Tag: Supreme Court

  • ED continues to quiz Soren in money laundering case, Section 144 clamped near CM’s residence

    Enforcement Directorate sleuths continued to question Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren at his official residence here on Saturday in connection with a money laundering case linked to an alleged land scam. The entire area has turned into a virtual fortress with heavy deployment of security forces, an official said.

    Soren, 48, who is also the executive president of the ruling Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM), had earlier skipped seven summonses by the ED. He finally gave his consent after the probe agency summoned him for the eighth time.

    The ED personnel reached Soren’s residence around 1 pm, the official said, adding, the questioning has been underway for more than six hours now. Security personnel, deployed in large numbers at the spot, are using high-resolution body cameras to keep track of activities around the house, he said.

    The measure comes in the wake of the recent attack on ED officials in West Bengal during a raid pertaining to an alleged multi-crore ration distribution scam.

    The Ranchi district administration has also imposed prohibitory orders under Section 144 of CrPC near Soren’s house, disallowing any demonstration, carrying weapons and public meetings. “The restrictions will be in place till 11 pm on Saturday,” Ranchi SDO Utkarsh Kumar told PTI. Security has also been bolstered outside the residences of key BJP leaders in the state and the party headquarters as a precautionary measure.

    Meanwhile, the JMM convened a meeting of its legislators at the chief minister’s residence.

    “The ED is questioning the CM… We are also holding our meeting… Any strategy about the future course of action will be made based on the outcome of the questioning,” JMM general secretary and spokesperson Supriyo Bhattacharya told PTI.

    Jamtara MLA Irfan Ansari, who met Soren before being quizzed by the ED officials, said the chief minister asked party workers to be patient.

    “The CM, after seeing me, turned emotional and asked us to have patience,” Ansari said.

    Opposing the ED action, JMM workers and tribal outfits staged protests across the state. Asked about the demonstrations, Bhattacharya said those were spontaneous, and his party had not taken any call on that.

    JMM workers armed with bows and arrows were also spotted at some distance from Soren’s house.

    Congress’ Jharkhand president Rajesh Thakur said that party MLAs were present to express solidarity with the CM.

    Those present inside Soren’s residence include Social Welfare Minister Joba Manjhi, Congress legislator Deepika Pandey Singh and Rajya Sabha MP Mahua Maji, besides several JMM legislators.

    Jharkhand Advocate General Rajiv Ranjan, DGP Ajay Kumar Singh, Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi, Rahul Kumar Sinha and SSP Chandan Kumar Sinha are also at the spot, officials said.

    The investigation pertains to a “huge racket of illegal change of ownership of land by the mafia” in Jharkhand, according to the central probe agency.

    It has so far arrested 14 people in the case, including 2011-batch IAS officer Chhavi Ranjan, who served as the director of the state’s Social Welfare Department and deputy commissioner of Ranchi.

    JMM MLA Ramdas Soren claimed that this was an attempt to destabilise the Jharkhand government.

    The BJP, however, alleged that the chief minister was playing the “victim card” by sponsoring protests across the state.

    “The CM should not have been given the privilege of interrogation at his official residence. Soren is scared of being arrested and that is why he did not visit the ED office for questioning,” senior BJP leader Amar Bauri told PTI.

    Jharkhand BJP president Babulal Marandi said the ED agreed to Soren’s request for questioning at the chief minister’s house out of respect for him.

    “Now, we hope that the CM will also show generosity and issue an order to the Jharkhand Police today itself that instead of calling any accused to the police station and interrogating him, officers should go to the house of the accused and question,” Marandi wrote on X.

    He also claimed that tribals in the state are not with Soren anymore, and they want his exit.

    Soren had filed a petition before the Supreme Court and the Jharkhand High Court, seeking protection from the ED action, terming the summonses “unwarranted”. Both the courts subsequently dismissed his petitions.

    Jharkhand Governor C P Radhakrishnan had earlier this week said that the ED was doing its duty and Soren should provide the “right answers” to the probe agency.

    In the 81-member Jharkhand Assembly, the ruling coalition holds 47 seats, including 29 MLAs from the JMM, 17 from the Congress, and one each from the RJD and the Communist Party of India (Marxists-Leninist).

  • Supreme Court rejects plea seeking quashing of notification that restored Rahul Gandhi’s Lok Sabha membership

    The Supreme Court on Friday took a stern view on the filing of “frivolous” petitions and dismissed with a cost of Rs 1 lakh a plea seeking the quashing of an August 7, 2023, notification that restored the Lok Sabha membership of Congress leader Rahul Gandhi. The Lok Sabha notification restored the membership of Rahul Gandhi following an apex court order staying his conviction in a 2019 defamation case over his ‘Modi’ surname remark.

    The top court had on August 4, 2023, stayed his conviction in the defamation case. Gandhi represents Wayanad in the Lower House of Parliament.

    The plea filed by Lucknow-based Ashok Pandey came up for hearing before a bench of Justices B R Gavai and Sandeep Mehta. The bench observed that Pandey had not appeared before it despite the matter being called twice for hearing.

    It also referred to two previous orders passed by the court on separate petitions filed by the petitioner.

    The bench noted that the top court had dismissed those petitions with costs of Rs 5 lakh and Rs 1 lakh respectively. “Filing of such frivolous petitions waste precious time not only of the court but also the entire registry…,” it observed while dismissing the plea and imposing the cost. The petitioner had arrayed the Lok Sabha Speaker, the Union of India, the Election Commission of India and Rahul Gandhi as respondents in the plea.

    The bench also observed that the issue raised by the petitioner was identical to the one raised in his earlier plea, which was dismissed in October last year with a cost of Rs 1 lakh.

    In the plea dismissed in October, the petitioner had challenged the restoration of Rahul Gandhi’s Lok Sabha membership.

    Last year, the apex court had also imposed a cost of Rs 5 lakh on the petitioner for claiming in a separate PIL that the oath taken by the Bombay High Court chief justice was “defective”.

    Gandhi was disqualified as an MP on March 24 last year after a Gujarat court convicted and sentenced him to two years imprisonment for criminal defamation for comments he made about the Modi surname.

    The Gujarat High Court later dismissed his petition for a stay on conviction, observing that “purity in politics” is the need of the hour. Thereafter, the apex court had stayed his conviction in the case.

    BJP leader Purnesh Modi had filed a criminal defamation case against Gandhi in 2019 over his “How come all thieves have Modi as the common surname?” remark made during an election rally in Kolar in Karnataka on April 13, 2019.

  • Congress never opposed Ram temple, BJP, RSS used Babri issue for political mileage: Digvijaya Singh

    Congress veteran Digvijaya Singh on Tuesday alleged that the intention of the BJP, RSS and VHP behind demolishing the Babri mosque in Ayodhya was not to build a temple at the site, but to make it a Hindu-Muslim issue for political mileage.

    In a post on social media platform X, the former Madhya Pradesh chief minister claimed the Congress never opposed the construction of the Ram temple in Ayodhya, but raised question marks over the location of the new temple, where the idol consecration ceremony will take place on January 22.

    “(The Congress) only asked to wait till the court’s decision for the construction (of temple) on the disputed land. Bhoomi pujan on non-disputed land was done during the time of Rajiv ji (former PM Rajiv Gandhi). (Ex-PM P V) Narasimha Rao ji had also acquired non-disputed land for the construction of Ram temple,” Singh said. He alleged the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), the Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) had to demolish the mosque anyway, but their intention was not to build a temple at the site.

    “…Because, until the mosque is demolished, it does not become a Hindu-Muslim issue. Destruction is in their behaviour and character; taking political advantage by spreading unrest is their strategy,” said the Rajya Sabha member, hitting out at the saffron organisations.

    When contacted, state BJP spokesman Pankaj Chaturvedi dubbed Singh as “Ram drohi” (anti-Lord Ram) and claimed the Congress leader and his party were against Sanatan Dharma. He said the erstwhile Congress-led UPA government, in an affidavit submitted in the Supreme Court, had called Lord Ram an “imaginary” figure. Singh should clarify how long he will continue to be “anti-Sanatan Dharma and Ram drohi”, asked Chaturvedi.

  • Ram Mandir inauguration: “People will reject them in upcoming elections,” Anurag Thakur slams Congress

    Union Minister Anurag Thakur slammed the Congress party for declining the invitation to attend the ‘Pran Pratishtha’ ceremony of Ram Lalla in Ayodhya, scheduled later this month and said that people too will “reject” them in the upcoming elections.

    Earlier on Wednesday, Congress declared that it would skip the massive inauguration ceremony being planned for the Ayodhya Ram Temple, saying it was a “political project” of the BJP and Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh.

    “Whenever Congress criticised Sanatana, whenever it insulted Hindus and whenever it questioned the existence of Lord Ram, we all have seen the condition of Congress after that,” Thakur told reporters on Thursday. He further asserted that Congress only boycotts the events, whether it is the ‘Pran Pratishtha’ ceremony of Ram Temple or anything else.

    “Whenever there is a Parliament session, Congress boycotts it. Whenever there is a speech by Modiji, Congress boycotts it. Whenever good work is done, Congress boycotts it. The people of the country will do the same thing by boycotting Congress in the next elections and will show the way out,” he added.

    Madhya Pradesh CM Mohan Yadav termed it unfortunate and claimed that the grand old party is insulting the ‘pran pratishtha’ ceremony.”This is very unfortunate. First, Congress created obstacles in (the construction) of Ram Temple. Now, they are insulting the ‘Pran Pratishtha’ ceremony. In a way, it has hurt the sentiments of the majority of the population of the country. Congress should apologise,” MP CM said. Chhattisgarh CM Vishnu Deo Sai said that the grand old party has rejected the invitation to the ‘pran pratishtha’ of Ram Temple, and people too will reject them.

    “This is wrong. They show double standards. They sometimes question the existence of Lord Ram and become ‘Chunavi Sanatani’ at other times…They have rejected the invitation to the ‘pran pratishtha’ of Ram Temple today, people too will reject them,” Chhattisgarh CM said.

    Madhya Pradesh Minister Kailash Vijayvargiya said that Congress always questioned the existence of Lord Ram.

    “Congress never looked at Lord Ram from the point of view of reverence, they said that he is imaginary so for them Lord Ram is not the centre of faith. This is an insult to the public sentiments of the country and the public will respond to it in the upcoming elections,” Vijayvargiya told on Thursday.

    Bihar BJP President Samrat Chaudhary also hit out at Congress and said that we are supporters of Sanatana Dharma, when Lord Ram is worshipped, BJP will stand.

    Meanwhile, RJD MP Manoj Jha said that Mahatma Gandhi did not become a devotee of Lord Ram by going to the temple but still he went to heaven.

    “It is wrong to do politics in the name of Lord Ram. There is a direct connection between me and Lord Ram. Gandhi did not become a devotee of Lord Ram by going to the temple, that concept was inside him, and that is why he went to heaven and went saying ‘Hey Ram’,” he added.

    Moreover, Uttar Pradesh Congress chief Ajay Rai said that said that all the Congressmen will visit Ayodhya on Makar Sankranti.

    “The name of Ram is the basis of life in this world. This Makar Sankranti, all of us Congressmen will go to Ayodhya from the state headquarters, Lucknow, to have darshan of Ramlala. We will also visit Hanuman Garhi and worship,” Rai posted on X.

    On Wednesday, senior Congress leaders–Mallikarjun Kharge, Sonia Gandhi and Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury–‘declined” the invitation for the grand event in Ayodhya.

    “Lord Ram is worshipped by millions in our country. Religion is a personal matter. But the RSS/BJP have long made a political project of the temple in Ayodhya. The inauguration of the incomplete temple by the leaders of the BJP and the RSS has obviously been brought forward for electoral gain. While abiding by the 2019 Supreme Court judgement and honouring the sentiments of millions who revere Lord Ram, Mallikarjun Kharge, Sonia Gandhi, and Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury have respectfully declined the invitation to what is clearly an RSS/BJP event,” the Congress said in its statement.

    Preparations are underway in full swing for the Ram Temple ‘Pran Pratishtha’ on January 22, which will draw dignitaries and people from all walks of life.

  • Maha govt should not give relief to 11 convicts: Sharad Pawar

    Nationalist Congress Party president Sharad Pawar on Tuesday said that the Maharashtra government should not give any relief to the 11 convicts of Bilkis Bano case.

    “The Maharashtra government should not give any relief. This was a serious and heinous crime. Seven people died. What this woman (Bilkis) suffered, the kind of atrocities she had to endure… She had seven of her relatives killed,” Sharad Pawar said while reacting to Monday’s Supreme Court order in the Bilkis Bano case.

    Pawar urged the Maharashtra government to take this case ‘seriously’. “I feel the Maharashtra government would not ignore the seriousness of the case and the heinous manner in which the crime was committed… What the Supreme Court has said has to be done.”

    When asked whether the Maharashtra government, which is also ruled by BJP, could follow Gujarat’s example and again grant remission to the convicts, Pawar said, “While the government has taken political decisions, this time I believe they will take this case seriously.” Pawar, however, appealed to both the chief minister and deputy chief minister (Devendra Fadnavis) “to take this case seriously”.

    “I have just one suggestion to the chief minister and the deputy chief minister. The crime against the woman cannot be ignored and the state should go by the SC verdict in the case. We expect that there should be no political bias in the decision the state government would take… A message should be sent to those indulging in atrocities that such kind of crimes will not be tolerated by society, the political system and the judiciary,” Pawar said.The NCP president lauded the SC decision saying that the people were happy with the verdict.

  • Supreme Court seeks Lok Sabha secretary general’s reply on Mahua Moitra’s expulsion plea

    New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday sought a reply from the Lok Sabha secretary general on Trinamool Congress leader Mahua Moitra’s plea challenging her expulsion from the Lower House. A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta refused to pass any order on an interim prayer of Moitra to let her attend the proceedings of the House, saying, allowing it would be like allowing the main petition.

    “We will consider your plea for interim relief in March,” Justice Khanna told Senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for Moitra.

    The top court also refused to issue any notice to Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla and the Committee on Ethics of Lok Sabha — both were made a party by Moitra in her plea — and said it would only seek a reply from the Lok Sabha secretary general. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Lok Sabha secretary general, requested the court not to issue a formal notice and said that he would file a reply to Moitra’s petition.

    Mehta said the court should not venture into the internal matter of discipline in the sovereign organ of the state. The bench then passed the order and listed the matter for further hearing in the week starting March 11.

    On December 8, after a heated debate in the Lok Sabha over the panel report, during which Moitra was not allowed to speak, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Pralhad Joshi moved a motion to expel the TMC MP from the House for “unethical conduct,” which was adopted by a voice vote. The ethics committee found Moitra guilty of “unethical conduct” and contempt of the House as she shared her Lok Sabha members’ portal credentials — user ID and password — with unauthorised people, which had an irrepressible impact on national security, Joshi had said. The committee had also recommended that in view of the “highly objectionable, unethical, heinous and criminal conduct” of Moitra, an intense legal and institutional inquiry be initiated by the government with a set deadline.

    The motion moved by Joshi said Moitra’s “conduct has further been found to be unbecoming as an MP for accepting gifts and illegal gratification from a businessman to further his interest, which is a serious misdemeanour and highly deplorable conduct” on her part.

    Earlier, ethics committee Chairman Vinod Kumar Sonkar had tabled the first report of the panel on a complaint filed by Bharatiya Janata Party MP Nishikant Dubey against Moitra.

    In October last year, Dubey, on the basis of a complaint submitted by Supreme Court lawyer Jai Anant Dehadrai, alleged that Moitra had asked questions in the Lok Sabha in exchange for cash and gifts from businessman Darshan Hiranandani to mount an attack on industrialist Gautam Adani and Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

    In an affidavit to the ethics committee on October 19, last year, Hiranandani claimed that Moitra had provided him with her login ID and password for the Lok Sabha members’ website.

    The Central Bureau of Investigation has already filed a preliminary FIR in the case.

  • Man loses building complex worth Rs 1.25 crore to daughter-in-law after son abandons her

    By Online Desk

    Marriages are made in heaven they say but unfortunately many married couples go through hell.

    One such case involving Varun Gopal and Shilpi Shrivastava has just been decided — in the wife’s favour. In this case, the Supreme Court has directed the Registrar of the Delhi High Court to sell six shops in a building complex belonging to Varun’s father and deposit the money in a fixed deposit to pay maintenance to his wife Shilpi.

    The directive came after Shilpi, a native of Chhattisgarh, approached the court seeking nearly Rs 1.25 crore in arrears from her husband, who separated from her around eight years ago after a two-year marriage. Varun married again in Australia after getting an ex-parte divorce in that country. He has two kids from his second marriage.

    Two years after the split, the woman won monthly maintenance of Rs 1 lakh from her husband from a family court in Bilaspur.

    She also later started criminal proceedings related to cheating against her husband and his family, prompting Varun to file for anticipatory bail. When anticipatory bail was denied to the husband, he refused to attend hearings about maintenance payments in India.

    However, Varun’s father Mohan Gopal was arrested in connection with the criminal proceedings initiated by Shilpa and spent ten months in jail in 2018-19.

    The next year, she got the Chhattisgarh High Court to raise the maintenance amount to Rs 1.27 lakh, arguing that Varun was earning Rs 4.25 lakh per month and that she deserved 30% of it.

    She successfully argued that the sum of Rs 1 lakh a month was not “befitting to the status, the respondent had enjoyed, when she was living with the applicant [husband].”

    The case again reached the Supreme Court when the wife could not obtain the maintenance of Rs 1.27 lakh per month and the arrears.

    The wife asked the Supreme Court to transfer several of the shops owned by the father-in-law to her name so that she can live off the rent generated by them.

    She argued that if she had got Rs 1.25 crore as arrears of her maintenance, she could have got “Rs 60,000-65,000 per month as an interest” and a rent of Rs 55,000 from the gym located on the first floor of the father-in-law’s building.

    The wife also pointed out that her father-in-law had gone back on his word to transfer to her Rs 1.29 crore as arrears.

    During the hearing in the Supreme Court, the father-in-law argued that he was not responsible to pay maintenance to his son’s wife.

    “..the maintenance order [was obtained] only against her husband which can be recovered from the husband or from his assets. The [father-in-law] is not personally liable to [his wife] when her husband is alive,” he argued.

    However, Justices S Ravindra Bhat and Aravind Kumar would have none of it.

    “The present case – as discussed earlier, has displayed persistent defiant conduct by Varun Gopal, and the petitioner, Mohan Gopal, who have, through one pretext or another stalled compliance with the orders of this court. It is the responsibility of the petitioner and Varun Gopal who are held liable to fulfil the payment of entire sum,” they said.

    Follow The New Indian Express channel on WhatsApp

    Marriages are made in heaven they say but unfortunately many married couples go through hell.

    One such case involving Varun Gopal and Shilpi Shrivastava has just been decided — in the wife’s favour. In this case, the Supreme Court has directed the Registrar of the Delhi High Court to sell six shops in a building complex belonging to Varun’s father and deposit the money in a fixed deposit to pay maintenance to his wife Shilpi.

    The directive came after Shilpi, a native of Chhattisgarh, approached the court seeking nearly Rs 1.25 crore in arrears from her husband, who separated from her around eight years ago after a two-year marriage. Varun married again in Australia after getting an ex-parte divorce in that country. He has two kids from his second marriage.googletag.cmd.push(function() {googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-8052921-2’); });

    Two years after the split, the woman won monthly maintenance of Rs 1 lakh from her husband from a family court in Bilaspur.

    She also later started criminal proceedings related to cheating against her husband and his family, prompting Varun to file for anticipatory bail. When anticipatory bail was denied to the husband, he refused to attend hearings about maintenance payments in India.

    However, Varun’s father Mohan Gopal was arrested in connection with the criminal proceedings initiated by Shilpa and spent ten months in jail in 2018-19.

    The next year, she got the Chhattisgarh High Court to raise the maintenance amount to Rs 1.27 lakh, arguing that Varun was earning Rs 4.25 lakh per month and that she deserved 30% of it.

    She successfully argued that the sum of Rs 1 lakh a month was not “befitting to the status, the respondent had enjoyed, when she was living with the applicant [husband].”

    The case again reached the Supreme Court when the wife could not obtain the maintenance of Rs 1.27 lakh per month and the arrears.

    The wife asked the Supreme Court to transfer several of the shops owned by the father-in-law to her name so that she can live off the rent generated by them.

    She argued that if she had got Rs 1.25 crore as arrears of her maintenance, she could have got “Rs 60,000-65,000 per month as an interest” and a rent of Rs 55,000 from the gym located on the first floor of the father-in-law’s building.

    The wife also pointed out that her father-in-law had gone back on his word to transfer to her Rs 1.29 crore as arrears.

    During the hearing in the Supreme Court, the father-in-law argued that he was not responsible to pay maintenance to his son’s wife.

    “..the maintenance order [was obtained] only against her husband which can be recovered from the husband or from his assets. The [father-in-law] is not personally liable to [his wife] when her husband is alive,” he argued.

    However, Justices S Ravindra Bhat and Aravind Kumar would have none of it.

    “The present case – as discussed earlier, has displayed persistent defiant conduct by Varun Gopal, and the petitioner, Mohan Gopal, who have, through one pretext or another stalled compliance with the orders of this court. It is the responsibility of the petitioner and Varun Gopal who are held liable to fulfil the payment of entire sum,” they said.

    Follow The New Indian Express channel on WhatsApp

  • SC directs for internal panels to report sexual harassment at hospitals, sports institutes, stadiums

    Express News Service

    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday directed to establish internal complaints committees to report sexual harassment at hospitals, nursing homes, sports institutes, stadiums, sports complex or competition or games venues.

    The order came while a bench of Justices S Ravindra Bhat and Dipankar Datta was dealing with a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking directions for the Centre and states to take steps for implementing the provisions of the Sexual Harassment at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH) rules.

    The apex court also said the Centre may consider amending the POSH Rules so as to identify one department and creating a ‘nodal person’ post within it to be responsible for the coordination required in implementing the Act, in order to ensure “greater uniformity in the implementation of the Act across the country.”

    In the judgement, the top court also issued directions for the better implementation of the POSH Act, including the Women and Child Development Ministry of every State/UT, to consider identifying a ‘nodal person’ within the Department, to oversee and aid in coordination as contemplated under the POSH Act

    Principal Secretary of the State/UT, and the Centre, will personally ensure appointment of a district officer in each district within their territorial jurisdiction, as contemplated under Section 5 within four weeks of the judgment, it said.

    The appointed district officers shall ensure the contact details of these nodal officers, and Local complaint committees shall be forwarded to the nodal person within the State Government by six weeks from the judgment

     A circular/bulletin containing names of all district officers, and their contact details (phone, address, and email), along with a district wise chart of the various nodal officers and their contact details shall be available online, it was directed.

    District Officers and LCs should be mandatorily trained and be sensitised to the nature of sexual harassment, the gendered interactions that occur in the workspace, it said.

    Further it said, State/UT Governments, and Union Government to set out the financial resources allocated or needed, to develop educational, communication and training material for spreading awareness of the provisions of this Act to the public.

    The court asked the Centre to ensure that it’s Handbook for implementation of POSH Act is circulated among district and remote level officers. Follow The New Indian Express channel on WhatsApp

    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday directed to establish internal complaints committees to report sexual harassment at hospitals, nursing homes, sports institutes, stadiums, sports complex or competition or games venues.

    The order came while a bench of Justices S Ravindra Bhat and Dipankar Datta was dealing with a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking directions for the Centre and states to take steps for implementing the provisions of the Sexual Harassment at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH) rules.

    The apex court also said the Centre may consider amending the POSH Rules so as to identify one department and creating a ‘nodal person’ post within it to be responsible for the coordination required in implementing the Act, in order to ensure “greater uniformity in the implementation of the Act across the country.”googletag.cmd.push(function() {googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-8052921-2’); });

    In the judgement, the top court also issued directions for the better implementation of the POSH Act, including the Women and Child Development Ministry of every State/UT, to consider identifying a ‘nodal person’ within the Department, to oversee and aid in coordination as contemplated under the POSH Act

    Principal Secretary of the State/UT, and the Centre, will personally ensure appointment of a district officer in each district within their territorial jurisdiction, as contemplated under Section 5 within four weeks of the judgment, it said.

    The appointed district officers shall ensure the contact details of these nodal officers, and Local complaint committees shall be forwarded to the nodal person within the State Government by six weeks from the judgment

     A circular/bulletin containing names of all district officers, and their contact details (phone, address, and email), along with a district wise chart of the various nodal officers and their contact details shall be available online, it was directed.

    District Officers and LCs should be mandatorily trained and be sensitised to the nature of sexual harassment, the gendered interactions that occur in the workspace, it said.

    Further it said, State/UT Governments, and Union Government to set out the financial resources allocated or needed, to develop educational, communication and training material for spreading awareness of the provisions of this Act to the public.

    The court asked the Centre to ensure that it’s Handbook for implementation of POSH Act is circulated among district and remote level officers. Follow The New Indian Express channel on WhatsApp

  • Money laundering case: SC extends Satyendar Jain’s medical interim bail by five weeks

    Express News Service

    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has allowed five weeks’ extension on the interim bail plea granted to former Delhi Minister Satyendar Jain on medical grounds in an ED-registered money laundering case.

    The relief was given by the bench of Justices A.S. Bopanna and Bela M. Trivedi after Jain’s counsel and senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi submitted that his client had undergone a spine surgery on July 21 and needed time to recover.

    Representing the central agency, Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju, did not oppose the submission.

    Raju said, ED wanted its application seeking independent evaluation of Jain by All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) or any other hospital to be heard on the next date.

    Accordingly, the matter adjourned for next hearing after five weeks.

    AAP senior leader Satyendra Kumar Jain was earlier granted an extension of his medical interim bail from July 10 till July 24.

    On May 26, the apex court granted interim bail to the former Minister for six weeks on medical grounds, saying a citizen had a right to receive treatment of his choice in a private hospital at his own expense.

    Jain had been arrested by the Enforcement Directorate in the case on May 30 last year and is accused of having laundered money through four companies allegedly linked to him.

    As per an earlier trial court order, “Jain is the conceptualizer, visualizer and executor of the entire operation and his being aided and abated by Vaibhav Jain and Ankush Jain (co-accused persons in the case).”

    “The fact that Satyendar Kumar Jain wrote a letter to income tax authorities to adjust his demand of tax against the tax deposited by Vaibhav Jain and Ankush Jain shows their close complicity,” as per the central agency’s argument.

    The order contended that “the plea of Satyendar Kumar Jain that he was not found in physical possession of any property needs to be rejected out-rightly as for the offence of money laundering the physical possession of proceeds of crime is not necessary. Similarly, the fact that shares so acquired were transferred back to Vaibhav Jain and Ankush Jain will also make no difference as it may again be done to conceal the proceeds of crime or projected as a untainted money.” Follow The New Indian Express channel on WhatsApp

    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has allowed five weeks’ extension on the interim bail plea granted to former Delhi Minister Satyendar Jain on medical grounds in an ED-registered money laundering case.

    The relief was given by the bench of Justices A.S. Bopanna and Bela M. Trivedi after Jain’s counsel and senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi submitted that his client had undergone a spine surgery on July 21 and needed time to recover.

    Representing the central agency, Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju, did not oppose the submission.googletag.cmd.push(function() {googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-8052921-2’); });

    Raju said, ED wanted its application seeking independent evaluation of Jain by All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) or any other hospital to be heard on the next date.

    Accordingly, the matter adjourned for next hearing after five weeks.

    AAP senior leader Satyendra Kumar Jain was earlier granted an extension of his medical interim bail from July 10 till July 24.

    On May 26, the apex court granted interim bail to the former Minister for six weeks on medical grounds, saying a citizen had a right to receive treatment of his choice in a private hospital at his own expense.

    Jain had been arrested by the Enforcement Directorate in the case on May 30 last year and is accused of having laundered money through four companies allegedly linked to him.

    As per an earlier trial court order, “Jain is the conceptualizer, visualizer and executor of the entire operation and his being aided and abated by Vaibhav Jain and Ankush Jain (co-accused persons in the case).”

    “The fact that Satyendar Kumar Jain wrote a letter to income tax authorities to adjust his demand of tax against the tax deposited by Vaibhav Jain and Ankush Jain shows their close complicity,” as per the central agency’s argument.

    The order contended that “the plea of Satyendar Kumar Jain that he was not found in physical possession of any property needs to be rejected out-rightly as for the offence of money laundering the physical possession of proceeds of crime is not necessary. Similarly, the fact that shares so acquired were transferred back to Vaibhav Jain and Ankush Jain will also make no difference as it may again be done to conceal the proceeds of crime or projected as a untainted money.” Follow The New Indian Express channel on WhatsApp

  • ‘Same-sex marriage will one day become reality,’ says India’s fastest woman Dutee Chand

    By PTI

    BHUBANESWAR: India’s fastest woman Dutee Chand has expressed optimism that same-sex marriage will become a reality one day.

    Chand made the remark while expressing her views on the apex court’s judgment on the legality of same-sex marriage.

    A five-judge constitution bench of the Supreme Court on Tuesday unanimously refused to accord legal recognition to same-sex marriage under the Special Marriage Act, ruling that it is within Parliament’s ambit to change the law for validating such union.

    “The Supreme Court has not prevented same-sex persons from staying together. As the country has no such legislation for marriage between same-sex persons, the SC did not interfere in it,” she said.

    “We are optimistic that the central government and Parliament will certainly consider the case and make a proper legislation for the marriage between same-sex persons in future,” Chand said.

    Dutee, who had no hesitation in revealing that she was in a relation with her partner for five years, said they love each other and decided to stay and get married.

    She said the marriage between same-sex should not be seen in terms of urban-rural, upper-lower, caste, creed or religion.

    “It is a problem of humanity and all should get proper rights in life,” she said.

    On her optimism for legal status for same-sex marriage, Dutee said, “Was there any such provision of widow marriage in India? The same-sex marriage will one day be allowed in the country,” she argued.

    ALSO READ | SC refuses to legalise same-sex marriage; CJI says right to enter union includes right to choose partner, its recognition

    Meera Parida, a transgender activist affiliated to the ruling BJD, said, “The Supreme Court judgment on same-sex marriage should be viewed positively. The court has no objection to transgenders staying together. Though marriage is not a fundamental right, it according to me is something more than that. LGBTQs should get rights to marry in the world’s biggest democracy like India.”

    She explained that even after staying together for years, one cannot get insurance and pension benefits.

    The civil society should consider these issues also, she added.

    “What is wrong if two adults stay together as partners for life,” she asked.

    LGBTQIA+ stands for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, questioning, intersex, pansexual, two-spirit, asexual and ally persons. Follow The New Indian Express channel on WhatsApp

    BHUBANESWAR: India’s fastest woman Dutee Chand has expressed optimism that same-sex marriage will become a reality one day.

    Chand made the remark while expressing her views on the apex court’s judgment on the legality of same-sex marriage.

    A five-judge constitution bench of the Supreme Court on Tuesday unanimously refused to accord legal recognition to same-sex marriage under the Special Marriage Act, ruling that it is within Parliament’s ambit to change the law for validating such union.googletag.cmd.push(function() {googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-8052921-2’); });

    “The Supreme Court has not prevented same-sex persons from staying together. As the country has no such legislation for marriage between same-sex persons, the SC did not interfere in it,” she said.

    “We are optimistic that the central government and Parliament will certainly consider the case and make a proper legislation for the marriage between same-sex persons in future,” Chand said.

    Dutee, who had no hesitation in revealing that she was in a relation with her partner for five years, said they love each other and decided to stay and get married.

    She said the marriage between same-sex should not be seen in terms of urban-rural, upper-lower, caste, creed or religion.

    “It is a problem of humanity and all should get proper rights in life,” she said.

    On her optimism for legal status for same-sex marriage, Dutee said, “Was there any such provision of widow marriage in India? The same-sex marriage will one day be allowed in the country,” she argued.

    ALSO READ | SC refuses to legalise same-sex marriage; CJI says right to enter union includes right to choose partner, its recognition

    Meera Parida, a transgender activist affiliated to the ruling BJD, said, “The Supreme Court judgment on same-sex marriage should be viewed positively. The court has no objection to transgenders staying together. Though marriage is not a fundamental right, it according to me is something more than that. LGBTQs should get rights to marry in the world’s biggest democracy like India.”

    She explained that even after staying together for years, one cannot get insurance and pension benefits.

    The civil society should consider these issues also, she added.

    “What is wrong if two adults stay together as partners for life,” she asked.

    LGBTQIA+ stands for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, questioning, intersex, pansexual, two-spirit, asexual and ally persons. Follow The New Indian Express channel on WhatsApp