by an earlier order.Then, the specially constituted bench comprising of Justices Misra, Ranjan Gogoi and A K Sikri had even asked SEBI counsel Arvind Datar what would happen if the Sahara chief did not deposit the requisite amount. To this, the senior counsel had implied that at least 87 properties associated with the company would be attached, a receiver could be appointed and the properties sold through auction.In December 2016, Roy informed the then Chief Justice of India TS Thakur, that Sahara had shared a “road map” with the appointed Amicus Curiae Shekhar Naphade to deposit the balance of the principal amount by December 2018. Based on this submission, the court had then extended Roy’s interim bail.On January 4, 2012, Sahara had filed an affidavit with the apex court indicating that it had enough underlying “unencumbered” assets with Sahara India Real Estate Corporation (SIREC) and Sahara Housing Investment Corporation (SHIC), to repay its investors.This affidavit was filed when the top court had temporarily stayed an October 2011 order by Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) – the body that hears appeals against SEBI orders. SAT had ordered Sahara to return the money it had collected by duping its investors.It remains to be seen if Sahara submits the same “free and unencumbered” properties it had filed in the 2012 affidavit (see box).Unencumbered properties listed by Sahara in 2012
(all invested amounts in Rs. crores) Rs. 3,459: Development rights in land owned by Aamby Valley Ltd measuring 707 acres near Pune.
Rs. 5,207: Development of Aamby Valley City, spread over 10,000 acres of land, by Sahara and its 11 subsidiaries. Rs. 40,461 crore claimed market value.
Rs. 1,436: Development rights in land measuring 186 acres in Delhi NCR through various Sahara group entities.
Rs. 1,848: 33 per cent stake in Versova project (near Lokhandwala Complex in Mumbai’s western suburbs), comprising 106 acres of land.
Rs. 1,105: 90 to 95 per cent stake in 64 special purpose vehicles (partnership firms) of the Sahara Group having 64 real estate projects in 64 cities.
40 per cent stake in four city home projects measuring 318 acres of land in four cities.
Rs.180: 50 per cent stake in 15 city home projects in 15 cities measuring 1,751 acres of land. In 2012, Sahara claimed that the valuation of its shares in four city home projects was about Rs 888 crore (before tax). And the value of 15 city homes project is Rs 5,192 crore.
Rs. 1,000: 30 percent stake in 40 acres of land in Lucknow district
Rs: 532: 100 per cent stake by way of holding equity shares in 60 entities with 515 acres of land at 16 locations. In 2012, the market value was pegged at Rs 3,138 crore.
Rs. 62: 100 per cent development rights held by two entities in land measuring 196 acres at Vasai and Malegaon in Maharashtra. In 2012, value was estimated at Rs 2,421 crore.

SC bars woman from filing PIL for arraying President as party

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Supreme Court today barred a woman and others from filing any PIL in any court in the country for making President Pranab Mukherjee as a party in her case and termed her petition as “absolutely malicious, vexatious and unjusticiable”. “It is an assault on the Constitution, more so when the high constitutional authorities are involved. They have, with incurable audacity, made allegations against the respondents which are absolutely unacceptable and, in fact, can never be conceived of. “No litigant can be permitted to browbeat or malign the system. This is essential for maintaining the integrity of the institution and the public confidence in the delivery of justice. It is sheer malice. The question of issuance of any kind of writ does not arise. “On the contrary, we are disposed to think that the grievance that has been agitated is absolutely unjusticiable,” a bench of Justices Dipak Misra and R Banumathi said. The apex court noted that petitioners Anindita and others have not been present in court after filing the petition and termed the plea as “vexatious and, in fact, is an expression of pervert proclivity”. The bench said the present writ petition preferred under Article 32 of the Constitution “is absolutely the product of disgruntled minds obsessed with their own litigation” as they have approached the court earlier in some appeals but could not meet with success. “They have imagined situations which are beyond realm of any kind of justiciability. A Constitution Bench of this court in 2006 has clearly held that the President of India cannot be arrayed as a party to the litigation. Despite the said pronouncement, the petitioners being emboldened by some kind of imaginative faculty have described the President as Respondent No.1,” the bench said. The apex court said that a litigant has space as far as he is concerned in the justice dispensation system, but he cannot assume the role that he is “the monarch of all he surveys” and “his ego, however colossal it may be, deserves condemnation and we do decry”. Barring the petitioners from filing any PIL in future in any constitutional court, the court said that none of their petition under Article 226 or Article 32 of the Constitution shall be entertained unless they are personally grieved. “If the petitioners deviate from this direction, they shall be liable for contempt of this court,” it said while dismissing the plea.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

.NewDelhiANI @ 1/30/2017 7:53:30 AM

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –> In a case which has reached the fag end of its argument, the Supreme Court today will hear the appeals filed by the four December 16 gangrape convicts challenging the Delhi High court order, which had sentenced them all to the gallows. The matter is now at present being heard by the Apex Court three judge bench headed by Justice Dipak Misra and Justices R. Banumathj and Ashok Bhushan. Earlier, the apex court had declined the request by two amici curiae – senior counsel Raju Ramachandran and Sanjay R Hegde to withdraw from assisting the court in hearing of appeals by the convicts in the gang rape case. Asking both to continue assisting the court in hearing of the appeals by the four accused convicted and sentenced to death, the three judge bench comprising of justices Dipak Misra, R Banumathi and Ashok Bhushan said: “We can appreciate the anguish expressed by the learned amici curiae”. Six people gang-raped a 23-year-old physiotherapy intern in a moving bus and thrashed her and her male friend. They then violently raped and attacked her, and threw both of them from the moving bus on December 16. The woman succumbed to her injuries in a Singapore hospital on December 29, 2012. One of the accused, Ram Singh hanged himself in prison, while another man, who was a juvenile at the time of the crime, was convicted in August and will serve the maximum sentence of three years in a reform home. Meanwhile, on December 3, amicus curiae Sanjay Hegde questioned the evidence produced by the prosecution in the gang-rape case, and came out with certain points putting a question on the merit of evidence. According to Hegde, one of the convicts, Mukesh, was not with the prime culprit Ram Singh when the offence was committed, since their mobile locations were found to be different on that night.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Sisodia seeks details of Centre’s social media campaigns

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Delhi Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia has written to Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Principal Secretary Nripendra Misra seeking details of the process of payments made for social media campaigns for various Centre-run schemes. Sisodia’s move comes 10 days after CBI registered a preliminary enquiry against him and others in connection with alleged irregularities in AAP government’s social media campaign ‘Talk to AK’ even as the AAP dispensation refuted the same saying that no consultant was hired especially for it. According to Delhi government, through proper tender, a public relations company was appointed by the government in June last year to publicise its works for a period of one year while ‘Talk to AK” was held in July. In his letter to Misra, the Deputy Chief Minister sought details of social media campaigns for ‘Make in India’, ‘Narendra Modi app’, ‘Startup India’ and ‘Digital India’. Sisodia sought to know details regarding central government’s agencies, private advertisement and event management companies, saying that whether bidding process was adopted by the Centre for advertisements for Centre-run schemes on Google, Facebook, Youtube and Twitter. “For social media campaign, payments have to be made through credit cards and credit limit only. Which department, government-run agencies or private agencies’ credit cards and credit limits were used for making payments for social media campaign for centre’s schemes?” asked the Deputy CM. He also sought to know who has developed ‘Narendra Modi app’ and who has the ownership right of this app and how much money was spent on advertisements for the app.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Stray dogs have a right to live, can’t be eradicated across country: Supreme Court

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>”Stray dogs have a right to live,” was how the Supreme Court reacted sharply when a submission was made that such canines should be completely destroyed across the country. A bench of Justices Dipak Misra and R Banumathi observed that though culling of stray dogs was permissible, there has to be a balance and a proper method for this. When one of the petitioners told the apex court that he wanted to “totally destroy” stray dogs across India, the bench said “nobody can destroy stray dogs in entirety. They also have a right to live”.Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Pinky Anand concurred with the observations of apex court and said that stray dogs have a right to live and there has to be a balance.The apex court has been hearing a batch of petitions on issues relating to orders passed by various civic bodies on culling of stray dogs which have become a menace, especially in Kerala and Mumbai.During the hearing, the bench said in Kerala, there were issues of human concern but for this all stray dogs cannot be killed. “A person can die due to dog bite. It is an accident and for that, we cannot say kill all the stray dogs,” it said.The bench was also informed that a panel headed by former Kerala High Court judge Sri Jagan had received around 400 matters related to dog bites and it was working on it. The panel was set up by the apex court to inquire into incidents in which people and even children killed stray dogs and these acts were supported by several vigilante groups in Kerala.”The panel has received around 400 applications out of which 24 have been settled. The committee is working on it,” one of the counsel told the bench, which listed the matter for further hearing on March one.When an advocate told the court that people have died due to dog bites in Kerala and children were unable to go to school due to this menace, the bench said “just because there are some stray dogs in a field or a school, they cannot be killed”.”They (stray dogs) have to be taken to shelter homes ….if there is no way out, they have to be culled and not killed. But there has to be a method for it,” it said. To this, one of the petitioners said he would construct shelter homes for dogs in his area in Kerala but the apex court asked him to submit a concrete proposal and prepare a road map.

© 2020 Yuva Sai Sagar. Theme by Anders Norén.