Law, Lawyers, Judiciary

[Capt M Kumar]

The court's abhorrence towards the alleged wanton killing of Azad was also in tune with its robust monitoring of Sohrabuddin fake encounter case. It displayed the importance the constitutional court attaches to right to life guaranteed to all citizens under Article 21, which says "no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law". http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india...351176.cms



The expression 'person' in Article 21 must include security personnel engaged in anti-Naxalite operations in the forests of West Bengal, Orissa and Chhattisgarh. They too have been killed. Though we can term it as occupational hazard for securitymen, will their mothers, widows and children not question the Republic for their irreparable loss?

[Capt M Kumar]

"However, more than 12 years have elapsed since the act was committed, we are of the opinion that the life sentence awarded by the High Court need not be enhanced in view of the factual position discussed in the earlier paragraphs." said the bench in its one of such replacement.



The original para in the judgement had read: "In the case on hand, though Graham Staines and his two minor sons were burnt to death while they were sleeping inside a station wagon at Manoharpur, the intention was to teach a lesson to Graham Staines about his religious activities, namely, converting poor tribals to Christianity. http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news...364268.cms

[Capt M Kumar]

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has again pulled up the government for its failure to overhaul personal laws of the minority communities, saying that it was a reflection on their secular credentials.



The court also said on Tuesday that government's attempts to reform personal laws don't go beyond Hindus who have been more tolerant of such initiatives.



"The Hindu community has been tolerant to these statutory interventions. But there appears a lack of secular commitment as it has not happened for other religions." http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india...456761.cms

[Capt M Kumar]

Causing a major embarrassment to the Delhi Government, Lokayukta Justice Manmohan Sarin has recommended PWD Minister Raj Kumar Chauhan’s dismissal — followed by his prosecution — to the President.



The Lokayukta held that the Minister tried to help Tivoli Garden Resorts owners in a case of tax evasion. “In view of such grave misconduct without any mitigating circumstances, it is recommended to the President that Chauhan, by his action and misconduct, has become disentitled to…hold office,” Justice Sarin stated.



http://www.dailypioneer.com/320339/Dismi...-Prez.html

[Capt M Kumar]

The court's anguish was palpable. A Bench of Justices Dalveer Bhandari and Deepak Verma asked the government why additional subsidised food grains be not released to 150 poor districts ahead of summer months when starvation and malnutrition visit the population like an annual ritual? http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india...041699.cms



The Bench said, "The government has to do something. It is a tragedy of sorts. We have our food granaries full and in many places overflowing. And prediction is for a bumper crop this year.

[Capt M Kumar]

"The said prayer of Swamy to appoint him as special public prosecutor and direct the CBI, the Enforcement Directorate and other prosecuting agencies of the government to assist him in conducting the case is, therefore, not tenable in law and is not worth acceptable," CBI said in its four-page reply.



The investigating agency emphasised that the Centre, as directed by the Supreme Court, has already appointed senior advocate U U Lalit as the special public prosecutor in the 2G spectrum case.



Regarding Swamy's plea that his private complaint should be clubbed with the CBI's case, the agency said, "Clubbing of both the cases is not in the interest of justice. The complaint of Swamy may be dealt with separately as per the law." http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india...159074.cms

[Capt M Kumar]

Your comment on the article "SC terms arming Salwa Judum 'unconstitutional'"' is now displayed on timesofindia.com.

"I think 1 of d very few areas where MMS got it right was dis viz. fighting d menace of maoists. SC in it's legal wisdom has given very unwise decision and should be condemned 4 doing so. SC should have ordered to improve d plight of SPOs if that was d concern. In face of armed maoists who r armed may be from Pak and China, SC has not applied it's mind properly to fight d menace and I think, this matter may go to full bench."

To reply to this comment , or see the whole conversation , click here

Thanks for sharing your thoughts and keep up the good work! http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/usrma...ommented=1

[Capt M Kumar]

NEW DELHI: A petition filed in the Supreme Court on Tuesday has sought a reconsideration of the apex court's judgment quashing the Rs 11,000 crore tax demand on Vodafone, saying that Chief Justice of India S H Kapadia who gave the lead verdict should have recused from hearing the case. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india...982851.cms



The petitioner, advocate M L Sharma, said that while ruling in favour of the telecom major, the Justice Kapadia-led three-judge bench considered a due diligence report filed by Ernst and Young -- the global consultancy firm with which the CJI's son Hoshnar Kapadia has been working as senior manager since 2008.