Merry Christmas to all Friends and the People at large !!!!!

Wishing All of You Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year 2012 !!!!

KARTIKEY SHROFF Law Office www.kartikey.com .........and kdshroff.blogspot.com Lawyers Team

Bombay High Court questioned "Anna Hazare's Stir as interference with functioning of the Parliament ?"

"Wouldn't your stir interfere with the functioning of Parliament?" the two-judge division bench of Hon. Mr. justices PB Majmudar and Mr. Justice Mridula Bhatkar of Bombay High Court recently asked Team Anna in respect of his proposed stir in Mumbai.The Bombay High Court came down heavily on Anna Hazare and his team, who had sought permission to use the MMRDA grounds in Mumbai for his fast, saying that "the court cannot allow parallel canvassing when Parliament is seized with a debate on the Lokpal Bill. Public opinion can be created in the entire country, so why are they insisting on this place?" the judge asked. He also told Team Anna that they were expecting too much from the government.The judge also said people in Mumbai are very sensitive about noise pollution due to rallies. "What is Satyagraha to you may not be for others. There will be people who may not want your Satyagraha," the HC judge said.As per the media report of IBN Live India, Hazare has also made it clear that he will go to jail if he does not get a place to protest... " Can a person or the mass be allowed to coarse or pressurize our Government beyond the limits of laws in the name of satyagrah or in the nae of the Freedom of Expression, Movement and Demonstration as such ? " is now another question of laws and facts looking to the prevailing situation so developed

No Revenue Authority can ignore even a Kaccha Entry : Gujarat High Court

While adjudicating SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 12060 of 2011 with SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 12061 of 2011, the HON. MR.JUSTICE S.R.BRAHMBHATT has recently ruled and observed that " The question arises as to whether the District Collector was justified in ignoring the Kachha entry and issuing the notice only to the original vendor. The cancellation of that entry has direct nexus and adverse impact upon the holding in question. Therefore, when the rights of parties are infringed on account of any action, even if it is administrative action, the notice is required to be issued to the party concerned, who is likely to be affected. On this principle alone without opining upon the merits of the order of the Collector, the order is quashed and set aside. The Court reiterate at the cost of repetition that the Court has not opined about the merit of passing the order of cancelling the entry no. 68. However, the order is required to be quashed only on account of the fact that the present petitioners whose names are there in the form of Kachha entries were not heard and they were likely to be affected."

In absence of allegations that applicants at the relevant time were in day to day affairs & management of the accused Company in a complaint, the applicants cannot be held vicariously liable under Sec: 141 of NI Act

While granting an order to set aside a complaint, for the offence under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the NI Act for dishonor of cheque signed and issued by an accused Company, and admittedly not signed by the accused applicants chairman and its directors, the Hon. Mr. Justice M.R. Shah of Gujarat High Court has recently reiterated the ratio set up by the Hon. Apex Court and significantly observed upon disposal of CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION No. 13256 of 2007 that " There are no averments and allegations in the complaint that the applicants at the relevant time were in day to day affairs and management of the original accused Company, as required under Section 141 of the NI Act. Considering the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Small Industries Corporation(Supra) and Central Bank of India(Supra), in absence of such averments in the complaint, the applicants cannot be held vicariously liable under Section 141 of NI Act for dishonor of the cheque issued by Company and for the offences alleged to have been committed by Company under Section 138 of the NI Act. It is also required to be noted that even the accused applicants have already resigned as Directors and intimation to that effect was given to the Registrar of Companies prior to the issuance of the cheque by original accused No.1 Company. Under the circumstances also, it cannot be said that applicants have committed any offence as alleged. Under the circumstances, to continue the criminal proceedings against the applicants would be unnecessary harassment to them and/or the same shall be abuse of process of law and Court as, as stated herein above, the applicants cannot be held vicariously liable under Section 141 of NI Act. Under the circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise powers under Section 482 of the CrPC and to quash and set aside the impugned complaint so far as the applicants accused are concerned."

Before passing Order of detention under PASA act, the detaining authority must come to a definite finding that there is threat to the “public order”

While applying the ratio, laid down by the Hon. Supreme Court, in the case of Ashokbhai Jivraj @ Jivabhai Solanki v. Police Commissioner, Surat [(2001) (1) GLH 393), having considered the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ram Manohar Lohia v. State of Bihar (AIR 1966 SC 740), the Hon. Mr. Justice M.D. Shah of Gujarat High Court has recently quashed and set aside the impugned order of detention dated 08.07.2011 passed by the Police Commissioner, Ahmedabad City, and ordered the detenu to be set at liberty forthwith, with the landmark setting observation and judicial precedence in a recently adjudicated SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 17648 of 2011 of NAGENDRA @ TINKU S/O PANDUVADIVEL MADRASI THROUGH HIS FRIEND - Petitioner as such that " It is held by the detaining authority that as the detenu is indulged in illegal activities, so it is required to restrain the detenu from carrying on further illegal activities, i.e. selling liquor. The detaining authority has placed reliance on the above registered offence and statements of unnamed witnesses. In the opinion of this Court, he activities of the detenu can, by no stretch of imagination, can be said to be disturbing the “public order”. It is seen from the grounds that a general statement that has been made by the detaining authority that consuming liquor is injurious to health. In fact, a perusal of the order passed by the detaining authority shows that the grounds which are mentioned in the order are in reference to the situation of “Law and order” and not “public order”. It is clear that before passing an order of detention of a detenu, the detaining authority must come to a definite finding that there is threat to the “public order” and it is very clear that the present case would not fall within the category of threat to “public order” Therefore, on this ground, the subjective satisfaction arrived at by the detaining authority is vitiated on account of non-application of mind and the impugned order, therefore, deserves to be quashed and set aside."

"Absence of basis ingredients of offence in a complaint justifies quashing of such complaint" : SC

Setting up a landmark judicial precedence in the matters of Gorige Pentaiah v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Others (2008) 12 SCC 531, the Hon. Apex court has significantly observed with the order of quashing the impugned criminal complaint FIR that " when the basic ingredients of the offence are missing in the complaint, then permitting such a complaint to continue and to compel the appellant to face the rigmarole of the criminal trial would be totally unjustified leading to abuse of process of law."

Insurance company could not be held liable for compensation for accidental death of a traveler in a goods vehicle

While adjudicating FIRST APPEAL No. 1361 of 1997 against an impugned order of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, the Hon. Mr. Justice K.S. Zhaveri of Gujarat High Court has observed that "It is not in dispute that the vehicle (Truck) in question in which the deceased was travelling was a 'goods vehicle'. Under the circumstances, the appellant-Insurance Company could not be held liable in view of the principle laid down in National Insurance Company Limited v. Rattani & Ors. (2009) 2 SCC 75, in respect of the victim father of original claimant was travelling in a goods vehicle like Truck "

" Parliament cannot be dictated from Footpath.. Image of Nation is at stake " Lallu Prasad Yadav

The Speech of Mr. Lallu Prasad Yadav, Member of Parliament in respect of recently presented Loppal Bill in parliament. It was RJD leader Lalu Prasad who stole the show during the introductory debate on the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Bill in Lok Sabha today.The portly former Bihar chief minister had the members from both the Congress and BJP benches in splits as he meandered through his comic monologue release by IndiaTV on http://youtu.be/NUo6-GFnvi4

Gujarat High Court slams Gujarat State Government in respect of reservation for weaker sections in power.

While deciding the issue, raised in writ proceedings by the petitioners Nathabhai Zala and Mohan Vaghela of Thoriyali and Khodapipar villages in Rajkot district after the Gujarat state government failed to respond to ensure reserved seats for the backward classes in their respective villages, A division bench of the Hon. Mr. justice VM Sahai and Mr. Justice AJ Desai awfully criticized against the Gujarat state government yesterday and has ordered for a fresh panchayati elections be held on December 29 in these villages after seats are reserved for the backward community members, with a specific direction to all the concerned departments, including the state election commission to ensure that detailed list of these "lesser" populated villages is prepared and ensured that every village in the state has a seat reserved for scheduled castes and scheduled tribes. The Division Bench observed that the weaker sections were prevented from providing effective leadership as dominant sections captured power and used it for their ends. This led to loss of faith in grassroot democracy. As per a media report, since decades the Gujarat state government had avoided reserving seats for representatives of these backward classes in close to 5,000 villages panchayat citing "inadequate populations" of these villages, out of 12000 villages of the state.In accordance with the provisions of article 243 B of our constitution, the reservation for these weaker classes, be it a lesser or a sizeable populated village is mandatory. The division bench has slammed the Gujarat state government, setting up a landmark mandate against the state government, now to ensure that every village in Gujarat has a seat reserved for representatives from backward communities.

Illegal Mushrooming of Educational Institutes in our Country is again awfully criticized by the Apex Court

While confirming the order of the dismissal Order of Gujarat High Court, in the matters of the writ proceedings initiated by unapproved MSKM B.Ed. College of Gujarat, managed by Shri Morvi Sarvajanik Kelavni Mandal, The Hon. Justice Mr. T.S. THAKUR, of Supreme Court of India, has further dismissed CIVIL APPEAL NO.11215 OF 2011, and has observed some serious remarks against the illegal mushrooming of educational institutes in our country as such that " Mushroom growth of ill-equipped, under-staffed and un-recognised educational institutions was noticed by this Court in State of Maharashtra v. Vikas Sahebrao Roundale and Ors. (1992) 4 SCC 435. This Court observed that the field of education had become a fertile, perennial and profitable business with the least capital outlay in some States and that societies and individuals were establishing such institutions without complying with the statutory requirements. The unfortunate part is that despite repeated pronouncements of this Court over the past two decades deprecating the setting up of such institutions. The mushrooming of the colleges continues all over the country at times in complicity with the statutory authorities, who fail to check this process by effectively enforcing the provisions of the NCTE Act and the Regulations framed thereunder. The present is one such case where the institution established by the appellant has been inspected more than once and several deficiencies that seriously affect its capacity to impart quality education and training to future teachers specifically pointed out. It is difficult to appreciate how the institution could have reported compliance with the requirements of the regulations and complete removal of the deficiencies after the order passed by the High Court when the institution had neither the land standing in its name nor the building constructed in which it could conduct the training program. The fact that the institution was being run in a building which was shared by two other colleges was itself sufficient to justify withdrawal of the recognition granted in its favour.

"Accused has no right to file any materials or documents at the stage of framing of charges" SC

While deciding a petition of the applicant Helios & Matheson Information Technology Ltd. & Ors., in the matter of SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO.4606 of 2011, the Hon. Supreme Court of India, has reiterated the principle of criminal jurisprudence in respect of the rights of the accused at the time of framing of charges, as earlier decided in the matters of State of Orissa v. Debendra Nath Padhi (2005) 1 SCC 568, and has observed that " The law is that at the time of framing charge or taking cognizance the accused has no right to produce any material. No provision in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short the "Code") grants to the accused any right to file any material or document at the stage of framing of charge. That right is granted only at the stage of the trial. Satish Mehra case, (1996) 9 SCC 766 holding that the trial court has powers to consider even materials which the accused may produce at the stage of Section 227 of the Code has not been correctly decided. It is well settled that at the stage of framing of charge the defence of the accused cannot be put forth. The acceptance of the contention of the accused would mean permitting the accused to adduce his defence at the stage of framing of charge and for examination thereof at that stage which is against the criminal jurisprudence."

" For custody of children, the paramount consideration is the welfare and interest of the child and not the rights of the parents under a statute." SC

While adjudicating about the custody of the minor children, in a judicial battle between husband and wife, in the matters of SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) Nos. 35468 & 35469 OF 2009 of the applicant wife Gayatri Bajaj, the Hon. Supreme Court of India has again emphasized upon the principles of welfare and interest of the child and has observed that " In a matter relating to the custody of children the first and the paramount consideration is the welfare and interest of the child and not the rights of the parents under a statute. Even the statues, namely, the Guardianship and Wards Act, 1890 and Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 make it clear that the welfare of the child is a predominant consideration. In a matter of this nature, particularly, when father and mother fighting their case without reference to the welfare of the child, a heavy duty is cast upon the Court to exercise its discretion judiciously bearing in mind the welfare of the child as paramount consideration.

For a specific performance of a contract of sale of immovable property, there must be certainty with respect to the property to be sold. And the relinquishment has to be unambiguous " SC

While adjudicating some important issues of laws, with respect to the specific performance of a contract,in the matters of Civil Appeal No. 3249 OF 2005, The Hon Supreme Court of India has recently observed that " Damages and specific performance are both remedies available upon breach of obligations by a party to the contract. The former is considered to be a substantial remedy, whereas the latter is of course a specific remedy. It is true that explanation (i) to Section 10 of the Act provides that unless and until the contrary is proved, the Court shall presume that breach of contract to transfer immovable property cannot be adequately relieved by compensation in money. However, this presumption is not an irrebuttable one. That apart, for a specific performance of a contract of sale of immovable property, there must be certainty with respect to the property to be sold. As held by this Court in para 18 of Mayawanti Vs. Kaushalya Devi reported in 1990 (3) SCC 1 :-"18. The specific performance of a contract is the actual execution of the contract according to its stipulations and terms, and the courts direct the party in default to do the very thing which he contracted to do. The stipulations and terms of the contract have, therefore, to be certain and the parties must have been consensus ad idem. The burden of showing the stipulations and terms of the contract and that the minds were ad idem is, of course, on the plaintiff. If the stipulations and terms are uncertain, and the parties are not ad idem, there can be no specific performance, for there was no contract at all............." As far as the propositions of law concerning relinquishment as canvassed by the respondents are concerned, there is no difficulty in accepting the same. However, the relinquishment has to be unambiguous. As held by this Court in Surjit Kaur Vs. Naurata Singh reported in 2000 (7) SCC 379, the party seeking part performance must unambiguously relinquish all claims to performance of remaining part of the contract. "

Sisva has set up an illustrative landmark in village administration

In Sisva village of Anand District in Gujarat has recently set up an illustrative landmark, by selecting unanimously only young unmarried girls of an age between 18 to 22 years as its Gram Panchayat Members, including its Sarpanch Hinalben Shaileshbhai Patel. It is also its fourth consecutive unanimous selection of all its Gram Panchayat Members, without any election, by this united electoral community of village Sisva. Such an unity at the smallest unit of an electoral body is not only meant to save lots of public money but also a symbol of strength to work together with unity, in the large interest and  progress of their village. And now for this term, the selection of all these young educated girls in the administration of a village has reinforced the strength and vision of this village for its pretty good future. So this is not only a big illustration to all our villages, but also other electoral units like Municipalities, Corporation, Taluka Panchayat as well as District Panchayat, where more and more involvement of selected young generation could be a new gateway for a total revolution,meant for development and progress at large.

Kartikey Shroff’s another Official Law Blog and Legal Updates

Please visit us on LexisNexis at http://community.martindale.com/members/4269168/default.aspx

www.kartikey.com

Lawyers Team

SC: "Right to Information is an intrinsic part of the fundamental right to free speech and expression." A Landmark Judgment of the Apex Court on its Denial and Remedies.

While adjudicating CIVIL APPEAL NOs.10787-10788 OF 2011 of Chief Information officer and others against the State of Manipiur and others , the Hon. Mr. Justice Ganguly Supreme Court of India has set up a landmark judicial precedent in respect of Laws of Rights to Information and its denial and remedies, in accordance with the provisions of Right to Information Act and has observed that " Right to information, which is basically founded on the right to know, is an intrinsic part of the fundamental right to free speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.A society which adopts openness as a value of overarching significance not only permits its citizens a wide range of freedom of expression,it also goes further in actually opening up the deliberative process of the Government itself to the sunlight of public scrutiny.In making a request for an Information, an applicant is not required to give any reason for obtaining the information or any other personal details excepting those which are necessary for contacting him. Such request has to be disposed of as expeditiously as possible. In any case within 30 days from the date of receipt of the request either the information shall be provided or the same may be rejected for any of the reasons provided under Sections 8 and 9. The proviso to Section 7 makes it clear that when it concerns the life or liberty of a person, the information shall be provided within forty-eight hours of the receipt of the request.The appellant after having applied for information under Section 6 and then not having received any reply thereto, it must be deemed that he has been refused the information.The said situation is covered by Section 7 of the Act. The remedy for such a person who has been refused the information is provided under Section 19 of the Act."

Vidhya Sahayak for teachers, Lok Rakshak for police and Gram Mitra in rural administration are "Gujarat State Sponsored Financial Exploitation"

A division bench of the Gujarat High Court, comprising Acting Chief Justice Bhaskar Bhattacharya and Justice J B Pardiwala, has observed last week, while hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) that has challenged the Gujarat government policy to recruit young people on fixed salary for five years, that "It had “almost” made up its mind that the state government’s scheme to recruit Class III and IV employees on fixed salary for a fixed time frame was in violation of Constitutional provisions." Dr. Rajendra Shukla, president of the Shree Yogkshem Foundation for Human Dignity, the petitioner of the aforesaid PIL called the policy of Government of Gujarat as 'unlawful’ and ‘unfair’ labour practice, which is exploitative in nature and has recently further added in public that, "In our state of Gujarat, today 'State Sponsored Financial Exploitation' is practised, wherein the youth are employed on a fixed salary basis, like Vidhya Sahayak for teachers, Lok Rakshak for police and Gram Mitra in rural administration, which is a practice not followed anywhere else in the country. For instance, a youth will get employed for a meagre amount of Rs.1350 per month for five years. Imagine how his person would be running his house? Under the name of development, everything is hollow.”

India needs strong implementation of laws, rather than new legislation

It was a dispute that there is no law or legislation to curb corruption, now it is a dispute that there is no strong legislation proposed to curb any corruption.... and all our politicians with their volunteers are involved in one kind of internal war against each other, without attending to their parliamentary functions and there is a bog waste of our valuable time, public money and man hours in such liquid political situations... This is really unfortunate transactions of the present time, because several laws are there in our nation... yet another agitation is procured without any judicious consideration... as you know well that the so-called Lokpal bill is still not legislated, but the so-called corrupt ministers like Raja, and Kanimozi could have been sent behind the bars... even in past several immune personalities should have suffered and incurred even severe imprisonments or vigorous sentences for their dishonest actions... and more such so-called immune public servants may be sent to jails in coming days, for their illegal dishonest corruptions... The History of our Nation is a good witness of such events, one can look at it... and It is that only important ingredient of "Dishonesty" behind every serious public offence like corruption, misappropriation, theft, cheating, criminal breach of trust or unlawful gratification pertaining to the moral turpitude under Indian Penal Code and other present Acts, ... So provisions of laws are there and remedies are also enacted, simply proper implementation and appropriate maintenance is strictly essential to control such the evil or corruption... and above all the strong and honest will power and determination to curb the corruption is necessary before any action or legislation... because "Laws alone are not the remedies to control corruption". If one may look at our certain landmark judicial precedents, it may be certainly summarized that "Nobody is immune in the eyes of laws, if he has contravened any express provisions of laws....No action is protected, if it is done against the provisions of laws.... an illegal act can not be said as an official act or duty.... no public servants are entitled to act beyond the laws... Thus every dishonest action or inaction are liable to be punished if it is so intended.. But it is never strongly intended, except we spend again and again... as usually in the hands of politically oriented people... As a matter of fact, the recent remarks of our Hon Supreme Court " How much we are spending on the security of the people who don't deserve it.. " says lots of things... if we read and see in between the lines in the large interest of our country...

A Slap of HC on the face of "Politically Interested Litigation" against the Appointment of Lokayukt in Gujarat

Recently on failure to deposit the penalty costs of Rs.25000/- for filing a frivolous litigation, as ordered in the judgment of WRIT PETITION (PIL) No. 129 of 2011, on Dt.14 October 2011 , the Division Bench of the HON. CHIEF JUSTICE MR.BHASKAR BHATTACHARYA and HON. MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA of Gujarat High Court has further passed an order to issue a bailable warrant against the litigant petitioner lawyer Mr. Asok Pande, if he fails to comply with the order further within a week from 8th December 2011. As it is previously discussed, the Petitioner Lawyer Mr. Pande had sought removal of Gujarat governor after chief minister Narendra Modi wrote a letter to the prime minister to recall her from her office, for appointing justice Mr. R A Mehta as Lokayukta without his consent. The Petitioner Lawyer had contended with the so-called supremacy of the Chief Minister Mr. Narendra Modi that the governor's appointment itself was illegal because Modi's consent was not taken before her appointment.And after hearing all the parties to this writ petition finally On October 14 this year, a division bench of Gujarat High Court has slapped him in a precedent setting manner, with a penalty costs of Rs.25000/- while dismissing his "publicity interest litigation" or "political interest litigation".

SC again emphasized for the Implementation of the Scheme of High Security Registration Plates (HSRP) and Sets up its Dead Line to 30th April 2012

Recently while dealing with the issue about the implementation and fixation of the previously proposed Scheme of High Security Registration Plates (HSRP) in all States and Union Territories of India, the Bench of Hon. Chief Justice of India, Mr. Justice S.K. Kapadia, Mr. Justice A.K. Patnaik and Mr. Justice Swatanter Kumar of the Supreme Court of India, again strongly emphasized for the the Implementation of the said HSRP Scheme and continued with its deadline to 30th April 2012, without changing its date for implementation all over the country. While adjudicating above issue, The Hon. Apex Court has further observed therewith, restricting all other High Courts of India too in the large interest of justice that " With a view to ensuring proper implementation of the judgments and directions of this Court, as contained in its various orders, in regard to manufacturing and affixation of the HSRP, it is imperative for this Court to direct that it will be in the fitness of things and even the judicial proprietary would demand that no High Court should pass any interim orders cancelling or staying the tender process in relation to implementation of the scheme." And further taking serious notes of the individual actions of all the states and union territories of our country, the Hon. Supreme Court of India strictly has commented that " Despite the above orders of this Court, majority of the States have not fully implemented the scheme regulating issuance and fixation of High Security Registration Plates (HSRP). From the affidavits filed on behalf of the respective States, it is clear that they have not been vigilant enough to take appropriate steps for initiation and completion of the HSRP scheme and, in any case, not with required expeditiousness." In respect of Gujarat, it is observed by the Apex Court that " The State of Gujarat had issued the tender notice and considered even the persons not possessed of `TYPE APPROVAL CERTIFICATE'. However, they have added a condition that upon awarding of the contract and before manufacturing HSRP, the TYPE APPROVAL CERTIFICATE duly signed by the competent authority should be submitted, at most within three months. Due date for submission of tender was 20th October, 2011. Five bids had been received. Technical bids had been opened. Financial bids are to be opened on 28th November, 2011 and the agreement would be signed by 15th April, 2012. We do not contribute to the method that has been adopted by the State of Gujarat for implementation of the scheme. They ought to have acted in consonance with the directions of this Court. Be that as it may, since the conditions contained in the directions of this Court have not been waived and only a period has been prescribed to submit the `TYPE APPROVAL CERTIFICATE', we do not consider it appropriate to direct the State to hold the entire tender process afresh. But we make it clear that the agreement should be signed and the implementation of scheme should positively commence by 30th April, 2012. We also make it clear that no further time would be granted to the State of Gujarat in this behalf."

India needs Cyber Policemen, who can ensure freedom of Speech and filter Abuses

Recently the social Networks like Facebook, Yahoo etc are hugely misused to upload offensive, defamatory and even abusive contents in respect of political personalities, celebrities, big industrialists, and even for young guys of any sex, simply in the names of fun, fury or political propaganda... Circulation of any such defamatory offensive or abusive contents among the circles or groups of friends can be a matter of fun and amusement but it is still an offence of defamation, in accordance with the provisions of Section:500 of India Penal Code and all those persons who are publishing, circulating, promoting and commenting and even sustaining on their Networks can be liable for the punishment as well as for a huge compensation in respect of any such offence of defamation and libel in the eyes of Indian Laws... Yet lots of such offensive publication and circulation of defamatory contents of our Political Leaders and celebrities are procured and promoted everyday on such Social Networking Sites, without any restraint.. and thus Freedom of Speech has crossed beyond the line and limits of demarcation, which is a true bitter fact.. Therefore India needs Cyber Policemen, who can ensure freedom of Speech and filter Abuses... Hence yesterday an eminent lawyer of Supreme Court of India and the Cabinet Minister in the Centre Mr. Kapil Sibal indicated in reference to such the cyber storm and misuse of Internet medias recently that " Our Indian government is working on some specific guidelines to enforce some sort of monitoring to screen the contents of the social networks. Intention of the government is just to monitor objectionable content and not to interfere with the freedom of expression or Freedom of The Press. We will evolve guidelines to ensure such content is not part of any platform. We simply want some human intervention until these platforms develop technologies to stop objectionable content from getting published. Countries like China, Saudi Arabia and Iran censor the internet. China has 30,000 cyber-policemen who monitor the net.." A Google spokesperson has rightly said in this regards that “We follow the law when it comes to illegal content… But it also means that when content is legal but controversial we don’t remove it because people’s differing views should be respected, so long as they are legal.” Anyway, in the nick of this time, India needs Cyber Policemen, who can ensure freedom of Speech and filter Abuses of Media and Social networking.."

"No right to insist for a particular route for Tazia procession on the eve of Moharram" Gujarat High Court

While adjudicating an issue about the route of the Tazia procession on the eve of Moharram, in the matters of SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 3143 of 2011 under Arts. 14, 19, 21, 25, 26 and 226 of the Constitution of India, HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAJESH H.SHUKLA of Gujarat High Court has recently observed That" The right under Art. 25 on the religious freedom cannot be a matter of quarrel as in a democratic and secular country. Such freedoms would always be there, but it has to be subject to reasonable restrictions. What could be reasonable restriction cannot be defined in formula uniformly for every place, every occasion and every situation as it will have to be considered depending on various factors including the change in the topography of the city, volume of traffic, public interest and ultimately it is the public interest which must prevail. Therefore, pubic interest and maintenance of law and order is an aspect which cannot be overlooked and therefore it cannot be said that the petitioner can have any right to insist for a particular route "

"No Blacklisting without affording an opportunity to be heard" Gujarat High Court

Following the established judicial guidelines by the Apex Court, the Division Bench of MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI and MR.JUSTICE A.J. DESAI of Gujarat High Court allowed a writ with a significant observations in tune with the Rules of the Natural Justice, in respect of the impugned Blacklisting of the petitioner offset printing press, by the government agency, in a recently adjudicated proceedings of SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 13929 of 2011, that " the order (of Blacklisting) cannot be passed without issuing any notice or without affording an opportunity of hearing to the affected party.The law contemplates that prior to passing of the impugned order of blacklisting, opportunity of hearing has to be afforded to the affected party as the blacklisting entails civil consequences.

"A woman makes her completely immune to the charge of adultery " SC

While adjudicating a CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2232 OF 2011, the Hon. Mr. Justice Aftab Alam, of the Apex Court of India recently observed in respect of the offence of adultery against a married woman, that " the provision of Section 497 deals with the offence of adultery which is currently under criticism from certain quarters for showing a strong gender bias for it makes the position of a married woman almost as a property of her husband. But in terms of the law as it stands, it is evident from a plain reading of the Section that only a man can be proceeded against and punished for the offence of adultery. Indeed, the Section provides expressly that the wife cannot be punished even as an abettor. Thus, the mere fact that the appellant is a woman makes her completely immune to the charge of adultery and she cannot be proceeded against for that offence"

"Award by Lokadalat in criminal Case on Settlement is an executable Decree in civil court " - SC

Hon. Mr. Justice P. Sathasivam of Supreme Court of India has recently redefined the meaning of the legal services rendered in Lokadalat, with a significant interpretation of Section 21 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, while finally adjudicating a CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10209 OF 2011, preferred by the appellant r. K.N. Govindan Kutty Menon, and the Apex Court has set up a landmark judicial precedent about the effect of an award, derived by our Lokadalat in a criminal case under the provisions of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The Question posed for the consideration before the Apex Court was that when a criminal case filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 referred to by the Magistrate Court to Lok Adalat is settled by the parties and an award is passed recording the settlement, can it be considered as a decree of a civil court and thus executable? And after a detailed interpretation about the provisions of Legal Services Authority Act and about the meaning of Lokadalat, the Hon. Apex Court ultimately has further observed that " Section 21 of this Act, contemplates a deeming provision, hence, it is a legal fiction that the "award" of the Lok Adalat is a decree of a civil court. In the case on hand, when a criminal case referred to by the Magistrate to a Lok Adalat is settled by the parties and award is passed recording the settlement, then every award passed by the Lok Adalat has be deemed to be a decree of a civil court and as such executable by that court."

The power of the ruling mob over peaceful persons is now the latest outcome of our Democracy ? Why the State should not be made responsible for all losses to the public or private properties ??

FDI, Dearness, Corruption and other politics oriented Issues are at present our burning controversies of our country. And all opposition Political parties have came on the streets to make show of their protests against the ruling Congress Parties... It is also a fact that everybody is entitled to make peaceful protest and wage any lawful demonstration against any such burning issues, in our democratic country, but no saction of a mob is ever allowed to cause any damages to any public properties or to restrain any law abiding peaceful persons or the public in the name of any such demonstration, because nobody has a right to take the laws in his hands... But recently it is reported that the mob of some powerful leaders in Ahmedabad forcefully caused the shop-keepers to close their shops and join their bandh call and it is further reported in state media, that the banks were also forced to close their doors, under some so-called threats or mischief ... whatever the truth may it be in such news-reports.??.. But the crucial fact to be discussed at this juncture is that it is now our daily experience that the strength and the power of the ruling or dominating mob in any such area of our country always prevail over the peaceful law abiding people, comprising even a large portion of the whole country, whenever there is any such Bandh or Call made in Gujarat, or Maharastra or Dellhi...or anywhere else.. Such The mob of few powerful poeple forcefully closes the shutters of your shops and cause the doors of our Banks, even schools and colleges and even courts, in the name of some threats or mischief... and the life of the law abiding people gets almost staggered.. and nobody dares to complain thereon, even though we have to say that we live are of a democratic nation and there is a pretty good law and order.... Don't you see that the values of our freedom is in the hands of few powerful persons only ??? .... and Is this not an obvious failure in maintaining law and order in such affected area by the concerned State Governance ?? Why state Governance should not be directly responsible for any damages or injuries that may have caused to any public or private properties or any law abiding persons or institutes ??? In fact, the time seems to have changed.. because the power of the ruling mob over peaceful persons is now latest outcome of our Democracy

Electricity Company has no right to interfere with Power Supply of the consumer father who is not an abettor of alleged power theft by his son.

While granting a writ of a mandamus quashing the notice of disconnection issued by the licensee Electricity Company, in the matters of LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No. 1563 of 2011, the Division Bench of Hon. acting Cheif Justice Mr. Bhasker Bhattacharya and Hon. MR. Justice J.B. Pardiwala of Gujarat High Court has recently held that " The respondent Electricity Company has no right to interfere with the supply of electricity of the writ-petitioner so long there is no violation of the provisions of the Act authorizing disconnection. A natural person has the right to do all lawful things unless his right has been curtailed by some rule of law. It is equally a fundamental principle that in case of a statutory authority, it is just the other way. The statutory authority has no power to do anything unless those powers are conferred on it by the Statutes which created it." In its latest landmark setting judicial precedent, protecting the rights of the power consumers without any defaults, the Hon Gujarat High Court has further observed that " A statutory authority like UTTAR GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LIMITED has no power of disconnection of electricity in the facts of the present case as the same is not authorized by the relevant provisions of Section 56 and 135 (A) of the Electricity Act, 2003 and Clause 8.7.5. of Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission (GERC) Electricity Supply Code and Related Matters, 11 of 2005, even as a natural person in the capacity as a decree-holder its right to enforce a decree against a third party is curtailed by Section 51 of the Code.A plain reading of the aforesaid statutory provisions makes it abundantly clear the relevant Statutes do not authorize the licensee under the Act to disconnect the supply of electricity of a consumer unless he is a defaulter in making payment of the charge of electricity or other charges payable under the relevant statutes or unless such consumer is guilty of theft of electricity. Simply because a person, who has suffered a money decree in a civil suit filed by the licensee, lives in a particular premises, such fact will not enable the licensee under the Act to disconnect the electricity of that premises when no amount is due and payable by the recorded consumer of electricity of that premises.Similarly, the Code of Civil Procedure does not authorize a decree-holder to take any coercive step against the father of the judgment-debtor for realization of unpaid money payable by a decree nor does it permit the decree holder to take any step whatsoever against the judgment-debtor than those provided in Section 51 of the Code. Disconnection of electricity of the premises where the judgment-debtor actually resides is also not provided as a mode of realization of unsatisfied decree in the Code of Civil Procedure. A father is also under no obligation to pay off the dues payable under a decree suffered by the son where the father is not party to the decree and regarding the allegation of theft of electricity levelled against the son of the appellant, it is needless to mention that such an act is a criminal offence and the criminal trial against the son of the appellant has not yet culminated in conviction with any finding of guilt. According to the criminal jurisprudence, the father of a person who is guilty of an offence cannot be punished in anyway for the crime committed by the son unless he is an abettor. In the case before us, the respondent has not alleged the charge of abetment of theft of electricity against the appellant and the alleged theft was not even committed in the premises in question owned by the appellant.We, therefore, hold that the Respondent, a creature of the statute by issuing a statutory notice of disconnection acted without jurisdiction in interfering with the legal right of the writ-petitioner to have electricity in accordance with law when he had not violated any of the provisions of the Act justifying disconnection. Thus, it is a case of abuse of statutory power at the instance of a statutory authority for the purpose of overcoming the statutory restriction imposed with an eye to enforce a money decree against a third party in a manner not prescribed by law.

"FIR with Vague & General Allegations of Harassment cannot be continued" : Gujarat High Court

While adjudicating CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION No. 1088 of 2011, lodged by the aggrieved petitioner accused husband and his parents and family members of a dowry case u/s 498A, 323, 504 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, Hon. Justice Mr. M.R. Shah of Gujarat High Court, recently made a landmark precedent setting observation, considering the averments and allegations made in the Complaint against the applicant husband and his relatives that " There are vague and general allegations against the applicants accused for harassment. It is required to be noted that applicants nos. 1 and 2 are the father-in-law and the mother-in-law and applicants nos. 3 and 4 are the brother-in-law and sister-in-law, who are right from the very beginning residing separately.Considering the general and vague allegations in the FIR, prima facie it appears that it cannot be said that the applicants have committed any offence as alleged, though in the year 2008 when she (the wife) left the house of her husband at village Salejada. And there was no reason for her to go to the residence of applicants nos. 1 and 2 for restitution of conjugal rights in the month of April, 2010, which shows the conduct on the part of respondent no. 2-original complainant (the wife) and, therefore, it prima facie appears that as such on the basis of general and vague allegations made in the FIR, the proceedings against the accused applicants for the offence alleged under Sections 498A, 323, 504 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act cannot be continued and to continue such criminal proceedings against the applicants accused would be harassment to the applicants and it would be abuse of process of law and Court

Who is supreme in the eyes of the constitution of India ? A Block of Few Activists or the Parliament of our Country ??

As per a recent report of PTI, Mr. Anna Hazare threatened to go on an indefinite fast in Delhi from December 27 if a strong anti-graft law is not passed in the Winter Session of Parliament, claiming further that "the draft report on Lokpal Bill by Parliamentary Standing Committee is a "betrayal". This Old Gandhian activist also said that his indefinite fast will be at Ramlila Maidan in Delhi from December 27 if a strong bill was not passed. If it happens, it will be his third indefinite fast this year on the Lokpal issue.Naturally, a question is now raised in our minds - "Who is supreme in the eyes of the constitution of India ? A Block of such the few Activists persons or the Parliament, empowered by the mandate of the people of the whole country ?" And again- Is not is so ridiculous that the proposed Lokpal Bill is drafted promoted and dictated by a Block of some Activists, out side the scope and reach of our Parliament, in the name of Fasts and threats of certain mass movements and street demonstrations, only against the ruling party Congress ? Does this block of the activists not know that only the Parliament can pass a Lokpal Bill in our Democratic Country, in due course of laws as per our Constitution, and the parliamentary Standing Committee, consisting of representatives of all political parties of our country is the only lawful statutory authority to decide what should go before the Parliament for an ultimate healthy discussion, for the final enactment of the strong Lokpal Bill and no other block of people or agency or a political party is entitled to rule over this statutory body or parliamentary authorities in the eyes of laws ? And don't they know that no Lokpal Bill can be passed, unless all other political parties may co-operate to run the Parliament with a healthy discussion on any proposed bill for enactment ? Everybody of our country now knows that the working of our Parliament is staggered, since the opening of its winter session... and the Members of the Opposition are simply shouting with protests, at the cost of our precious time, public money and their solemn duties as the public servants to legislate well in the large interest of the people of our Nation. On one side, the main opposition party BJP has already went on the Streets against the Proposed FDI issue, even though its Party had already and admittedly proposed for FDI in past. And Now looking to another latest news report, the Ruling Party Congress may agree to an adjournment motion in parliament from the opposition...So now it seems that no political parties, including the Ruling Congress Party are interested to run the winter session of the parliament in any way, to make a room for the discussion and enactment of the proposed Lokpal Bill. So now at this crucial juncture it is only prudent to leave this question be decided by the wise people of our country whether such the high profiled political dramas of our leaders go for any public interest and justice and whether it will maintain our laws and constitutional dignity ? and What are the correct judicious ways to procure our Leaders to abide by their duties to deal with the business of some necessary legislation in the large interest of our Country ?

Does our Remedy lives on the street or in public speech with Threats and Shouts for and with ever growing Agitations ?

Recently a typical Public Interest Litigation has come before the Hon. Supreme Court of India, moved by an NGO, 'People For Better Treatment' seeking the Central Government and the Medical Council of India, to initiate disciplinary proceedings against doctors who refuse to give emergency treatment to patients during their strikes and demonstrations. The Hon. Chief Justice of India, Mr. S H Kapadia has also issued notices to the government, the Council and AIIMS which have witnessed many strikes in recent years. It is also a fact that Doctors group across India have been frequently using the same tactics in recent times to establish their claims with great peril for helpless patients. Recently a similar situation has also raised in Ahmedabad, in respect of a controversial death of a woman, ended with the suicide of her husband and the doctors of VS Hospital and its Management had come down with defensive cries on the Roads with a peculiar demonstration, endangering the life of their patients too. And these kinds of the problems are not limited only to our medical professionals, but this does also happen every where in respect of every other professions and persons too... Just before a day a well known senior advocate cannot restrain himself to pass some ugly comments before a media against a respectful judge, who subsequently responded with for some kinds of restraints over such tarnishing tactics....And it has also now become a fashion with our present leaders of all political parties, to shout in streets or in houses or before the camera in public on every little issues, without any fruitful healthy discussion in the large interest of the people of our Nation. Is this a lawful way to derive any remedy or to meet with the ends of justice or to serve our society ??!!! Does our Remedy for every other issues only lives on our streets or in any public speech with Threats and Shouts for and with ever growing Agitations ??? Can't anyone see the risk of helpless patients, or law abiding litigants or poor simple citizens of our Nation ???

"BJP is now getting converted as a rotten congress party... Both Parties cheats the people of our Nation" Jansangi journalist Mr. Jitu Pandya exposed BJP on Gujarati Sidhivat TV Local Channel

Mr. Deepak Churasia, a well known TV Journalist of Star News TV had recently telecast at a special report, at http://youtu.be/52eq3zRVK2Y, on a detailed visual comparative picture of high profiled political dramas, played by the leaders of Bharaatiya Janata Party and Congress against each other at a time, when there is peace and no communal disturbance at that moment.And High Profiled leaders of both the political parties made lots of allegations against each other and people of Gujarat was made a silent witness of all these sudden mass political movements... It is also came to know from various news reports that Government of Gujarat, under the rule Chief Minister Mr. Narendra Modi, has also moved all its district collectors, District Development officers, District Information officers and other government machineries, including mamlatdars, primary school teachers and many more to take this Sadbhavana Mission, at all district levels... and so on the leaders of the opposite Congress party also came on the streets with a Unique Satkarma Mission and the whole state of Gujarat has been witnessing unprecedented scenario of a new war of words between various leaders of both the aforesaid power oriented political parties, as if to show the people who is more devoted to maintain more Sadbhavana and the communal harmony in the state... And as great surprise of all these episodes, the platforms of Sadbhavana Fast of CM Narendra Modi was mostly used to talk against the Central Government and its supremos, by BJP's invited National Leaders, even though Sadbhavana Mission was organized there only at the instance of Gujarat State Government...!!! So, irrespective of the allegations and abuses made by the political leaders of both the barking political parties against each others, the judicially prudent people of Gujarat now ask to the Nation at such a juncture, if a State can use its wings, machinery and public money for any political aims and ambitions in the name of so-called Sadbhavana, when there is no communal disturbance or any immense apprehension, asking to maintain public tranquility in the State..!!! Many people are still surprised why such Sadbhavana Movements are promoted by State Government and the public servants are directed and engaged to maintain these shows in the State, even at the costs of public amenities and facilities... What is the need or apprehension, caused to the Chief Minister of Gujarat to field with Fast for such kinds of state-wide Sadbhavana Mission ??? !!! Does the State of Gujarat has no other mission left in the interest and welfare of the people of the State ? News reports say lots of things everyday..But a recent shocking TV at a Gujarati Sidhivaat Local TV Channel, a senior devoted Jansangi journalist Mr. Jitu Pandya exposed the current moves of both the political parties in the state of Gujarat, at his released video http://youtu.be/b7oW_V9dGyo with a saying that "BJP is now getting converted as a rotten congress party... Both these Parties cheats the people of our Nation" The people of Gujarat will find the truth behind this TV Report...but the questions of this point of time are still significant.. Is not this a big corruption and cheating with the sentiments of the people of our State by the leaders of our Country ?? Immunity of the people in power is rather a great nuisance, for which some concrete actions or enactment is the prime essence of the time...so that our leaders may be restrained to waste the public money and machinery and can be stopped to play with the sentiments of the law abiding people, in the name of caste, state and religion...

Advice of the Chief Justice of India to all for keeping their Scales in Balance on Law Day

Amid criticism of alleged judicial overreach as per Hindustan Times Report, The Hon. Chief Justice of India Mr. SH Kapadia on Saturday advised to all to keep their Scale in Balance and said that “The judiciary has to exercise considerable restraint to ensure that the surcharged democracy does not lead to a breakdown of the working of the Parliament and the government”. Addressing a gathering of judges and advocates, in presence of Law minister Mr. Salman Khurshid, at the Supreme Court premises, on Law Day — celebrated to mark the adoption of the Indian Constitution in 1949 — the CJI advised his “brother judges” to work within the area demarcated for them by the Constitution.It is noted that The CJI has himself also emphasized that the constitutional courts’ power of judicial review is a guarantee against arbitrariness in government actions.In respect of current well debated issue of corruption, Justice Kapadia said that if any judge was corrupt, he/she should be named in public, but he had cautioned against putting all judges in “one basket”. “Don’t bring the entire judiciary in disrepute. Please don’t dismantle the established system and institution unless and until you’ve something better to offer.”

Apex court rules on advocates-on-record questioned before HC

The Supreme Court registry has been asked by the Delhi High Court to explain why its rule allowing only its Advocates-On-Record (AOR) to file petitions before it should not be scrapped. A bench of Acting Chief Justice A K Sikri and Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw sought the apex court's response through its registry to a plea by a city advocate challenging the Supreme Court rules on the ground that it violated the fundamental rights of other lawyers having the same qualification. The high court bench sought the reply by December 9, issuing the notice on the plea by advocate Balraj Singh Mali, who argued that large number of advocates are suffering professionally because of this rule giving the privilege of filing petitions in the apex court only to its advocates-on-record. The bench also issued notices to the Attorney General of India, the Solicitor General, the Supreme Court Bar Association as well as the Advocate-on-Record Association, seeking their replies on the issue. Challenging the Supreme Court Rules of 1966 which allows only the AOR to file petitions before the apex court, Malik pointed out that "other advocates are equally skilled in filing cases according to requirements of different formats in different courts and there is no speciality in the Supreme Court practice other than high courts." (PTI)

"Investigation through independent agency in respect of alleged scam of RTO check Posts after CAG's Report" : Gujarat High Court

In a recent development, as per DNS news report, Gujarat State government has finally cancelled some controversial contract, awarded to a private firm, namely, Chasmita Engineers Pvt Ltd, for maintenance of weigh bridges and the automated vehicle tax collection system installed at all the 11 RTO check posts of Gujarat State, ultimately over a alleged scam of Rs. 693 crore, detected at all 11 RTO check posts in the state.The irregularities were reported by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) in the year 2006, but the same was said pending for consideration before the Public Accounts Committee of the State, as per a recent submission made by the advocate general, before the Hon. Gujarat High Court. The cancellation of contract is said to be the result of a PIL filed in the Gujarat high court earlier this year, by Mr. Vipulkumar Ramjibhai Patel vide Public Interest Litigation WRIT PETITION (PIL)/3/2011, wherein the Hon. Gujarat High court has allowed Comptroller and Auditor General of India to audit for the further period from 2006 to 31st March 2011 and submit report before the State Government, who has assured to investigate with regard to the earlier report submitted by Comptroller and Auditor General about the aforesaid irregularities at all 11 RTO check post in Gujarat. The Division Bench of HON. THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA and HON. MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA of Gujarat High Court, has recently also observed after hearing both the parties to this PIL, that the question of investigation through an independent agency will be considered on the next date of hearing, depending upon the report as may be submitted by Comptroller and Auditor General. The petitioner had pointed out in this PIL that though the contract had ended in September 2006, the aforesaid company was allowed to continue operations.

SC defined "Principles to absorb Badli workman in the protected category employee"

While adjudicating SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.10845 of 2009 of Mr. H.S. Rajashekhara, in its appellate jurisdiction, against State Bank of Mysore 7 others, the Hon Supreme Court has redefined the principles of absorbing Badli workman in the protected category employee. It is well known that a badli workman means a person who is employed as a casual workman who is working in place of another. By virtue of the bipartite agreement published in Circular No. XVIII/90/20 dated 7-9-1990 of the federation of the Bank, such a badli worker is entitled to be absorbed if he completes 240 days of badli service in a block of twelve months or a calendar year after the cut-off date dt.10.2.1988. Based on the conclusion arrived at by the learned Single Judge in the matter of Radha Raman Samanta Vs. Bank of India, (2004) 1 SCC 605, after considering the relevant documents, the fact of the appellant's service for the required period cannot be disputed. Nomenclature of his work profile may change, but it is clear that he rendered services in a vacancy of a temporary post for more than 240 days. This is sufficient to treat him as a badli for the purpose of absorption. It would be sufficient, if the petitioner could establish, that he had rendered more than 240 days service in a "block of twelve months" for inclusion in the protected category employee.

"An agreement of supply at a rate 20% less than the market rate is not null and void" : SC

While adjudicating in CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2755 OF 2007 between union of India v/s Col. L.S.N. Murthy & others, the Hon. Supreme Court of India has recently set aside the order of Hydrabad High Court and has considered the validity of an impugned agreement in terms of Sec.23 of Indian Contract Act, for a supply on tender at a rate 20% less than market rate with significant observation that " unless the effect of an agreement results in performance of an unlawful act, an agreement which is otherwise legal cannot be held to be void and if the effect of an agreement did not result in performance of an unlawful act, as a matter of public policy, the court should refuse to declare the contract void with a view to save the bargain entered into by the parties and the solemn promises made there under. In Shri Lachoo Mal vs. Shri Radhey Shyam [(1971) 1 SCC 619], this Court held: "What makes an agreement, which is otherwise legal, void is that its performance is impossible except by disobedience of law. Clearly no question of illegality can arise unless the performance of the unlawful act was necessarily the effect of an agreement."

Landmark Ruling of the Apex Court in Bail in respect of Economic Offences

While granting bails to the under-trial accused corporate personalities, namely, to Unitech Limited's MD Sanjay Chandra, Swan Telecom's Director Vinod Goenka, and Reliance Anil Dhirubhai Ambani Group's executives Hari Nair, Gautam Doshi and Surrendra Pipara, the Hon. Justice Mr. G. S. SINGHVI and Justice Mr. H. L. DATTU of Supreme Court of India, recently adjudicated a landmark judicial precedence in the matters of CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2178 OF 2011 that " In bail applications, generally, it has been laid down from the earliest times that the object of bail is to secure the appearance of the accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. The object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative. Deprivation of liberty must be considered a punishment, unless it can be required to ensure that an accused person will stand his trial when called upon. The courts owe more than verbal respect to the principle that punishment begins after conviction, and that every man is deemed to be innocent until duly tried and duly found guilty. From the earliest times, it was appreciated that detention in custody pending completion of trial could be a cause of great hardship. From time to time, necessity demands that some un-convicted persons should be held in custody pending trial to secure their attendance at the trial but in such cases, `necessity' is the operative test. In this country, it would be quite contrary to the concept of personal liberty enshrined in the Constitution that any person should be punished in respect of any matter, upon which, he has not been convicted or that in any circumstances, he should be deprived of his liberty upon only the belief that he will tamper with the witnesses if left at liberty, save in the most extraordinary circumstances.Apart from the question of prevention being the object of a refusal of bail, one must not lose sight of the fact that any imprisonment before conviction has a substantial punitive content and it would be improper for any Court to refuse bail as a mark of disapproval of former conduct whether the accused has been convicted for it or not or to refuse bail to an un-convicted person for the purpose of giving him a taste of imprisonment as a lesson.This Court, time and again, has stated that bail is the rule and committal to jail an exception. It is also observed that refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. In the case of State of Rajasthan v. Balchand, (1977) 4 SCC 308, this Court opined: "The basic rule may perhaps be tersely put as bail, not jail.." In the case of Gudikanti Narasimhulu v. Public Prosecutor, (1978) 1 SCC 240, V.R. Krishna Iyer, J., sitting as Chamber Judge, enunciated the principles of bail. In Gurcharan Singh v. State (Delhi Admn.),(1978) 1 SCC 118, this Court took the view:" Unlessexceptional circumstances are brought to the notice of the Court which may defeat proper investigation and a fair trial, the Court will not decline to grant bail to a person who is not accused of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life.The concept and philosophy of bail was discussed by this Court in Vaman Narain Ghiya v. State of Rajasthan, (2009) 2 SCC 281 .More recently, in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, this Court observed that "Just as liberty is precious to an individual, so is the society's interest in maintenance of peace, law and order. Both are equally important."But at the same time, right to bail is not to be denied merely because of the sentiments of the community against the accused.When the undertrial prisoners are detained in jail custody to an indefinite period, Article 21 of the Constitution is violated In the case of State of Kerala Vs. Raneef (2011) 1 SCC 784, it is an important factor which should certainly be taken into consideration by the court is the delay in concluding the trial.When the investigating agency has already completed investigation and the charge sheet is already filed, therefore, their presence in the custody may not be necessary for further investigation."

Disrupting Parliamentarian should be made collectively responsible for a loss to the Nation

As per an estimated report of "Hindustan Times", the loss of four hours work in the Lok Sabha due to the bedlam over the opposition's boycott of home minister P Chidambaram on the first day of Parliament's winter session is estimated to have caused a Rs 1 crore loss to the nation. The disruption came despite an appeal from Prime Minister Manmohan Singh for the session's smooth running to enable important legislative business.Manmohan Singh, ahead of the Parliament's sitting, expressed the hope that all political parties "realise that we have important legislations to discuss in the winter session" and that the session runs smoothly.But the Lok Sabha was adjourned twice, once during the Question Hour and later for the day after noon, the house lost about four hours of work, due to the uproars of BJP's and other parties' parliamentarian. Officials of PRS Legislative Research, a policy study group, noted that the Lok Sabha, which nornally meets for five hours day, was in session for just about half-an-hour as it had to be adjourned due to the pandemonium..A rough estimate, based on the budgetary allocation for parliament's functioning, puts the cost of an hour's work of parliament at Rs25 lakh. Considering this, the exchequer lost about Rs 1 crore. It is the second day of the winter session of Parliament. On Tuesday, the Lok Sabha was adjourned not once, but twice over the Uttar Pradesh split resolution. On Day 2 on Wednesday, the House was expected to discuss Finance Pranab Mukherjee's statement on price rise. But obviously due to the deliberate defaults in the Parliament, the Nation has incurred not only a great deed of monitory loss of the public money but also an awful delay in the enactment of some important intended legislation, for which these parliamentarian are duty bound to discuss, debate and resolve to in the large interest of our Nation.It ought to be now the voice of the people of our Nation, at this crucial juncture if all these disrupting parliamentarian should be made collectively responsible for such a huge loss to the Nation.

SC : "Workmen cannot be forced to work in different management."

While disposing CIVIL APPEAL NOs. 9921-9922 OF 2011, the Hon. Justice Mr. P. Sathasivam, of the Supreme Court of India, has recently observed in a precedent setting landmark judgment in respect of employees/workers of Phillips India Ltd., that " It is settled law that without consent, workmen cannot be forced to work under different management and in that event, those workmen are entitled to retirement/retrenchment compensation in terms of the Act."

Order of Gujarat High Court for a Fresh Complaint of Murder against 21 Gujarat Police officers, in respect of Faked Encounter of Isharat Jahan, made in the name of so-called conspiracy against CM Narendra Modi. The Apex Court has taken a very serious approach in such fake encounters.

In a huge setback to the Gujarat government after the highly debated Soharabuddin and Kausharbeg faked encounter cases, the court-appointed special investigation team (SIT) on Monday concluded in a written investigation report that college girl Ishrat Jahan and her three friends were murdered by the Gujarat state police in a staged shootout and later passed off as militants. The conclusion by the special investigation team (SIT) probing the 2004 killings, as per the order of the Division Bench of Hon. Justice Mr. Jayant Patel and Hon. Justice Abhilashakumari of Gujarat High Court, prompted the Gujarat high court to order a fresh complaint against the accused police officers for the murder under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code that covers the death penalty. The court-appointed SIT, headed by police officer RR Verma, said that Jahan, a 19-year-old girl from Mumbai, Javed Sheikh alias Pranesh Pillai, Amjad Ali Rana and Zeeshan Johar were killed earlier than the shootout date of June 15, 2004. They were shot dead on the outskirts of Ahmedabad in a private car. Police claimed that they were linked to the Lashkar-e Taiba terror outfit and were in the city to assassinate Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi. A total of 21 policemen, including four Indian Police Service (IPS) officers - then joint commissioner PP Pande, suspended deputy inspector general DG Vanzara, then assistant commissioner GL Singhal and assistant commissioner NK Amin - were involved in the staged shootout. The Division Bench of Hon. Justice Mr. P. Sathasivam and Hon Justice Mr. B.S. Chauhan of the Supreme Court of India has recently taken a very serious approach, while upholding the punishment of life imprisonment of four police officers of Punjab, expressed over police atrocities and fake encounters happened in our country that “tolerance of police atrocities would amount to an acceptance of systemic subversion and erosion of the rule of law, because such the atrocities are not only violation of the constitutional fundamental rights of life and personal liberty, granted under Article 21, but also infringement of right of information of personal arrest about the grounds of his detention and production before the magistrate in time under the provisions of Article 22 of the constitution of India. Police atrocities in India have always been a subject matter of controversy and debate. In view of the provisions of Article 21 of the Constitution, any form of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment is inhibited.Any kinds of torture was not permissible “whether it occurs during investigation, interrogation or otherwise. The wrongdoer is accountable and the state is responsible if a person in custody of the police is deprived of his life except in accordance with the procedure established by law. The state must protect victims of torture, ill-treatment as well as the human rights defender fighting for the interest of the victims, giving the issue serious consideration for the reason that victims of torture suffer enormous consequences psychologically.” When the Hon Apex Court has taken a serious approach by fixing the liability of the state in such fake encounters, it is now worth to be noted that certain more other controversially debated police encounters and atrocities, committed by Gujarat Police are now also before our courts, awaiting for judgments in the coming days... We have to simply gauge what will happen of Gujarat State ??!!! Only the concerned courts and the Apex Court along with the time alone can say this......

India’s judicial system suffers from countless pending cases, legal mediation is being looked at as a favourable alternative to dispense justice.

At a time when India’s judicial system suffers from countless pending cases, legal mediation is being looked at as a favourable alternative to dispense justice. This call came from senior judges and legal experts at the second regional conference of southern states on mediation, organised by Bangalore Mediation Centre (BMC) on Sunday. Justice Dalveer Bhandari, Judge, Supreme Court of India and Chairman of Mediation� and Conciliation Project Committee (MCPC) opined that mediation had the potential to solve backlogging of court cases in the nation. “The number of cases pending in our courts suggests two things. One, people still have faith in the judiciary. Second, it shows our inability to deliver justice. I see mediation as an alternative dispute resolution method, which has worked in several other countries,” he said. As on March 31, more than 2 crore cases are pending in the subordinate courts, with 42.92 lakh pending in high courts and 56,383 pending in the Supreme Court.� Justice Dalveer added that with soaring costs involved in litigations, mediation had proved to become a preferred option for litigators. “The cost involved in court cases is frightening. People are not interested in the sophisticated court processes,” he said, adding that justice had become the prerogative of individual judges. “This will not occur in mediation process,” he said. Apart from solving backlogging of cases in courts, mediation was also said to improve relationships between the warring parties. “Mediation should not be looked from an arrears perspective. There is a deeper meaning to it. It helps improve human relationships. It is a peace-making process,” said Justice Cyriac Joseph, Judge, Supreme Court and member, MCPC. (Reported in CNN-IBN)

Conviction of a Corrupt Minister sets an illustrative judicial precedence, when the movement to eradicate corruption at all level is getting more momentum gradually in our country

"It is a matter of common knowledge that it is virtually impossible to get any direct evidence where both i.e bribe giver and the person who takes the bribe, worked in joint concert," Special Judge R.P. Pandey said in his recent 188-page judgment in the matters of well debated Bribe Case against the Former telecom minister Mr. Sukhram in Ex-PM Mr. PV Narasimha Rao's Congress ruled cabinet. and has further observed that " the accused Sukhram also obtained (illegal) gratification other than legal remunerations from Choudhary as a motive or reward for showing the favour to the said firm (HTL)," This corruption case dates back to 1996, when the telecom ministry under Sukhram's stewardship had awarded private firm Haryana Telecom Limited (HTL) a contract worth Rs 30 crore to supply 3.5 Lakh Conductor Kilometers (LCKM) of Polythene Insulated Jelly Filled (PIJF) cables to the telecom department after receiving a bribe of Rs 3 lakh 15 years back. The conviction of of a corrupt Minister sets an illustrative judicial precedence for the present era, when the movement to eradicate corruption at all level is getting more momentum gradually in our country

Justice should be prevented from taking away to the street

During last week,reacting over the behaviour of CPI-M leader M V Jayarajan, who had allegedly ridiculed the performance of two high court judges in public, making derogatory remarks, the Division Bench of the Hon. justices Mr. R M Lodha and Mr. H L Gokhale, while granting a stay against a Kerala High Court order of a sentence of imprisonment, expressed serious concern, with the following words, that "Justice cannot be taken to street. It is not acceptable. These things should stop. These are not good things. We are the upholders of the laws" The Hon Supreme Court of India has then rightly defined how and where the Justice should be admeasured in a democratic country like India, but it is still unfortunate that Justice is knowingly taken away again and again to the street.. and the same is so done by our media as well as our politicians of all parties of our country, who believe that Justice is to be made by the public and that in the street only... if we look at today's Gujarati media reports, it is found that the President of BJP Mr. Nitin Gadakari has also stated in a press conference in public at Nagpur that " the release of BJP MP Mr. Sudhir Kulkarni and others on bail in a highly debated "Cash-For-Vote" case by Delhi High Court, has allegedly proved that it was a political conspiracy to throw these BJP leaders in jail, so PM Manmohan Singh and Sonia Gandhi should apologize for this...". Apart from the facts and evidences of highly debated "Cash-For-Vote" case , the vital Question of laws, at this juncture, is only if such a responsible leader of BJP can prejudge about the innocence of their accused party persons who are involved in such a serious criminal case, which is not finally adjudicated and is still subjudice to meet to the ends of justice before appropriate forum of courts of our country. Any layman can say that the Release on Bail is not the final judgment and Justice is still not finally adjudicated. But such our leaders do take justice to the street every day in every such other instances...Even our media is also found to try in its own ways before justice is made by the appropriate forum of courts of laws.., as it is so happened recently in well debated "Times Now Channel" Case.... And ultimately the interest of justice is only jeopardized... Hence, a right course at this juncture is only some better implementation, is needed in tune with the aforesaid recent voice of the Hon. Apex Court with some specific preventive remedy available within four corners of our judicial system, with a view to securing the ends of justice from taking away to the streets by any persons, media or politician or else of our country in future.

"We are becoming insensitive to common man, the prices of medicines should not rise" - SC

The Supreme Court Thursday told the central government that the prices of medicines should not rise further. 'Bring it down, don't escalate it in the name of policy,' the court said. 'It should go down, not go up,' said the apex court bench of Justice G.S. Singhvi and Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya. The bench said that the prices of medicines and lab tests were already too high and cautioned the government to ensure that they did not shoot up further. 'We are becoming insensitive to common man,' Justice Singhvi observed, saying that earlier a blood test used to cost Rs.60 now it costs much more. 'If there were no institutions like RML (Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital), Safdarjung (Hospital) and AIIMS (All India Institute of Medical Sciences), at least 10 per cent of the population would be finished,' Justice Singhvi said. 'We have become very mechanical, the doctor prescribes (medicines) and we buy and claim reimbursements. We have become insensitive to the concerns of the common man,' Justice Singhvi said. The observation during the hearing on a public interest litigation (PIL) by the All India Drug Action Network (AIDAN), supported by NGOs, which had moved the court in 2003 seeking intervention to ensure that the prices of essential drugs remained within the reach of common man. The AIDAN has drawn the court's attention to draft National Pharmaceuticals Pricing Policy, 2011, which, it said, if implemented would push up the drug prices. Appearing for AIDAN, senior counsel Colin Gonsalves said the the government's proposed policy would lead to further escalation of drug prices. The new pricing policy would make drug prices independent of the cost of manufacturing. Additional Solicitor General Praga Tripathi told the court that the new policy would take some more time to be given effect, suggesting that there was no immediate cause of hike in drugs prices. Tripathi told the court that it would take at least three months before any decision was taken on the policy because before being placed before the cabinet for approval, it would be taken up by a group of ministers. The government in its affidavit told the court that the new policy would bring all 348 medicines which figure in the National List of Essential Medicines, 2011, and other associated medicines under the price control regime. Currently, only drugs which figure in the First Schedule of the Drugs (Prices Control) Order, 1995, are under price control. These are 74 bulk drugs. Under the proposed policy, the government plans to remove a large number of drugs from the price control regime. The court adjourned the hearing till January 2012 (Yahoo News)

Breach of Mandatory duty in closing Primary schools in Gujarat ?!!!

Primary Education is a State Function and it is a statutory mandatory duty to provide primary education to all and to run primary schools in the state, but we have come to know from recent reliable news reports that the department of Primary Education in our State of Gujarat has already decided to close 13450 primary schools, out of which such the 3500 primary schools have been targeted to be closed this year by the Gujarat State and such the controversial resolution of the state has also been implemented in some parts of the districts of Gandhinager, Panchamahal, Surat, Kaccha, Rajkot etc. and the same decision of Gujarat State has been largely opposed by Gujarat State Primary teachers Associations and others. But the crucial question of facts and laws at this juncture is whether such the decision of Gujarat State for the closure of these much primary schools is a breach of the statutory mandatory duty of the state government.At one stage, Modi's Gujarat Government advertises for the promotion of education at every level, but the closure of the primary educational institutes are not only breach of the State Function in the eyes of laws but also is aimed to make rooms for the private professional educational vendors to capture this basic primary educational sectors for minting money at the costs of the poor primary students. A recent announcement of state secretary of primary education for the revision of the aforesaid controversial decision of closure is prima facie deserves to be welcomed, but any such further controversial decision of the state for the closure of primary schools, may undoubtedly invite the judicial investigation at some day in any other ways on the defaults of state in respect of statutory functions.

"Exercise of suo motu powers under Article 227 of the Constitution after 18 years, for no subject matter, requires to be quashed" Gujarat High Court

In a LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No. 475 of 2001 against MALIA HATINA GRAM PANCHAYAT & others in SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 870 of 1991, before the Hon Gujarat High Court, the division bench of Hon Justice V.M. Sahai and Hon Justice K.S. Jhaveri while quashing the observations made by the Learned Single Judge from the impugned judgment have observed that " it would not be proper for this Court to exercise the suo-motu powers after almost 18 years, in respect of a judgment which was not the subject matter of the writ petition."

"Compromise cannot be allowed in non-compoundable cases.But sentence is reduced" Latest Precedence of SC

" This Court has in a long line of decisions ruled that offences which are not compoundable under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C. cannot be allowed to be compounded even if there is any settlement between the complainant on the one hand and the accused on the other. Reference in this regard may be made to the decisions of this Court in Ram Lal and Anr. v. State of J & K (1999) 2 SCC 213, and Ishwar Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2008) 15 SCC 667." the Hon. Supreme Court of India has recently reiterated so. While deciding a criminal appeal of Gulabdas & others against state of MP., the Apex Court further set a judicial precedence that "the incident had led to registration of a cross case against the complainant party in which the trial Court has already convicted Veeraji and others for offences punishable under Sections 325/34 and 323 IPC and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for a period of two years and a fine of Rs.300/- and imprisonment of six months under Section 323 IPC. In the totality of the circumstances we are of the view that the settlement arrived at between the parties is a sensible step that will benefit the parties, give quietus to the controversy and rehabilitate and normalise the relationship between them. In the result, while upholding the order of conviction recorded by the Courts below, we reduce the sentence awarded to the appellants to the sentence already undergone by them."

"Inspection reports of co-operative banks should be made public by RBI" : CIC's Landmark Ruling

In a precedent setting judgement, the Chief Information Commissioner asked for the audit and inspection report of a cooperative bank to be disclosed under the RTI Act, rejecting the central banks contention that the disclosure would lead to loss of faith in some banks and adversely affect economic interests of the state. In order to safeguard the interests of depositors and ensure a strong banking system, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) is required to conduct an inspection of banks at periodic intervals under Section 35 of the B R Act, 1949. Such inspections directly affect the consumer, as it is his or her money that is being handled or mishandled by the banks. Co-operative Banks, which fall under dual regulation of RBI and state government, are no exceptions under such inspection, ruled the Chief Information Commission (CIC) , in respect of an RTI application, concerning Baroda-based Makarpura Industrial Estate Cooperative Bank Ltd, by a city resident Jayantilal N Mistry, with the Urban Banks Department of the apex bank.

"Recovery of vehicle to be effected in due process of law and not by use of force" - SC

The Supreme Court of India, recently reiterated again the principles of laws, particularly in the decision, rendered in ICICI Bank Ltd. Vs. Prakash Kaur (supra),in respect of the recovery of hire-purchased vehicle by the Bank from the defaulters of loan yesterday, while disposing off Civil Appeal No.9711 of 2011 in the matters of the appellants CITICORP. MARUTI FINANCE LTD, that " It is, necessary for us to go into the said question all over again and we reiterate the earlier view taken that even in case of mortgaged goods subject to Hire-Purchase Agreements, the recovery process has to be in accordance with law and the recovery process referred to in the Agreements also contemplates such recovery to be effected in due process of law and not by use of force. Till such time as the ownership is not transferred to the purchaser, the hirer normally continues to be the owner of the goods, but that does not entitle him on the strength of the agreement to take back possession of the vehicle by use of force.The guidelines which had been laid down by the Reserve Bank of India as well as the Appellant Bank itself, in fact, support and make a virtue of such conduct. If any action is taken for recovery in violation of such guidelines or the principles as laid down by this Court, such an action cannot but be struck down. This is again a landmark ruling of our Apex Court, against any such forceful controversial action, carried out by any such bank for the recovery of any kinds of the hire-purchased vehicles from any such the borrowers in default

Landmark Guidelines by the Apex Court illustrating when a FIR can be quashed

the Hon Supreme Court of India has categorically illustrated a landmark guideline when a FIR can be quashed under the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code, in exercise of the extra-ordinary power under Article 226 of the constitution or the inherent powers Under Section 482 of the Code. While adjudicating CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1356 OF 2004, instituted by the appellant Ramesh Gandhi against Union of India & others,the Apex Court has set up the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice,., with a caution to caution to the effect that the power of quashing a criminal proceeding should be exercised very sparingly and with circumspection and that too in the rarest of rare cases; that the Court will not be justified in embarking upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the F.I.R. or the complaint and that the extraordinary or inherent powers do not confer an arbitrary jurisdiction on the Court to act according to its whim or caprice." Illustrative Cases when it can be quashed 1. Where the allegations made in the First Information Report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima-facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. 2. Where the allegations in the First Information Report and other materials, if any, accompanying the F.I.R. do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers Under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code. 3. Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused. 4. Where, the allegations in the F.I.R. do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated Under Section 155(2) of the Code. 5. Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. 6. Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party. 7. Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.

"Justice cannot be taken to street". SC warned over behavior of a leader.

"Justice cannot be taken to street. It is not acceptable. These things should stop. These are not good things. We are the upholders of the laws" the Division Bench of the Hon. justices Mr. R M Lodha and Mr. H L Gokhale, while granting a stay against a Kerala High Court order of a sentence of imprisonment, recently expressed serious concern, in the aforesaid words over the behaviour of CPI-M leader M V Jayarajan, who had allegedly ridiculed the performance of two high court judges in public and making derogatory remarks. The bench also showed displeasure over the High Court decision for immediate implementation of its order leading to his arrest and not granting the politician time to approach the apex court. Taking a strong view of offensive remarks made against judges and the judiciary by Jayarajan, the High Court had on November 8 sentenced him to six months imprisonment for contempt of court, upon a suo moto proceedings.

Significant Direction of The Apex Court to Defaulting States like Gujarat, Delhi, Orrissa and others

The Supreme Court of India has passed a significant direction, in respect of the the defaulting states like AP, Delhi, Gujarat, West Bengal, Orissa, Chhattisgarh, Assam and Goa, for failing to set up special CBI courts to tackle corruption despite the Prime Minister's directive to this effect, since July 2009, while dealing with an appeal filed by the CBI, challenging a Gujarat High Court order which had stayed the transfer of an agency official probing certain tax evasion case by oil companies in the state.A bench of Hon. Justices Mr. GS Singhvi and Mr. SD Mukhopdhyaya of the Apex Court has recently observed that " Should we take it that the states are not interested in eradicating corruption when the highest political executive the Hon'ble Prime Minister himself has been very keen to eradicate it. if defaulting states fails to file proper replies and take steps for notifying CBI courts, their chief secretaries will have to appear in person "at their own costs"

"Divide and Rule and Make the People Fool" New Controversial Mode of Legislative Action ?!!!

Declaration of division of UP State in four different states by UP state Cabinet of Mayavati Government is another dirty political play of " Divide & Rule and Make the People Fool ", which was knowingly played in past in British Rule. Sardar Patel encouraged merger of different state to create an united Nation of India & Indira Gandhi abolished the laws of privy purses... meant for the regular payment of life time pension to the ancient royal rulers, merged in India. But the time is absolutely changed nowadays... and actions, intention and legislation are also totally changed now.. after the completion of a cycle of more than six decades... Obviously the people of India are getting divided more and more in the name of state, race, caste, religion and even class. And the legislative statutory rulers are also speedily getting increased day by day, to whom life time pensions are awarded even though no services are ever rendered . In fact hundreds of privy purse are only abolished but thousands of new legislative rulers fetching regular life time pension are deliberately increased... and the people of our country are divided in several created issued... so that nobody can spare himself to think about the eradication of this new evil... Even our Judiciary is also without any remedy to this newly created situation..., because there is no statutory enactment at all to resist such actions of these legislators... Do you have any lawful suggestion how we can stop this deliberate wrongful actions and inaction ????

Anticipatory Bail is granted if prima facie no roll in commission of the alleged offence u/s 406, 420 & 120-B of IPC

While considering prima facie facts of absence of any direct roll in the alleged offences u/s 406, 420, 120-B etc. of IPC, in two different similar bail petitions, vide Cr.M.A.No.14297/2011 & 14837/2011, the Hon. Gujarat High Court, has recently granted the anticipatory bail, in favour of both the accused, including a notary public and advocate, putting much emphasis on the principles of laws laid down by the Hon Apex Court therein that " This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra & Ors., reported in (2011) 1 SCC 694, wherein the Apex Court reiterated the law laid down by the Constitutional Bench in the case of Shri Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia & Ors., reported in (1980) 2 SCC 565"

What is an offence of Conspiracy under Sec.120 B of IPC ? Redifined by SC

Recently while setting aside a conviction awarded by Kerala High Court, under Sec.324 & 120B of IPC, in the matters of the appellant Sherimon, vide Criminal Appeal No.1221 of 2005, the Hon. Supreme Court of India, has explained the gist of the offence of conspiracy, in accordance with the provisions of Sec: 120-B if Indian Penal Code. The Apex Court has categorically explained this provisions in its recent landmark judgment that " The gist of the offence of conspiracy is the agreement between two and more persons to do or cause to be done an illegal act or a legal act by illegal means. There must be meeting of minds resulting in an ultimate decision taken by the conspirators regarding the commission of the crime."

"Tea Vendors and others use child labour in public, but nobody takes cognizance. The scraping or Reformation of the present Laws will not eliminate Child Labour."

while addressing stakeholders at the two-day workshop on 'Elimination of Bonded Labour and Child Labour' held at Mahatma Gandhi Labour Institute in Memnagar, in Gujarat,the Hon. retired Justice BC Patel, a member of National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) Delhi, stated recently as per DNA reports, that " The burning issue of child labour has even had Gujarat in the list of states responsible for taking away the childhood of many children. At an age when they should be studying in school, children are found working in the unorganised sector as labourers. However, the current provisions of the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986, should be scrapped and a new act should be framed to replace it." The words of the Hon. Retired Justice are undoubtedly true to some extent, because the provisions of the present Act are not sufficient to serve the situation. But in my opinion, the remedy is not this alone.Because, it is a matter of facts in our routine life that "Tea Vendors and others in our country use child labour in public, but nobody takes cognizance " Can The scraping or Reformation of the present Laws will eliminate Child Labour, until the Anti- child labour awareness is strengthened in public at large." Being a man of judicial professional, it is also our routine experience that no strict provisions of laws or adjudication of justice has any deterrent effect in the minds of the people effected in that area, unless it is properly implemented and promoted with the proper awareness to the minds of those peoples. Otherwise, no untoward communal incidence would have ever been happened and irrupted in the city of Petlad in District Kheda, immoderately after the declaration of a judgment in Sardarpura Case in Gujarat. In as much as ever Laws and Adjudication are differently seen, explained, and interpreted differently and so on with the different social or political themes of implementation thereon.

"Plea of Controversial Immunity of our legislators are still misconceived." - Rejected by Delhi High Court.

As per the basic principles of Laws of Contract in our land, a demand or proposal is made and accepted by the lawmakers and promises are given in public as well as in the parliament or legislative bodies to carry out certain action as it is promised, but the same does not happen at all.It becomes a breach of contract, if it is a business transaction or general deal or agreement, but the case is different, if it is a promise given by our parliamentarian or legislators, because they are immune and no liability stick to them for any breach of promise or contract in our system...because there is neither any statutory provisions in our legal system to enforce such promises nor any such statutory enactment like right to recall such the lawmakers, except to wait till next election. Such a similar unfortunate case has been recently adjudicated by our Delhi High Court, where the local resident had asked to have the court direction with a view to enforcing the statements made by the finance minister of Government of National Capital Territory (GNCT) in the Budget speech for the year 2003-2004 for a cut in stamp duty on property transfer. Taking a judicious approach in this legal controversy, the Hon. Justice Mr. S Muralidhar at last rejected this prayer of petitioner to issue a mandamus to the GNCTD and the Government of India, in order to enforce a statement made by the finance minister of GNCTD to the State Legislative Assemble in 2003-04 followed by the statement made in the Parliament by the Union minister for urban affairs, stating in his verdict that "Court cannot direct for enforcement for the promises of the lawmakers made in the Parliament or Assembly unless a statutory provision or notification is issued for the same"