New Delhi, October 31
Perturbed over large-scale deaths in Saturday’s terror attacks in the Capital, Chief Justice of India (CJI) R.C. Lahoti, demitting office tomorrow, today came out strongly against the government for the manner the issue of terrorism had been handled all these years. He advocated special laws against it and retaining of the capital punishment to tackle such heinous crimes against humanity.

Talking to the media on the eve of his retirement, Justice Lahoti, credited with having a candid view on the rule of law and judicial supremacy, said, “We have no political will to fight terrorism and finding a remedy to tackle it.... We have to take effective steps…. We have to go into the root of its causes…. and implement police reforms.”

Contrary to the view of CJI designate Y.K. Sabharwal that the capital punishment should be abolished from the statue book, Justice Lahoti disagreed with him and said, “What should be the punishment for dastardly bomb blasts that have killed so many and injured several others. I am told a small child is the only survivor in a family.”

“If police lays hand on persons responsible for yesterday’s attacks, the only punishment to them will be death penalty,” Justice Lahoti said.

But he was cautious to add that it was not the view of the Supreme Court. “I am not speaking for the Supreme Court. I am speaking for myself,” he said.

He said, “There is enough in-built mechanism in the law and the Constitution to filter the cases where the capital punishment is required. The President is ultimately vested with the power of clemency.”

When his attention was drawn to recent letter of President A.P.J. Abdul Kalam to the Home Ministry on the issue of clemency, he said, “If the President feels in every case the death penalty has to be converted into life imprisonment, he is free to do so as he has powers under the Constitution to do so.”

Asked whether it was wrong to repeal POTA, which was enacted specially to deal with terrorism, he was of the view that when a serious challenge was posed to the nation by terrorism, new methods to deal with it were required.

“Certainly we need new laws and special investigation methods to handle terrorism. Have we taken any step to gear up police to have scientific investigation. The cases of terrorism are handled by an ordinary Inspector with no special training,” he said.

He also advocated separate jails for accused of terrorism attacks stating that if they were lodged with other hardened criminals, there was every chance of their influencing and getting them also into their fold.

Disapproving the present system of policing in the country, he said there was an urgent need to implement police reforms recommended by various panels like the N.N. Vohra committee.

“There has to be separate specialised police force for maintaining law and order, for VIP security, investigating heinous crimes, especially terrorism cases, and conducting prosecution. In the fast changing scenario, the police training on old British pattern would not help,” he said.

Reminding the authorities how the USA and the UK had taken tough measures against terrorism after September 11 and July 7 attacks, he said the same will was lacking in our country.

New Delhi, October 31
Contrary to the claim of Law Minister H. R. Bharadwaj that the Chief Justice of India (CJI) had sent his report on the National Judicial Council (NJC) Bill aimed at enacting a law for probing corruption charges and misconduct of Supreme Court and High Court judges, outgoing CJI R. C. Lahoti said today that he had certain reservations on the Bill and was yet to submit the report to the government.

Responding to various questions by mediapersons, who called upon him to know his views on various issues, including apex court’s controversial directive in the Jharkhand Assembly floor test, on the eve of his retirement, Justice Lahoti also clarified his position why he had talked tough about some UPA ministers’ attack on the Supreme Court after it had pronounced certain important judgements recently.

He said it was for the first time in his entire career that he had “lost his cool” when at least two ministers of the government had consistently attacked the Supreme Court. “I don’t mind any criticism of a judge or myself for a judgement, but if some members of the executive attacked the institution of Supreme Court, it would cause immense harm to it. As a CJI, I am duty bound to protect the Institution.”

On the issue of the NJC Bill, he said he would submit his report in a day or two. “Personally I feel the draft of the Bill is prepared in a hurried manner. It should be referred to the Law Commission with my suggestions,” he said expressing reservations over the Bill.

New Delhi, October 31
The outgoing Chief Justice of India, who headed the Supreme Court Collegium that takes decisions on appointment and transfer of judges, today said that Sikkim High Court Chief Justice B K Roy, who had seen three transfers during a short period of less than two years, was himself responsible for it.

Justice Lahoti, who will demit office tomorrow, said enough opportunity was given to Justice Roy to mend his style of functioning and carry on all his brother judges with him when posted as Chief Justice of Punjab and Haryana High Court, but he did not follow the advice and continued to function in his own way.

There were complaints from 25 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court judges that he had “painted them in black” and all of them had said they be transferred to some other high courts. “But their view point was not heard for almost a year by any one”.

Disapproving the action of Punjab and Haryana High Court judges going on a mass leave in protest, Justice Lahoti said but their complaint had some merit.

Similarly 11 out fo 13 judges of the Guwahati High Court had sent similar complaints against Justice Roy, he said forcing the collegium to transfer him to Sikkim High Court.

When asked why he did not initiate action against Justice Roy for his alleged “misconduct” as per the laid down procedure, Justice Lahoti said that he did not lose hope that he would mend his ways as he had promised the same.

Patna, October 31
The Election Commission seemed to have won the first round of battle of nerves against the “political pressure,” apparently by the UPA, in connection with the Bihar poll with Vijay Prakash, RJD nominee for the Jamui Assembly seat and brother of Union Minister Jaiprakash Narain Yadav, today surrendered in Jamui court which remanded him in judicial custody till November 14.

He surrendered before the acting Chief Judicial Magistrate of Jamui.

The DGP, Mr Ashish Ranjan Sinha, said though Vijay Prakash was accompanied by his lawyer, no bail application was moved on his behalf.

The acting Chief Judicial Magistrate had issued non-bailable arrest warrants against Vijay Prakash, Jaiprakash Narain Yadav, suspended officer in charge of Khaira police station Mukteshwar Prasad, Independent candidate from Jamui Ashok Ram and an RJD worker, Batohi Yadav, in connection with Vijay Prakash’s illegal release from police custody on October 18.

Mr Justice S.K. Singh of Jamui court had already rejected the anticipatory bail petition by the Union Minister for the arrest warrant issued against him for entering into a criminal conspiracy with the officer in charge to secure the illegal release of his brother.

The minister is still absconding. 

Kolkata, October 31
The “tainted” CPM minister of West Bengal, Mr Narayan Biswas, resigned today following party leadership’s direction. The Chief Minister, Mr Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee, forwarded his resignation letter to the Governor, Mr Gopal Krishna Gandhi, for acceptance.

Another “tainted” minister, Mr Sushanta Ghose, has not resigned since he had been granted bail. The party leadership said Mr Ghose could remain a minister till he was not convicted.

The induction of the ministers in the Buddhadeb government caused much uproar in political circles and a section of the CPM leadership in the state following the publication of an exclusive news item in this regard in The Tribune on October 20. The Politburo also took a serious view of the matter.

According to party sources, the news item was discussed between the Chief Minister and the Politburo leadership during a meeting in Delhi when Mr Prakash Karat, general secretary, expressed his resentment that the ministers could still hold ministerial berth ignoring the court’s order.

This was the first time during its 26-year tenure that the CPM in West Bengal has been forced to drop a “tainted” minister from the government.

The party secretary, Mr Anil Biswas, who was protecting the ministers, said today that Mr Narayan Biswas had been asked to surrender before the SDJM’s court at Balurghat, West Dinajpur, as soon as his resignation was formally accepted.

It was stated that the ministers who were chargesheeted for murder, arson and rioting in West Dinajpur and Midnapore districts, respectively, had been visiting party office regularly, even after the issuance of non-bailable warrants against them.

New Delhi, October 31
Outgoing Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Mufti Mohammad Sayeed expressed happiness that for the first time in 57 years Indo-Pak relations were focussing on Kashmir and believed that concrete progress was very much on the cards.

With Kashmir being in focus, both India and Pakistan can give up their hard positions and strike for a breakthrough, Mr Sayeed said in an interview to the BBC.

Asked if the bomb blasts in the Capital would cast a shadow on the Indo-Pak peace process, the Mufti said whatever was being talked between the two neighbours on Kashmir could not be made public before time.

“I feel that concrete progress on the Kashmir issue between India and Pakistan is very much in the offing. I am hopeful that a concrete picture will emerge in the coming days, facilitating both countries to move away from status quo. This would happen gradually and not in one go,” Mr Sayeed contended.

Patna, October 31
Rest aside the exit poll predictions, even otherwise the NDA chief ministerial candidate Nitish Kumar seems to have a distinct edge over his arch rival Lalu Prasad for not being confronted with family feud like the RJD supremo which badly bruised his image.

For already beleaguered Lalu, the insatiable political ambition of his brothers-in law and sisters-in-law is seemingly taking its toll affecting his political fortunes.

In the last February poll, the eldest brother-in-law of Lalu Prasad, Prabhunath Yadav, had fought from Mirganj and another brother-in- law Sadhu Yadav`s wife, Indira Yadav had contested from Gopalganj by defying the party line.

The open revolt by his brother-in- laws had caused unexpected political setback in Gopalganj in February, as both above two seats along with a few more did not fall in the RJD`s kitty due to division of Yadav votes.

Even the controversial RJD MP Mohammad Shahabuddin was also reportedly unhappy with Lalu for giving too much leverage to his brothers-in-laws in the party matters.

This time, while Lalu succeeded in persuading Sadhu Yadav and Prabhunath Yadav to see reason, it was his youngest brother-in-law, Subhash Yadav, who decided to militate against him.

Subhash Yadav has fielded his wife Renu Devi from Mirganj Assembly seat in Gopalganj, a seat primarily allotted to the Congress as per the seat-sharing arrangement.

Sources in the RJD disclosed that even Rabri Devi was also not happy with her brothers as their actions were only embarrassing his husband at a time when he was fighting the toughest political battle of his life.

With signs of dissent already visible in the family front of Lalu Prasad, for Nitish Kumar, it might help him in terms of projecting a “clean image” for not promoting dynasty rule in Bihar politics.