Yuva Sai Sagar

Online news channel!

Tag: bombay-high

No clue about Prof G N Saibaba’s health: Family

In June last year, the Mumbai police had arrested him for his alleged links with Maoists, after questioning him more than four times at his residence. A division bench headed by Bombay high Court Chief Justice had granted interim bail.

Prabhati Nayak Mishra
Info

<!– –>

0
0
0

TOP
<!– /.block –>TOP <!– /.block –>
<</h2>
Forest panel stalls clearance for three coal mines owned by PSUs <!– /.block –>
<!– /.block –>
<!– /.block –>
Also ReadIndiaBJP has a ball over Congress blooperIndiaGurgaon girl kidnapped outside her college, freed after 7 hoursIndiaBMC cracks whip on officials who failed it in Bombay High CourtIndiaTwo South Mumbai women seek medical help for excessive shoppingIndiaCentre contradicting own stand on DDCA probe: AAPIndiaTamil Nadu elections: DMK chief Karunanidhi extends hand of friendship to Congress for alliance <!– /.block –>

<!– /#sidebar-second –>Forest panel stalls clearance for three coal mines owned by PSUs<!– /.block –> <!– /#content_bottom –>
<!– /11440465/DNA_Article_Desktop_970x90_BTF –><!– /.block –><!– /11440465/DNA_Article_Tablet_728x90_BTF –><!– /.block –> <!– /#bottom_bar –>

<!– footer start –>

Partner site: Zee News
©2015 Diligent Media Corporation Ltd.

<!– footer end –>

Forest panel stalls clearance for three coal mines owned by PSUs

The ministry’s expert panel said that even this project involves chopping down a sizeable; 14,698 trees that will show significant impact on flora and fauna of the area. The panel has thus asked for re submission of the proposal with additional details such density of forest and details of compensatory afforestation.

dna Correspondent

<!– –>

0
0
0

TOP
<!– /.block –>TOP <!– /.block –>
<</h2>
Maneka Gandhi reveals plan to modernise anganwadis <!– /.block –>
<!– /.block –>
<!– /.block –>
Also ReadIndiaBJP has a ball over Congress blooperIndiaGurgaon girl kidnapped outside her college, freed after 7 hoursIndiaBMC cracks whip on officials who failed it in Bombay High CourtIndiaTwo South Mumbai women seek medical help for excessive shoppingIndiaCentre contradicting own stand on DDCA probe: AAPIndiaTamil Nadu elections: DMK chief Karunanidhi extends hand of friendship to Congress for alliance <!– /.block –>

<!– /#sidebar-second –>Maneka Gandhi reveals plan to modernise anganwadis<!– /.block –> <!– /#content_bottom –>
<!– /11440465/DNA_Article_Desktop_970x90_BTF –><!– /.block –><!– /11440465/DNA_Article_Tablet_728x90_BTF –><!– /.block –> <!– /#bottom_bar –>

<!– footer start –>

Partner site: Zee News
©2015 Diligent Media Corporation Ltd.

<!– footer end –>

Maneka Gandhi reveals plan to modernise anganwadis

Gandhi also said that she has written to the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) to include more than one bogey for women in metro trains. “The trains are very crowded, and with the women’s bogey being the first in a train, it is a bit difficult for them,” she said. She said that she has written to ask for three bogies in longer trains and two in smaller ones. “Another scheme I really want to see take off is free bus passes for women over 60,” she said.

dna Correspondent

<!– –>

0
0
0

TOP
<!– /.block –>TOP <!– /.block –>
<</h2>
AAP leader’s badly mutilated body found in Delhi <!– /.block –>
<!– /.block –>
<!– /.block –>
Also ReadIndiaBJP has a ball over Congress blooperIndiaGurgaon girl kidnapped outside her college, freed after 7 hoursIndiaBMC cracks whip on officials who failed it in Bombay High CourtIndiaTwo South Mumbai women seek medical help for excessive shoppingIndiaCentre contradicting own stand on DDCA probe: AAPIndiaTamil Nadu elections: DMK chief Karunanidhi extends hand of friendship to Congress for alliance <!– /.block –>

<!– /#sidebar-second –>Old barracks, police library and vehicle dump yard gave way for new building<!– /.block –>AAP leader’s badly mutilated body found in Delhi<!– /.block –> <!– /#content_bottom –>
<!– /11440465/DNA_Article_Desktop_970x90_BTF –><!– /.block –><!– /11440465/DNA_Article_Tablet_728x90_BTF –><!– /.block –> <!– /#bottom_bar –>

<!– footer start –>

Partner site: Zee News
©2015 Diligent Media Corporation Ltd.

<!– footer end –>

Bombay HC cancels DU professor Saibaba’s bail, issues contempt notice to writer Arundhati Roy

“);
}
$(‘.social-sticky’).addClass(‘sticky-social-top’);
}else{
$(‘.social-sticky’).removeClass(‘sticky-social-top’);
$(‘.social-sticky’).html(shtml);
}
});
}

Saibaba was arrested in May 2014 by Gadchiroli police of Maharashtra for alleged active links with Maoists.
File Photo
PTI
The Nagpur bench of Bombay High Court on Wednesday rejected the regular bail application filed by the Delhi University professor G N Saibaba, arrested for alleged links with the Naxals, and directed him to surrender within 48 hours.Taking a serious view of criticism of the judiciary by Booker prize-winner writer Arundhati Roy in her article about the professor, Justice Arun Choudhary also issued a criminal contempt notice to her which is returnable by January 25. Justice Chaudhary, while dismissing the bail application, declined the request to grant more time to Saibaba to surrender and directed the police to arrest him if he failed to turn up within two days.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The High Court cited a medical report which clearly stated that proper medical aid was extended to Saibaba by the doctors when he was lodged in the Nagpur prison. The lawyers of wheelchair-bound Saibaba had pleaded for extension of bail on the ground of his health.The judge also rejected the argument that the evidence against him was very weak, and stated noted that earlier a single bench had rejected the bail application on merit, and that he will not take a divergent view. Saibaba was arrested in May 2014 by Gadchiroli police of Maharashtra for alleged active links with Maoists.Pournima Upadhyay, an activist, had written a letter to the Chief Justice of Bombay High Court which was treated as PIL and thereafter temporary bail was granted to Saibaba for three months on health grounds by the Principal Bench of High Court in Mumbai.

JD(U) MP KC Tyagi seeks action against Baba Ramdev’s Patanjali

The Uttarakhand government, he said, had found an Ayurvedic ‘son-bearing’ medicine sold by Baba Ramdev’s pharma company fake but no action was taken.

JD(U) MLA KC Tyagi

A demand for action against yoga guru Baba Ramdev’s Patanjali pharma company for selling products like noodles and pasta without the food regulator’s approval was made in the Rajya Sabha on Thursday.Raising the issue through a Zero Hour mention, KC Tyagi (JD-U) also raised questions over why no appeal was filed in the Supreme Court against the Bombay High Court order lifting restrictions on sale of popular noodles Maggi.Describing the two as the new “Dabangs”, he said no action has been taken despite FSSAI finding faults with their products. He alleged that Patanjali noodles and pasta are being sold without the approval of the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI).<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Uttarakhand government, he said, had found an Ayurvedic ‘son-bearing’ medicine sold by Baba Ramdev’s pharma company fake but no action was taken.”He (Baba Ramdev) poses as if he is very close to Prime Minister Narendra Modi. He openly claims that he has helped with ‘tan, man and dhan’ (physically, mentally and monetarily) in formation of the BJP government,” Tyagi alleged.Similarly, the verdict of Bombay High Court in the Maggi case was accepted. “Why was no appeal made to the Supreme Court,” the JD(U) leader said and remarked “daal mein kuchh kala hai” (there is something fishy).

Mumbai: Fabrication artist behind double murder?

Two bodies found in Kandivli on Saturday identified as those of celebrated artist Hema Upadhyay and her lawyer.

Hema Upadhyay

PTI
The two bodies that were found in Kandivli (W) on Saturday have been identified as those of artist Hema Upadhyay (43) and her lawyer Harish Bhambani (65). Hema was involved in an acrimonious divorce battle with Chintan Upadhyay, a celebrated name in the art world, in the Bombay High Court. The bodies were found in two gunny bags inside two cardboard boxes in a drain near Dhanukarwadi around 7:30 pm on Saturday. On Sunday, the Mumbai police detained three people and questioned Chintan for over six hours. Sources in the Mumbai police told dna that a fourth suspect, a metal fabrication artist called Rajbhar, could turn out to be the key suspect. The police are on the look-out for him.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –> According to sources, Rajbhar is believed to have called Hema, claiming that he has clinching evidences against Chintan, which would help her in the divorce case. “We learn that Rajbhar wanted to meet Hema to hand over some proof against Chintan. Hema then asked Bhambani to accompany her. It seems that they were murdered after they reached the place where Rajbhar was waiting,” said a source.”It looks like that the idea was to kill Hema, but as Bhambani was accompanying her, he became a collateral damage,” he said. The bodies were first spotted by some local sweepers. When they found something amiss, they informed the police. When the boxes were opened, the police found two bodies – one of a male and the other of a female – wrapped in plastic sheets. “Initially, the identity of the bodies could not be ascertained as the murderers did not leave any personal possessions of the victims. Their cellphones, wallets and jewellery were missing,” said an officer from the Kandivli police station. “Bhambani’s hands were tied and his mouth was gagged with a cloth and had a cello tape on it. Hema’s body was just wrapped in a plastic sheet,” he said. The identities of the bodies were ascertained on Sunday. “Both of them were strangulated to death and there are no external injury marks on the bodies,” said an officer. “We have sent the bodies for autopsy,” he said. An officer privy to the investigation said that before leaving his residence in King’s Circle around 6:30 pm on Friday, Bhambani had told his family that he has a meeting with a client in Andheri. Hema left her residence in Juhu on Friday morning and headed straight to her studio in Laxmi Industries off Veer Desai Road in Andheri (West). Around 6:30 pm, Hema made a call to her help, Hemant Mandal, asking him not to expect her for dinner. “The CCTV footage collected from the area of Laxmi Industries Estate establish that both Hema and Bhambani left the studio around 8:30 pm in the lawyer’s Honda City,” said an officer. “Their last cellphone tower location was in the Kandivli area. We have not yet recovered the missing car”. When Hema did not turn up home on Friday night, Mandal made several calls to her. When she did not answer, he approached the Santa Cruz police station and registered a missing complaint on the wee hours of Sunday. Even Bhambani’s family registered a missing complaint with the Matunga police station. As the Kandivli police launched an investigation into the double murder, the Mumbai crime branch also started a parallel investigation. Hema had filed for divorce in 2010, citing domestic violence. The family court had passed a decree in favour of Chintan. But Hema challenged it in the Bombay High Court and Bhambani was representing her. The celebrated artist-couple were in the news in 2013, when Hema filed a criminal case against Chintan for sketching obscene paintings on the wall of their bedroom. “Prima facie, personal enmity seems to be the reason behind the murder but investigations are still on and we are checking for further leads,” the police said.

Salman Khan hit and run case: ‘Faith in judicial system has been shaken’, say eminent lawyers

The Maharashtra government should file an appeal in the apex court as it is a fit case to be challenged, advocate Abha Singh said.

Salman Khan outside Bombay High Court on December 10, 2015.

PTI
Legal experts on Thursday described the Bombay High Court verdict acquitting Bollywood superstar Salman Khan in the hit-and-run case as shocking and said “the faith of common man in the judicial system has been shaken.”Prosecutor Pradeep Gharat, who led the prosecution in the case in the trial court, termed the high court verdict as “shocking”, while leading criminal lawyer Abha Singh said “the faith of common man in the judicial system has been shaken.”<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>”It is shocking, but I will reserve my comment till I see the entire judgement copy,” Gharat, who had secured a five-year jail sentence for the actor, said.The judgement should be challenged in the Supreme Court as the Bombay High court totally reversed the order of the trial court, Gharat said.Lawyer Abha Singh said the High Court could have sent the case back to the sessions court to remove anomalies rather than giving benefit of technical hitches to Salman and acquitting him. Under section 386 of CrPc, the high court has the powers to refer the case back to the sessions court to remove anomalies, Singh added. Also read: Survivors of hit-and-run case against Salman Khan await justiceThe Maharashtra government should file an appeal in the apex court as it is a fit case to be challenged, she said. Singh was of the view that procedural lapses cannot be used to deny justice to the victims. Even the apex court had said this in its judgements, she said.Ashok Singh, family driver of Salman, came to the trial court 13 years after the mishap as a defence witness saying he was driving the car at the relevant time and not Salman, Singh said and asked why the actor had not disclosed this (about Ashok Singh driving the car) when his statement was recorded by police 13 years ago.”Besides, under section 45 of Indian Evidence Act, an expert’s opinion has to be considered as a relevant fact and considered by a court,” she said referring to the chemical analyser’s report on Salman’s blood test for alcohol consumption.”I am surprised that the high court has bypassed the Indian Evidence Act and kept quiet while acquitting the actor”.The High Court, she said, had also held that the testimony of eye witness Ravindra Patil, former police bodyguard of Salman, was not reliable. “This is against the spirit of section 32 of Indian Evidence Act because when a person makes a statement before a Magistrate it is a strong piece of evidence,” Singh said.

Bombay HC verdict is best birthday gift for Salman Khan: Zarine Khan

Zarine, 28, feels the 50th birthday plans of the actor will now be grander.

Bollywood actor Salman Khan walks from Bombay High Court in Mumbai on December 10, 2015, after being acquitted of culpable homicide.

AFP photo
Bollywood actress Zarine Khan, who made her debut opposite Salman Khan in Veer, says the Bombay High Court verdict in 13-year-old hit-and-run case acquitting him is the best birthday gift for the superstar.The Bombay High Court on Thursday acquitted the 49-year-old actor of all the charges, holding that the prosecution had failed to prove he was driving the vehicle after having consumed alcohol in the 2002 hit-and-run case.Zarine, 28, feels the 50th birthday plans of the actor will now be grander.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>”I am very happy for him. This is the best gift he could get for his 50th birthday. They had grand plans for his birthday celebrations which will now be grander for sure,” Zarine told PTI.The actress also appeared with Salman in the song “Character Dheela” from Ready. The Bajrangi Bhaijaan actor, who will celebrate his 50th birthday on December 27, broke down on hearing the verdict and was seen wiping his tears which trickled down.

Salman Khan ‘hit-and-run case’: Here’s why Bhai was found ‘not guilty’

What the Bombay High Court judge said.

File Photo

On Thursday, the Bombay High Court acquitted Salman Khan of all charges of the 2002-hit-and-run case in which he had been earlier convicted and sentenced to five years imprisonment by a sessions court. On September 28, 2002, his car had rammed into a bakery shop in suburban Bandra where one person was killed and four others were injured. What the trial court said in May 2015On May 6, Salman was convicted of culpable homicide and sentenced to five years imprisonment in the 2002 hit-and-run case but was granted interim bail till May 8. He had been found guilty of offences under section 279 IPC (rash and negligent driving), and sections 337 and 338 IPC (causing hurt by acts endangering life or personal property of others). He was also sentenced to jail for six months under sections 181 (driving without licence) and 185 of Motor Vehicles Act (drink driving).<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Judge Deshpande had also rejected the prosecution’s plea that the actor was not drunk while driving and also that he didn’t have a driving licence. “All charges have been proved against you…What you have to say?” the judge asked Salman who was in the dock. “I hold that you were driving the vehicle. You were intoxicated. I also do not agree with your plea that the person who had died had received fatal injuries after a crane dropped the car on the persons underneath while removing it,” the judge said, rejecting the defence’s claim that the actor’s driver Ashok Singh was at the wheel when the accident took place.What Bombay High Court said in December 2015While acquitting the 49-year-old actor in a jampacked courtroom, Justice AR Joshi said, “The appeal is allowed. The trial court’s verdict is quashed and set aside. Salman is acquitted of all charges.” On hearing the verdict, Salman broke down. The actor, who wore a blue-white check shirt, arrived in the court at 1.30 p,m even as the police made a tight bandobast around the high court premises. He was accompanied by his bodyguard Shera, brother-in-law Ayush, sister Alvira and his manager.Justice Joshi, who started dictating the verdict on Monday, said the prosecution failed to establish its case against the appellant accused (Salman) on all charges.Lawyers, litigants and many others had gathered in and around the court to have a glimpse of Salman as he came rushing from a studio in Karjat on the outskirts of Mumbai where he was shooting.The judge said the burden is on the prosecution to establish the guilt of the accused and this needs to be done beyond reasonable doubt. There are various shortcomings by the prosecution like not recording evidence of necessary and important witnesses and omissions and contradictions in the evidence of injured witnesses, which definitely create a doubt about the involvement of Salman for offences for which he has been charged, the court said. On the basis of such evidence, Salman cannot be convicted, it said.The judge further said that the investigation was conducted in a faulty manner with many loose ends and as such benefit of this had to be given in favour of the accused. It is the duty of the court to analyse the evidence submitted to it and to see that the offence is proved beyond reasonable doubt, Justice Joshi said.He said he is of the considered view that the appreciation of evidence done by the trial court while convicting the appellant was not proper and legal, as per the principles of criminal jurisprudence. Consequently it must be said that this is not a case where the prosecution has successfully established its charges, he observed, adding that the entire evidence of the prosecution was circumstantial in nature.On the main aspects as to driving and drunkenness, the prosecution has not brought any material evidence which spells out the offence of the accused, the court said. The trial court erred in accepting bills (of Rain Bar and Restaurant where Salman had gone before the mishap) without a panchnama, the judge said while dictating the verdict. In summary: 1. The appeal is allowed. The trial court’s verdict is quashed and set aside. Salman is acquitted of all charges.2. The prosecution failed to establish its case against the appellant-accused (Salman) on all charges. The burden is on the prosecution to establish the guilt of the accused and this needs to be done beyond reasonable doubt.3. There are various shortcomings by the prosecution like not recording evidence of necessary and important witnesses and omissions.4. There are contradictions in the evidence of injured witnesses, which definitely create a doubt about the involvement of Salman for offences for which he has been charged. On the basis of such evidence, Salman cannot be convicted.5. The investigation was conducted in a faulty manner with many loose ends and as such, benefit of this had to be given in favour of the accused.6. The trial court erred in accepting bills (of Rain Bar and Restaurant where Salman had gone before the mishap) without a panchnama, 7. The judge said he is of the considered view that the appreciation of evidence done by the trial court while convicting the appellant was not proper and legal, as per the principles of criminal jurisprudence.Salman Khan case time-line: September 2002: Salman Khan’s car runs over five people sleeping on a Mumbai street killing a homeless man and injuring four others. October 2002: Khan charged with culpable homicide not amounting to murder was arrested but granted bail. May 2003: Court rejects Salman Khan’s plea to drop culpable homicide charge.June 2003: Bombay High Court drops culpable homicide charge and instead, he is tried for rash and negligent driving. October 2007: Ravindra Patil, the prime witness dies .March 2015: Salman Khan tells the court that he was drunk and his driver was behind the wheel. May 2015: Salman Khan is found guilty and given a five-year sentence by a trial court. December 2015: Salman Khan is acquitted of all charges.

Salman Khan hit and run case: Here’s what the judge said while delivering the verdict

The Bombay High Court on Thursday acquitted Bollywood star Salman Khan of all charges in the 2002 hit-and-run case.

The Bombay High Court on Thursday acquitted Bollywood star Salman Khan of all charges in the 2002 hit-and-run case in which he had been earlier convicted and sentenced to five years imprisonment by a sessions court.On September 28, 2002, Salman’s car had rammed into a bakery shop in suburban Bandra. One person was killed and four others were injured in the mishap.Here is what Justice A R Joshi said:<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>1) The appeal is allowed. The trial court’s verdict is quashed and set aside. Salman is acquitted of all charges.2) The prosecution failed to establish its case against the appellant-accused (Salman) on all charges. The burden is on the prosecution to establish the guilt of the accused and this needs to be done beyond reasonable doubt.3) There are various shortcomings by the prosecution like not recording evidence of necessary and important witnesses and omissions.4) There are contradictions in the evidence of injured witnesses, which definitely create a doubt about the involvement of Salman for offences for which he has been charged. On the basis of such evidence, Salman cannot be convicted.5) The investigation was conducted in a faulty manner with many loose ends and as such, benefit of this had to be given in favour of the accused.6) The trial court erred in accepting bills (of Rain Bar and Restaurant where Salman had gone before the mishap) without a panchnama, 7) The judge said he is of the considered view that the appreciation of evidence done by the trial court while convicting the appellant was not proper and legal, as per the principles of criminal jurisprudence.Also Read: All you need to know about Salman Khan hit-and-run case

2002 hit-and-run case: Fans rejoice Salman Khan’s acquittal

“It’s a big reason for happiness for us. He is an honest person. We are happy for him. Our prayers are with him,” added another fan.

Salman Khan’s fans on Thursday expressed their delight over the Bombay High Court’s decision to quash all the charges against him in the 2002 hit-and-run case and described the Bollywood actor as a very good ‘human being’.”Salman Khan is a very good human being. It’s good that he got acquitted. I watch his movies. I am waiting in front of his house to see him. I am very happy that he got acquitted,” said one of his fans.”It’s a big reason for happiness for us. He is an honest person. We are happy for him. Our prayers are with him,” added another fan.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Meanwhile, scores of fans of the ‘Dabangg’ actor have gathered outside his Galaxy apartment in Mumbai to celebrate his acquittal.The Bombay High Court earlier quashed all the charges against Salman in this case.The High Court said that on basis of evidences produced by the prosecution, the appellant cannot be convicted, no matter how differently the common man thinks.Pronouncing the verdict, Justice AR Joshi observed that the prosecution has failed to establish the case against Salman.The High Court also observed that appreciation of evidence by trial court is not proper according to principles of jurisprudence. There has been a faulty manner to establish procedure for connecting chain of evidence with regard to biological evidence, the High Court added.The actor was convicted of all charges by a sessions court earlier this year in the case relating to 2002 when Salman’s Toyota Land Cruiser had crashed into five men sleeping outside a bakery on Hill Road in Bandra in the early hours of September 28. One person was killed and four others were injured.

Congress demand to sack ministers Sudhir Mungantiwar, Vinod Tawde ‘childish’: Maharashtra BJP

“The two ministers have been made respondents in the PIL filed by a Congress activist and they have not got notices as yet.

Maharashtra BJP on Saturday termed the opposition Congress’s demand for sacking Finance Minister Sudhir Mungantiwar and Education Minister Vinod Tawde over strong observations by Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court in the sexual harassment case in Government Medical College, Nagpur as “childish”. “Congress’s demand for sacking of these ministers (Mungantiwar and Tawde) following observations of the bench in connection with a PIL on November 30, is laughable and childish,” State BJP spokesperson Madhav Bhandari told reporters here. <!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>”The two ministers have been made respondents in the PIL filed by a Congress activist and they have not got notices as yet.The hearing in the Court is yet to begin and the ministers have not got chance to put their case before the court,” he said. “The Congress is giving its verdict before the court verifies the PIL. This is nothing but making a mockery of judiciary,” Bhandari claimed. He also said even though Makrand Vyavhare, facing charges of sexual abuse, is a relative of Mungantiwar, the government has taken action against him.”The state government has no intention to protect anybody guilty in the case. During the 15-year-rule of Congress-NCP, former Chief Minister Vilasrao Deshmukh to NCP minister Gulabrao Devkar faced allegations of corruption against them. But, their resignations were not taken,” he said. Yesterday, the Maharashtra Pradesh Congress Committee (MPCC) had demanded that Mungantiwar and Tawde be sacked following Nagpur Bench of Bombay High Court’s strong observation against state government on the issue of sexual harassment of a resident doctor at Government Medical College and Hospital (GMCH), Nagpur.

Fund embezzlement: Supreme Court extends Teesta Seetalvad’s protection from arrest

The couple is facing two cases-one is the case by Gujarat police for alleged embezzlement of funds to construct a museum in the name of riot victims and the second was by CBI for allegedly receiving foreign fund illegally.

Social activist Teesta Seetalvad and her husband Javed Anand on Tuesday sought the Supreme Court to expunge the Bombay High Court’s remark against her in the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) violation case.The court issued notice to CBI, which alleged that the couple had received 2,90,000 US dollar fund from US-based firm Ford Foundation illegally through their NGO Sabrang Communications and Publishing Pvt Ltd in 2006 and the money was used against the national interest and communal harmony, was asked to respond to her plea.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>She told the court that the Bombay High Court while granting them anticipatory bail had erroneously remarked that there was “prima facie” violation of the FCRA by them.Meanwhile, the bench, extended till January 31 the interim protection from arrest granted to the couple in a case of alleged embezzlement of funds for a museum at Ahmedabad’s Gulbarg Society that was devastated in the 2002 riots.The couple is facing two cases-one is the case by Gujarat police for alleged embezzlement of funds to construct a museum in the name of riot victims and the second was by CBI for allegedly receiving foreign fund illegally.The CBI has challenged the August 11 order of the Bombay High Court granting anticipatory bail to Setalvad and her husband in the FCRA violation case, claiming the court had erred in giving relief after holding “prima facie” that they had violated the law. While the couple has denied all charges, claiming they are being victimised for taking up the cause of riot victims.

Teesta Setalvad not cooperating in probe: CBI

Seeking cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to them by the Bombay High Court, CBI claimed that “to ascertain whether the amounts were utilised for the purposes prejudicial to national interests, their custodial interrogation was required.”

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has alleged before the Supreme Court that social activist Teesta Setalvad and her husband, Javed Anand, facing probe for illegally receiving funds from the US-based Ford Foundation in violation of FCRA, had utilised the ‘foreign money’ and then submitted a report to the donor firm which was “derogatory, detrimental to the national interests and communal harmony.” Seeking cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to them by the Bombay High Court, CBI claimed that “to ascertain whether the amounts were utilised for the purposes prejudicial to national interests, their custodial interrogation was required.”<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Economic Offence Wing of CBI Mumbai, which has filed an appeal against the high court’s August 11 bail order, alleged that these social activists through their company M/s Sabrang Communication and Publishing Pvt Ltd (SCPPL) had received $2,90,000 from the Ford Foundation in 2006 without mandatory approval from the Centre under the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA).It was alleged that despite the court’s direction to them, they were not co-operating in the investigation.On October 14, Setalvad and her husband were granted protection from arrest by the apex court till December 5 but were directed to co-operate in the investigation.Filing an affidavit on November 27, the agency said, “After receipt of contribution from the foreign source, they submitted information to the donor much beyond the scope of objectives of the company M/s. Sabrang Communications and narrative. Reports were submitted to the donor and information to foreign sources which are derogatory to India and detrimental to national interests and communal harmony.”They knew permission of Central government was required but they conveniently avoided the same and received foreign contributions from Ford Foundation violating the provisions of FCRA and Rule,” the affidavit also said.Further, CBI alleged that despite assurance from Setalvad and Anand to furnish the original documents relating to their company’s income and expenditure about the money $2, 90,000 for the period 2004-2010, they have not supplied any detail till date.”There is absolute non-co-operation from the side of respondents (Setalvad and Anand) in the investigation of this case. They were not prepared to make any disclosure regarding utilization of grant $2, 90,000 received by them as well as the connected relevant records such as cash books, bank accounts of the company from 2004 till date, ledger accounts, original vouchers showing expenditures of grant received from Ford,” the CBI said referring to its November 2, 2015 notice to them.Dismissing Setalvad’s claim that the amount which was received by M/s Sabrang Communication from Ford Founadation was consultancy fee for their professional services, the agency indicated the letters seized by CBI during searches conducted at the office premises of M/s Sabrang in July and said the documents establish that the amount was “grant” received from a foreign firm illegally.The couple also face another case of alleged embezzlement of funds for a museum at Ahmedabad’s Gulbarg Society that was devastated in the 2002 riots

Will explore all legal options: Fadnavis on SC dance bar order

The Bombay High Court on April 12, 2006 had quashed the government’s decision and declared the provision unconstitutional, saying it was against Article 19(1)(g) (to practice any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business) of the Constitution.

Devendra Fadnavis

Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis on Thursday said his government was not in favour of opening dance bars and would explore legal options after Supreme Court asked it to implement its order in this regard.”We respect the Supreme Court’s order. However, we are principally against opening of dance bars. Will explore all legal options including legislative intervention,” Fadnavis said here. Earlier in the day, the apex court asked the Maharashtra government to implement its earlier order on dance bars and decide within two weeks hoteliers’ application seeking grant of licence for running them in the state. The Maharashtra government had amended the 2005 Bombay Police Act, which was challenged in High Court by Indian Hotel and Restaurant Association.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Bombay High Court on April 12, 2006 had quashed the government’s decision and declared the provision unconstitutional, saying it was against Article 19(1)(g) (to practice any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business) of the Constitution. However, the state government had moved the apex court against the High Court’s order that same year.On July 16, 2013, the Supreme Court had upheld the Bombay High Court verdict quashing state government’s order, saying the ban violated the constitutional right to earn a living. The state Assembly had on June 13, 2014 passed the Maharashtra Police (second amendment) Bill which prevented licenses for dance performances in three-star and five-star hotels. The ban also covered drama theatres, cinema halls, auditoriums, sports clubs and gymkhanas, where entry is restricted only to members.Restaurant owners had challenged the law saying many of its members would be forced into prostitution if the state refused to allow dance performances. The state police had cracked down on dance performances in bars for the first time in 2005. Elite establishments, including five star hotels, were, however, exempted.Last month, the Supreme Court had stayed the operation of 2014 amendment in the Maharashtra Police Act that had banned dance performances at bars and some other places, paving the way for reopening of dance bars across the state.

Bombay HC stays Government ban on surrogacy for foreign couples

In an interim order, the Bombay High Court has stayed a Government decision to ban surrogacy for foreign couples who have already reached the end of the process or are in the crucial stage of treatment.

In an interim order, the Bombay High Court has stayed a Government decision to ban surrogacy for foreign couples who have already reached the end of the process or are in the crucial stage of treatment.The interim order was delivered on November 3 by vacation bench of Justice Ravi Deshpande on a petition filed by Dr Mrs Kaushal Kadam and some fertility clinics.The petition had challenged a communication issued on October 27 by Indian Council for Medical Research addressed to all the doctors having fertility centers informing that as per the stand of Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, surrogacy will be limited to Indian married couples only and not to foreigners.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The communication requested the doctors not to entertain foreigners for availing surrogacy services in India.The court ruled that the interim relief granted by it shall be restricted only to the cases which are in the midst of treatment for a period of 15 to 20 days.The HC also asked the petitioners to disclose the details of such cases to the authorities in a sealed envelope and asked them not undertake the process of commissioning surrogacy in respect of foreign nationals which has not yet commenced.The Judge, while posting the matter for hearing on December 15, also directed that such sealed covers would not be opened without prior permission of the Court.Asking the Union Government to file an affidavit within four weeks, the HC rejected its contention that there was no urgency for hearing the matter.”From the avernments made in the petition, it is apparent that petitioners are seeking protection in respect of the process which has already been completed and in cases where the process of commissioning of surrogacy has reached the crucial stage of 15 days ahead of menstrual cycle. They shall therefore be entitled for grant of interim relief,” the judge held.The court also observed that in case of making a change in policy by the Government, prior notices to the parties should have been given, which was not done in this case.

Maharashtra: Kolhapur serial rapist to be hanged, President Pranab Mukherjee rejects mercy plea

Mohan Anna Chavan had raped and brutally killed two minor girls, after serving over 10 years in jail for two other rapes

President Pranab Mukherjee has rejected the mercy petition of a serial rapist, convicted for raping four minor girls and brutally killing two – aged 5 and 10 years. Kolhapur resident Mohan Anna Chavan had first raped a minor girl in 1989, for which he received a two-year jail term and was soon out on bail. Once out of jail, he committed his second rape – of a nine-year-old – the same year. This time, the court sentenced him to 10 years’ rigorous imprisonment. In 1999, he completed his term and walked out of jail, but as a more heinous criminal.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>He soon picked up two minor girls – aged 5 and 10 years – raped them, and killed them brutally. The court termed it as a “rarest of rare” case deserving death penalty. His mercy petition was finally rejected by the President on October 5. “Chavan has already exhausted all possible legal remedies and we expect to get the date for his execution soon,” said a senior officer from the prison department. In 2008, the Supreme Court had first rejected his appeal against the Bombay High Court judgment upholding the lower court judgment, awarding him the death sentence.”Shockingly, a large number of criminals go unpunished, thereby encouraging them … Justice demands that courts should impose punishment befitting the crime so that courts reflect public abhorrence of the crime. The court must not only keep in view the rights of the criminal but also the rights of the victim of the crime and the society at large while considering the imposition of appropriate punishment,” the apex court noted.As per the prosecution, Sangita, 5, and Sheela, 10 (both names changed), were living in Gulamb village in Kolhapur and were studying in the Ist and the 4th standards, respectively. Chavan was their neighbour and lived there with his wife and daughter, who, too, testified in the court as a witnesses against Chavan. On December 14, 1999, Chavan had a scuffle with Tanaji Jadhav, cousin of Sangita and Sheela. He threatened Jadhav that he will settle the issue by the evening itself. Later in the day, Chavan went to a grocery shop with his daughter Reshma. The two girls were also there at the shop.Both Reshma and Sheela asked him to buy them chocolates. On the pretext of not having change, Chavan sent his daughter Reshma home and asked the two girls to accompany him. He then took them to an isolated place and raped them and threw Sangita’s body into a nearby well. He hid Sheela’s body in a bush.When the two girls didn’t return home, angry villagers nabbed Chavan since the girls were last seen with him. Soon, he was handed over to the police and he was convicted on the basis of strong circumstantial evidence.Circumstantial evidence that nailed Chavan in court.The deceased were last seen with him. Forensic report confirmed that the clothes of Chavan were stained with blood Group A, which is the blood group of both the victims Dead bodies of both girls were recovered on his disclosure.

‘New tests find ‘Maggi noodles safe’

Fresh tests mandated by a court in India on Nestle’s popular Maggi noodles find them to be safe with levels of lead well below permissible limits, the company says.

SC to Teesta Setalvad: Non-cooperation in FCRA probe will lead to cancellation of anticipatory bail

A three-judge Bench headed by Justice A R Dave issued notice to the couple asking them to respond to the CBI petition seeking their custodial interrogation and charging them with failing to cooperate in the probe of misusing foreign funds received by them and posing a threat to communal harmony.
File Photo
dna Research & Archives
The Supreme Court on Wednesday told social activist Teesta Setalvad and her husband that their failure to adhere to the conditions imposed by the Bombay High Court may lead to the cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to them in a case where they have been accused of misusing foreign funds.The apex court asked Setalvad and her husband Javed Anand to cooperate with the CBI in its investigation in the case in which their company, Sabrang Communication and Publishing Pvt Ltd (SCPPL), had received Rs 1.8 crore from US-based Ford Foundation allegedly without mandatory approval from the Centre. It orally observed that their “anticipatory bail may be cancelled if they would not follow the conditions imposed by the High Court.”<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>A three-judge Bench headed by Justice A R Dave issued notice to the couple asking them to respond to the CBI petition seeking their custodial interrogation and charging them with failing to cooperate in the probe of misusing foreign funds received by them and posing a threat to communal harmony.Also read: Supreme Court gives relief to Teesta Setalvad, grants interim bail till December 5″It is expected that the respondents (Setalvad and her husband) will adhere to the conditions of anticipatory bail,” said the bench, also comprising Justices F M I Kalifulla and V Gopala Gowda, which also extended the interim protection from arrest till December 5 to the couple in another case of alleged embezzlement of funds for a museum at Ahmedabad’s Gulbarg Society that was devastated in the 2002 riots.During the hearing of the FCRA case which is posted for December 1, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the couple, denied the allegations of CBI that they were not cooperating in the probe and claimed that they have submitted all documents sought by the agency.Solicitor General Ranjit Kumar had alleged that Setalvad and her husband were not cooperating in the probe and had marched to the CBI office in Mumbai in procession carrying placards and chanting all sorts of slogans.Taking note of the Solicitor General’s submission, the bench said, “why do you (Setalvad and husband) want to go in procession. That is the allegation. Don’t go in procession.”You (Sibal) advise your client that they don’t go in procession. You advise them to go with advocates/accountants,” the bench said. The case of alleged violation of provisions of Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) was taken after the bench had extended the interim bail of the couple in the fund embezzlement case in which Gujarat Police in an affidavit accused them of misappropriating funds meant for charity for personal expenses, buying items ranging from wine to mobile phone, besides tampering with evidence.A two-judge bench on October 12 had admitted that it was a mistake to consider extending the interim bail of Setalvad and her husband in the fund embezzlement case by them as it was referred to the three-judge bench.Accordingly, a three-judge bench was constituted to consider the matter, which witnessed heated exchange of words between Gujarat police counsel Mahesh Jethmalani and others including senior advocate Dushyant Dave, who was one of the counsel along with Sibal appearing for Teesta.While Dave was insisting that the interim protection from arrest to them be extended till further order, the bench said it can stay the order of Gujarat High Court ordering custodial interogation till a particular time limit and granted the relief till December 5. However, when the FCRA matter came up, the bench first was of the view that it should be placed before a two-judge bench but Sibal and others pleaded that the matter be taken by the same bench.In the FCRA case, the agency has come out with several grounds to challenge the August 11 order of the Bombay High Court granting anticipatory bail to Setalvad and her husband after it was denied by the sessions court.CBI has sought cancellation of their anticipatory bail claiming that the high court had erred in giving relief after “prima facie” finding that FCRA provisions were violated.While the couple has denied all charges saying they have been victimised for taking up the cause of riots victims, the agency said after ‘prima facie’ holding that there was misuse of funds they had received from Ford Foundation for which they were “undoubtedly answerable”, the high court ought not have granted anticipatory bail by using its extraordinary discretionary powers.

dna Must read: From mild earthquake in Delhi to West Bengal municipality elections results

1) Uttar Pradesh: Protesters clash with police in Mainpuri over alleged cow slaughter, cops’ vehicles gutted

1) Uttar Pradesh: Protesters clash with police in Mainpuri over alleged cow slaughter, cops’ vehicles guttedScores of people held protests and clashed with the police on Friday in Karhal area here following rumour of cow slaughter. People in Nagaria village set police jeeps on fire and damaged several other vehicles as they were agitated over allegation of killing of a cow in the village, police said. Read more<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>2) Mild earthquake hits Delhi, no damage reportedA medium-intensity earthquake measuring 3.0 magnitude on the Richter scale hit the national capital early on Friday. According to the National Centre for Seismology, the epicentre of the earthquake was located in Delhi-NCR and the depth of the tremor was 5 km. The tremor was felt at 1.40 AM across Delhi and its adjoining areas. However, there were no reports of loss of lives and damage to property. Read More3) LIVE| West Bengal Municipality Elections: TMC takes early leadCounting are being held for the municipality elections in Bidhannagar, Bali and Asansol municipality in West Bengal . This is the last set of election in the state before the all important Assembly polls in April- May next year. Read More4) Fed up with ISIS, Azamgarh youth wants to come back homeA 28 year old youth from Azamgarh in Uttar Pradesh is the latest ISIS renegade wanting to escape back home from the war torn Syria-Iraq axis. Sources said the family of the youth shared the information with security agencies after the youth contacted them through phone and showed his willingness to come home. Read More5) Decide on starting casinos: Bombay High Court to Maharashtra governmentThe Bombay High Court on Friday directed Maharashtra government to take a decision within reasonable time on implementation of a four-decade-old law which makes it legal to run casinos in the state. Read More

Sohrabuddin Sheikh ‘encounter’ case: Bombay HC refuses to drop plea challenging Amit Shah’s acquittal

Bombay High Court has refused to drop a plea challenging Amit Shah’s acquittal in Sohrabuddin Sheikh encounter case.Rubabuddin Shaikh, brother of Sohrabuddin Shaikh, killed in an alleged fake encounter in Gujarat, on Tuesday moved the Bombay High Court seeking to withdraw his petition challenging the discharge of BJP President Amit Shah by a Mumbai court in the case. The application was filed in the court of Justice Anuja Prabhudesai seeking to withdraw his petition in which he had challenged Shah’s discharge by the trial court in the Sohrabuddin Sheikh and Tulsiram Prajapati fake encounter killing cases. Shaikh pleaded that he wanted to withdraw the petition as there was some “communication gap” with his lawyer. The Judge posted the matter for hearing after two weeks.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Rubabuddin’s lawyer Vijay Hiremath said, “Rubabuddin has gone to the High Court seeking withdrawal of his petition on his own and has not consulted me. Therefore, I am not aware of the grounds cited in that application for withdrawing the petition.” On December 30, 2014, a CBI Court in Mumbai had discharged Shah in the alleged fake encounter cases saying there existed “no case” against him and that he had been implicated for “political reasons”.The trial court had also ordered dropping of charges of murder, abduction and criminal conspiracy against the BJP Chief.Sohrabuddin, an alleged gangster whom the Gujarat police had claimed to have links to Pakistan-based terror outfit Lashkar-e-Taiba, and his wife Kausar Bi, were allegedly abducted by Gujarat ATS from Hyderabad on their way to Sangli in Maharashtra, according to prosecution in the trial court. Sohrabuddin was killed in the alleged fake encounter near Gandhinagar in November 2005 after which his wife had disappeared and was believed to have died.Tulsiram, an aide of the alleged gangster and an eyewitness to the encounter, was also allegedly killed by police at Chapri village in Banaskantha district in Gujarat in December, 2006.Shah, who was the then Minister of State for Home in Gujarat, was alleged to have plotted the killings with some police officers.He was arrested by CBI in July, 2010 and granted bail by the Supreme Court three months later on October 29 on the condition that he will not enter Gujarat.The Sohrabuddin killing case was transferred to Mumbai in September, 2012 at CBI’s request for a fair trial. In 2013, the Supreme Court had clubbed Tulsiram Prajapati’s encounter killing case with that of Sohrabuddin.

Former ATS chief KP Raghuvanshi and top lawyers welcome verdict, convicts to appeal in High Court

Five persons were sentenced to death and seven others imprisoned for life by a special court here for the serial blasts that left 189 commuters dead and over 800 injured.

Former ATS chief K P Raghuvanshi today welcomed the court verdict in the 2006 serial blasts on Mumbai local trains, saying it had vindicated the efforts of his team of officers which conducted the probe even as the defence counsel said they will appeal in the High Court.”I congratulate all my 15 officers, who had probed the case. The verdict is a vindication of our efforts. I am happy that the court has appreciated the evidence and given an appropriate quantum of punishment in the case,” he told PTI.Five persons were sentenced to death and seven others imprisoned for life by a special court here for the serial blasts that left 189 commuters dead and over 800 injured.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Soon after the quantum of sentence was pronounced, Raghuvanshi arrived at the city sessions court here and said, “I am satisfied with the quantum announced by the court. I would have been more happy had all the convicted been awarded death sentence.””All the claims of people who had accused us of arresting the wrong people have been proved false. With this verdict, police’s credibility has increased. The judgement proves that truth cannot be hidden,” he told reporters.Leading lawyers too hailed the decision of the court.”I welcome the verdict because in this case the evidence was circumstantial and the prosecution was able to successfully prove the guilt of the accused,” said Ujjwal Nikam, a leading public prosecutor who has appeared on behalf the state in many terror-related cases.Nikam said that the court had accepted that there was a criminal conspiracy to create the serial blasts during peak hours in local trains. However, in a criminal conspiracy all the conspirators have an equal role to play and they are also responsible individually and collectively for the terror act.Therefore, all the convicts should have got death punishment.However, advocate Sharif Shaikh, who defended some of the convicts in this case, said, “They have been falsely implicated by the ATS (prosecuting agency). We shall appeal in the Bombay High Court. All those ATS officers who have fabricated evidence in this case will go behind bars.” The case had seen a twist when the defence lawyer sought to call Indian Mujahideen co-founder Sadiq Sheikh as defence witness after he told the police in 2008 that IM members were responsible for all the blasts that happened since 2005 including the train blasts.The court had allowed examination of Sadiq as a defence witness but he later claimed that he gave his confession under duress.Leading defence lawyer Majeed Memon said the verdict was expected to be “harsh” because a serious offence had been committed against the society. However, the death penalty imposed on five convicts would assume finality only after the Bombay High Court confirms the punishment awarded to convicts.

Bombay HC hasn’t stayed circular on sedition, claims Maharashtra govt

The Maharashtra home department on Wednesday claimed that the Bombay High Court had not stayed its controversial circular about the use of section 124-A of Indian Penal Code which deals with the offence of sedition.

The Maharashtra home department on Wednesday claimed that the Bombay High Court had not stayed its controversial circular about the use of section 124-A of Indian Penal Code which deals with the offence of sedition.The court on Tuesday only asked it to file an affidavit on the issue at the next hearing on October 20, an official statement said in Mumbai, adding “the department is working to bring more clarity on the subject”.The circular, which contains guidelines for invoking the stringent section, has been lambasted for allegedly advising the police to press sedition charge ever for a mere criticism of the government. The court had on Tuesday asked the government not to implement the guidelines until further hearing.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Cartoonist Aseem Trivedi and others have challenged its constitutional validity.

Maharashtra govt admits Marathi translation of sedition circular ‘wrong’, to revise document

In a setback to the Maharashtra government, the Bombay High Court on Tuesday directed it not to implement its controversial circular on sedition till October 20 even as the administration said the letter got lost in translation and promised to bring a revised version.

Bombay High Court

dna Research & Archives
In a setback to the Maharashtra government, the Bombay High Court on Tuesday directed it not to implement its controversial circular on sedition till October 20 even as the administration said the letter got lost in translation and promised to bring a revised version.The circular has triggered a row for ostensibly trying to invoke sedition charges for criticising the political establishment. In its order, the division bench headed by Justice VM Kanade asked the state to file a reply to two petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the circular issued on August 27.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The bench said if the state fails to file its reply by October 20, the court would treat these petitions, one filed by famous cartoonist Aseem Trivedi and three others while the other one by advocate Narendra Sharma, as uncontroverted and decide them at the admission stage itself.Close on the heels of the court’s order, the government said that the circular got lost in translation and promised to bring a revised version.”Our view is that the Law and Judiciary department got confused with certain sentences of the order while translating it in Marathi. The Law and Judiciary department has now suggested corrections and soon the revised version of the circular will be presented before the court,” said Additional Chief Secretary KP Bakshi.Explaining the circumstances behind issuing the circular, the bureaucrat said, “the circular that we had issued pertaining to sedition charges was based on the judgement of the (high) court (delivered) in English. But we were then accused of curtailing the freedom of people. We have read the circular and the Home department has nothing to do with the translation. It was translated by the Law and Judiciary department”.He was referring to the high court order earlier Trivedi who was arrested on September 8, 2012, on the basis of an FIR under section 124A and other provisions of IPC for cartoons published on “India Against Corruption” website, and later granted bail. The government later dropped the sedition charge against Trivedi.The circular, which has sparked a row, has laid down certain conditions required to be considered for initiating action against a person under section 124 A of IPC which deals with sedition. Trivedi and others contended that clause 1 and 2 of the circular does not mention the basic ingredients of sedition i.e words (spoken or written), signs or representations must be made with object to overthrow or subvert the government (central or state) established by law by “violent means”, by creating feeling of contempt or hatred or disaffection against it or by bringing or attempting to bring into hatred or contempt towards it or by exciting or attempting to excite disaffection towards it.

Bombay High Court stays Maharashtra government circular on sedition

The Bombay High Court on Tuesday stayed Maharashtra government’s circular on sedition, which says that charges can be imposed on anybody who, by words, signs or visible representation, criticises politicians or elected representatives belonging to the government.

The Bombay High Court on Tuesday stayed Maharashtra government’s circular on sedition, which says that charges can be imposed on anybody who, by words, signs or visible representation, criticises politicians or elected representatives belonging to the government.The petitioner Narendra Sharma had contended that the circular dated August 27 amounts to violation of the fundamental rights of a person and sought the High Court’s direction to quash and set it aside.The circular asks police to bear in mind that the sedition clause of IPC can be invoked against whoever, by “words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representation or otherwise, brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, dissatisfaction and provoking violence” against the central or state government.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>However, the section 124-A will not be invoked against those trying to bring change in government through legal means without hatred and contempt, it said.According to the petitioner, the circular can be misused by the police who may not have appropriate training and requisite experience to understand the consequences of imposing such stringent provisions of IPC.The circular was issued following a direction from the Bombay High Court in March which had taken up suo moto cognizance of the issue following the arrest of cartoonist Aseem Trivedi.Amnesty International had said that a circular issued by the government is “overly broad” and demonstrates why it must be “urgently repealed.”

If rape victim’s statement is reliable, further corroboration not needed: Bombay HC

Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has upheld the conviction of a 23-year-old man for raping a minor girl while observing that if the statement of a rape victim is trustworthy and reliable, further corroboration is not needed.

A division bench of Acting Chief Justice VK Tahilramani and Justice AS Gadkari on September 16 held that the conviction and ten-year sentence awarded by a sessions court to Pandurang Lalasaheb Yadav, a resident of Sangli, for raping a nine-year-old girl was correct.

Representational image. IbnliveRepresentational image. Ibnlive

Representational image. Ibnlive

According to prosecution, on December 23, 2006, the accused accosted the victim when she was on her way home from school. The accused told the girl that her parents were waiting outside his house and hence she should come with him. He then took the girl to a nearby field and raped her.

The girl later informed her mother about the incident following which she was taken to doctor and a case was registered.

“We find that the testimony of the victim is wholly trustworthy and reliable and it does not require any corroboration in support thereof,” the court said.

The High Court also held that the victim’s statement has been corroborated by evidence of her mother and doctor who conducted the medical check.

The HC, while upholding the conviction, took note of a Supreme Court judgement which said, “A victim of rape stands at a higher pedestal than an injured witness. In the latter case, there is injury on the physical form, while in the former it is physical as well as psychological and emotional.”

PTI

Meat ban row: Supreme Court refuses to interfere with Bombay HC order, meat to be sold today in Mumbai

The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to interfere with Bombay High Court order staying the ban on sale of meat in Maharashtra.

The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to interfere with Bombay High Court order staying the ban on sale of meat in Maharashtra.News agency ANI reported, “While refusing to interfere, Bench of Justice Thakur observed that ‘there has to be a spirit of tolerance’.It also observed that ‘these are not issues which can be forced down somebody’s throat.’The Bombay High Court on Monday had stayed the ban on sale of meat on September 17 during the Jain fasting period ‘Paryushan’ ​and refused to interfere with ban on slaughter of animals on that day.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The High Court, which was hearing a petition filed by Bombay Mutton Dealers Association challenging the ban imposed in the wake of Jain community’s ‘Paryushan’ fasting period, said the stay will be limited to Mumbai jurisdiction area.A division bench of Justices Anoop V Mohta and Amjad Sayyed in their order said, “We are staying the ban on sale of meat on September 17, but we are not interfering with the ban on slaughter of meat and closure of abattoirs on that date.” The High Court also observed that though the Maharashtra government issued a circular in 2004 banning meat sale on two days, it was never implemented fully.”Though there was a ban since 2004, it was never implemented in its true sense,” the judges said.The state government had on September 7, 2004, issued a circular stating that for two days during the Jain community’s ‘Paryushan’ fasting period there will be closure of abattoirs and ban on slaughter and sale of meat.”Although the circular was of 2004, we are very clear that the MCGM never fully implemented the ban on sale of meat. It never insisted on this (ban on sale of meat), but only insisted on closure of abattoirs,” the court said.”We are only going by the law and not dealing with this matter via sentiments and political things,” the judges further observed.The High Court also clarified that since the petition has challenged the ban only in Mumbai area, the stay too will be limited to the Mumbai jurisdiction area.

Meat ban row: Bombay High Court stays ban on sale of meat on September 17

The Bombay High Court on Monday stayed ban on sale of meat on September 17 during the Jain fasting period ‘Paryushan’ ​and refuses to interfere with ban on slaughter of animals on that day.

dna
The Bombay High Court on Monday stayed the ban on sale of meat on September 17 during the Jain fasting period ‘Paryushan’ ​and refused to interfere with ban on slaughter of animals on that day.The High Court also said that though the state government circular banning meat sale on two days was issued in 2004, it was never implemented fully.Last week a division bench consisting of Justice Anoop Mohta and Justice AA Sayed said called Mumbai a metropolitan city. They had said that such a straight jacket ban on meat could not be done. “Ban is on slaughter and sale of the meat. What about other sources through which meat can be availed? What about packaged meat that is already available in the market?”<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The court had asked the corporation why it had extended the ban to four days (Sept 10, 13, 17 & 18), when the government counsel clarified that the ban is not a new thing and a two-day ban is being imposed since 2004.The court had also asked if the Jain community had a problem, why a directive could not be issued against open slaughtering and display of meat in shops.The petitioners claimed that the decision is unconstitutional as it affects the livelihood of a section of people and favours a small percentage of population. They also contended that it goes against the secular fabric of Constitution.​Wrangling over the ban on sale of meat, Shiv Sena and Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) took to the streets to protest against it.The Raj Thackeray-led MNS set up a stall to sell chicken meat at busy Dadar area as a symbolic protest while Shiv Sena workers tore off notices put up by Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai.A similar ban has also been clamped on neighbouring Mira-Bhayander and Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporations.Seeking response of the state and the civic body on a plea of Bombay Mutton Dealers Association, a Division Bench of the High Court said imposing a ban on animal slaughter and sale of meat for four days is not feasible in a metropolitan city like Mumbai.

Meat ban now implemented in Chhattisgarh and Ludhiana too

The ban has created an outrage especially in Mumbai and Rajasthan and was strongly challenged by mutton traders.

Representational Image
File Photo

Meat ban has now been imposed in five regions, Chhattisgarh and Ludhiana being the new entrants.The ban on sale of non-vegetarian food has been has been implement in BJP-ruled regions for the Jain festival ‘Samvatsari’ on September 17.The ban has created an outrage especially in Mumbai and Rajasthan and was strongly challenged by mutton traders and opposed by many political parties including the ruling BJP’s ally Shiv Sena.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The orders stated that the ban was imposed as the sale of such items on the occasion may hurt religious sentiments of the people, particularly of the Jain community.The ban would be applicable in Ludhiana at various places, including hotels, meat shops and places serving non-vegetarian food, for a day. In Chhattisgarh, the sale of meat is banned till September 17. The Rajasthan government has prohibited the sale of meat and fish on September 17, 18 and 27 on account of various festivals, including the Jain festival. The Bombay High Court is expected on Thursday to decide on a petition challenging the meat ban in Mumbai. Mutton traders have said that it discriminates against their right to a livelihood. The court said on Thursday, “An eight-day straight ban can’t be a formula. Mumbai is a modern city.”

Bombay HC questions feasibility of meat ban, seeks response from state, civic body

Mumbai: The Bombay High Court on Thursday said imposing a ban on animal slaughter and sale of meat for four days during the Jain festival ‘Paryushan’ is not feasible in a metropolitan city like Mumbai and sought response from the state and the municipal body on a petition challenging it.

Bombay High Court. IBNLive

Bombay High Court. IBNLive

A division bench headed by Justice Anoop Mohta was hearing a petition filed by Bombay Mutton Dealers Association challenging Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation’s (BMC) decision to ban the sale of meat for four days–10, 13, 17 and 18 September–during the festival.

While the ban on 10 and 17 September was as per government’s directives, the Shiv Sena-BJP run BMC imposed it on 13 and 18. The ban covers only the sale of mutton and chicken.

“Mumbai is a metropolitan city. Such straight ban on meat cannot be a formula. Ban is on slaughter and sale of the meat. What about other sources? What about packaged meat that is already available in the market?” the court asked.

The court suggested if the Jain community had a problem with animals being slaughtered in the open and displayed in shops, a direction can be issued against it.

The court posted the matter for hearing on Friday and asked the state government and BMC to file short affidavits.

The court also sought to know from the civic body under which provision of law it imposed such a ban.

The petitioners have claimed that the decision is unconstitutional as it affects the livelihood of a section of people and favours a small percentage of population. It also goes against the secular fabric of the constitution, they have said.

PTI

Bombay HC asks police if Radhe Maa can be charged with obscenity

The Bombay High Court on Thursday sought to know if the offence of indecency and obscenity, as prescribed under the Bombay Police Act, is made out against self-styled godwoman Radhe Maa.

Radhe Maa

dna Research & Archives
The Bombay High Court on Thursday sought to know if the offence of indecency and obscenity, as prescribed under the Bombay Police Act, is made out against self-styled godwoman Radhe Maa.The query was made by the division bench of justices VM Kanade and Shalini Phansalkar-Joshi, hearing a PIL filed by advocate Falguni Brahmbhatt seeking an FIR against Radhe Maa on charges of obscenity, cheating and hurting religious sentiments. Brahmbhatt moved the court after suburban Borivali police allegedly failed to take action on her complaint.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The controversial ‘godwoman’ had opposed the petition and her lawyers claimed that all sermons are given inside a room and hence, it cannot amount to indecent or obscene behaviour in public.”Does the offence of indecency and obscenity under section 110 of the Bombay Police Act stand against her (Radhe Maa) as she (Radhe Maa) claims that it happened inside four walls?” the high court asked.The court had last week directed the city police to file an affidavit stating what steps they have taken regarding the complaints received against Radhe Maa. The police today sought further time of two weeks to file their affidavit.The court, however, granted police only one week and said no further time would be granted. Earlier, Radhe Maa had been in controversy after a 32- year-old woman on August 5 lodged a complaint with suburban Kandivali police alleging that she had instigated her in-laws, who are her followers for many years, to demand dowry.The Kandivali police later summoned Radhe Maa and six others in connection with the case, following which she had appeared before the police.

Watch: Maggi’s #WeMissYouToo ads

Nestle India has releases a series of #WeMissYouToo ads on Facebook amid the ban.

In an effort to plug in the popularity of the much loved noodle brand, Nestle India has released a series of #WeMissYouToo ads on Facebook amid the ban. After the ban was overturned on August 14, the noodles are set to make a comeback in stores by the end of 2015.Along with the ads posted on facebook, Maggie also posted sentimental messaged to all who miss the two-minute-noodle. Read: Bombay High Court sets aside order imposing ban on manufacture/sale of Maggi Noodles in India<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Check out the videos:Maggi: This one is for all our fans! Can’t thank you enough for your support. Share it and keep spreading the MAGGI love smile emoticon ‪#‎WeMissYouToo‬.MAGGI | Menu Cards.
This one is for all our fans! Can’t thank you enough for your support.Share it and keep spreading the MAGGI love 🙂 #WeMissYouToo
Posted by Meri Maggi on Monday, August 24, 2015Maggi: Thanking all our lovely fans for the immense love and support. All we want to say is ‪#‎WeMissYouToo‬. Share this and keep spreading the MAGGI love smile emoticonMAGGI | Neighbours
Thanking all our lovely fans for the immense love and support. All we want to say is #WeMissYouToo. Share this and keep spreading the MAGGI love 🙂
Posted by Meri Maggi on Monday, August 24, 2015Maggi: We are touched by your love and all we want to say is ‪#‎WeMissYouToo‬. Share this and keep spreading the MAGGI love smile emoticonMAGGI | Mom
We are touched by your love and all we want to say is #WeMissYouToo. Share this and keep spreading the MAGGI love 🙂
Posted by Meri Maggi on Monday, August 24, 2015

Maggi row: Despite Bombay HC verdict, will press ahead with Rs 640 cr suit, says govt

New Delhi: Unfazed by the Bombay High Court order quashing the ban on Maggi noodles, Union Minister Ram Vilas Paswan has said the verdict does not alter the grounds on which it has claimed Rs 640 crore in damages from Nestle for misleading advertisement and unfair trade practices.

Nestle India got a reprieve last week from the High Court which lifted the ban slapped by food regulators on nine variants of the popular instant noodles across the country and asked the company to go for fresh tests of the product.

ReutersReuters

Reuters

On behalf of the consumers, the Food and Consumer Affairs Ministry separately filed a Class Action Suit against Nestle India before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) last week, using a hitherto unused provision in the three-decade-old Consumer Protection Act.

Stating that the High Court order would not alter the grounds on which the case has been filed at NCDRC, Food and Consumer Affairs Minister Ram Vilas Paswan said the government would not withdraw its petition.

The case, wherein the Centre has claimed damages worth Rs 640 crore, is likely to come up for hearing tomorrow.

“The decision of the Bombay High Court does not materially alter, either on law or on facts, the grounds urged in our complaint,” Paswan told PTI.

He was replying to a question whether the government would to drop the case against Nestle India in the wake of the High Court order.

The petition has made a case that the trade practices followed by Nestle India were “unfair, deceptive and misleading” and therefore to the detriment to the consumers, he said.

“There is no question of withdrawing our petition against the company. It has been listed before NCDRC for admission and the case is likely to be heard on Monday,” he added.

Nestle, which had to recall the popular noodles brand after orders from the central food safety regulator FSSAI and food regulators in various states, is the first foreign firm in India to face a class action suit.

The Ministry has sought Rs 284.45 crore in basic damages and further Rs 355.50 crore in punitive damages, resulting in total damages of Rs 639.95 crore from the Swiss giant.

The damage claim from Nestle for selling “defective and hazardous” Maggi noodles may rise further as the Ministry said in the petition that it is in the process of “tabulating further damages” and will seek additional damages when further facts and data emerges.

The government also wants Nestle India to pay interest at a rate of 18 per cent per annum till the date of actual payment, while it has also asked the consumer forum to order the company to take remedial measures for wrong labelling and misleading advertisements.

The amount has been proposed to be deposited in the Consumer Welfare Fund of the government.

PTI

Maa takes along cashew, fruit juice

QUESTION TIME | I’m no reincarnation of god, she tells cops * Arrives at Kandivali station in convoy * Cops find many replies to many of 70 questions ‘unsatisfactory’

Radhe Maa at Kandivli police station on Friday
Dinesh Parab
dna
Cashew nuts, fruit juice and supporters could not help self-styled godwoman Radhe Maa from hiding her nervousness and tension on Friday as she faced a volley of questions from Mumbai police in connection with a dowry harassment complaint.Sukhwinder Kaur alias Radhe Maa, who reached Kandivali station along with her trusted followers including Sanjeev Gupta, Choti Maa and her advocate in a case filed by a 32-year-old woman, replied to 70 questions, many which cops termed ‘unsatisfactory’. The police will in the coming days take a call on whether to call her for another round of questioning.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>”She told us that she is no reincarnation of any god and that she only tells her followers to take care of their parents,” said an officer who questioned her.Arriving on station premises in a convoy – herself in a white Fortuner – at around 12.15 pm, Maa was whisked to inside the station by the awaiting cops and taken to the second floor where her statement was recorded by a female sub-inspector. Hundreds of Maa supporters had congregated outside the station, and police had to do barricade the premises to restrict them from gate-crashing.”We quizzed her mainly on questions concerning the case – including since when she know complainant Niki Gupta’s family, etc.,” said senior inspector Mukund Pawar.”A team from Borivli station also questioned Maa for two hours with regard to a complaint filed with them by advocate Falguni Bramhabhatt. Borivli police asked her 28 questions with regards to their case. Since the questioning session went on for hours, she occasionally took to eating cashews and drinking fruit juice which they had brought along,” said another officer.A police vehicle was kept on standby, and the moment Maa left the station at 5pm, it escorted her vehicle till Borivli.The complainant had alleged that Maa instigated her in-laws, who have been her followers for last several years. HC grants her 2-week reliefThe Bombay High Court on Friday granted Radhe Maa interim relief from arrest for two weeks and directed her to appear before the police every Wednesday for investigation in connection with the dowry harassment case. Justice Mridula Bhatkar granted anticipatory bail to her on a personal bond of Rs20,000. A sessions court had on Thursday rejected her anticipatory bail application.

Radhe Maa granted two-weeks interim bail by Bombay High Court

Controversial godwoman Radhe Maa has been granted interim anticipatory bail for two weeks by Bombay High Court.

Controversial godwoman Radhe Maa has been granted interim anticipatory bail for two weeks by Bombay High Court. Self-styled godwoman Radhe Maa on Friday turned up at the Kandivali Police Station in response to the summons issued by the Mumbai Police for questioning with regard to a dowry harassment case.Senior inspector Mukund Pawar said, “Presently I will not be able to tell anything with regard to the case and the statement of the accused as well as of Radhe Maa.”Her statement will be recorded today by police in response to allegations levelled by a 32-year-old woman that Radhe Maa instigated her in-laws, who are her followers, to demand dowry from her, police said.The Kandivali police had last week issued summons to Radhe Maa and other six others in connection with the case filed on August 5 in which the woman alleged that she was physically and mentally harassed by her in-laws for dowry.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>A local court had yesterday denied pre-arrest bail to Sukhvinder Kaur alias Radhe Maa in connection with the case. Also, BJP MLA in Gujarat Vasan Ahir on Thursday said he had written to the state Home department and demanded probe against the controversial godwoman in connection with a case where seven members of a family committed suicide in Anjar tehsil (Ahir’s constituency) of Kutch district in March 2014. Ahir alleged that the family had sold its entire land and given the godwoman Rs 1.35 crores because Radhe Maa had promised them place in heaven if they paid her the money and became her life-time disciples.After realising that they had been duped, they committed suicide, he alleged. Further in Mumbai, advocate Rajkumar Rajhans yesterday filed a complaint with the Airport police station, alleging that Radhe Maa had carried a trishul (trident) with her at an airport and on a flight during her recent travels. Police had not registered any case yet, however.In Thane, near Mumbai, an NGO called ‘Support’ claimed that the high-end car used by Radhe Maa during her recent visit to Aurangabad was purchased using fake documents. It demanded probe by the police and the Thane Regional Transport Office.

Maggi row: Will go through the judgement, before taking any action, says Health Minister JP Nadda

The Bombay High Court today lifted the nationwide ban imposed by Indian food regulators on Maggi noodles, providing a conditional relief to the popular snack’s manufacturer Nestle India Pvt Ltd as it ordered a fresh test of samples in three independent laboratories across India.
File Photo
dna Research & Archives
The government said on Thursday it will go through the judgement of Bombay High Court, which lifted the nationwide ban imposed by Indian food regulators on Maggi noodles, before taking next course of action.Union Health Minister J P Nadda said that his Ministry was aware of the judgement and would like to go into the details and consult the officials before taking further action.”First of all let me go through the details of the judgement. We have heard about it. I would like to go into the detail and see what does the judgement say. Accordingly, after the sitting (meeting) with officials, we will decide about the next course of action,” Nadda said.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Bombay High Court lifted the nationwide ban imposed by Indian food regulators on Maggi noodles on Thursday, providing a conditional relief to the popular snack’s manufacturer Nestle India Pvt Ltd as it ordered a fresh test of samples in three independent laboratories across India. It said that if the fresh tests show that lead content was below permissible limit, then the company will be allowed to manufacture and sell Maggi again in the country.A division bench comprising justices V M Kanade and B P Colabawalla also set aside the June 5 order of the central government’s Food Safety Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) and also quashed the order of Maharashtra’s Food and Drugs Administration (FDA) banning production and sale of Maggi noodles in India and the state, respectively.Both the food regulators had in the impugned orders alleged that lead content in Maggi noodles was beyond the permissible limit and asked the company to refrain from selling all nine variants of its product as it may cause harm to public health. Central food regulator FSSAI meanwhile today said its “doors were never shut” for Nestle India with regard to Maggi. FSSAI also said that an appeal before the Supreme Court is “neither ruled in, nor ruled out” as yet.

Our doors are not shut for Nestle India: FSSAI after Bombay HC ruling

In a major relief to Nestle India, the Bombay High Court on Thursday quashed the orders of FSSAI and Maharashtra food regulator FDA, which had banned nine variants of Maggi noodles in the country.
File Photo
Reuters
Food regulator FSSAI said on Thursday its “doors were never shut” for Nestle India with regard to Maggi, even as the Bombay High Court quashed the central regulatory authority’s ban on the popular noodles brand. Stating that the regulator would decide on its next course of action after studying the High Court order, FSSAI also said that an appeal before the Supreme Court is “neither ruled in, nor ruled out” as yet.In a major relief to Nestle India, the Bombay High Court on Thursday quashed the orders of FSSAI and Maharashtra food regulator FDA, which had banned nine variants of Maggi noodles in the country. The court also said that the principles of natural justice were not followed in executing the ban as the manufacturer was not given a hearing.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Asked about his comments on the court order, Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) Chairman Ashish Bahuguna said, “I cannot say anything till I receive the court orders. Only then we can decide future course of action….Its only if I find I am not in agreement with the court order, if i feel that the court order has not taken into submission of the authority, its only then I will think of going to Supreme court,” Bahuguna told reporters here when asked whether FSSAI would approach the apex court challenging the Bombay High Court order.”Supreme Court option is neither ruled in nor ruled out,” he said.To another query on whether FSSAI’s doors were still open for Nestle and can the company come for fresh testing, Bahuguna said, “Doors were always open to Nestle. Doors were never been shut.”A division bench of the high court has allowed Nestle to go in for fresh testing of five samples of each variant of the noodles at three independent laboratories in Punjab, Hyderabad and Jaipur which were accredited with National Accreditation Board for Testing and Calibration Laboratories (NABL). These samples would be taken out of the 750 samples preserved by the company following the ban.A huge stock of Maggi noodles was destroyed by Nestle after the ban was imposed by the food regulators. If the lead content is found below permissible limits by these three labs, Nestle India will be allowed to manufacture Maggi noodles, Justices V M Kanade and B P Colabawala said. The labs have been asked to submit their report within six weeks.

Indians celebrate Maggi verdict

Indian social media has erupted with joy after it was reported that a court called the ban on Maggi noodles legally untenable.

India Maggi ban ‘legally untenable’

A court in India lifts a government ban on Nestle’s popular Maggi noodles, but orders fresh tests before the product can go back on sale.

Lawyer moves Bombay HC seeking FIR against Radhe Maa

Mumbai: In more trouble for self-proclaimed godwoman Radhe Maa, a petition filed in the Bombay High Court on Tuesday sought a direction to the police to lodge an FIR against her for alleged cheating, obscenity and hurting religious sentiments.

Radhe Maa. Agencies

Radhe Maa. Agencies

Advocate Falguni Brahmbhatt, the petitioner, said she moved the court after the suburban Borivali police failed to take action on her complaint.

“It has been five days since I asked police to take action against Radhe maa. But nothing was done,” she said.

The petition accuses Radhe Maa of cheating innocent people, hurting their religious sentiments, and obscenity. It would come up for hearing in due course of time.

Mumbai police had last week registered a case against her after a woman alleged that Radhe Maa instigated her in-laws to harass her for dowry. Police have summoned the godwoman for questioning.

PTI

Hit-and-run case: Salman Khan falsely implicated by tutored witness, says lawyer

Mumbai: A crucial eyewitness produced by the prosecution in the 2002 hit-and-run case involving Salman Khan, implicated the Bollywood star falsely with a tutored testimony, Salman’s lawyer on Friday argued before the Bombay High Court.

Khan was sentenced to five years in prison by the sessions court in May. He is accused of running over his car on people sleeping outside a shop in suburban Bandra on 28 September, 2002, killing one and injuring four.

Salman Khan. PTI

Salman Khan. PTI

The actor, on bail, has filed appeal in the High Court.

Khan’s lawyer Amit Desai on Friday said Muslim Sheikh, who was among the injured, told the magistrate in 2006 (during the first trial) that he had not seen anyone getting down from the car after the accident.

But he told the sessions court during the fresh trial in 2014 that he saw Salman Khan getting down, Desai said.

“It appears that with age, memory becomes sharper,” the lawyer quipped.

The case was heard afresh by the sessions court after the charge against Khan was upgraded to culpable homicide not amounting to murder.

Alleging that the witness was tutored by the prosecution, Desai said “why do you need to tutor a witness when there are eyewitnesses who are alive and available and not examined?” referring to the singer Kamaal Khan who was in the car with Khan at the time and was never examined.

“A key question still remains to be answered…who was driving the car,” Desai added.

Justice A R Joshi asked the defence and also prosecutor SS Shinde to prepare a list of witnesses in a tabular form and their respective statements, posting the next hearing to 25 August.

PTI

Salman Khan hit-and-run case: SC dismisses plea to transfer case to Delhi

Salman’s appeal against his five-year jail term in the hit-and-run case is currently pending before the Bombay High Court.

The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed the petition filed by the mother of a deceased Mumbai police constable, seeking transfer of Bollywood actor Salman Khan’s 2002 hit-and-run case from Mumbai to Delhi.She also wanted Salman’s bail plea to be rejected. Salman’s appeal against his five-year jail term in the hit-and-run case is currently pending before the Bombay High Court.

Salman hit-and-run case: SC to hear plea to transfer case to Delhi

The plea has also asked for the cancellation of the bail given to the actor.

The Supreme Court will on Monday hear a plea filed by the mother of a deceased Mumbai police constable, seeking transfer of Bollywood actor Salman Khan’s 2002 hit-and-run case from Mumbai to Delhi.The plea has also asked for the cancellation of the bail given to the actor. Salman’s appeal against his five-year jail term in the hit-and-run case is currently pending before the Bombay High Court.

Maggi misled customers, breached trust: FSSAI

The HC was hearing a plea by Nestle India against the food regulator’s earlier directive restraining it from selling nine variants of Maggi and the state government’s order prohibiting their sale.

AFP photo
The Food Safety Standards Authority of India (FSSAI), which has imposed a restriction on the sale of Maggi, informed the Bombay High Court on Friday that snack-maker Nestle India had not acted in a trustworthy manner. The noodle had been banned in the Philippines, argued advocate Mehmood Pracha, who represented the CEO of the FSSAI, suggesting that the company could have made the product safe for consumption in India based on its past experience. The HC was hearing a plea by Nestle India against the food regulator’s earlier directive restraining it from selling nine variants of Maggi and the state government’s order prohibiting their sale.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –> Pracha had brought along with him a few packets of Maggi and claimed that he had purchased them in Delhi on July 22. Alleging that Nestle had not recalled the product from the market, Pracha told a division bench of justices VM Kanade and BP Colabawalla that the firm had failed to follow official directives. The lawyer opened a few packets to show that each of them contained two tastemakers that didn’t have any labels. This is not permitted, he said. The FSSAI accused Nestle of misleading the public with its tagline ‘Mummy, I am Hungry’. Maggi contains lead which is harmful. It is mostly consumed by children, said Pracha, adding that the element, once it enters the system, doesn’t get flushed out. “It stays in the kidneys and lungs.” Countering Nestle’s claim that tests on Maggi samples should have been done using distilled water, FSSAI said that if that was the case, even the process to cook the noodle should also require distilled water. Moreover, distilled water is hazardous to health, claimed Pracha. The court will continue hearing the matter on Monday.

Enforce cap on school bag weight within reasonable time period: Bombay High Court

A division bench consisting of Justice V M Kanade and Justice B P Colabawala were informed by the government pleader that she had not received any instructions with regards to the decision taken and sought two weeks’ time for the same.
Amit Bandre
dna
The Bombay High Court on Thursday directed the state government to implement its decision on reducing the weight of school bags within a reasonable time period. The government, based on a committee report, had earlier put a cap on the weight of school bags – that it should not exceed 10 percent of the student’s body weight.A division bench consisting of Justice V M Kanade and Justice B P Colabawala were informed by the government pleader that she had not received any instructions with regards to the decision taken and sought two weeks’ time for the same. The court then said, “We understand that you (state) and schools will need time to implement the decision; but do it in a reasonable time.”<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>However, Swati Patil, who had moved the Bombay High Court seeking a directive to the state government in reducing school bag weight, said: “The government has shifted the onus on to the schools and the parents. This is not the right way in implementing an issue which has serious health implications on the children.”According to the government resolution, parents are also called upon to ensure that the cap on the weight is followed. It is their responsibility to see to it that students only carry books that are essential. The government and schools will also keep a check by weighing bags.As per the government-appointed committee report, children are carrying schoolbags which are 20-30% heavier than what could be carried by children of their age, because of which around 60% students below the age of 10 suffer from orthopaedic as well as stress-induced ailments.Patil, in her public interest litigation (PIL), also produced a certificate issued by a doctor from the civic-run KEM hospital stating that children may suffer from backaches, spondylitis, neck pain, and other orthopaedic problems if they continue to carry heavy bags regularly to school. Further, Patil said that in 2006, the Education department had issued a few rules regarding the same. However, these rules were not implemented as the department then said that if possible the schools can implement them.Meanwhile, parents have expressed delight in the state government’s decision to put a cap on the weight of school bags. Some parents, whom dna spoke to, said the decision will go a long way in reducing the burden of their wards. They also demanded regular monitoring on part of the Education department to ensure that the decision is effectively implemented in toto.

FSSAI justifies Maggi ban; says would give hearing to Nestle

The FSSAI counsel argued that after the lab tests found that Maggi contained lead beyond permissible limit, the food regulator immediately issued order asking Nestle to stop manufacture and sale.

Representational image

Food Safety Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) today justified the ban on Maggi noodles before the Bombay High Court, saying that the popular instant snack contained lead beyond permissible limit.FSSAI lawyer and Maharashtra Advocate General Anil Singh argued that the food regulator had studied the representation of Nestle India (Maggi manufacturer) and was ready to give the company a hearing.”We have still not revoked our approval to the product….we are ready to hear them and if they are prepared to abide by conditions laid down in law, then they would be allowed to manufacture and sell it in the market,” he said.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The division bench of Justices V M Kanade and B P Colabawalla was hearing a petition filed by Nestle India against FSSAI’s June 5 order banning nine variants of Maggi and Maharashtra government’s order prohibiting their sale.Singh argued that FSSAI had collected samples of various batches of Magge in different states. In all, 72 samples were tested and 30 of them were found to contain lead beyond the permissible limit, he said.To a question by Justice B P Colabawalla, Singh said FSSAI had tested three variants of Maggi.”If three variants were tested, then why should you ban all the nine variants? Also, why only Maggi was selected for the test and why not other noodle manufacturing companies?” the judge said.”From what you say, the quality of 30 samples of Maggi was found to be sub-standard, but 42 other samples were found to be in order,” the judge noted. The FSSAI counsel argued that after the lab tests found that Maggi contained lead beyond permissible limit, the food regulator immediately issued order asking Nestle to stop manufacture and sale.However, it also issued Nestle a notice asking why the approval granted to Maggie should not be cancelled in the wake of such tests, said advocate Singh.”We have not asked Nestle to withdraw the product…we have only asked them to stop production and sale of Maggi,” the counsel said.FSSAI was entitled to ban the production because under FSSAI Act it has powers to do so, he submitted.”We found lead content in 30 samples of Maggi to be beyond the permissible limit and this is dangerous to public health. In such a situation, there was no need to give the company a show-cause notice and hear it. Hence, the impugned order to stop production and sale of Maggi was passed.”FSSAI was not against Nestle India or on inimical terms with it. We are ready to give it a hearing. If it complies with the conditions in law, we have no objection to the company producing and selling Maggi in Indian market,” Singh said.The arguments would continue on Friday.Nestle has argued that a certain batch of Maggi may have contained lead beyond permissible limit but the decision to impose a blanket ban was “unfair and illegal.” The company has claimed that it had tested the product in 2,700 laboratories in India and also abroad and the tests indicated that the lead content was less than the permissible limit of 0.5%.

Plastic-made national flags to be banned soon

“We will soon issue the order banning national flags made of plastic,” a senior Home Ministry official said. There have been complaints that after Republic Day and Independence Day, flags made of plastic are often found lying on roads and gutters.

The government is going to issue an order putting a ban on use, sale and purchase of plastic- made national flags in the country.”We will soon issue the order banning national flags made of plastic,” a senior Home Ministry official said. There have been complaints that after Republic Day and Independence Day, flags made of plastic are often found lying on roads and gutters.In March, the Bombay High Court had asked Maharashtra Government to come up with a comprehensive policy to ensure a ban on use, sale and purchase of national flags made of plastic. The central government had also informed the court that a proposal to ban manufacture of national flags made of plastic was pending.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>”The government should come up with a comprehensive policy. Create public awareness. Like the national anthem and pledge are printed in school textbooks, a message about national flags can also be printed,” the High Court had told Maharashtra Government.

This Maharashtra cop gets an English lesson by the Bombay High Court

Bad grammar can lead to worse trouble than merely low grades at school, a police official discovered recently to his own peril. The Bombay High Court recently rapped this official for insisting on filing an affidavit on his own and not letting the public prosecutor correct his language.

This was during a petition filed by a person challenging preventive detention. The High Court set aside his detention, which was ordered under a stringent Maharashtra law, dealing with druglords, bootleggers and drug offenders. You can read The Times of India‘s report on the judgment here.

Bombay High Court.  Image courtesy- ReutersBombay High Court.  Image courtesy- Reuters

Bombay High Court. Image courtesy- Reuters

So miffed was the court with the police official’s language, that it asked the state government’s principal secretary and the home secretary to take note of the issue.

The judges hearing the case noted that such errors can leave the court with no option but to release the person who was detained. “By their over-anxiety and over-enthusiasm, they (police) should not spoil the matters and cases of the state,” the court said.

From a reading of the affidavit, which was quoted in the judgment, it appears that the court had good reason to be unhappy. Sample this extract from the affidavit:

“I felt that the detenue was likely to released on bail in future therefore before arriving my subjectively satisfaction that detenue is likely to be released on bail this was the particulars relied by me and therefore my subject to sanctification regarding the possibility of the detenue may be released on bail is not the speculation but it is my subject to sanctification that if detenue may be granted the bail by the Hon’ble High Court and detenue is likely to repeat the similar activities prejudicial to the maintenance of public order.”

Peace be upon the souls of Wren and Martin.

Salman Khan hit and run case: High Court allows actor’s plea for translation of documents

The Bombay High Court on Monday directed its registry to submit by July 20 the translation of copies of documents sought by Bollywood actor Salman Khan in connection with his appeal against the five-year sentence awarded to him by a sessions court in the 2002 hit-and-run case.

The Bombay High Court on Monday directed its registry to submit by July 20 the translation of copies of documents sought by Bollywood actor Salman Khan in connection with his appeal against the five-year sentence awarded to him by a sessions court in the 2002 hit-and-run case.Some documents in the case are in vernacular language and the actor’s lawyer Amit Desai had urged for an English translation of these copies so that the appeal could be heard. Salman’s lawyer also filed an application giving a list of “missing” documents in the case. He said if the “missing” documents were not required by the court then he would not press for it, but if they were necessary for hearing the appeal, the authorities may be directed to supply the same.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Justice A R Joshi directed Public Prosecutor S S Shinde and the investigating officer in the case to scrutinise the list given by Salman and ascertain if some documents were missing in the ‘paper book.’ If they find some papers are missing, they have been asked to provide these documents before July 20, when the matter has been posted for further hearing. Salman’s lawyer sought adjournment of the hearing till July 27 as the actor’s legal team would be busy in a Jodhpur court in connection with another case involving the actor, on July 20. However, the HC did not grant a longer date as sought by the actor’s lawyer and deferred the matter by a week. The 49-year-old actor did not come to the court today as he is on bail. His sister, Alvira, who normally comes for every hearing, was also not present. Salman was convicted by a sessions court on May 6 and sentenced to five years imprisonment on various counts, including ‘culpable homicide not amounting to murder’. A man was killed and four others were injured when the actor’s Toyota Land Cruiser ran over them while they were asleep on a pavement outside a bakery in suburban Bandra on September 28, 2002. The HC had on May 8 stayed the execution of the 5-year sentence awarded to Salman in the 13-year-old case and granted him bail while admitting his appeal. Salman has challenged the findings of the trial court that he was drunk and was driving under the influence of liquor. The actor pleaded that the trial court had wrongly convicted him under the culpable homicide charge because he had no knowledge that he would meet with an accident. In the appeal, he has argued that the trial court had failed to appreciate the fact that four prosecution witnesses, including the investigating officer, had said that there were four persons present in the Toyota Land Cruiser when the accident occurred and that it was the family driver Ashok Singh who was at the wheels.Public Prosecutor Sandeep Shinde, though not opposing admission of appeal, had earlier objected to suspension of the sentence and argued that the actor had knowledge of consequences of rash and negligent and drunken driving. Therefore, he had said, the trial court had rightly convicted him under the charge of culpable homicide not amounting to murder.Shinde has said the blood test of Salman revealed there was alcohol content above the permissible limit. Apart from being convicted of culpable homicide, Salman was also found guilty of offences under section 279 of IPC (rash and negligent driving) and sections 337 and 338 of IPC (causing hurt by acts endangering life or personal property of others), which prescribe six months’ jail. He was sentenced to undergo jail for six months under sections 181 (driving without licence) and 185 (drink driving) of Motor Vehicles Act. Salman was also found guilty under the Bombay Prohibition Act’s section 66 (a) and (b) for which he received two months’ imprisonment and fine of Rs 500. All sentences will run concurrently.

Ex-CJI YK Sabharwal passes away in New Delhi

Justice Sabharwal was CJI from November 1, 2005 to January 13, 2007. He was elevated as an additional judge of the Delhi High Court in 1986 and became its permanent judge in April 1987.

Former Chief Justice of India Y K Sabharwal passed away in New Delhi on Friday evening.73-year-old Justice Sabharwal is survived by two sons Chetan and Nitin. The cremation will take place on Saturday.Justice Sabharwal was CJI from November 1, 2005 to January 13, 2007. He was elevated as an additional judge of the Delhi High Court in 1986 and became its permanent judge in April 1987.From Delhi High Court, he went to Bombay High Court as chief justice before being appointed as a judge of the SC on January 28, 2001.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Justice Sabharwal delivered several important judgements including the verdict in January 2006, that held the dissolution of Bihar Assembly as illegal and unconstitutional.

Suspended professor GN Saibaba accused of Maoist links released on bail

The wheel-chair bound English lecturer was arrested by the Maharashtra police in May, 2014 for his alleged links with top leaders of the banned Communist Party of India (Maoist) and lodged in Nagpur central prison for over a year. His worsening health condition was the main ground for his release, officials said

File image

Suspended Delhi University professor G N Saibaba who was lodged in the central prison in Nagpur after being accused of Maoist links was released on Friday after he was granted temporary bail for three months by the Bombay High Court.The wheel-chair bound English lecturer was arrested by the Maharashtra police in May, 2014 for his alleged links with top leaders of the banned Communist Party of India (Maoist) and lodged in Nagpur central prison for over a year. His worsening health condition was the main ground for his release, officials said.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>”We are satisfied that if Saibaba is not released on temporary bail for medical treatment, then there is a chance that his life will be at risk. This court would be failing in its duty to protect the fundamental right of Saibaba,” a division bench of Chief Justice Mohit Shah and Justice S B Shukre had said earlier. Responding to a petition earlier, the Bombay High Court had felt the need to release him so that his family could take care of him.However, the court had asked him to furnish a personal bond of Rs 50,000 to walk out of the Nagpur central prison. While granting him temporary bail for three months, a division bench of the Bombay High Court, comprising Chief Justice Mohit Shah and Justice S B Shukre had said that if he was not released on bail for medical treatment and supportive care, he could face a risk to his life.The Bombay High Court had taken suo moto (on its own) cognisance of the matter after a news report on Saibaba’s health condition appeared and a letter written by activist Purnima Upadhyay to the court. The court had called for a doctor’s report which stated that Saibaba was suffering from a condition which causes degeneration of his spine.However, the Maharashtra government had strongly opposed granting bail to Saibaba on the ground that he may tamper with evidence or witnesses or may even abscond. “Saibaba is accused of serious charges. He is an active member of banned terrorist organisation CPI (Maoist).We have seized several incriminating material from his laptops and house. He has been charged under various provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act,” public prosecutor Sandeep Shinde had argued. After perusing charges against Saibaba and the charge sheet, the court said, “Saibaba has not been assigned any role that has got anything to do with committing a terrorist act.

In numbers: Nestle India’s Maggi problem

The staggering numbers behind Nestle’s operation to destroy all the Maggi in India.

Bombay HC directs state to shift jailed Delhi University Professor to hospital

The Judges had taken suo moto (on its own) cognisance of the matter following a letter by activist Purnima Upadhyay highlighting the condition of the professor arrested last year by Maharashtra police for his alleged links with Maoists.

The Bombay High Court on Wednesday asked Maharashtra government and other state authorities to shift professor of Delhi University, arrested a year back for alleged links with Maoists, to a private hospital in view of his deteriorating health condition in Nagpur jail.The order was passed by a division bench of Chief Justice Mohit Shah and Justice Anil Menon which asked the head of neuro-surgery department of a private hospital in Nagpur to file a report within a week on the deteriorating health condition of the undertrial professor G N Saibaba.The Judges had taken suo moto (on its own) cognisance of the matter following a letter written to it by activist Purnima Upadhyay highlighting the condition of the professor who was arrested last year by Maharashtra police for his alleged links with Maoists.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>According to the letter written by Upadhyay, Saibaba is 90 per cent handicapped due to post-polio paralysis and is bed-ridden. Issuing notices to the authorities, the HC had last week asked them to file affidavits giving details of Saibaba’s health condition and the status of the investigation against him and also stating whether a charge sheet against him has been filed or not.

Can’t use indecent language for historically respected personalities like Mahatma Gandhi, says SC

New Delhi: The Supreme Court today dismissed the plea of a bank employee who had challenged framing of charges against him for publishing an alleged “vulgar and obscene” poem on Mahatma Gandhi in 1994 in an in-house magazine of which he was an editor.

A bench comprising justices Dipak Misra and Prafulla C Pant said one cannot be allowed to use indecent language for “historically respected personalities like Mahatma Gandhi”.

Ibnlive imageIbnlive image

Ibnlive image

The bench upheld the Bombay High Court’s decision of not quashing charge of sale/publication of obscene books, framed against accused Devidas Ramchandra Tuljapurkar, saying freedom of speech and expression does not allow a person to cross “contemporaneous community parameters” on decency.

The bench asked Tuljapurkar, the then editor of in-house magazine of Bank of Maharashtra Employees Union, to express his point of view before the lower court during the trial.

The court, however, quashed the criminal proceedings against the printers and publishers of the magazine in which the poem penned by Marathi poet Vasant Dattatraya Gurjar was published, saying they have already tendered an unconditional apology.

On 16 April, the apex court had reserved its verdict on the plea of Tuljapurkar, who was made an accused in 1994 for publishing the allegedly vulgar poem on Gandhi, for quashing of his prosecution under section 292 (sale, publication of obscene books) under the IPC.

The court had said it would decide as to whether putting “indecent words” in the “mouth of Mahatma Gandhi” by the poet falls under ambit of freedom of speech and expression or not.

“The issue of linguistic freedom qua Mahatma Gandhi is bothering us. It is a question of statutory or constitutional comfort,” the bench had said.

Referring to the poem ‘Gandhi Mala Bhetala Hota’, written by Gurjar in 1984, Tuljapurkars’s lawyer had submitted that people, who know Marathi, say that the poem is “satirical”.

The accused had approached the apex court against the Bombay High Court order dismissing his plea seeking quashing of his prosecution.

For a first-time offender, the penal provision prescribes maximum two years of jail term and a fine of Rs 2,000.

The poem was published in the in-house magazine of the Bank of Maharashtra Employees Union in 1994. Tuljapurkar, the General Secretary of the Bank Union, has been facing charges of publishing the ‘vulgar and obscene’ poem since then.

Earlier, an organisation ‘Patit Pawan Sanghatana’ had moved the Pune Police alleging that the poem was obscene and lowers the image of the father of the nation.

Later, an FIR was registered at Latur in 1994 under various provisions of the IPC against the poet and others including the bank employees.

The Chief Judicial Magistrate discharged the accused under some IPC provisions but retained the charge dealing with sale and publication of obscene books. A plea was then filed by the accused in the Bombay High Court.

The High Court, on 20 January, 2010, dismissed the plea saying that the words used in certain stanzas “of the said poem are not only vulgar but also obscene and indecent, which will definitely damage the image and reputation of the father of nation, which is nurtured by every citizen of this country”.

PTI

Salman Khan’s bail justified or unusual? Lawyers divided over Bombay HC decision

New Delhi: It took 13 years for a conclusion in the hit-and-run case involving Salman Khan, but Friday’s decision of the Bombay High Court, granting bail to the actor after he was convicted and sentenced to five years in jail by the sessions court leaves the case open again. The High Court had granted the actor interim bail for two days on Wednesday; after the lapse of the period, his appeal for suspension of the sentence was once again heard and he was granted permanent bail till next order. How does the legal fraternity view the latest development?

Explaining the grounds of the bail, advocate KC Mittal, senior lawyer of the Delhi High Court, “In a criminal appeal, courts look into the conduct of the accused, whether there is any violation of natural justice and also broadly on the facts of the case to reach the conclusion that the case is fit for grant of bail. Courts always keep in mind that the accused should be kept in custody or granted bail on the basis of the facts and circumstances of the case. In this case, the order has been passed considering all these aspects.”

Salman with father Salim Khan and brother Arbaaaz at his residence after returning from the Sessions court in Mumbai. PTISalman with father Salim Khan and brother Arbaaaz at his residence after returning from the Sessions court in Mumbai. PTI

Salman with father Salim Khan and brother Arbaaaz at his residence after returning from the Sessions court in Mumbai. PTI

Raising questions on charging the actor under Section 304 Part II (culpable homicide not amounting to murder), the veteran lawyer says even if alcohol was found in the blood sample of the accused, it does not amount to culpable homicide. “Even the honourable judge has made the same observation as I came to know from initial reports. The observation has merits,” he said. The court has observed that slapping Section 304 Part II of the IPC needs further consideration.

Similarly, Mittal added, another fact that has emerged is “non-examination of Kamal Khan, a singer, who was stated to be in the car at the time of the incident”. The court has also said that “…a number of arguable points have been raised, which need consideration”. Salman’s counsel Amit Desai told the court that despite interrogation by the investigating officer, the statement of Ashok Singh, the driver of the actor, was not recorded.

The defence lawyer also brought to the notice of the court that the trial court did not accept the statements of Salman’s body guard Ravindra Patil, the key witness of the case who is no more, despite the fact he went on record during an interview saying that there were four persons in the car when it ran into a bakery killing one and injuring three on the fateful night of 28 September, 2002.

Mittal also wondered why the actor was not provided a copy of the judgement soon after the pronouncement of the trial court’s verdict on Wednesday. “I fail to understand why the copy of the judgement was not kept ready at the time of its pronouncement to afford proper opportunity for an appeal,” he said.

Supreme Court advocate Rebecca Mammen John finds the bail to Salman unusual. “I know nothing about the Salman Khan case except that it was a hit-and-run case and that a poor citizen of this country died. I also know that Salman Khan was convicted and handed out a five-year sentence. When a person is sentenced to three years or below, the CrPc allows the trial court to suspend the sentence to enable the accused to file an appeal in the higher court.

“But where a five-year sentence is handed out, that rule does not apply and the accused is taken into custody forthwith .The High Court’s order on Wednesday allowing him to go home the same day and it’s order today suspending his sentence pending final disposal of his appeal, without his having served any time, is very unusual. Processes must be respected and the law must apply equally to everyone,” she said.

Terming the High Court’s decision “justified and as per law, Justice Kalimullah Khan, retired judge of Allahabad High Court, said, “Section 389 of CrPc confers the power on the appellate court to suspend the sentence awarded to the accused appellant and to release the appellant on bail. It provides that pending any appeal by a convicted person, the appellate court may, for reasons to be recorded by it him writing, order that the execution of the sentence or order appeal against be suspended and, also, if he is in confinement, that he be released on bail or on his own bond.”

He further says since the offences under which accused Salman Khan was prosecuted are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term of not less than 10 years, the appellate court (the Bombay High Court in this case) “need not give opportunity to the public prosecutor to petition in writing against such release”.

“The Bombay High Court is fully justified in passing such orders,” said Justice Khan.

Offering the same arguments in support of the Bombay High Court order, senior Advocate Feroz Khan Ghazi said there was no irregularity in the HC order. “Being the appellate court in this case, the High Court is empowered enough to grant him or her bail.”

Had the sentence been for less than or up to three years, the same trial court would have released him on a bail bond pending appeal in higher court, he added.

Rahul Gandhi moves SC in defamation case against him filed by RSS leader

New Delhi: Congress Vice President Rahul Gandhi has moved the Supreme Court seeking a stay on the Bombay High Court order dismissing his plea for quashing a defamation case against him for allegedly blaming RSS for the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi.

Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi moved the Supreme Court in the defamation case filed against him. PTI

Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi moved the Supreme Court in the defamation case filed against him. PTI

The petition, which is listed for hearing on Thursday before the bench headed by Justice Dipak Mishra, has also challenged the constitutional validity of the penal provisions dealing with defamation.

Gandhi’s plea, seeking to quash the complaint filed by RSS activist Rajesh Kunte before a magisterial court in Bhiwandi in Thane district of Maharashtra, was rejected by the Bombay High Court on 10 March.

It was alleged by the RSS activist that the Congress leader had said at a rally during last year’s Lok Sabha poll that a worker of the saffron outfit killed Mahatma Gandhi.

In his complaint, Kunte, secretary of Bhiwandi unit of RSS, had alleged that Rahul told an election rally at Sonale on 6 March that “RSS people killed Gandhiji”. He said the Congress vice president had sought to tarnish the reputation of the Sangh through his speech.

Following the complaint, the magistrate’s court had initiated proceedings and issued a notice to Rahul directing him to appear before it.

The Congress leader then approached the High Court seeking exemption from appearance and quashing of the complaint.

Rahul’s lawyers argued that the complaint was motivated and malafide and deserved to be quashed.

They argued that no case was made out against Rahul and the criminal proceedings initiated against him were part of BJP’s election campaign.

The prosecution had opposed the petition and argued that Rahul can plead his case and lead evidence during trial before the magistrate.

The High Court on Wednesday dismissed the petition and refused to grant stay on its order to allow the Congress leader time to appeal against it in the Supreme Court.

PTI

Rahul Gandhi moves SC in defamation case against him filed by an RSS leader

New Delhi: Congress Vice President Rahul Gandhi has moved the Supreme Court seeking a stay on the Bombay High Court order dismissing his plea for quashing a defamation case against him for allegedly blaming RSS for the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi.

Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi moved the Supreme Court in the defamation case filed against him. PTI

Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi moved the Supreme Court in the defamation case filed against him. PTI

The petition, which is listed for hearing on Thursday before the bench headed by Justice Dipak Mishra, has also challenged the constitutional validity of the penal provisions dealing with defamation.

Gandhi’s plea, seeking to quash the complaint filed by RSS activist Rajesh Kunte before a magisterial court in Bhiwandi in Thane district of Maharashtra, was rejected by the Bombay High Court on 10 March.

It was alleged by the RSS activist that the Congress leader had said at a rally during last year’s Lok Sabha poll that a worker of the saffron outfit killed Mahatma Gandhi.

In his complaint, Kunte, secretary of Bhiwandi unit of RSS, had alleged that Rahul told an election rally at Sonale on 6 March that “RSS people killed Gandhiji”. He said the Congress vice president had sought to tarnish the reputation of the Sangh through his speech.

Following the complaint, the magistrate’s court had initiated proceedings and issued a notice to Rahul directing him to appear before it.

The Congress leader then approached the High Court seeking exemption from appearance and quashing of the complaint.

Rahul’s lawyers argued that the complaint was motivated and malafide and deserved to be quashed.

They argued that no case was made out against Rahul and the criminal proceedings initiated against him were part of BJP’s election campaign.

The prosecution had opposed the petition and argued that Rahul can plead his case and lead evidence during trial before the magistrate.

The High Court on Wednesday dismissed the petition and refused to grant stay on its order to allow the Congress leader time to appeal against it in the Supreme Court.

PTI

Mumbai: HC upholds life term to man for raping daughter for two years

The accused was arrested on April 16, 2003 by Mumbai police after his teenage daughter lodged an FIR against him for raping her repeatedly since September 2001.

Representative Image

The Bombay High Court has upheld the life imprisonment awarded to a 43-year-old man for raping his teenage daughter repeatedly for two years. The accused – Kishan Gehlot – was arrested on April 16, 2003 by the city police after his daughter, who was 17 years old then, lodged a FIR against him for raping her repeatedly since September 2001.According to the prosecution, the accused lived with his daughter and 15-year-old son in suburban Malad. His wife had started living separately after frequent quarrels with the accused. Soon after the wife left in September 2001, the accused attempted to rape the victim and when she resisted he assaulted her. Since then, the accused raped the victim repeatedly for two years.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>On April 16, 2003 the victim girl confided about the assault and rape to her younger brother. The siblings then approached their maternal uncle who took the girl to the police to lodge a complaint. The trial court had convicted Gehlot under Section 376 of Indian Penal Code for rape and sentenced him to life imprisonment.Gehlot then approached the high court challenging his conviction on the ground that his daughter had lodged a false complaint against him at the behest of his estranged wife. The court, however, refused to accept this and said, “It is difficult to imagine that the victim would make false accusation against the appellant, who is her father. Nothing has been elicited in the evidence which would lead us to record a finding that the appellant has been falsely implicated in this crime.”The court held that the trial court has rightly convicted and sentenced the accused.”The appellant (Gehlot) was the victim’s father and he took advantage of the relationship and committed forcible sexual intercourse with the victim repeatedly for two years. We do not think that the case warrants any reduction in sentence. In our opinion, the appellant has been rightly convicted and sentenced,” a division bench headed by Justice P V Hardas said.

Bombay HC’s order to rlys: Ensure medical facility at suburban stations

The Bombay High Court today said the railways must take the responsibility of safety of commuters and make available basic medical facility at all suburban stations in the city.

The Bombay High Court today said the railways must take the responsibility of safety of commuters and make available basic medical facility at all suburban stations in the city.A division bench of justices A S Oka and A K Menon was hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) by activist Samir Zaveri, who had himself lost his legs in a railway accident, He has sought setting up of emergency medical centres in suburban stations.After the petition was filed and orders were passed by the court, the railways had set up emergency medical centres at 15 out of a total of 125 suburban stations.The Maharashtra government had also stationed ambulances at 46 stations to handle accident cases and ferry victims to the nearest hospital.”Setting up of emergency medical centres was the first phase. The railways should now make available some kind of medical facilities at each and every station. The railways must take responsibility,” Justice Oka said.The court also directed the government to ensure that the doctors who sit in the ambulances outside the stations are trained to handle emergency situations and equipments in the ambulances.”Since, the doctors are not MBBS graduates but Bachelor of Ayurvedic Medicine and Surgery (BAMS) graduates, they might need additional training to handle such peculiar cases. There should be a mandatory training at a government-established centre,” it said.The court said that with doctors who are not trained or equipped to handle emergency cases, purpose of having an ambulance is not served.The government has been asked to file an affidavit in the matter on March 25.

Not just job reservations: Maharashtra govt scraps 5% education quota for Muslims

Mumbai: While scrapping a five percent reservation for Muslims in government jobs that was struck down by the Bombay High Court, the Maharashtra state government has also axed a five percent reservation that had been provided for the community in educational institutions.

An official government notification said that the ordinance, that was brought by the Congress-NCP government in July last year to try and woo the community, had lapsed and therefore the government resolution preceding it was also done away with.

Representational image. AFPRepresentational image. AFP

Representational image. AFP

“An ordinance to this effect (providing a five percent job quota) lapsed on December 23 last year,” a Maharashtra government resolution said.

“Considering this fact, the concerned government resolution issued on 24 July last year is being scrapped,” the government resolution said.

However, as a result the reservation for the community in educational institutions was also done away with despite it having the Bombay High Court’s sanction.

The community had five percent reservation in government schools.

An Indian Express report points out that despite coming to power in the state the state government allowed the ordinance to lapse and chose not to extend it into an Act despite the fact that it would give Muslims seats in government-run schools.

The report points out that on the day this happened, the Chief Minister held a meeting to discuss the development of minorities in the state.

In June last year, Maharashtra’s earlier Congress-NCP government had approved a 16 percent reservation for Marathas and a five percent for Muslims just ahead of the 15 October Assembly polls, after the Congress was routed in the general elections.

The quota was given through two separate categories, namely the Educationally and Socially Backward Category (ESBC) for Marathas as well as a Special Backward Class (Muslims) segment for the Muslims.

On 14 November, 2014, the Bombay High Court had stayed implementation of the decision of the erstwhile Congress-NCP government to provide 16 percent reservations for Marathas in jobs and education, which was announced just ahead of the Maharashtra Assembly polls.

The court had also stayed the Maharashtra state’s decision to provide a five percent job reservation to Muslims in government service, but it allowed quotas for them in educational institutions.

The Maharashtra state government had challenged the Bombay High Court order in the Supreme Court, which refused to interfere with the interim decision of the High Court but asked the Maharashtra state government to go back to the Bombay High Court on the issue.

with PTI inputs

© 2020 Yuva Sai Sagar. Theme by Anders Norén.