Law, Lawyers, Judiciary

06-05-2007, 03:30 AM

SC suspends RK Anand, IU Khan in BMW case <!--emo& Big Grin

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' />

07-04-2007, 02:46 AM

Re:
QUOTEhttp://hinduism.about.com/od/history/a/successionact.htm
Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005


The question I want to ask is about
QUOTE# The daughter shall be subject to the same liability in the said coparcenary property as that of a son; and any reference to a Hindu Mitakshara coparceners shall be deemed to include a reference to a daughter of a coparcener; 

For example say, for the past 10 to 15 years a hindu family has married off daughters, happy., etc... Son taking take care of parents under his expense and his liability..Unexpected events happen.. Does the daughters before or after this amendment would take share of liabilities to maintain the family on an equal basis? What about for the past 15 years the Son say spent X amount of money, that be divided too?

Any explanation gratefully accepted.
thanks

07-18-2007, 06:48 PM

mmm... it looks like I touched something or said something that either nobody knows or interested in. ok.

07-18-2007, 09:00 PM

QUOTEDoes the daughters before or after this amendment would take share of liabilities to maintain the family on an equal basis? What about for the past 15 years the Son say spent X amount of money, that be divided too?
I am not a law graduate.

What son had spent is gone. But again, it depends on what kind of expenses.
If he had spent that money on fixing property, If he had taken permission or he had contract with his sister to fix it, then both share responsibility(loss/profit). If he had done on his own he will pay the price.
In case he had spent money on parentâs welfare, same will happen. Now both son and daughter would have to make decisions jointly.

Indian law is trying to overpower woman, but I feel they are giving them too much power, which is not good. In place of equality it is promoting inequality.

When it comes to taking care of parents, it is left on male child. Girls do take care but majority of the time it is emotional care not financial responsibility.
There are some incidences where parents had filed case against daughter but itâs rare.

07-18-2007, 09:31 PM

In UK, one Hindu, indian origin couple, they are married for eleven years, now they are in a situation. He is only son and one sister. They live in a house owned my mother. Husband and wife take care of mother, who is widow and unemployed. They take good care of her, including alternate year trip to India. Daughter never contributed only see mother when she need baby sister. She is married to well off man and live in a nice house. At this stage, son is unemployed and going through health problem, he may not work again. He is only 36 years old. His wife is the only earning member. There house need a repairs, mother was expecting son/daughter-in-law will take care of repairs. But couple is not interested to put any money in house because according to law, after mother's death, house will be divided. This is mother's wish also. So now couple had two options either ask mother to give property rights to them or move out and buy own house and invest in their own property.
Last week after rain their roof started leaking and collapsed, mother is in India. Who will pay the bills; home insurance will pay limited amount rest they have to take care. So now they are saying if we have to spend 15k pounds on repairs and he will get half of it. It is complete waste. Who is going to ask daughter to put half of money in repairs. Everyone knows she will say sell it and will take half of share.

07-20-2007, 02:52 AM

thanks mudy.. and thanks for the inequality part of it, that is greatly seen by me. compounded gain and loss of the family must be accounted for property distribution. Sons should get freedom to express disappointments w.r.t financial burdens faced in up bringing of the family and then suddenly daughters swindle and go!. I vote some law that is really equal. all liabilities and responsibilities are shared equal. Its not fair law to share only gains and not the losses.

Law should enable Sons to table all losses and expenses plus compounding values of those expenses since over the period of time, cost of living as gone up and so is the salary. Hence, say property bought at Rs. 12k could be now earning say 40Lakhs in certain area, can't Sons have right to demonstrate their stakes being part of the family and stake ownership against an agreeable amount that is not at market value of the house in terms of sharing?. Of course, when Sons gave money to family, they never asked for documents and proof spending etc.

I 'm in a situation that I have spent a lot, and now that is all trashed.. they don't even consider such expenses, and its all about property now. If it goes to court, I am sure the court would want to sell the house and distribute the money among coparceners. But that is not what the intention was to build a house and its maintenance year long. The land ownership document is not Son's and this is where our law fails.

Indian laws are either unfair or totally abused by people. In general, I hate our (rather my) family values with this respect.

07-20-2007, 03:24 AM

Indian law is trying to combine Western Law with Indian/Hindu culture law.

QUOTESons have right to demonstrate their stakes being part of the family and stake ownership against an agreeable amount that is not at market value of the house in terms of sharing?. Of course, when Sons gave money to family, they never asked for documents and proof spending etc. 
In this case, Court case will be dragged for 10- 15 yrs and you will get nothing. There is no point having so many laws when one can't implement or or one will get justice after 20 years.

QUOTE I'm in a situation that I have spent a lot, and now that is all trashed.. they don't even consider such expenses, and its all about property now. If it goes to court, I am sure the court would want to sell the house and distribute the money among coparceners. But that is not what the intention was to build a house and its maintenance year long. The land ownership document is not Son's and this is where our law fails 
In this case, only owner of the property can do justice and leave a Will. If there is no Will, then this is a disputed property and whatever you have spent is a waste.
Like lot of other people do, ask sisters to give up her rights from property, which is very common practice. 
It is very important to leave a Will.
Vedic/ancient Hindu custom/culture were very different, there was no dowry etc was involved. Now parents spend equal amount of money on boys and girls education. In some case equal amount in marriage. In these case, if after marriage if only boys are taking care of parents then portion according to contribution should go to son. But only parents can decide this. So Will is very important.

In west daughter and son either contribute equal amount or they don't do at all. In India parents still stays with sons and in north India parents when visit married daughters house they don't even drink water from that house and leave "Sagan", which could be cash or goods. When we have these customs, it is wrong to equally divide property.

QUOTEIn general, I hate our (rather my) family values with this respect. 
Laws are creating inequality. I am woman and strongly oppose some law which are so-called empowering woman are nonsense and will destroy marriage and family. So much power had given to daughter-in-laws that had made them worst abuser. One side woman asks for equal rights on otherside they want reserved seats in bus and trains. Why?

08-03-2007, 02:15 AM

QUOTEEC takes U-turn in SC 
Pioneer.com
Abraham Thomas | New Delhi
Tells court it can suo motu recommend commissioner's removal
In a major U-turn, which could have serious bearing on the fate of Election Commissioner Navin Chawla, the Election Commission on Thursday told the Supreme Court that it enjoyed suo motu powers to recommend the removal of ECs if a petition is moved before it.

Significantly, in June 2006 the then CEC BB Tandon had filed an affidavit before the SC stating that the Commission could proceed against its members only if a reference was received by the President. Tandon's affidavit came in response to a petition filed by senior BJP leader Jaswant Singh seeking removal of Election Commissioner Navin Chawla for allegedly receiving funds for a trust run by his wife from MPLAD scheme of Congress leaders.

The BJP leaders had questioned Chawla's neutrality on the basis of his close link with the Congress. The matter came to the court after the Centre gave a clean chit to Chawla without consulting the CEC, who expressed helplessness in initiating any action without Presidential reference since the NDA petition was submitted to the Rashtrapati Bhavan.

Making a departure from its earlier view, the Commission said, "We recognise that in any given case the Election Commission can suo motu recommend removal (of Election Commissioner)." Finding that the court was little convinced of the Commission's view, advocate Meenakshi Arora went to the extent to suggest, "my statement can be recorded as it's on instruction of the CEC".

But the Bench of Justices Ashok Bhan and VS Sirpurkar asked the Commission to file an affidavit by Monday indicating its stand and the reason for its earlier stand.

The recent statement of the EC is all set to change the course of this case since the Bench has already expressed its intent to end the case by directing the CEC to look into the NDA representation. In this regard, the Bench indicated that the petitioner may be granted the liberty to approach the EC directly.

Senior advocate Arun Jaitley, appearing for the petitioner, stated that in the event such an order is passed, it must clearly indicate the CEC's admission that it could recommend the removal suo motu.

But the Centre opposed the court's suggestion indicating it would amount to allowing the petition. Additional Solicitor General Gopal Subramanium said, "CEC is intended to be a safety valve for purposes of removal of EC. It's one thing to say that in some extreme cases the CEC can take suo motu notice. But to assert suo motu recommending powers will run against the scheme of Parliament."

Reacting to this argument, the Bench said, "This was not the intention of Constitution framers that the CEC will not have powers. The Election Commission has to be insulated, it is an institution headed by a person having same status as that of a Supreme Court judge." Putting full faith in the Commission, the Bench added, "we expect that he (CEC) will act as per the advice according to law".
Elaborating the scheme of Constitution providing for removal of Election Commissioner under Article 324(5), the Bench said, "The Government will have the power. But in that, you have to get the opinion of CEC." It further held the petitioner's right to obtain the recommendation from CEC asking the Centre to file a detailed reply on all the above counts. 

The Bench noted that its suggestion does not intend to make out a case against Chawla. In an oblique reference the conservative approach of the Centre towards Chawla, the Bench added, "See it from the Constitution point of view and not X, Y or Z. They'll be there for two or three years." The matter is expected to come up for hearing on Tuesday next.

08-05-2007, 09:49 PM

EC avoids comment on Sonia Gandhi's foreign origin in SCQUOTEThe Election Commission has refrained from making any comments on Sonia Gandhi's foreign origin before the Supreme Court, which has decided to examine whether a person not born in the country is entitled to hold public office under the Constitution.

The court had sought a specific reply whether a person who had acquired citizenship by registration can be appointed to public office.

"It is respectfully submitted that EC has no comment to make on this constitutional question as it does not pertain to the conduct of elections or disqualifications of a candidate," the Election Commission said in its affidavit.

"None of the provisions nor any mandate of any other law confers any jurisdiction on it to interfere with what the successful candidate does or what post he is occupying after the elections are over," the Commission said while noting that its essential job relates to the superintendence, direction and control of elections.

The apex court had on April 16 directed the Commission to file its reply on the question "whether the person who is not born in the country can be appointed or elected to a public office under the Constitution." The court had issued notices to the Centre and the poll panel and made it clear that it would examine the issue in context of the persons who are citizens by registration

09-25-2007, 08:19 AM

<img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/argue.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='argue.gif' /> Courting seclusion

Saturday, September 22, 2007
12:01 IST
http://content.msn.co.in/News/National/Nat...07_1201.htm#top
By
Barkha Dutt

New Delhi: If you leave out the magnetic stardom of sportsmen and actors, middle-class India today really has just two heroes Ã¢â¬â the army and the judiciary.

The armyÃ¢â¬â¢s original job description was to protect borders, but a demanding country depends on it for everything else too, from rebuilding bridges after a tsunami to keeping the peace when religious riots erupt. And the courts today are seen by most of us as an ally in the crusade against corruption.

So, whether it is a contentious quota policy, pulling off polluting buses off the road or bringing down illegal buildings, we have come to treat the judiciary almost as an alternative mode of governance.

Stung by relentless intervention in what was once their domain, politicians have often objected strenuously to the overweening authority of the judiciary. But the knee-jerk contempt for the neta ensures that the public at large tends to deride these complaints.

Ordinary folk have sometimes devoted decades of their lives getting knocked about from court to court. but even so, they look towards the judiciary as their ultimate gateway of hope.

But the power that comes from playing Chief Arbiter in all our lives has bestowed judges with a near God-like seclusion from scepticism and scrutiny. Just as the believer is not meant to ask for proof at the temple of faith, we are expected not to demand evidence that the men and women who uphold our Constitution have the integrity to do so.

Every institution of IndiaÃ Ã¢â¬â politicians, journalists and corporate chieftains Ã¢â¬â comes within the purview of the judiciary but when it comes to auditing their own conscience, judges want everyone else to stay out.

If you have been following the controversy surrounding IndiaÃ¢â¬â¢s previous Chief Justice, Y.K. Sabharwal, you will know that four journalists from Mid-Day have been slapped with a prison sentence on charges of contempt of court for their critical reports of him.

Ã

Though the journalists are out on bail, the court made it clear that Ã¢â¬Åin the garb of scandalising a retired Chief Justice of IndiaÃ¢â¬Â¦ the image of the highest court has been tarnishedÃ¢â¬Â.

The charges against the retired judge are grave and complex. Essentially, he has been accused on two counts. The first allegation was that his verdict on shutting down lakhs of commercial establishments in Delhi benefited his sons, who had business partnerships with mall-owners Ã¢â¬â presumably the next logical destination for all those whose shops had been closed.

Several lawyers and jurists say Justice Sabharwal shouldnÃ¢â¬â¢t have sat in on this particular case because of the obvious conflict of interest. instead, they have claimed that he specifically assigned it to his own court.

Those campaigning against him pointed out that his sons had used the judgeÃ¢â¬â¢s official residence as their business address. Justice Sabharwal says this was a clerical error that was rectified as soon it came to his notice.

The second allegation relates to land allotted to his sons by the erstwhile Mulayam Singh government in Uttar Pradesh. His detractors claim that four different plots were sanctioned to the judgeÃ¢â¬â¢s sons by the state government at prices considerably lower than the market rate, while he was handling a case on whether or not Amar SinghÃ¢â¬â¢s private telephone conversations could be broadcast.

The judge had ruled against the publication or airing of the CDs, propelling the criticism that once again, a quid pro quo could not be ruled out.

PREV Page1 | Page2

ramana · 09-26-2007, 03:30 AM

From Deccan Chronicle, 25 Sept., 2007
QUOTEItâs time to fast track justice 
By Joginder Singh

The government is contemplating to constitute a National Judicial Commission. New legislation now being considered will empower the Commission to look into inquiries against Supreme Court and High Court judges on receiving specific complaints. The Commission is also expected to make recommendations for the appointment of judges to the Supreme Court and Chief Justices and judges to High Courts. It will be a recommendatory body, and will not be vested with any powers. All High Courts have unanimously opposed the proposal.

Amidst this, the government has been dodging the real issue of the quick disposal of cases. No move has been made to see how the huge backlog of cases can be reduced. Consider these official figures:

* Total cases pending in the Supreme Court on June 30, 2007: 43,580.

* Total cases pending in 21 High Courts on March 31, 2007: 3,678,043 (29,98,226 civil cases; 679,817 criminal cases).

* Total cases pending in district and subordinate courts on March 31, 2007: 24,956,919 (7,210,174 civil cases; 17,746,745 criminal cases).

A former attorney and a former Chief Justice of India have observed that the criminal justice system in India is on the verge of collapse, owing to an inordinate delay in getting a judicial verdict. Many litigants take recourse to a parallel mafia dominated system of "justice" that has sprung up in metros.

The way our country has been run, with wafer thin majorities, it is doubtful if any action taken by the political executive can be evaluated without taking into account vote bank considerations. In the name of equality, social justice and equity, every institution has been debunked and debased by the political class. Mahatma Gandhi had said in May 1939, "I would go to the length of giving the whole Congress a decent burial, rather than put up with the corruption that is rampant." This was his reaction to the corruption in the Congress ministries formed by a 1935 Act in six States in 1937. Things have gone from bad to worse over the years.

Criminalisation of politics is another aspect of corruption. A committee set up by the government had observed that a network of mafias was virtually running a parallel government, pushing the State apparatus into irrelevance. There has been a rapid growth of criminal gangs, armed senas, drug mafias, smuggling gangs and economic lobbies which have developed a network of contacts with bureaucrats, government functionaries, politicians and journalists. Criminalisation of politics has increased so much that known criminals are now members of legislatures. But instead of taking steps to reform the system, politicians are shedding crocodile tears. And when pressed to take action, they do so reluctantly.

The real villain in not providing speedy justice is the government. Of the sanctioned strength of 14,719 posts in district and subordinate courts in the country, 2,768 vacancies exist. In 21 High Courts with a sanctioned strength of 725 judges, 142 vacancies exist. How can anyone get justice when there is no judge to give a verdict? As per a Law Commission report, there should be 50 judges per one million people. In our country, the number is fewer than ten. Instead of wasting its time and Parliamentâs time, the government should focus on ensuring that justice is available on demand and without any delay.

The following steps can help: Apart from increasing the number of judges, it is imperative to fill the existing vacancies without any further delay. Filling of vacancies should be an ongoing process, instead of once in a blue moon exercise. Modern technology should be made available to the courts, along with the supporting staff. There is a need to develop a no-adjournment culture by fixing priorities and a time schedule. Petty cases like traffic offences, except for serious injuries or death, should be taken out of the normal channel of the courts, by developing an alternative redressal route. Cases relating to traffic challans and motor vehicle claims are innumerable. About 14.55 lakh bounced-cheque cases are pending.

Other cases in courts relate to marriage maintenance in which 2.42 lakh cases are pending, with a maximum of 34,230 in West Bengal. Cases involving food adulteration number 51,816, juvenile crime 43,863, and State transport challans 27,180. These cases can be fast-tracked.

These are vital issues on which the government should focus, rather than on the formation of a National Judicial Commission.

The Supreme Court, in S.P. Gupta v Union of India has laid down that the "Basic Structure" of the Constitution cannot be altered. The concept of independence of the judiciary is a noble concept which inspires the Constitutional scheme and constitutes the foundation on which rests the edifice of our democratic polity. The government should first put its own house in order, rather than trying to control the judiciary through this Commission. This ill-conceived proposal has no takers in the country, except for politicians.

Joginder Singh is a former director of the CBI

09-26-2007, 05:52 AM

Gujarat and Rajastan had fast track courts. During Emergency days, govt tried fast courts and it back fired, because courts were busy clearing cases without proper hearing.
They should hire more Judges, streamline law, Have people court concept.

12-11-2007, 03:26 AM

QUOTEJudges cannot create law, only enforce: SC 
Pioneer News Service | New Delhi
Posted online: December 10, 2007
In the light of widespread concern of country's political fraternity and a section of the media, being in the mood of slef-introspection the Supreme Court on Monday scolded lower courts saying that the judges should now their jurisdiction and should not encroach on the legislative or executive domain.

Coming down heavily on judicial activism, the apex court deprecated the tendency of courts in India to rule on issues like nursery admissions and autorickshaw overcharging and said judges should know their "limits" and not to try to run government.

While performing an autopsy on the judgments of its own and its subsidiaries, a two-member bench said, "... We are repeatedly coming across cases where judges are unjustifiably trying to perform executive or legislative functions."

"In our opinion, this is clearly unconstitutional. In the name of judicial activism, judges cannot cross their limits and try to takeover functions which belong to another organ of the State."

"They must remember that judicial activism is not an unguided missile, failure to bear this in mind would lead to chaos. Public adulation must not sway the judges and personal aggrandizement must be eschewed," a bench of Justices AK Mathur and Markandey Katju observed.

Looking inward the apex court also held that the directions given by it in the assembly proceedings in Uttar Pradesh in 1998 and Jharkhand in 2005 as "glaring examples of deviations from the clearly provided constitutional scheme of separation of powers." The bench listed a number of local issues like unauthorised schools, criteria for free seats in schools, the size of speed-breakers on Delhi roads and enhancing of road fines dealt with by the Delhi High Court which, they said, were "matters pertaining exclusively to the executive or legislative domain." "If there is a law, judges can enforce it. But judges cannot create a law and seek to enforce it," the bench observed.

The observations came in a 22-page verdict with the Court's setting aside a Punjab and Haryana High Court order directing creation of posts of tractor driver to accommodate two gardeners employed on daily wages at a golf club run by Haryana Tourism Corporation and were asked to perform the duties of tractor drivers.

12-17-2007, 07:22 AM

<!--emo&

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif' />
Shield for corrupt babus, netas soon
17 Dec 2007, 0221 hrs IST,Subodh Ghildiyal ,TNN
NEW DELHI: It may soon be difficult to link ill-gotten money of "public servants" to corruption charges.

Government is mulling a change in the definition of "known sources of income" under the Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA).

It plans to limit the "known sources..." to money received from "lawful source" and delete the additional requirement that "such receipt" be declared under rules applicable to a public servant.

Top sources said a decision to modify what constitutes "known sources of income" has been taken by a Group of Ministers, headed by Home Minister Shivraj Patil, looking into the amendments to PCA.

Explaining its implications, experts point out if a corruption probe were to reveal a sum of undeclared money and link it to illegal earnings, the accused may be able to wriggle out by claiming that the money was from other sources like farm income or rentals.

This is because the key requirement of declaring extra income outside of salary for it to be legal will be done away with. Public servants are also bound by "service rules" to file annual property returns and declare extra income to the government, besides the I-T returns.

While service rules may still remain in force, it is only the existing PCA which imputes a criminal intent to non-intimation.

Once non-intimation is deleted from PCA, experts said it would make it easier for tainted officials, as also MPs and MLAs, to escape the net of law enforcement authorities. Ironically, the GoM has taken the decision on complaints that the said clause led to harassment of honest officers. While corrupt officers resort to explaining unaccounted funds and properties as accruing from farms or other such assets, agencies have been able to pin them down by citing non-declared income as illegal, as required under the PCA.

Altaf Ahmed, former Additional Solicitor General, says the said provision puts the burden of justifying 'extra' money on a public servant. He feels if the GoM's suggestion is accepted, it will take the burden away from an officer "when caught". Sources said the GoM has agreed to trim the explanation of "known sources of income" in Section 13 dealing with "criminal misconduct by a public servant".

The 'explanation' says, "Known sources of income means income received from any lawful source and such receipt has been intimated in accordance with the provisions of any law, rules or orders for the time being applicable to a public servant." If the GoM's view is accepted, it would end at "any lawful source".

The 'good news' for babus and MPs/MLAs comes after the GoM earlier decided to extend the immunity from legal action - sanction for prosecution - from serving public servants to those who have retired or ceased to be one, as reported earlier by TOI .

01-18-2008, 02:41 AM

QUOTEAppointing judges 
The Pioneer Edit Desk
Collegium must not be ignored
The Government's disclosure that as many as 351 additional judges were appointed permanent judges of different High Courts between January 1999 and July 2007 without consulting the Supreme Court collegium comes as a surprise. Though it cannot be denied that permanent appointments to the High Courts are steps in the right direction, the procedural shortcoming renders them somewhat flawed. There is a regular procedure laid down for the appointment of judges in the Indian Constitution, which has also been interpreted by the Supreme Court. A law, therefore, exists -- the procedure that must be followed for these appointments as also when additional judges of the High Court are given permanent status is clearly settled. The Constitution calls for consultation between the Union Government and a collegium of senior superior court judges that includes the Chief Justice of India, selected senior judges of the Supreme Court and the Chief Justice of the High Court concerned. It is a settled position in law that such consultation has to be substantial and meaningful. It cannot be an empty or meaningless gesture. In fact, judicial interpretation over the years has put the power to appoint judges essentially in the hands of this judicial collegium. It goes without saying that the views of the judiciary, which takes into account the performance of those appointed to judicial posts, is as important as Union Government's appraisal as well as inputs by the Bar. Deviation from this procedure can convey, needlessly so, the impression that there is lack of fairness. This would be unfortunate. It hardly needs saying that judicial appointments should not only be impartial, but also be seen to be so. When the Government takes upon itself the sole initiative to appoint judges, the procedure acquires a grey tone.

That the established procedure, tilted in favour of the judicial collegium, has aroused criticism and may not entirely be satisfactory is a different matter. It is open to the Government to work for a change in the procedure for the appointment of judges. But as long as a procedure exists, the Government must work within the confines of legality. It must be said, however, that the filling of vacancies in the various High Courts is necessary. There is a shortfall of judges in the country as well as a serious backlog of cases. Though this is a phenomenon more pronounced in the lower courts, it is also a serious matter in the higher courts where the crowded dockets of judges make litigants suffer, and unnecessarily so. Therefore, while the Government should not delay judicial appointments, it must ensure that the existing procedure is followed.

Appoint couple of more Judge Banerjees, that will solve court problem.

**acharya** · 02-24-2008, 06:40 PM

Indiaâs litany of protests seen as much ado about nothing

* Supreme Court is beginning to worry that legal complaints are adding to a massive backlog for overburdened courts

NEW DELHI: Lawyer Raj Kumar Pandey says he has filed at least 200 court cases in the past 10 years accusing people of disrespecting the national flag - a crime in India.

Pandey is always on the watch for infractions and his latest target is top Indian tennis star Sania Mirza, whose feet were shown on a table near the flag at the Australian Open. The lawyer said this âinsulted national honour.â But Mirza is not the only one facing legal headaches, as an increasing amount of litigation and street protests have led to a flurry of bans on films and books and court cases against celebrities. âThere is increasing evidence that the pluralist foundations of this country ... are being subverted by narrow-minded, sectarian zealots,â journalist Jug Suraiya wrote in a column for The Times of India. For Mirza, who has been criticised for wearing short tennis skirts, shooting a TV commercial in a mosque and for remarks seen as endorsing premarital sex, the flag row was the last straw. She responded by refusing to play in India. âThe controversies have been going on for a long time. It is not easy to deal with such stuff,â she said, announcing her decision this month. On the cultural front, a mega Bollywood production was banned in central Madhya Pradesh state this week after protesters said the historical romance between a Hindu princess and a Mughal king showed their women in a poor light. Last week, Indiaâs most populous state, Uttar Pradesh, banned the book âRaniâ (Queen) after protesters objected to a fictionalised romance between the heroine who fought against British rule and a British official. They said the tale besmirched her memory.

Legal complaints: Indiaâs Supreme Court is also beginning to worry that legal complaints - which anyone in India has the right to file - are adding to a massive backlog for the countryâs overburdened courts. There are 30 million cases pending.

âWe are engaged in doing frivolous work. We are unable to do regular work,â Justice Markandey Katju said this month in the Supreme Court, expressing frustration at the growing number of such complaints. For instance, a court in Bhopal in central India is hearing 76 cases, all filed by Mirzaâs accuser Pandey, involving alleged violations of Indiaâs Flag Code which forbids, for instance, hoisting a grubby flag or using it in ads. But Pandey, who has also filed a case against cricket ace Sachin Tendulkar for cutting a cake with the flagâs saffron-white-and-green colours, said he will continue his crusade to protect the flagâs sanctity even if it overloads the courts.

âI salute the flag every time I see it. I stand up every time I hear the national anthem. I feel very strongly about it,â Pandey said. Meanwhile, Hollywood star Richard Gere is still battling to clear his name on charges of obscenity after he kissed actress Shilpa Shetty on the cheek at an AIDS fundraising event. âMost of these protests are not really necessary,â said Delhi University sociologist Patricia Oberoi. âBut there seems to be anxiety about Westernisation and changing lifestylesâ as Indiaâs economy booms. In addition, the countryâs most celebrated artist, MF Husain, has been in self-imposed exile in Dubai and London for two years following protests by hardline Hindu groups opposed to his paintings of nude goddesses. In 2006, one extremist Hindu group offered an 11.5-million-dollar reward for the assassination of the 93-year-old painter.

And Bangladeshi author Taslima Nasreen has been in hiding in New Delhi since last November after radical Muslims in Kolkata, where she had been living, protested against âanti-Islamicâ passages in her works. In many cases, commentators believe people are seeking electoral mileage. âPoliticians gain by playing one group against another,â said Dipankar Gupta, a sociology professor at Jawaharlal Nehru University, adding the âlaw needs to come down hard on these protests.â afp

Capt M Kumar · 03-12-2008, 11:31 AM

<img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/mad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='mad.gif' /> Plea against Lalu: Can a sitting MP contest from another LS seat?
12 Mar 2008, 0809 hrs IST,TNN
Print Save EMail Write to Editor
NEW DELHI: Can a politician, while being a member of the Lok Sabha, contest the election to the same House from another constituency? This interesting question has been raised before the Supreme Court in a petition accusing railway minister Lalu Prasad of getting elected to Parliament violating election rules.

Advocate P C Sharma, whose petition was dismissed by the Allahabad high court On jurisdiction ground, said that Lalu Prasad contested elections to the Lok Sabha in 2004 from Madhepura and Chapra constituencies in Bihar.

The election to Chapra was countermanded by the Election Commission on the ground of large-scale booth capturing and rigging, but Lalu got elected to Lok Sabha from Madhepura. He took the oath as MP from Madhepura on May 26, 2004.

However, the election to Chapra was held on May 31, 2004, a clear five days after he got elected as MP from Mad hepura and on June 2, 2004, Prasad was declared elected to the Lok Sabha, the petitioner said.

Bharatvarsh · 04-01-2008, 03:25 AM

Does anyone know about the law regarding male genital mutilation (aka circumcision) in India?

Is it legal for anyone who wants to have it done on their son?

What about female genital mutilation, is this practice prevalent anywhere in India and if so, is it legal?

I was watching a Penn and Teller "Bullshit" episode regarding this, which reminded me of it:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=v7FgMOJIYEM

In Canada clipping off dicks is considered ok by law, but the equivalent procedure for women (prevalent in parts of Africa) is a criminal offense, oh and yes Canada supposedly guarantees male-female equality.

Capt M Kumar · 04-19-2008, 11:22 AM

<img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/argue.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='argue.gif' /> EXPRESS EDITORIAL

Rent a politician
Posted online: Saturday, April 19, 2008 at 0034 hrs Print Email
SC ruling can transform Delhi, and by precedent other cities. But thereâs Congress and BJP

The Indian Express

: In a city of 13 million can two lakh people who donât have right on their side block a reform thatâs been decades overdue? Of course they can. So anxiety is the smart response to the Supreme Courtâs burial of the absurd, 50-year-old rent provisions governing Delhiâs shops. Traders, a hugely powerful lobby in the city with equal influence in both the Congress and BJP, will want to exhume the old rules that allowed, say, a Connaught Place restaurant-owner to pay a monthly rent that wonât buy a dinner for two at his eatery. Elections in Delhi are coming. The Congress is nervous and the BJP is hopeful. Between them these two parties have achieved a beautiful consensus that the reformed Delhi Rent Act should not be notified. So since 1995 Parliamentâs will and the presidentâs assent have been ignored in the nationâs capital. How difficult is it then for Delhiâs politicians to use the system to stall the court-mandated change?

Related Stories

Five-day trade union conference from todayCouple âshelterâ Andhra Naxal, heldPMK chief meets SoniaParty gets new office-bearersIn attendance
Ad Links

Commercial Rent Business Real Estate Delhi Lease

But, just to indulge in a fantasy, supposing the change goes through and that too quickly, what will happen? A small miracle. The real estate market in Delhiâs commercial heart will open up. Space will be freed and pricing distortion will be removed. There will be more investment, bigger businesses, more jobs and, yes, the once-grand CP may lose its ragged look. In fact, one of the problems big, organised retail has faced is the lack of commercial space in some of the most attractive city areas. Market rents for shops will get the big boys in and the knock-on effects of big retail are well known.

The familiar argument against all this will be: Where will the âsmall boysâ go? Well, first, asking landlords to receive a pittance for their properties is not social justice. It is anyway absurd to say that all landlords are rich property barons, so the emotive argument doesnât work either. Second, shopkeepers are hardly the only social group being asked to pay market prices. Delhiâs residential tenancy prices are largely market-determined now and as a result the city has a wide range of rented properties on supply for all income groups. Third, there can be little sympathy for businesses run on the principle that a large part of costs (rent) will be politically fixed while income (prices of commodities and services sold) will be market-determined. Those among Delhiâs traders who have built a business model on â50s rent levels will simply have to reinvent their model. Delhi, as a result, will be a better, more liveable city. Does that argument work for the cityâs politicians?

editor@expressindia.com

Capt M Kumar · 06-14-2008, 10:13 AM

<img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/clap.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='clap.gif' /> NEW DELHI: It is the judiciary which makes the executive legally responsible to the people for its actions, Chief Justice of India (CJI) K G Balakrishnan has said giving the formal stamp on the watchdog status of the courts.
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/News/P...how/3128418.cms

Login




Remember me Lost Password?