Tag: Supreme Court

  • SC takes note after Panjab University students write to CJI, seek probe into police ‘atrocities’

    By Express News Service
    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court will hear 35 students of Panjab University who wrote to the Chief Justice urging him to take cognizance of police excesses against protesting farmers.

    The top court registered the letter written by these students as a PIL. In their letter, the students appealed the top court to order an inquiry into the Haryana Police’s action of ‘illegitimate’ use of water cannons, tear gas shells and lathis on the peaceful protesting farmers. The letter contended that farmers are protesting peacefully, but the government  is not sensitive to these issues.

    Incidentally, the Haryana Police on Sunday had fired tear gas shells to stop a group of farmers from moving towards Delhi. Hundreds of farmers, mostly from Punjab, have been protesting at Delhi borders for over a month for repeal of the three recently enacted farm laws. The students have urged the Chief Justice to direct the Haryana and Delhi Police to withdraw all the cases against innocent farmers which, they claimed, were registered as political vendetta, as well as order a probe into the cases of illegal detention of farmers. 

    The students from the Centre for Human Rights and Duties, Panjab University, also sought a direction from the top court to both the Centre and the state governments to ensure the safety of all protesters, and to provide basic amenities to all, especially women, children and the elderly.

    MP minister attacks protestersMP agriculture minister Kamal Patel said farmers staging protest on Delhi borders have rejected pleas to end their stir as they are “enacting a drama to sleep” and it is not possible to “awake” them.

    Hooda reaches out to farmersHaryana Leader of Opposition Bhupinder Singh Hooda said the Congress will provide a financial assistance of `2 lakh each to families of farmers who have died during the agitation. 

  • Supreme Court directs Centre to amend Cattle Slaughter Rules

    By Express News Service
    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday asked the Centre to either withdraw or amend rules notified in 2017 for confiscating animals of traders and transporters during the pendency of trial in cases under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, saying they are contrary to the law.

    A bench headed by Chief Justice of India S A Bobde said that the rules will be stayed if not withdrawn or amended by the Centre as the law provides that animals can be confiscated only if a person is convicted under the Act.

    “Animals are source of livelihood. We are not talking about pet dogs and cats. People live on the basis of their animals. You can’t confiscate them and keep them before the man is convicted. Your rules are contrary. You either withdraw it or we will stay it,” the bench said.

    The bench told Additional Solicitor General Jayant K Sud, appearing for the Centre, that the government cannot confiscate the cattle and keep it before a person is convicted.

    At the outset, Sud informed the bench that the 2017 rules have been notified as atrocities were being committed on animals.

    The bench said, “We are trying to tell you that the section is very clear that only the person who is convicted can lose the animal. You either amend the rule or we will stay it. We cannot have a situation where the rule is running contrary to the express provision of the Act.”

    The bench posted the matter for further hearing on January 11.

    The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Care and Maintenance of Case Property Animals) Rules, 2017 framed under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, were notified on May 23, 2017.

  • SC accepts petition sent to CJI seeking inquiry against Haryana Police for using water cannons on farmers

    By ANI
    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court accepted a letter petition sent to Chief Justice of India SA Bobde by a group of students from Punjab seeking an inquiry against Haryana Police for using water cannons, tear gases shells on farmers to stop them from proceeding to Delhi to protest against the Centre’s newly-enacted farm laws.

    The students wrote an open letter to the CJI and urged that Haryana and Delhi police withdraw all the cases against farmers which were registered under alleged political vendetta.

    The letter, written by former and current human rights students of the Centre for Human Rights and Duties, Punjab University, also asked that the cases of illegal detention of protesters be looked into.

    The letter signed by Gurmohan Preet Singh and 34 other students requested that the governments at both Central and State level ensure the safety of all protesters, and provide basic amenities for all, especially women, children and elderly. It also asked for mobile toilet vans to be provided at protest places.

    “Issue appropriate guidelines, as the court may deem fit, regarding hygienic conditions at protest sites in the backdrop of COVID-19. Take an action to curb fake news and against media channels, engaged in misrepresentation, polarisation and sensationalisation of the whole issue,” it stated.

    They sought top court’s immediate intervention to protect “gross neglect of human rights”.

    “We, being students of human rights are very much disturbed and disheartened by witnessing the execrable way in which the government of India is dealing with its own farmers, who are protesting much peacefully as per their constitutional rights,” the letter said.

    Farmers’ protest at several Delhi borders has been going on for over a month. 

  • SC to consider ex-IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt’s plea for sentence suspension

    By ANI
    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday listed for the third week of January the petition filed by former Indian Police Service (IPS) officer Sanjiv Bhatt to suspend his sentence in a custodial death case of 1990.

    A three-judge bench of the apex court, headed by Justice Ashok Bhushan and also comprising Justices M R Shah and R Subhash Reddy, posted the petition filed by Sanjiv Bhatt for hearing in the third week of January. “We will list the matter in the third week of January in the case,” the bench led by Justice Bhushan said today.

    The top court accepted the request made by Bhatt’s lawyer, Farrukh Rasheed, who pleaded for the hearing to be postponed to the third week of January.

    Bhatt had filed the Special Leave Petition (SLP) before the Supreme Court challenging the Gujarat High Court’s order, which declined to suspend his sentence of life imprisonment awarded by a Jamnagar court on June 20, 2019, in a 30-year-old custodial death case.

    “The HC ought to have appreciated that the trial court did not consider evidence of court witness P Pandey, Investigating Officer, then superintendent of police, Crime Investigation Department (Crime), Ahmedabad, who recorded the statement of different police officers, clearly indicating no beating or ill-treatment of the arrested accused,” Bhatt in his plea claimed, before the apex court.

    Bhatt was sentenced to life imprisonment for his involvement in the custodial death of Jamjodhpur resident, Prabhudas Vaishnani in November 1990.

    Bhatt, in his SLP, claimed before the Supreme Court that there is a “political vendetta”, against him, and further said that the charges were framed against him without due (proper) sanction from the state government.  

  • Supreme Court seeks response from central government on agricultural laws in four weeks

    The Supreme Court on Monday issued a notice to the Central Government seeking its response to several petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the three recently disputed agricultural laws. A bench headed by Chief Justice SA Bobde has sought a reply from the Center on the notice within four weeks.

    Three laws – Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Price Assurance and Agricultural Services Agreement Act, 2020, Farmers Product Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Simplification) Act, 2020 and Essential Commodities (Amendment) Act, 2020, after the approval of President Ramnath Kovind They came into effect on 27 September.

    The bench was hearing petitions filed by Rashtriya Janata Dal Rajya Sabha member Manoj Jha, Congress Lok Sabha MP from Kerala TN Pratapan and DMK Rajya Sabha members Tiruchi Siva and Rakesh Vaishnav from Tamil Nadu.

    The bench also comprises Justices AS Bopanna and V Ramasubramanian. It has been alleged in the petitions that the Agricultural Laws passed by the Parliament will put an end to the Agricultural Produce Market Committee system made to ensure fair prices of agricultural products to farmers.

  • Supreme Court said – the right to classify the state into SC / ST category, now the matter will go to the big bench

    New Delhi:The Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court has given an important decision on Thursday, saying that states can also create categories in the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (SC / STs) community for reservation. The court has taken this decision so that some castes coming in SC / ST can be given priority for reservation over the rest. Earlier in 2004, the Supreme Court Constitution Bench in EV Chinnaiya v. State of Andhra Pradesh ruled that quota was not allowed within the quota received by any class. Due to differences in the two benches of five judges, the matter will now be referred to the larger bench (bench of seven judges).

    A five-judge bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra said the 2004 verdict needs to be revisited. The bench said that if the state government has the power to give reservations, it also has the power to create sub-classification. Therefore, this case should be placed before the Chief Justice of India for proper instruction. The bench comprising Indira Banerjee, Vineet Saran, MR Shah and Anirudh Bose said that the 2004 verdict was not properly decided and states can legislate to subclass caste within SC / ST.

    The Bench insisted on establishing a large bench

    The bench insisted for setting up of a larger bench to reconsider the earlier decision in the case filed against the High Court order before the CJI Justice SA Bobde by the Punjab government. In fact, the Punjab and Haryana High Court abolished a law empowering the state government to subclassify SC / ST. The High Court had relied on the 2004 verdict of the apex court and held that the Punjab government did not have the authority to subdivide SC / ST.

  • CBI: Between devil & deep sea

    If the landmark Vineet Narain judgment of the Supreme Court in the 1997 Jain hawala case is anything to go by, then it built enough jurisprudence to insulate the CBI (Central Bureau of Investigation) from political interference and even made it impossible for politicians in the government to remove the CBI director for two years, ensuring he had freedom to carry out time-bound investigations. What happened on the ground after this judgment was that the CBI, which had worked under the Home Ministry earlier, was brought under the direct control of the Prime Minister’s Office. The agency now works under the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) which reports directly to the PMO. In that sense, this esteemed office is quite aware of the CBI’s functioning and could access information if it wanted to. This was evident during the coal scam investigations when PMO officials were caught vetting sealed CBI reports meant for the Supreme Court, which forced the judges to describe the apex agency as a “caged parrot.” From my 11-year experience as a journalist and having followed CBI’s involvement in the 2G scam, I must say Prime Minister Narendra Modi couldn’t exert overarching control over it or stem the tide of misuse.

    When Modi came to power in May 2014, the then CBI Director Ranjit Sinha had the most tainted record but was in the saddle serving out his term. He was appointed on the recommendation of the then RJD supremo Lalu Prasad Yadav. Such was his reputation that the Patna High Court even disqualified him from the fodder scam probe in the mid-1990s. Frankly, till his retirement in December 2014, Modi took no action against Ranjit Sinha, who even appointed an IRS officer as DIG in the CBI’s anti-corruption wing in Delhi during the power transition in May 2014. This officer was caught for torturing a civil servant working in the Ministry of Corporate Affairs for taking a bribe and forcing him and his entire family to commit suicide. The concerned IRS officer, Sanjiv Gautam, was then a private Secretary to a powerful UPA Minister and it is a million dollar question how Sinha took him as DIG in the CBI just days before Modi became the Prime Minister. But then the Indian bureaucracy is known to play smart with appointments during power transitions, keeping them absolutely legitimate and within rules.

    Sinha was even called out by Supreme Court’s 2G and coal scam benches for meeting many of the accused, including corporates, at his home and was under the scanner of a court-dictated probe. This was a golden chance for Modi to act, cleanse the country’s top probe agency once and for all and get a transparent process going. But the Prime Minister remained silent, one which unfortunately amounted to being a safe passage for Sinha. Why? None has an answer.

    The next CBI Director was selected in December 2014, as per the Lokpal Act, by a high-powered committee comprising the Prime Minister, the Chief Justice of India and the Opposition Leader in the Lok Sabha. The Prime Minister selected Ranjit Sinha’s protégé Anil Sinha as per existing seniority norms, a decision agreed to by the other members on the panel. Till December 2016, Anil Sinha dragged his feet on major corruption scandals like Aircel-Maxis, AgustaWestland, Robert Vadra’s land acquisitions and the National Herald-related cases, which were major campaign planks of the BJP when it was in the Opposition.

    His tenure was marked by controversial raids at two sitting Chief Ministers’ offices, namely Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kerjiwal and Himachal Pradesh Chief Minister Vir Bhadra Singh. In both instances, the Prime Minister was not in Delhi, travelling abroad during one and addressing naval officers on a warship in the high seas during the other. Had the CBI Director got clearance from the Prime Minister to conduct the raid in sitting Chief Ministers’ offices? Or did someone in the Cabinet direct him to do so once the Prime Minister was out of reach?

    Anil Sinha even shunted a CBI Joint Director Ashok Tewari for summoning former Finance Minister P Chidambaram in December 2014 with regard to the Aircel-Maxis scam. How can an officer be shunted out for doing his duty? Have we then become the mythical “deep state?” That is the only answer.

    In fact, proof that Modi was aware of the CBI’s wrongdoings lies in the fact that he himself brought Gujarat cadre IPS officers, namely Rakesh Asthana, YC Modi and AK Sharma.

    Even Enforcement Directorate’s young officer Rajeshwar Singh was hounded by the system for raiding Chidambaram’s home in December 2015 and exposing his family’s assets in 14 countries and 21 foreign bank accounts. One would have expected Ashok Tewari and Rajeshwar Singh to be heroes in the Modi regime for taking bold action against his political rival Chidambaram. But the underbelly of Lutyens’ Delhi is difficult to grasp.

    I must bring out two incidents of CBI’s sheer lethargy and tardiness for political “give and take.” The first concerns a trial court judge overseeing the coal scam cases, Bharat Prashar, who summoned former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, holding him responsible for allocation of coal mines. The Congress even conducted a protest march against this. Meanwhile, Singh approached a non-relevant Supreme Court Bench and obtained a stay on the summons when he should have ideally sought redress in the Coal Scam Bench. It was CBI’s duty to tell the court about this anomaly. However, it kept quiet and the trial court convicted poor Harish Chandra Gupta, then Coal Secretary, who was also not inclined to reveal the truth and became an approver. The endgame? Both the IAS lobby and politicians shed crocodile tears for a while, leading to recasting of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The CBI was rendered toothless. Again. The second case that emasculated the CBI further was the Delhi High Court staying the prosecution of Sonia Gandhi’s former private secretary Vincent George in January 2015. Till date, the CBI has not challenged this decision in the Supreme Court, though the Delhi High Court has terminated the magistrate son of the concerned High Court judge, who was caught for possessing unaccounted cash.

    Now let us come to the current controversy. After the exit of Anil Sinha, Modi used his might, bypassed the next senior candidate RK Dutta and appointed trusted lieutenant Rakesh Asthana as CBI’s Acting Director in December 2016. Asthana was too junior to hold the post of CBI chief and later, the

    Prime Minister himself selected non-controversial Delhi Police Commissioner Alok Verma as the new Director in January 2017. He had selected him as Delhi Police Commissioner, too, in 2015.

    However, post the appointments Modi perhaps could not sense the duel that had started between his trusted officers in the CBI. Rakesh Asthana, YC Modi and AK Sharma had already started bickering with each other and PMO officials reportedly took sides in this mud-slinging instead of sorting out issues. Meanwhile YC Modi was shunted out to the National Investigative Agency (NIA). The tussle continued as Asthana was not at all in a mood to obey the new CBI Director, who decided to take on Asthana by fixing the latter’s culpability in the Sterling Diary bribes. This time, Central Vigilance Commissioner KV Chowdhary looked the other way. And the PMO, in an unprecedented manner, issued a midnight order approving the promotion of Rakesh Asthana as Special Director in October 2017. This was the real breaking point between the CBI Director and his real superior, the Prime Minister. Now that the Supreme Court is seized of the matter, let us wait for its verdict.

    Will the Supreme Court deliver the judgment before the retirement of Alok Verma on February 2? If justice is delayed, then it would give credence to what is generally assumed, that bigwigs protect each other and no matter what the regime, the bureaucracy’s shenanigans can always hold a system hostage to its priorities and ego. There is a famous Latin judicial term, “Fiat justitia ruat caelum, which means “Let justice be done though the heavens fall.”

  • Sabarimala won’t be allowed to turn into Ayodhya: Vijayan

    Taking a firm stand, Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan said on Wednesday that Sabarimala won’t be allowed to become an Ayodhya.

    Sabarimala town has witnessed protests ever since the Supreme Court ruled in September that women of all ages can enter the temple that hitherto banned girls and women aged 10-50.

    As the Kerala Assembly opened on Wednesday, legislators from the Congress-led opposition came with placards and banners demanding that the prohibitory orders in the temple town be lifted.

    During the entire question hour, the opposition was rooted before the Speaker shouting slogans. As former Devasom Minister VS Sivakumar alleged that the Left government and the Sangh parivar were colluding to destroy the sanctity of the Sabarimala temple, Vijayan said that the prohibitory orders now in place at the temple town will not be withdrawn.

    “We are bound to adhere to the apex court ruling even as the Sangh parivar with the support of the Congress is out to create trouble in the temple,” the Chief Minister said.

    “At no cost will we allow Sabarimala to be turned into an Ayodhya and there is no question of withdrawing the prohibitory orders,” he said to thumping of desks by the treasury benches.

    Vijayan said that even the Kerala High Court had supported the rules now in force at Sabarimala. “The Congress is trying to make political capital out of the Sabarimala issue.”

    Leader of Opposition Ramesh Chennithala said that now it had become clear that Vijayan had only one agenda — to weaken the Congress party and for that he has given the full support to the BJP/RSS.

    “The decision of the police to hand over the mike to RSS leader Valsan Thilenkery to control the protesters at the temple reveals everything… Vijayan is behaving like those who built the Titanic who said the ship will never sink. But it sank. Vijayan is also going to meet such an end. The way he is handling the Sabarimala issue, devotees are deeply pained,” he said.

    When the opposition members trooped near Speaker P. Sreeramakrishnan, he went through the listed business of the day in a flash and adjourned the House for the day.

    The Assembly saw the lone BJP legislator O. Rajagopal and his new found ally P.C. George turn up in black shirts. They said they were protesting against the Government for putting the Sabarimala pilgrims into difficulties.

  • Article :- Yadi Raam Mandir Supreem Kort Ke Lie Praathamikata Nahin Hai To Sarakaar Ko Kaanoon Laaya Jaana Chaahie: Bhaagavat

    Mohan Bhagwat, chief of the National Self-Service Association (RSS), has made a big statement about the construction of Ram Mandir in Ayodhya. While addressing the Hoonark rally of Vishwa Hindu Parishad on Sunday, he said in a tone that now the time has come that the government has brought an ordinance for the construction of Ram Temple. Taking a beating, he said that there is no question of Ram temple in the priority of the Supreme Court. But, the decision in the temple case should come before the Lok Sabha elections. The Ram temple issue is related to the feelings of the majority population of the country. In such a case, if the court can not decide, then the government should immediately make the law. He called on Longo to pressurize the government for the construction of the temple.

    If the pressure of the public is created then the government will have to bring an ordinance to construct the temple in every situation.
    RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat expressed his displeasure at the court’s late-Lateefi. He said that Hindus have kept patience for the decision of the court for 30 years. Delay in justice is also injustice. But, this work was done to avoid the issue related to public interest. But now the situation should be clear. Commenting on the government, he said that considering the sentiments of Hindus, the government should also make its preparations.

    There are a few months left in the Lok Sabha elections. In such a situation, the issue of Ram temple in Ayodhya has once again got hot. Religious gatherings in Ayodhya or Pune, and Bangalore in connection with Ram temple. During the Dharm Sabha in Pune, President of the National Center for Volunteer Union Mohan Bhagwat said that the country needs Ram temple. He said that there was a lot of patience now, now it has to be done in the whole country.

    Bhagwat questioned the delay in the hearing of the matter in the Supreme Court and said that it would have been done to avoid the issues of public interest. However, Bhagwat clarified that Ram Temple has our demand and it is not difficult to fight.

    Earlier, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad had a religious meeting in Ayodhya or Bagchi in large Bhaktmal on Sunday. Its two to three lakh devotees reached Ayodhya. Through this sacrament Sant and Dharmacharya tried to put pressure on the government to fix the date of construction of the Ram temple. VHP said that they should have complete land for the construction of the temple. Sunni Waqf Board will have to take back the proprietary rights to the land.

    At the same time, Shiv Sena appeared on Ramlala and targeted the BJP-Congress. Thackeray said while tugging that all people are Ram-Ram at the time of election and after the elections, they just relax.
    Speaking in Nagpur, the Sangh chief said that the court should get the decision quickly at the Ram temple. He further said that the issue of public interest should not be avoided. It is not okay to stop the truth and justice. It seems that there is no temple in the court’s priority.

    Mohan Bhagwat said that it has been proved that there was a Ram temple there. During the excavation carried out by the ASI, it was found that there was a temple that was demolished. He said that if the Ram temple is not built there, then whose temple will be built. He further said that there was a need to construct a grand Ram temple.

    Mohan Bhagwat further said that the legislation will be passed in the parliament to build a Ram temple soon enough. He said that once again the whole country should come together on the Ram temple issue.
    “Every decision will be taken by the RSS”

    Earlier, VHP International Secretary Champat Rai said that for the construction of the Ram Temple, we need complete land and no formula for land sharing will be approved. Champa Rai further said that the Sunni Waqf Board should take back the title of the land title title. And VHP will not be nominated on this land.

  • All-party meet fails to break Sabarimala impasse; duty-bound to implement SC order, says Ker govt

    An all-party meeting on the Sabarimala issue here Thursday saw the Kerala government sticking to its stand of being “duty-bound” to implement the Supreme Court order allowing the entry of women of all ages into the Lord Ayyappa temple, leading to a walkout by opposition parties.

    The opposition parties made a demand for putting off the implementation of the apex court order till January 22, when the review petitions against the verdict are slated to come up for hearing.

    Rejecting the demand, Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan pointed out that since the court had not stayed its September 28 verdict, there was no other option but to allow women in the age group of 10-50 years during the upcoming pilgrim season.

    As no consensus emerged at the nearly three-hour long meeting, opposition Congress-led United Democratic Front (UDF) and the BJP staged a walkout at the fag end of the crucial parleys, convened two days ahead of the temple’s opening on November 17 for the two-month long pilgrim season.

    Frenzied protests by devotees and various Hindu outfit activists had prevented some women in the 10-50 age group from entering the temple, when it opened twice since last month after the apex court order.

    Speaking to reporters, Vijayan said the government had convened the meeting without any prejudice.

    “The government was not stubborn. But had no other option, but to implement the apex court verdict. If tomorrow the court takes another decision, the government will follow that,” he said.

    The chief minister, however, said the government “is with the believers. There is no need for any concern,” he said, adding the government will provide security to all devotees.

    The government can only obey the court verdict and all the believers should understand this, the Left leader said.

    Announcing the walkout, Leader of the Opposition in Kerala Assembly Ramesh Chennithala said the government was “adamant” in its stand to implement the court verdict and was not prepared for any compromise.

    “This is a challenge to the believers,” he said alleging that the government was trying to “weaken” the Sabarimala pilgrimage.

    Attacking the government, BJP state unit chief  P S Sreedharan Pillai said the meeting was a “waste of time”.

    Meanwhile, Vijayan will also meet representatives of the Pandalam Royal family, traditionally associated with the Sabarimala temple, and members of the ‘thantri’ (priest) family.