Tuesday, November 29, 2011
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.
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 ?
Monday, November 28, 2011
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 ???
Sunday, November 27, 2011
"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...
Saturday, November 26, 2011
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.”
Friday, November 25, 2011
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.
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.
Wednesday, November 23, 2011
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."
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."
Tuesday, November 22, 2011
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.
Monday, November 21, 2011
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)
Friday, November 18, 2011
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
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.
Thursday, November 17, 2011
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)
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."
Wednesday, November 16, 2011
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.
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
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
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. 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"
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 ????
Monday, November 14, 2011
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"
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."
Sunday, November 13, 2011
"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.
Thursday, November 10, 2011
"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"
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
SC: "Right to Free drinking Water is a part of Right to Life.Supply of clean potable water is the function of municipal local bodies."
While adjudicating a Writ Petition (Civil) No.203 of 2010, instituted by a Voluntary Organization Voice of India during last month, the Division Bench of Supreme Court of India, consisting of Hon Chief Justice Mr. K.S.Radhakrishnan and Justice Mr. Swatanter Kumar, has emphasized that "Right to Free drinking Water is a part of Right to Life under Article 21 of the Constitution.Supply of clean potable water is the function of municipal corporations and other local bodies.So the water is to be supplied to every citizen in this country free of cost. We are fully conscious of the fact that even after 60 years a citizen of this country is not getting clean potable water.So where citizens do not get clean potable water for drinking, the aggrieved petitioner may move the concerned High Court with regard to its grievances, because it is a State Subject under the Constitution " It is to be noted that In this writ petition all the States and Union Territories are made party-respondents, in the large public interest.
Yesterday, A special court in Gujarat on Wednesday convicted and jailed for life 31 of the 73 accused in the 2002 Sardarpura post-Godhra riot case in which 33 people of a minority community were burnt alive.The Sardarpura killings case is one of nine singled out for special investigation by India's Supreme Court - in 2003 and is the first post-Godhra riot case, probed by the Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT), on which the verdict has been pronounced and the 31 accused were found guilty of murder, attempted murder, arson, rioting and criminal conspiracy after 33 people were burned alive in a building.After the Godhra train burning incident in which 59 people, mainly karsevaks, were burnt to death on February 27 2002, riots had taken place across the state, in which Sardarpura town in Vijapur taluka also fell prey to violence.Out of 76 accused arrested in respect of Sardarpura Case, the court had framed charged against 73 accused and 112 witnesses were examined including 20 eye witnesses victims and others. In February last year in the matters of highly debated Godhara Train Burning case, probed by a special court in Gujarat, 31 people were jailed for life, being found guilty of setting fire to the passenger train with the killings of 59 karsevaks in the town of Godhra. And the recent verdict in Sardarpura Case is the first verdict in post-Godhara riots, which was one of India's worst outbreaks of religious violence in recent years, disturbing the public tranquility and communal harmony in India. But it is always said in our Judiciary that Law has its own way to measure justice against all kinds of attacks over public tranquility, irrespective of any discrimination on the basis of caste or religion. The Goddess of Justice does not see who is before her but only measures the weight of evidences put before her.
Tuesday, November 8, 2011
The Supreme Court today cautioned Swami Agnivesh, the member of core committee of Anna Hazare, for making off a controversial remarks against Amarnath pilgrimage.A bench comprising Justices H L Dattu and C K Prasad cautioned the Swami and said "Men in public life must think 10 times before saying something." Swami Agnivesh has approached the Supreme Court against the order of Punjab and Haryana High Court refusing to drop criminal proceedings initiated against him for hurting the religious sentiments of the members of the majority community.
Monday, November 7, 2011
How can police remain inactive with a wanted criminal publicly present in BJP's public function ?!!!
It is the duty of the police to take a wanted criminal in custody and proceed further in accordance with laws as soon as he is found. But recently Gujarat police is found not only inactive but fully co-operative with a wanted criminal Mr. Sukha Patel who was on dais with BJP Leaders Mr. Advani and CM Mr. Narendra Modi during Advani's nationwide "Jan Chetana Yatra" against corruption and black money reached Surat, Gujarat on Sunday. A TV Channel has taken a live video of this political drama of BJP's National Leaders, giving free hand to such a wanted liquor mafiamen, named Sukha Patel against whom 27 cases are registered for illegal supply of liquor as this commodity is banned in Gujarat and who is a wanted criminal as per police records, yet he was seen sharing the stage and the Gujarat police is found not only inactive but fully co-operative with this wanted mafia. As per BJP's clarification, Sukha Patel is a local BJP leader, but his criminal records must have been known to local BJP leaders as well as to the Gujarat police. yet it was a shocking truth, being also questioned in media is how a man with such police record was given the seat on the stage. Now the Significant question of facts and law is also how the police can remain inactive with a wanted criminal, found publicly present in BJP's Jan Chetana Yatra, meant for awareness against corruption ?!!! In Fact the State of Gujarat itself is legally responsible for such a deliberate inaction of the Gujarat Police, contravening its public duties, by abstaining from arresting a wanted criminal from a public function, sharing chairs with Gujarat Leaders, even though being lawfully bound to arrest immediately so..Would this not be a sufficient report for taking action in accordance with laws ?
Sunday, November 6, 2011
Whether the State of Gujarat becomes responsible for the murder of a key witness, who was under the police security in view of the Apex Court's latest Ruling ?
Recently, an English TV News Channel released a sensitive news interview of Ex-Gujarat top cop, R B Sreekumar who has raised an alarm again for security of key witnesses of some controversial criminal cases of Gujarat. This time, he has stated that there is a pattern to the deaths of whistleblowers in Gujarat. Sreekumar's statement came after the killing of the fourth whistleblowers like, Nadeem Sayed, a witness in the Naroda Patiya massacre and a Congress worker who was stabbed to death in Ahmedabad on Saturday, in spite of being under police security. It is also heard from Ex-Gujarat top cop, R B Sreekumar, saying in this report, that "Gujarat police is known for its such attitude towards witnesses.And Gujarat Police is also not properly monitoring" It is said that Nadeem Sayed had demanded police security just a few days ago, but it is also said that the security constables were not present when he was stabbed. It is also said that he was going to discuss case matters as a key witness in respect of Naroda Patia Sensitive Case, with the concerned lawyer on the very next day, before he was stabbed to death. In view of the recent serious approach taken by The Division Bench of Hon. Justice Mr. P. Sathasivam and Hon Justice Mr. B.S. Chauhan of the Supreme Court of India in a punjab police fake encounter case, as reported and discussed by KARTIKEY SHROFF Law Office in its Blog it is again to see 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 and further it is to see in that Apex Court Judgment that " 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. " Now certain significant question of laws and facts are newly raised at this juncture in view of the aforesaid Apex Court ruling, that when an important activist and key witness of a serious criminal occurrence like Naroda Patil Incidence, who had been stabbed to death, in spite of being under the Gujarat police security, whether The State of Gujarat is responsible for such death of a key witness under the police security ??!!
Serious Approach of Supreme Court against Fake Encounters by Punjab Police. What will happen in Gujarat Encounter Cases ?!!!
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.” The Division Bench of Hon. Justice Mr. P. Sathasivam and Hon Justice Mr. B.S. Chauhan of the Supreme Court of India has rejected this special appeal of the accused five police officers Prithipal Singh, Satnam Singh, Surinderpal Singh, Jasbir Singh and Amarjit Singh of Punjab, who have been imprisoned for the kidnap and murder of Jaswant Singh Khalra in 1995 by considering even the corroborative evidence or sole testimony of a witness sufficient to uphold the guilt and has also reiterated that " 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 also before the courts awaiting for judgments in the coming days...We have to simply gauge what will happen of Gujarat State ??!!! Only the Apex Court and the time alone can say this.......
Saturday, November 5, 2011
Religious guru Sri Sri Ravishankar has said law alone is not sufficient to curb corruption and a moral and a spiritual wave has to be created in the country to tackle the menace. "A law is necessary (to tackle graft). However, a law alone cannot bring down corruption. A moral and spiritual wave has to be created (to deal with the issue)," the Art of Living founder, camping in Vadodara, said in a statement on Friday night.Ravishankar said he will continue to fight against corruption.(HT Reported)
Friday, November 4, 2011
Petrol Rate Hike Issue went to High Court. "Political Parties make shows...but Governments cannot escape liabilities"
"The People of our are now scared ... the rates of the essential commodity like petrol diesel are frequently hiked.. and political parties are simply displaying shows.. and nobody care for the consumers... then neither Central Government nor the State Government escape their liabilities in such issues...." the aforesaid significant remarks are recently made by the Division Bench of Kerala High Court, consisting of the acting chief Justice Mr.C.N. Ramchandran Nair,and Justice Mr. P.S.Gopinathan, while granting an order against oil companies like Reliance and IOC to produce their balance sheet before the court in three weeks, during the hearing of a public interest litigation, initiated by ex-MP Mr. P.C. Thomas.The High Court also pointed out therein that an application motivated with any political intention is also meant for certain public interest too.
Ex-Justice was denied access to records in Mining Lease Scam, allegedly involving BJP Chief Minister Shivraj Singh and his wife. Is laws without any Remedy ?
Former chief justice of Gauhati high court Justice R S Garg, an expert personality of our judiciary is also said to have been denied access to certain official documents under RTI Act at the office of the special police establishment of Madhya Pradesh Lokayukta when he went there to get details about " dumper scam" allegedly involving BJP Chief Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan and his wife - accused of misusing his official position by renting out dumper trucks in 2006, registered in his wife's name, to an industrial group as a quid pro quo for allotting out-of-turn mining leases, as per the recent news report published in Times of India, today. It is really shocking to know that RTI Law is implemented and the Judiciary is its watchdog to secure the information within four corners of this ACT, with a view to meeting the ends of public interest and justice at large, but such kind of police establishments playing in the hands of the political leaders, neither care of the people, nor care to bother even any judicial order....as it is so happened with Mr. R.S.Garg, Ex-Justice. How the administrators of laws remain silent without any legal remedies in such cases ?
SC stated "Judicial discretion shall always be exercised "according to the rules of reason and justice and not according to private opinion"
In a recent Judgment, condoning a delay in filing an appeal against a civil decree in the matters of Poonam & others Vs. Harish Kumar and another, and setting aside an impugned order dated 01.12.2008 of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Civil Revision No.3745/2008, the Hon Justice Ganguli, of Supreme Court of India has defined the principles of discretion of the court and has said that When a Court exercises its discretion in either condoning or refusing to condone delay in filing any proceeding, the Court acts in exercise of its discretion. Normally, this Court in exercise of its discretion under Article 136 of the Constitution may not interfere with the exercise of discretion by the High Court in such matters.However, there is no strait-jacket about this. The discretion of this Court under Article 136 of the Constitution is meant to further the ends of justice and this Court has been using its discretion in appropriate cases when it is satisfied that exercise of jurisdiction by the High Court or other Tribunals has not been on sound judicial principles. It is well settled that judicial discretion shall always be exercised "according to the rules of reason and justice and not according to private opinion" The High Court should also have considered that it has been settled by a catena of cases that, unless the delay is gross, an explanation for the same should be liberally construed.
While setting aside the impugned common Judgment and Order dated 25.07.2005 passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in the Special Civil Application No.735 of 1999 and connected eight applications filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, against certain textile units of Gujarat, the Hon. Supreme Court of India, recently emphasizes upon the principle of equality under the provisions of the Constitution of India. In a recent judgment SC declared that " Nevertheless, in our opinion, two different interpretations of a particular entry by the same authority on same set of facts, cannot be immunised from the equality clause under Article 14 of the Constitution. It would be a case of operating law unequally, attracting Article 14 of the Constitution.To sum up, Article 14 does not prohibit reasonable classification of persons, objects and transactions by the Legislature for the purpose of attaining specific ends. To satisfy the test of permissible classification, it must not be "arbitrary, artificial or evasive" but must be based on some real and substantial distinction bearing a just and reasonable relation to the object sought to be achieved by the Legislature"
Thursday, November 3, 2011
A Recent case of a suicide of a discarded father of eight sons who was thrown away their old and infirm father out of their home in Kerala can again certainly give rise to a new question of facts and of law, to decide the legal responsibility behind such the disheartening incidence of suicide. A detailed report is recently published today in Gujarat Samachar : But there is not a single whisper about what actions of laws ever taken by the concerned enforcement authorities therein. Should it not be a case, where such the newspaper report itself is sufficient a complaint where necessary actions can be taken by the police in such cognizable offence, provoking an old father causing his own death at last, without any comfortable recourse and rescue in the evening of his life ?
A battle of words and allegations from Marathi leaders and Uttar Bharatiya Leaders of Mumbai have moved the whole Metropolitan city of Mumbai in a grave apprehension since last two weeks. Recently a Marathi Newspaper has outright stated that "Mumbai is of Marathi and only of Marathi people...and Uttarbharatiya people were never invited..." A vital question of facts and laws in accordance with the provisions of our secular democratic constitution, any discrimination in the name of state or language are unlawful.So a battle in the name of the peoples and in the name of states and ownership of a big city of our nation is also apparently unwanted in the eyes of laws, because Mumbai is not of Uttarbharatiya people, nor of only Marathi but it is only of India and of Indian People..Is there any control with our Judiciary over such the provoking controversy. ???
If the witnesses dare not to say before the court, then the truth may never come out" Judicial Verdict in 2G Scam Bail Order
CBI Judge Mr. Saini stated in a recent order rejecting the bail petition in controversial 2G Scam that " If the witnesses do not dare to say before the court, then the Tripod will be broken and the truth may never come out." Contrary to expectation, 2G telecom scam accused DMK MP Kanimozhi and seven others were denied bail on Thursday with the trial court holding that CBI's no objection to their pleas was of "no consequence" given the grave nature of the offence. Even though CBI had no objection to the plea of Bail, the court has taken a serious approach in such a controversial economic racket, involving some white colored leaders, by rejecting the bail petition.
A Battle of Dismrimination on the Basis Caste among Madras High Court Judges ?!! Justices' cries for Justice ?!!
Justice C S Karnan of the Madras high court, who alleged humiliation by fellow judges on November 2 (first reported in TOI), on Thursday said in a press conference that other dalit judges, too, are targeted and their reputation tarnished whenever they assert their self-respect. He added that "more than four or five high court judges" have humiliated him on the basis of his caste and that the National Commission for Scheduled Castes may look into his complaint."Some judges are very narrow-minded; they seek to dominate dalit judges," Karnan said.He said he did not rake up the issue all these months as he wanted to safeguard the dignity of the institution. "I was forced to approach the national forum for SCs only after the atrocities crossed tolerable limits," he said, adding that several other dalit judges in the subordinate judiciary too face similar ordeal. "It's a black mark on Indian judiciary," he said. Justice Karnan claimed that after the National Commission for Scheduled Castes forwarded a copy of his complaint against fellow judges to the Chief Justice of India, he has permitted the panel chairman to hold an inquiry into his allegations. Asked why he rushed to the forum instead of taking it up with the chief justice of the Madras high court, Karnan said: "The National Commission for SCs is the watchdog for all dalits, including dalit judges, in the country. It is the competent and appropriate body to safeguard the interests of dalits." Justice Karnan reiterated that a judge deliberately rubbed his shoes against him and then trampled a card carrying his (Justice Karnan) name at a function, and said he would reveal the identity of the judge at the time of inquiry. "The judge, sitting cross-legged next to me, touched me with his shoes deliberately and then said sorry. Two other judges were watching it smiling," he said. Justice Karnan claimed that he was discriminated against on basis of caste at several get-togethers such as full court meeting, high tea and dinner. "It's a chain of occurrences, and not once or twice," he said.On rumors about his transfer, Justice Karnan asked what was the need to do so. "I have given the highest disposal, and all my decisions have been upheld by the higher judicial forum". (Times of India)
Tuesday, November 1, 2011
The Supreme Court of India has ruled in a receent matter of public interest that all government schools across the country should provide temporary toilets by November 30, and permanent ones by December 31 this year, as per a recent report released
"Cops were punished for controlling riots"- Judicail Cognizance may be taken on affirmation of Ex-DGP of Gujarat in interest of justice ?!!
A Recent Report of Time of India has brought in light about a solemn affirmation of Retired IPS officer and former state intelligence bureau (IB) chief, R B Sreekumar who has said having requested the Godhra probe panel to seek details on how efficient cops managed to control riots in 2002 in most part of Gujarat. He has also told the commission that state government has "with ulterior motive underplayed or belittled the praiseworthy and model performance of law enforcers" who controlled riots in their respective jurisdictions. it is also reported by this daily news paper that Sreekumar has till date filed eight affidavits before the commission exposing the State's complicity in the 2002 riots. He was denied promotion by the Narendra Modi government, but he fought a long legal battle and got promotion on Gujarat high court order after he retiredSreekumar, who has reportedly dashed off a letter to the Nanavati-Mehta commission and the Supreme Court-mandated special investigation team, has highlighted that state government's claims that the 2002 riots were "spontaneous" and violence took place due to "failure of system" were completely misleading. Sreekumar has also allegedly told the commission to seek details from senior police officers like V K Gupta, Manoj Shashidhar, Satish Verma, Narasimha Komar, Vivek Srivastava, Rahul Sharma, M D Antani, Upendra Singh and Keshav Kumar on how they managed to control violence in their areas. "The information on the operational strategy, tactics, ground-level methodology, techniques of leadership and motivation and administrative measures, adopted by these officers during the time of protracted 2002 anti-minority blood bath in Gujarat will be of great relevance to the terms of reference of the Commission," the letter stated. Analyzing the incidents of violence, Sreekumar has stated that the authorities deliberately acted against the minority community, which resulted in massive violence in areas like Ahmedabad, Vadodara, Panchmahals and north Gujarat.He said that there was either no violence or negligible damage in 16 districts and two commissionerates. But the government has never given due credit to its police officers for effectively containing riots. Instead, those cops have received "shabby treatment from the state government including punishment postings and departmental actions in the post-riot period." His affidavit filed last year contained names of such officials. Looking to the aforesaid news report recently released in public about the said eight solemn affirmations of a retired cop Sreekumar against Modi's Gujarat Govenrment, it becomes now highly necessary for the competent law authorities to take cognizance of such affirmed allegations with a view to digging out the truth from the allegations of a cop in the large interest of justice. Simultaneously it is also very important to justify the actions of Modi's Gujarat Governments, if such the open allegations are false and without any lawful substances. The prime things are that the public at large are not interested to see such the battle of provoking words and virtual swords, but to have a true judicious verdict protecting the public peace and tranquility at large in Gujarat, since a decade.
Popular Posts on our Law Office Blogs
" If the land owners are not paid and compensated within two years after the declaration of the acquisition of the proposed land, the w...
While adjudicating **Pinakin Rawal v/s State of Gujarat CR.APPEAL NO.811/2004]****the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed in its landmark...
Powered by www.kartikey.com ::::: A Law Office of India, pioneering the online concept of free legal aid and laws consultation through E-L...
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, Su...
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 las...
On the eve of Dipavali...it is a rising of a new dawn...with a hope of a happy and prosperous New year, We extend our cordial wishes to all ...
Would it not be a discrimination by conferring different forums in different states for trials of certain same Offences under IPC ??Why does there exist typical difference in respect of forum for trial of certain offences like those under sections 326, 409, 466, 467, 468,...
Recently, the Supreme Court of India has pronounced a landmark judgment, while adjudicating and dismissing writ petition lodged by Bar Coun...
While exercising Criminal Appellant Jurisdiction in the matters of CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.305 OF 2013,moved by appellants Mr. Surender Kaushik a...
Recently yesterday, the Hon'ble Apex Court of India has reconfirmed the Rules and Laws about the Admissions of a party while adjudicatin...
Law Blog Archive
- October (1)
- September (6)
- August (7)
- July (8)
- June (4)
- May (7)
- April (8)
- March (9)
- February (9)
- January (6)
- December (9)
- November (4)
- October (3)
- September (5)
- August (11)
- July (2)
- June (1)
- February (2)