|
|
|
|
|
Babri demolition case
China ready to cooperate with India on Afghanistan
Scheduled Caste panel orders arrest of Secy, Higher Education
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
MARINES row
SC slaps Rs 100-cr fine on Sterlite for causing pollution
Mumbai police red-faced over jihad memo
Kerala minister quits after wife alleges domestic violence
realtor bhardwaj’s murder
‘VIP treatment’ to surrendered ultras questioned in Assam House
Modi govt’s Bill scuttles prospects for an effective Lokayukta
Congress rejects Digvijay’s remark on two power centres
|
|
SC questions CBI over delay in filing appeal
R Sedhuraman Legal Correspondent
New Delhi, April 2 Appearing for the CBI before a Bench comprising Justices HL Dattu and JS Khehar, senior counsel PP Rao said the law officers of the government could not give the final touches to the appeal in the Ayodhya case as they were busy handling the 2G case which was being heard by another SC Bench. The CBI gave the explanation as Advani and other accused sought dismissal of the CBI appeal on account of the agency’s failure to challenge the May 21, 2010 order the Allahabad High Court within the stipulated 90 days. CBI is handling both the 2G and Ayodhya cases. Rao also said the delay was also due to the fact that the then Solicitor General Gopal Subramanium had fallen ill for some days. Unconvinced, the Bench said the reasons for the delay should be explained by the office of the SG and other law officers of the government and not by the CBI. It gave a week’s time for the purpose and posted the case for next hearing on April 16. Nevertheless, the SC asked counsel for Advani and others as to why they were opposing the appeal on account of delay which was not done normally. “Does it mean you have a weak case on merits,” it asked. Senior counsel Ravi Shankar Prasad, appearing for most of the accused, said his clients rather had a strong case and it was the government which had foisted politically-motivated charges on them. Earlier, Rao had contended that CBI took time to file the appeal in the SC on February 18, 2011 as it had to translate voluminous documents from Hindi to English. The HC had upheld the May 4, 2001 decision of the Special Judge, holding trial at Rae Bareilly, to drop the conspiracy charges against Advani and 20 others, including Vinay Katiyar (BJP), Kalyan Singh, Uma Bharati and Mahant Avaidyanath (all former BJP leaders) and Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) leaders Ashok Singhal, Giriraj Kishore, Vishnu Hari Dalmiya, Ram Vilas Vedanti and Paramhans Rmachandra Das. The Rae Bareilly court is, however, proceeding with the trial against them on the charges of promoting enmity between classes (Section 153A IPC), circulating rumours to disturb public peace (Section 505) and making statements prejudicial to national integration (153B).
CBI blames 2G case
|
|
China ready to cooperate with India on Afghanistan
New Delhi, April 2 Top officials of India and China are expected to meet later this month to discuss how their two countries could cooperate in Afghanistan so that the war-ravaged nation could stand on its own feet. The post-drawdown situation in Afghanistan has been a cause of worry for both the countries. Hitherto, China was wary of engaging with India on Afghanistan, fearing that it might upset Pakistan, its ‘all weather’ friend. However, the rise of Islamic fundamentalism in its own backyard in the Muslim-dominated Xianjing province and the spectre of the Taliban raising its ugly head again in Afghanistan appear to have compelled Beijing to reconsider its Afghan policy. According to official sources, the first signs of China’s attitude towards India on the Afghan issue came when National Security Adviser (NSA) Shivshanker Menon visited Moscow earlier this year for the India-Russia-China trilateral meeting on Afghanistan’s future. The Chinese side was keen to know from Menon how India viewed the emerging situation in Afghanistan and how the country could be saved from going back to the days of the Taliban regime. All the three countries are vehemently opposed to the Western attempt at reconciliation with the Taliban, contending that the militia could yet again push Afghanistan back to the 1990s, thereby destabilising the entire region. China has made huge investments in Afghanistan, especially in the mining sector, and has also signed a strategic partnership agreement with Kabul on the lines of a similar pact signed by the embattled nation with New Delhi in 2011. The sources said India was ready to cooperate with all countries in the region, including Pakistan, to ensure the stability of Afghanistan. However, Islamabad has shown no interest in cooperating with India on the issue since it has been eyeing to run Afghanistan through its proxies after the withdrawal of foreign troops. Meanwhile, a lot of other engagements are also said to be in the pipeline between India and China now that the once-in-a-decade leadership transition process in Beijing has been completed. Officials of the two countries are also likely to meet this month for a meeting of the working mechanism on boundary dispute. Following last week’s meeting between Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and new Chinese President Xi Jinping in Durban, there are indications that Singh would visit Beijing in the first part of the year. The Chinese President or the Premier would pay a return visit possibly by the end of the year.
Beijing’s policy shift?
|
||
|
Scheduled Caste panel orders arrest of Secy, Higher Education
New Delhi, April 2 PL Punia, chairman of the commission, which has statutory powers under the Constitution of India, ordered the Commissioner of Delhi Police to arrest Ashok Thakur, Higher Education Secretary and produce him before the panel on April 15. The arrest warrant was issued after Thakur failed to honour the previous directions of the commission to present himself before it for clarifications in massive allegations of discrimination against SC teachers at BHU, a central university directly funded by the Ministry of HRD. The commission had earlier issued summons for Thakur, asking him to attend the hearing on April 1. After he failed to make a personal appearance yesterday, chairman PL Punia issued the arrest warrant after recording his displeasure over the disrespect the Secretary showed to the constitutional authority by non-appearance when summoned. The Higher Education Secretary’s appearance was ordered in the case of Indu Choudhary, General Secretary of SC, ST Employee Welfare Association, BHU, Varanasi, who alleged in her complaint to the commission that the BHU authorities ignored the reservation policy while filling up vacant posts, giving promotions and other benefits. Out of 362 SC posts for teachers at BHU, 247 are lying vacant. The complainant also produced evidence of her victimisation by the university after she made a complaint to the commission. “The complaint has alleged that the university has wrongfully deducted a sum of Rs 27,000 from her salary and even framed a vigilance case against her when she objected to it. Registering similar complaints, General Secretary and Joint Secretary of the association had also requested the commission for immediate intervention and corrective measures,” the SC Commission order said today. Speaking to The Tribune about the order, PL Punia said the attitude of BHU and the Ministry of HRD had been one of extreme indifference and also disregard for the orders of the constitutional commission. “There have been a series of complaints against BHU. This time, the complainant has been chargesheeted by the university on absolutely frivolous grounds. One reason cited in the chargesheet is use of official BHU residence address on the association letterhead by the general secretary. This is injustice. Higher Education Secretary has failed to explain the matter,” Punia said. The state of SC/ST teachers’ recruitment against quota in all the 40 central universities is very poor, with none having filled the sanctioned teaching posts for SC and ST candidates. More than 70 per cent sanctioned teaching positions across universities are lying vacant.
Vanishing act
Officer repeatedly absented himself in a hearing on vacant SC teachers’ posts in BHU Varanasi.
|
||
|
NIA allowed to quiz Liyaqat in jail
New Delhi, April 2 Shah has been booked for waging war against the country by Delhi Police which claimed he was planning to carry out terror attacks in the national capital. District Judge I S Mehta allowed the NIA's plea seeking permission to interrogate Shah in the jail itself. "I have perused the application. The same is allowed. Chief investigating officer (of NIA) along with his team is allowed to interrogate Sayyed Liyaqat Shah in Tihar Jail till April 30, 2013 as and when required," the judge said. With Shah's arrest generating conflicting versions from the Delhi and Jammu and Kashmir police, the Centre recently transferred the probe in the case to NIA. While the Delhi Police has claimed that with Shah's arrest they had foiled a 'fidayeen' (suicide) attack in the capital ahead of Holi, its J-K counterpart insisted that he was one of those who had exfiltrated in 1990s and had returned to India to surrender under the state's rehabilitation policy. Shah (45), a resident of Jammu and Kashmir, was sent to judicial custody by a court here till April 12 after he was produced before it on expiry of his 15 days of police custody. Shah has been quizzed by the special cell of the Delhi Police since March 21. The police had earlier said that Shah was apprehended on March 20 from the Indo-Nepal border area near Gorakhpur in Uttar Pradesh and during had revealed during interrogation that he is a trained militant of banned terror group Hizbul Mujahideen and was settled in Muzaffarabad in Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK). — PTI
|
||
|
SC lifts ban on Italian envoy’s overseas visits
R Sedhuraman Legal Correspondent
New Delhi, April 2 A three-member Bench headed by Chief Justice Altamas Kabir had passed the restraint order against the ambassador on March 14 as Italy refused to return the marines who had been allowed by the SC to visit their country for four weeks for casting their votes in the February 24-25 Parliament election. The SC had permitted the marines on the envoy’s assurance that he would ensure their return within the March 22 deadline. Today, the apex court, however, questioned the Central Government on the delay in initiating the trial of the marines -- Massimiliano Lattore and Salvatore Girone -- in a special court as directed by the Bench. It asked Attorney General GE Vahanvati to appraise it on this score at the next hearing on April 16. Italy’s senior counsel Mukul Rohatgi said he had come to know through media reports that the Centre had appointed a Chief Judicial Magistrate for holding the trial. Since the marines were facing murder charges, the trial could be conducted only by a Sessions Court. He also questioned the Centre’s reported decision to hand over the investigations in the case to the National Investigation Agency (NIA), contending that NIA had no jurisdiction in the case. Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy sought to raise objections over India’s reported assurance to Italy that the marines, if convicted, would not face death sentence. The Bench, however, refused to take notice of Swamy’s contentions as his petition in the matter was yet to be listed for hearing.
The case file
|
||
|
SC slaps Rs 100-cr fine on Sterlite for causing pollution
New Delhi, April 2 A Bench comprising Justices AK Patnaik and HL Gokhale pointed out that the company had complied with 29 of the 30 conditions imposed on it by the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board (TNPCB) and was about to implement the last condition. For allowing the continued operations of the plant, the SC also cited the facts that the company had 1,300 employees and “contributes substantially” to the production of copper which was used in Defence, electricity, automobile, construction and infrastructure. The plant was also accounting for 10 per cent of the total cargo volume of the Tuticorin port. Asking the company to deposit Rs 100 crore within three months with the district collector for causing damage to the environment during 1997-2012, the SC said it would be kept in a fixed deposit in a nationalised bank and the interest would be spent on suitable measures for improving the environment - water, soil and air in the vicinity of the plant. The Bench also made it clear that its verdict would not come in the way of authorities asking the plant to shift to some other place or the affected people seeking further damages. “As the deficiencies in the plant of the appellants which affected the environment as pointed out by NEERI (National Environmental Engineering and Research Institute) have now been removed, the impugned order of the HC directing closure of the plant of the appellants is liable to be set aside,” the apex court held in its 64-page judgment. The HC had ordered the closure of the plant as it was located at Tuticorin within 25 km of four of the 21 ecologically sensitive islands in the Gulf of Munnar. The four islands have been notified under the Wildlife Protection Act 1972. The SC, however, pointed out that the TNPCB had given its clearance despite the fact that the plant was located within 25 km of the islands. It also made it clear that no material was placed before it to show that the environmental clearance given by the Union Ministry of Environment and Forests “was wholly irrational and frustrated the very purpose” of the environmental impact assessment.
green concerns
|
||
|
Mumbai police red-faced over jihad memo
Mumbai, April 2 The circular written by Additional Commissioner of Police Naval Bajaj, who heads the Special Branch of the Mumbai police, tells local police stations to keep a close watch on GIO that aims to "brainwash both college and schoolgirls and train them for jihad". The circular noted that GIO, which came into being in 1984 in Kerala, purportedly aims to impart the teachings of the Quran to Muslim women. However its real objective, the circular said, aimed to train them for jehad. The contents of the circular issued last week made its way into local newspapers sparking off anger among Muslim organisations. The Jammat-e-Islami Hind (JIH), of which GIO is a part, has come out strongly against the circular. The organisation has threatened to sue the Mumbai police if it did not withdraw it and apologise to the minority community. In its response, the JIH said that GIO runs 40 high schools and three colleges in Maharashtra and aims to improve the lot of women in the community. "We do good work among the women and help improve their condition. We also fight for women's rights," Taufiq Khan, president, JIH, said. Denying that GIO supports jehad, Khan said that GIO does not support violence. He added that the JIH would sue the Mumbai police and was in the process of issuing a legal notice in the matter. Khan and other officials of the Jamaat met Bajaj and sought to obtain his comments regarding the circular. Bajaj reportedly told JIH officials that the circular was issued following intelligence reports.
|
||
|
Kerala minister quits after wife alleges domestic violence
Thiruvananthapuram, April 2 Forty-six-year old film star-turned-politician was accompanied by his friend and State Labour Minister Shibu Baby John and other friends from the film industry including ace director Shaji Kailas and producer Suresh Kumar at the chief minister's official residence. Though earlier in the evening he refused to resign, KB Ganesh Kumar was forced to change his mind after his estranged wife Yamini Thankachi, a medical professional, complained about his ill treatment of her in written to Chandy. Chandy accepted the letter and asked her to approach the nearest police station. The Chief Minister then called DGP KS Balasubramanion, and his senior cabinet colleagues and held closed door discussions. Speaking to reporters Chandy said that Kumar's wife had come with a written complaint against the minister. "I called the DGP and handed over the complaint. In the morning Kumar had also registered a complaint at the police station. "And now in the light of this he has decided to resign and his resignation will be sent to the governor tomorrow," he said. Kumar, in the presence of Chandy, said he was stepping down to keep the high moral standards. "For an impartial inquiry into the allegations that have been levelled, it's improper for me to continue as a minister and hence I have stepped down." Earlier in the day, Thankachi accused Chandy of "cheating" her by not accepting her complaint of domestic violence by her husband who was now moving to divorce her. She claimed to have been assured by Chandy for his intervention to solve the matter amicably. But hours later Kumar filed for divorce, alleging harassment including physical torture, by his doctor wife Thankachi. "I had a complaint with me but the CM did not accept it and told me that he will intervene and bring an amicable settlement. Chandy dismissed the charge. "The last date according to the agreement was yesterday (Sunday) and I spoke to the CM yesterday (Sunday) also but today (Monday) I hear that the minister has filed a divorce petition. I was cheated by the CM," said Thankachi. — IANS
|
||
|
realtor bhardwaj’s murder
New Delhi, April 2 Investigators said a three-page disclosure report of Purshotam Rana, one of the two alleged killers, reveals that a man named Swamiji is a main conspirator in the case. He had allegedly provided money to Purshotam for killing Bhardwaj. The second man who has come under the radar of the police is Raju. Investigators claim the second alleged killer, Sunil, had procured the guns from Raju and Purshotam knows the whereabouts of the weapons used to murder Bhardwaj. According to the police, Purshotam claims to have thrown them in a canal. Yesterday, Delhi Police arrested Purshotam, Sunil and Amit, who was driving the Skoda car used as a getaway vehicle by the killers and the car owner named Rakesh. Investigators have recovered a SIM card that the alleged killers and Amit had used. More SIM cards have to be recovered, according to the police. Purshotam, Sunil and Amit were present at the Patiala House court in Delhi today. Metropolitan Magistrate (MM) Prashant Sharma remanded them in the custody of Delhi Police for 10 days. The police will take the three accused to Mathura, Haridwar, Jhajjar and some areas in Haryana. The police will conduct raids in these locations, where they are likely to recover the weapons used to kill Bhardwaj. They will also discover the escape trail used by the killers after they murdered Bhardwaj at his farmhouse on March 26. “More people are involved (in the case). We have to unearth the conspiracy and establish the links in the case. We also want to ascertain the motive behind the murder,” the police informed the court. According to the police, Purshotam is well aware of the conspiracy and the people involved in it. Purshotam, Sunil and Amit today refused to undergo a Test Identification Parade (TIP). In the TIP, a case’s complainant identifies the accused. At a different courtroom, when MM Jasjeet Kaur asked the three accused why they didn’t want to undergo the TIP, they replied that the police had taken their photographs when they were arrested. |
||
|
‘VIP treatment’ to surrendered ultras questioned in Assam House
Guwahati, April 2 These militants in truce are accommodated in government-run and secured designated camps, leaders are provided with PSOs and even a monthly payment for their self-maintenance during the course of prolonged dialogue process. The government policy in dealing with insurgents who have come over ground for holding dialogue with the government has come in for criticism in Assam Assembly, with a section of members of the House questioning the justification for according such “VIP status” to insurgents who were involved in violence and killings of innocent people including children and women. Some of the members from the Opposition All India United Democratic Front (AIUDF) even observed that such a policy of the government in dealing with insurgents in truce would only encourage lakhs of unemployed youth in the state to take up arms so that they are later treated as “VIPs” once they give up arms. The members were referring to a large number of militants belonging to various outfits in truce like the ULFA (pro-talks), a faction of the National Democratic Front of Bodoland (NDFB), Dima Halam Daogah (DHD), Karbi Longri North Cachar Hills Liberation Front (KLNLF), United People’s Democratic Solidarity (UPDS) etc. These militants in truce are now apparently leading a very comfortable and secured life, thanks to the benevolence of the government’s policy towards them. In the process, there has been heartburn for those in the state who have lost their near and dear ones in the theatre of violence in Assam for over three decades now. In reply to the debate, Assam government informed the House that the policy of dealing with insurgents who have come over for dialogue by giving up the path of violence, was formulated by the Government of India and it was part of the government’s strategy to provide succour to the common people from the spell of insurgency-related violence. On date, 12 insurgent groups in Assam are in truce and engaged in peace talks while accords have been signed by the Government of India with three militant groups. Six militant outfits have remained active in the state as per information provided in the House by the government of Assam.
|
||
|
Modi govt’s Bill scuttles prospects for an effective Lokayukta
Ahmedabad, April 2 The “Gujarat Lokayukta Ayog Bill, 2013” was passed by the House by a voice vote after a prolonged debate but in the absence of the entire Opposition against the “anti-people measure” on the last day of the budget session. Contrary to the claims of the state cabinet spokesman Nitin Patel that the amendment Bill had retained most of the clauses of the 1986 bill on the Lokayukta, the new measure has changed the entire selection process of the watchdog body concentrating all the powers in the hands of the CM to select the Lokayukta and also decide the fate of its “recommendations.” The Bill eliminates the Chief Justice of the Gujarat High Court from the process of consultation for the selection of the Lokayukta, named the Governor as the appointing authority but without having any say in the selection process and rendered the Leader of the Opposition ineffective in deciding the choice. In total contrast to the stand the BJP had taken during the Anna Hazare movement for a strong Lokpal Bill at the centre, Modi has opted for a “toothless” Lokayukta to function as a decorative piece to cover up the misdeeds of the government. The Bill, which would replace the 1986 Act after signed by the Governor, successfully scuttled the prospects of justice RA Mehta, a retired judge of the Gujarat High Court, to take over as the Lokayukta, though his unilateral appointment by the Governor Kamala Beniwal was held valid both by the Gujarat High Court and the Supreme Court. The Bill entrusted the task of selecting one Lokayukta and up to four up-Lokayuktas to a six-member committee to be headed by the CM and comprise of one cabinet minister to be named by the CM, the Speaker of the state Assembly, the Leader of the Opposition, a judge of the High Court to be nominated by the Chief Justice and the vigilance commissioner. Giving a clear weightage to the views of the CM, the Bill provides for majority opinion to decide on the selection in case there was no unanimity. Under the existing act, the Governor was empowered to appoint a Lokayukta in consultation with the CM, the Chief Justice of the High Court and the Leader of the Opposition. Apparently, the exercise to amend the Lokayukta Act was taken by the state government only to nullify the appointment of Justice Mehta who Modi viewed as his arch enemy because of his being a “sympathiser” of the human rights organisations fighting for the rights of the victims of the 2002 communal riots. The post of the Lokayukta has remained vacant for more than nine years, since the last Lokayukta, justice RM Soni, who was appointed by Modi’s predecessor Keshubhai Patel, laid down the office in 2003 at completion of his five-year term. As the Modi government made no move to fill up the vacant post, the Governor initiated the move to appoint a Lokayukta in 2009 but the CM and the Leader of the Opposition kept differing on any one name forcing the Governor to finally accept the recommendation of the then Chief Justice of the High Court, SJ Mukhopadhyaya, now a judge in the Supreme Court, and unilaterally appoint justice Mehta as the Lokayukta. The Modi government did not allow Justice Mehta to take charge and moved the High Court and later the Supreme Court challenging the Governor’s decision. A curative petition on the issue is still pending in the apex court. The amended Bill bars the Lokayukta from taking up a complaint on an issue more than five years old.
|
||
|
Congress rejects Digvijay’s remark on two power centres
New Delhi, April 2 This statement was immediately interpreted in Congress circles to indicate that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh could be in line for a third term if the party forms the government in the 2014 General Election. “The relationship which exists between the Congress president Sonia Gandhi and the PM today is unique and something which has never been seen before and perhaps this should be the ideal model for the future,” AICC general secretary Janardan Dwivedi told mediapersons today. Dwivedi, who also doubles as the party’s media department chief, underlined that the Congress would decide its Prime Ministerial candidate at an appropriate time. “At the moment, Manmohan Singh is leading the government,” he said, adding Congress Vice-President Rahul Gandhi has made it clear that now “there is no question of the PM’s post”. His colleague Digvijay Singh recently told a television news channel that the experiment with two power centres had proved to be a failure. While Dwivedi’s rejection of Digvijay Singh’s comments is understandable (this is not the first time that the Congress has distanced itself from his statements), the Congress media head’s remark that this experiment could be repeated in the future created a buzz in party circles. The Congress is in a dilemma. On one hand, there is a clamour in the Congress rank and file that Rahul Gandhi should be projected as their PM candidate in next year’s general election. On the other hand, the Nehru-Gandhi scion has repeatedly said he is not interested in the top job and would like to concentrate on strengthening the organisation. This confusion was further compounded when the Prime Minister did not reject recent suggestions on whether he would accept a third term if the Congress returned to power next year. “This is a hypothetical question. We will cross the bridge when we reach there,” he had said. All these statements indicate Congress wants to keep alive the suspense about its next Prime Ministerial contender to insulate Rahul Gandhi from the opposition’s attack which is bound to become more strident if he is in the race for the top post. Moreover, there is a growing view in the Congress that Rahul Gandhi should take over as PM only if the Congress gets 200-odd Lok Sabha seats in the next election so that he does not have to handle a fractious coalition. Since the possibility of Congress getting close to the 200-mark appears remote, the party would rather keep everybody guessing about its future PM contender.
|
|
| HOME PAGE | |
Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir |
Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs |
Nation | Opinions | | Business | Sports | World | Letters | Chandigarh | Ludhiana | Delhi | | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | E-mail | |
New Delhi, April 2
New Delhi, April 2
