News Analysis India

Tag: Bombay HC

  • SC reserves order on Gautam Navlaka’s bail plea in Bhima Koregaon case

    By ANI
    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday reserved its order on a petition filed by Gautam Navlakha, an accused in Bhima Koregaon violence case, challenging the Bombay High Court order rejecting his plea for default bail.

    A three-judge bench headed by Justice UU Lalit reserved the order after hearing arguments from counsels appearing for Navlakha and NIA.

    The High Court had rejected Navlakha’s plea on February 8 saying that the period for which an accused is under illegal detention cannot be taken into account while computing the 90-day custody period for grant of default bail.

    Navlakha, in the apex court, has sought bail on the ground that the National Investigation Agency (NIA) failed to file its charge-sheet within the prescribed upper-limit of 90 days as per Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).

    He stated that the period for which he was confined to his house under house arrest should be calculated as part of judicial custody and should be taken into account while deciding the custody period under Section 167(2).

    He had sought bail from the High Court on the same grounds. Last year, a special court had rejected his application for default bail.

    Navlakha, one of the several civil liberties activists in the Bhima Koregaon case, has been booked under stringent provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) for an alleged conspiracy to topple the government. 

  • Goa CM welcomes SC stay on order cancelling polls in 5 civic bodies

    By PTI
    PANAJI: Goa Chief Minister Pramod Sawant on Thursday welcomed the Supreme Court directive staying the Bombay High Court’s order cancelling the elections in five municipalities.

    The apex court on Thursday ordered to stay the verdict of the High Court’s Goa bench, which had set aside a notification of the state Urban Development ministry on reservation of wards in five municipal councils.

    Taking to Twitter, Sawant said, “Hon.Supreme Court has stayed the High Court’s order cancelling elections to five municipalities and consequent order of the State Election Commission keeping the election process in abeyance.

    Matter to come up for final hearing on Tuesday. Now, the democratic process has been restored!” The Goa bench of the High Court had on March 1 set aside the notification issued by the Urban Development ministry, stalling polls in municipal councils of Margao, Mormugao, Mapusa, Sanguem and Quepem.

    The elections to 11 civic bodies in the coastal state are scheduled to be held on March 20 and at least 2.5 lakh people are eligible to vote in these polls.

  • Bombay HC extends protection to NCP’s Eknath Khadse till February 24 in land deal case

    By PTI
    MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court on Wednesday extended till February 24 the interim protection from coercive action granted to Maharashtra NCP leader Eknath Khadse in a land deal case.

    The former BJP minister approached the high court in January urging it to quash the summons issued by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in an Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) registered by the agency in October 2020.

    Last month, the ED had opposed Khadse’s plea, saying it was “not maintainable.”

    Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh, who appeared for the ED, had told a bench of justices SS Shinde and Manish Pitale that an ECIR was not like an FIR but an internal document.

    Therefore, there was no question of quashing of the ECIR, Singh had said.

    The summons and ECIR pertain to a case the ED had lodged in connection with the 2016 land deal involving Khadse’s family in Pune’s Bhosari area.

    Senior advocate Abad Ponda, who appeared for Khadse, argued on Wednesday that the NCP leader was entitled to seeking every relief from the high court, including the quashing of summons.

    The court adjourned further hearing in the case to February 24 and extended till then, the interim protection that it had granted to Khadse on the last hearing.

    In mid-January, Khadse (68), who quit the BJP and joined the NCP last year, had appeared before the ED in connection with the case.

    He had resigned from the Devendra Fadnavis cabinet in 2016 after facing allegations regarding the controversial land deal. It was alleged that he misused his official powers to facilitate the purchase of government land by his family.

    Khadse has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing.

    Earlier, the Maharashtra Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) had investigated the matter and submitted a closure report.

  • Bombay HC judge who delivered controversial verdicts gets one year fresh term as additional judge

    By PTI
    NEW DELHI: A Bombay High Court additional judge, who had delivered two controversial verdicts in sexual assault cases, was on Friday given a fresh one-year term as an additional judge, instead of two years as recommended by the Supreme Court collegium.

    Justice Pushpa Ganediwala’s fresh tenure would be effective from February 13.

    Her earlier tenure as an additional judge was to end on Friday.

    Last month, the Supreme Court collegium had withdrawn its approval to a proposal for the appointment of additional judge, Justice Ganediwala as a permanent judge of the court following her two controversial verdicts.

    The collegium had recommended that she be given a fresh term as an additional judge for two years.

    But the government issued a notification on Friday saying she has been given a fresh term as an additional judge for one year.

    Instead of asking the collegium to reconsider its recommendation of a fresh two year term, the government decided to extend the period by only one year, sources pointed out.

    Additional judges are usually appointed for two years before being elevated as permanent judges.

    The decision was taken after the judge faced flak for her interpretation of sexual assault under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

    Justice Ganediwala recently acquitted a man accused of groping a 12-year-old girl’s breast because he did not make skin-to-skin contact and days earlier, ruled that holding the hands of a five-year-old girl and unzipping the trousers do not amount to “sexual assault” under the POCSO Act.

    On January 27, the Supreme Court stayed the Bombay High Court order acquitting the man after Attorney General K K Venugopal said the order would set a dangerous precedent.

    The collegium headed by Chief Justice S A Bobde, at a meeting held on January 20, had okayed the proposal for making Justice Ganediwala a permanent judge.

    Besides the CJI, justices N V Ramana and R F Nariman are part of the three-member collegium, which takes decisions with regard to high court judges.

  • Malegaon blast case: Bombay High Court asks Prasad Shrikant Purohit about conspiracy meet

    By PTI
    MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court on Tuesday asked 2008 Malegaon blast accused Lieutenant Colonel Prasad Shrikant Purohit if he had any documents to show he attended alleged conspiracy meetings for the blast as part of his official duty for the Army.

    A bench of Justices SS Shinde and Manish Pitale asked Purohit about a meeting that he had attended on January 26, 2008.

    As per the National Investigation Agency (NIA), this meeting was organised by a group called Abhinav Bharat and the conspiracy for the blast was hatched here.

    Six people were killed and over 100 injured in the blast that took place near a mosque in Malegaon on September 29, 2008.

    “The meeting that you attended on 26, where is the reference? Where is the reference that it was part of the official duty?” the bench asked.

    The bench had asked a similar question to Purohit on the last hearing on February 3 too.

    The court was hearing a plea filed by Purohit in HC last year seeking dropping of all charges against him.

    He has maintained before HC that in attending the conspiracy meetings for the blast, he was discharging his duties, collecting intelligence for the Army.

    His counsels Neela Gokhale and Shrikant Shivade have argued in all past hearings that by meeting other accused persons and participating in conspiracy meetings, Purohit had merely been collecting information and passing it on to the Army.

    In his plea, Purohit has said, since he was working for the Army, the NIA should have obtained a prior sanction before prosecuting him.

    On Tuesday, the HC suggested Purohit seek recourse before the trial court.

    Shivade, however, argued that if at the end of the trial in the blast case, the lower court was to hold that his prosecution had indeed been without sanction, then why must he go through the trial at all.

    Shivade also sought the court’s permission to bring Purohit before the HC bench.

    The bench said it could agree to the request if Purohit “maintained decorum”.

    HC will continue hearing the arguments in the case on February 24.

  • How reinstatement of cops affects you, Bombay High Court asks Khwaja Yunus’ mother

    By PTI
    MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court on Thursday sought to know how Asiya Begum, the mother of blast suspect Khwaja Yunus who died in police custody, was personally affected by the reinstatement of accused policemen.

    Begum has sought action for contempt of court against Mumbai police commissioner Parambir Singh, claiming that reinstatement of the four policemen was violation of the court’s orders.

    The high court had in April 2004 directed the Maharashtra government to suspend four policemen accused of custodial torture and destruction of evidence, the plea said.

    Assistant police inspector Sachin Vaze and constables Rajendra Tiwari, Sunil Desai and Rajaram Nikam are currently facing trial for the alleged custodial death of Yunus in 2003.

    A division bench led by Justice Nitin Jamdar, on Thursday, however, noted that reinstatement was a service matter.

    “How is the petitioner personally affected by this,” the court said, adjourning the hearing for two weeks.

    In June 2020, a review committee headed by Parambir Singh decided that the four policemen should be taken back in active service pending departmental inquiry and the trial.

    Begum’s petition claimed that no departmental inquiry had been initiated yet.

    Yunus (27) was arrested on December 25, 2002, in connection with a blast in suburban Ghatkopar on December 2 that year.

    In January 2003, police claimed that he escaped when a police vehicle taking him to Aurangabad met with accident.

    But his co-accused alleged that he was beaten up severely in custody which probably caused his death.

  • Contempt notice to Customs officials for defying Bombay High Court order

    By PTI
    MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court has issued a contempt of court notice to three Customs officials for the failure to release a consignment of yellow peas from China despite the court’s orders.

    A division bench of Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and Abhay Ahuja was hearing a petition filed by Raj Grow Impext LLP challenging the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) confiscating the consignment.

    It had also filed a contempt of court petition.

    The firm’s lawyer Sujay Kantawala pointed out that on October 15, 2020, the high court had ordered the customs authorities to release the goods.

    The court in its order on Wednesday said that on the face of it, the directions of Customs Commissioner (Appeals), Mumbai Zone-1 were “totally in contravention to the order of this court”.

    “When the high court had directed release of the goods forthwith, it is beyond comprehension as to how a lower appellate authority can nullify such direction by ordering absolute confiscation of the goods,” the bench said.

    It directed release of the goods immediately.

    It also issued notice to Commissioner (Appeals) Manoj Kedia, deputy commissioner Ram Nath Purohit and assistant commissioner KK Sharma, seeking to know why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against them.

    They are to file replies by January 21.