Foreign visitors in Bali are now required to carry their passports and stay permits at all times when outside their accommodations. The new rule is part of a crackdown by immigration authorities aiming to enforce visa compliance, as patrols intensify across the island to monitor and penalize violations of immigration laws.

Foreigners in Bali must carry passport and stay permit amid immigration crackdown

Lakshadweep, a tropical archipelago off the southwestern coast of India, is a haven of natural beauty and pristine landscapes. Comprising 36 coral islands, the Indian region boasts of turquoise lagoons, coral reefs and ivory beaches that together form a picturesque setting.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi recently visited Lakshadweep, where he did snorkelling and posted about his experience on the microblogging site X.

He wrote, "For those who wish to embrace the adventurer in them, Lakshadweep has to be on your list. During my stay, I also tried snorkelling - what an exhilarating experience it was."&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
For those who wish to embrace the adventurer in them, Lakshadweep has to be on your list. 
 
During my stay, I also tried snorkelling - what an exhilarating experience it was! <a href="https://t.co/rikUTGlFN7">pic.twitter.com/rikUTGlFN7</a>
— Narendra Modi (@narendramodi) <a href="https://twitter.com/narendramodi/status/1742831497776951361?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 4, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

&nbsp;

Unfortunately, his visit soon led to a controversy after derogatory remarks by Maldives' ministers that led to an unexpected diplomatic row between India and Maldives. Many Indians objected to the disparaging remarks and joined the boycott campaign against Maldives, and soon discussions about visiting and promoting Indian destinations began to surface on X, and Lakshadweep started trending over the past week.

However, did you know that every person, who is not a native of Lakshadweep, shall have to obtain a permit for a visit to the archipelago?

But don't worry, we will provide you with all the information you need to know if you intend to visit Lakshadweep.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/maldives-tourism-body-says-indian-tourists-boost-their-economy-678538">Maldives tourism body says Indian tourists boost their economy</a>

<h2>How to apply for the permit?</h2>

There are mainly two ways to apply for a permit to visit Lakshadweep islands.

<h2>Offline Permit</h2>

One needs to download the application form from the Lakshadweep Administration website (http://www.lakshadweeptourism.com/contact.html) or get it from the District Collector’s office in Kavaratti. 
 
Once the form has been obtained, it must be filled fully and then sent to the Collector's office&nbsp;together with the necessary paperwork. &nbsp;

<h2>Online Permit</h2>

The easiest and fastest way to apply for a permit is to do that online. 
 
One needs to visit the ePermit portal (https://epermit.utl.gov.in/pages/signup). Make an account and fill in the necessary information in the form. After that, one must select their island and travel dates, upload any necessary papers&nbsp;and make the required payment. The permission should arrive by email 15 days before travel.

<h2>Fee Details</h2>

Each candidate must pay an application cost of $ 0.60 (Rs 50) and the heritage fee is $1.20 (Rs 100) for children aged between 12 and 18 while for individuals above 18, the heritage fee is $2.40 (Rs 200).

Documents Required

-A clear passport-sized photograph

-A photocopy of one’s valid ID proof (Aadhaar card, voter ID, driver's license etc.)

-Proof of travel (flight tickets or boat reservation details)

-Hotel Booking confirmation (if staying in a resort)

(With inputs from agencies)

Lakshadweep, a tropical archipelago off the southwestern coast of India, is a haven of natural beauty and pristine landscapes. Comprising 36 coral islands, the Indian region boasts of turquoise lagoons, coral reefs and ivory beaches that together form a picturesque setting.

Lakshadweep, a tropical archipelago off the southwestern coast of India, is a haven of natural beauty and pristine landscapes. Comprising 36 coral islands, the Indian region boasts of turquoise lagoons, coral reefs and ivory beaches that together form a picturesque setting. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi recently visited Lakshadweep, where he did snorkelling and posted about his experience on the microblogging site X. He wrote, "For those who wish to embrace the adventurer in them, Lakshadweep has to be on your list. During my stay, I also tried snorkelling - what an exhilarating experience it was." For those who wish to embrace the adventurer in them, Lakshadweep has to be on your list. During my stay, I also tried snorkelling - what an exhilarating experience it was! pic.twitter.com/rikUTGlFN7 — Narendra Modi (@narendramodi) January 4, 2024 × Unfortunately, his visit soon led to a controversy after derogatory remarks by Maldives' ministers that led to an unexpected diplomatic row between India and Maldives. Many Indians objected to the disparaging remarks and joined the boycott campaign against Maldives, and soon discussions about visiting and promoting Indian destinations began to surface on X, and Lakshadweep started trending over the past week. However, did you know that every person, who is not a native of Lakshadweep, shall have to obtain a permit for a visit to the archipelago? But don't worry, we will provide you with all the information you need to know if you intend to visit Lakshadweep. Also read | Maldives tourism body says Indian tourists boost their economy How to apply for the permit? There are mainly two ways to apply for a permit to visit Lakshadweep islands. Offline Permit One needs to download the application form from the Lakshadweep Administration website (http://www.lakshadweeptourism.com/contact.html) or get it from the District Collector’s office in Kavaratti. Once the form has been obtained, it must be filled fully and then sent to the Collector's office together with the necessary paperwork. Online Permit The easiest and fastest way to apply for a permit is to do that online. One needs to visit the ePermit portal (https://epermit.utl.gov.in/pages/signup). Make an account and fill in the necessary information in the form. After that, one must select their island and travel dates, upload any necessary papers and make the required payment. The permission should arrive by email 15 days before travel. Fee Details Each candidate must pay an application cost of $ 0.60 (Rs 50) and the heritage fee is $1.20 (Rs 100) for children aged between 12 and 18 while for individuals above 18, the heritage fee is $2.40 (Rs 200). Documents Required -A clear passport-sized photograph -A photocopy of one’s valid ID proof (Aadhaar card, voter ID, driver's license etc.) -Proof of travel (flight tickets or boat reservation details) -Hotel Booking confirmation (if staying in a resort) (With inputs from agencies)

Planning to visit Lakshadweep? Here’s how you can get the permit

Some uniform changes have been announced by the Marines in the US. These include permitting different socks, longer hair and more nail colour options for women. &nbsp;

The aim of the changes is to “positively impact diversity, equity, and inclusion,” a statement of the Corps related to the announcement on Wednesday read, as per the Marine Corps Times. &nbsp;

Earlier, Marines were allowed to have “bulk of hair” of maximum two inches. Now, the limit has been raised to three inches. &nbsp;

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/watch-us-president-joe-biden-mistakenly-refers-to-defense-secretary-lloyd-austin-as-secretary-of-state-465613" hreflang="en">Watch: US President Joe Biden mistakenly refers to Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin as secretary of state &nbsp;</a>

Not just this, male Marines will now be able to shave “undesirable hair that extends beyond/below the natural hairline,” like a “widow’s peak.” &nbsp;&nbsp;

It has also allowed female Marines to wear “clear,” “nude,” or “fingernail polish that resembles the wearer’s skin tone and covers the whole nail.” &nbsp;

Marines can also wear black, olive drab, or Marine camouflage helmet caps in some circumstances, but they must be worn “underneath the helmet and may be worn as an outer garment for short periods when the helmet is removed.” &nbsp;&nbsp;

Watch:&nbsp;US President Biden calls for unity among democracies ahead of meeting with Polish President Duda

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/us-president-biden-calls-for-unity-among-democracies-ahead-of-meeting-with-polish-president-duda-465583/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

They are also permitted to wear olive drab- or black-coloured socks along with the regular coyote brown. &nbsp;&nbsp;

The female Marines are still not permitted to wear hair in a ponytail form. It is the only service branch to not allow it. Currently, they can only put their hair in a “half ponytail” while working out. &nbsp;&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)

Some uniform changes have been announced by the Marines in the US. These include permitting different socks, longer hair and more nail colour options for women. The aim of the changes is to “positively impact diversity, equity, and inclusion,” a statement of the Corps related to the announcement on Wednesday read, as per the Marine Corps Times.

Some uniform changes have been announced by the Marines in the US. These include permitting different socks, longer hair and more nail colour options for women. The aim of the changes is to “positively impact diversity, equity, and inclusion,” a statement of the Corps related to the announcement on Wednesday read, as per the Marine Corps Times. Earlier, Marines were allowed to have “bulk of hair” of maximum two inches. Now, the limit has been raised to three inches. Also Read | Watch: US President Joe Biden mistakenly refers to Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin as secretary of state Not just this, male Marines will now be able to shave “undesirable hair that extends beyond/below the natural hairline,” like a “widow’s peak.” It has also allowed female Marines to wear “clear,” “nude,” or “fingernail polish that resembles the wearer’s skin tone and covers the whole nail.” Marines can also wear black, olive drab, or Marine camouflage helmet caps in some circumstances, but they must be worn “underneath the helmet and may be worn as an outer garment for short periods when the helmet is removed.” Watch: US President Biden calls for unity among democracies ahead of meeting with Polish President Duda × They are also permitted to wear olive drab- or black-coloured socks along with the regular coyote brown. The female Marines are still not permitted to wear hair in a ponytail form. It is the only service branch to not allow it. Currently, they can only put their hair in a “half ponytail” while working out. (With inputs from agencies)

US Marines announce uniform changes, permit longer hair, different socks, more nail colours

At dusk the converted school bus pulled up to the little park as it does every Friday evening, and a line began to form. A man with a clipboard made his way down the line taking names and asking questions: “You need any socks or hygiene kits tonight? Anything I can pray for?”

Then came the main event: Volunteers in the bus, run by a group called City Relief, handed each waiting person a cup of hot vegetable soup, two big rolls and a cup of hot chocolate.

Among the regulars waiting here, at Peter Francisco Park behind Newark Penn Station, the news that city officials plan to make it harder to give food to homeless people did not go over well.

“I think it’s wrong,” Olivia Fontana, 40, who has lived in a shelter for the past year, said this month as she waited in the soup line, which typically feeds about 60 people. “People need to eat.”

A few days before Thanksgiving, the city sent out an email to churches and relief organizations announcing that it was prohibiting feeding homeless people in public places, including parks and the train station.

After inquiries from The New York Times about the policy, the city shifted and said that groups who give out food would need a permit and that the new rule would be specifically targeted at those who give food to the homeless.

“The ordinance the city is working on will prohibit agencies and individuals without a permit from feeding residents without addresses,” a spokeswoman for Mayor Ras Baraka said in an email. “All violators will be ticketed and fined.”

Putting restrictions on perhaps the most fundamental act of human charity, feeding the hungry, may seem harsh. But many places do it. According to a 2019 report from the National Homelessness Law Center, at least 17 cities across the U.S. either ban giving out food in public areas or require permits for it, some with onerous conditions attached.

Tristia Bauman, a senior attorney at the law center, said that by singling out homeless people, Newark’s ordinance could violate the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause and also impinge food donors’ First Amendment rights, since courts have found that food sharing is a form of protected speech.

“This discriminatory restriction seems based on animus toward people experiencing homelessness, rather than a legitimate government interest,” Bauman said in an email.

A few miles away in New York City, the Coalition for the Homeless serves about 1,000 hot meals seven nights a week in 25 pop-up locations. While the city technically requires a $70-a-year permit to serve food “at a fixed location for a temporary period of time,” the group has never been asked for a distribution permit, said David Giffen, the coalition’s executive director, adding “nor do we think we should be.”

“In terms of going to the streets and handing out meals, people are just hungry, and we have to feed them,” Giffen said. “This can’t be buried in bureaucratic morasses. We have to be able to respond to a need. These are life-or-death issues.”

Newark officials offered various reasons for the crackdown, saying the city needed to ensure that food being given out was safe, and that distributing food in public places actually encouraged street homelessness. The city wants those who wish to donate food to bring it to shelters and soup kitchens instead.

But the shifting ground also reflects a struggle over marquee public space.

Restrictions on food handouts have been pushed by a business-improvement group in the Ironbound neighborhood, which includes Peter Francisco Park, a well-trodden 1-acre triangle where weekends bring a steady stream of food donors and often end with the park filled with litter. The Ironbound, like much of Newark’s downtown, is undergoing a wave of redevelopment.

Seth Grossman, executive director of the Ironbound Business Improvement District, said groups that brought food sometimes did not clean up trash left behind.

“It’s always important to be a good neighbor, and what constitutes a good neighbor is a person who is safe, clean and considerate of each other,” he said.

Newark’s move to limit food handouts, which the city has periodically discussed for at least five years, also comes as the state of New Jersey and New Jersey Transit are gearing up for a $190 million makeover of Newark Penn Station, an 85-year-old neoclassical behemoth where one morning this month a dozen men were slumped across long benches in the grand, high-ceilinged waiting room.

Like cities across the country, Newark—New Jersey’s biggest city, with a population of 311,000 — has seen homelessness worsen during the pandemic. The nonprofit that the city contracts with to do homeless outreach, Bridges, has tallied 1,366 people who have spent an unsheltered night so far this year. The equivalent figure in New York City, which has nearly 30 times as many residents as Newark, would be about 37,000 unsheltered people, far higher than any estimate of New York’s street-homeless population.

Under Baraka, the city has taken steps to reduce homelessness. He created an office of homeless services last year and appointed a former Bridges official, Sakinah Hoyte, to be the city’s homelessness czar. This year, the city opened a housing facility called Hope Village, made from converted shipping containers, which is designed to help transition people who live in and around the train station into permanent housing. The city is converting a former schoolhouse into another shelter and housing-services center.

It was in the context of these new programs that Hoyte sent out a “public feeding letter” on Nov. 19 announcing an outright ban on giving food to homeless people in public areas.

“Feeding people in parks doesn’t encourage any sort of transitioning folks into housing,” Hoyte said in an interview. “It keeps people living on sidewalks and sleeping outside.”

She said the city welcomed relief groups offering homeless people emergency supplies like warm clothes and helping connect them to social services, but that public feeding should not be part of the picture.

To City Relief’s chief program officer, Josiah Haken, this approach seemed backward: Offering people food where they are, he said, is often the first step to getting them off the street.

“The meal is really important,” he said. “It’s what helps us build trust, and we leverage that trust to help people move forward. The simple truth is that there aren’t enough resources in Newark for the people that are in the street.”

Besides, he said, no one decides to live in the street or a train station, rather than in an apartment, because of the convenience of a nearby free meal.

The day after Hoyte spoke to the Times, the city had changed course and said it would require permits instead. Haken said City Relief would abide by the city’s permit process.

Inside the train station this month, several men who live there said they had sometimes seen the New Jersey Transit police telling groups that came in with food donations to distribute the food outside.

“I saw them stop people from coming in here the other day,” said Eugene Bradley, 41. “It’s stupid, inconsiderate and pointless.”

But Vincent Jiles, 57, who has lived in the station for three years, said he understood that New Jersey Transit was trying to run a train station, not a shelter.

“This is a place of business,” he said. “You’ve got a lot of movement through here, and by distributing food, it can interrupt the businesses.” Sometimes when people bring in food, he said, “People go a little crazy, and then it can make a big mess.”

At dusk the converted school bus pulled up to the little park as it does every Friday evening, and a line began to form. A man with a clipboard made his way down the line taking names and asking questions: “You need any socks or hygiene kits tonight?

At dusk the converted school bus pulled up to the little park as it does every Friday evening, and a line began to form. A man with a clipboard made his way down the line taking names and asking questions: “You need any socks or hygiene kits tonight? Anything I can pray for?” Then came the main event: Volunteers in the bus, run by a group called City Relief, handed each waiting person a cup of hot vegetable soup, two big rolls and a cup of hot chocolate. Among the regulars waiting here, at Peter Francisco Park behind Newark Penn Station, the news that city officials plan to make it harder to give food to homeless people did not go over well. “I think it’s wrong,” Olivia Fontana, 40, who has lived in a shelter for the past year, said this month as she waited in the soup line, which typically feeds about 60 people. “People need to eat.” A few days before Thanksgiving, the city sent out an email to churches and relief organizations announcing that it was prohibiting feeding homeless people in public places, including parks and the train station. After inquiries from The New York Times about the policy, the city shifted and said that groups who give out food would need a permit and that the new rule would be specifically targeted at those who give food to the homeless. “The ordinance the city is working on will prohibit agencies and individuals without a permit from feeding residents without addresses,” a spokeswoman for Mayor Ras Baraka said in an email. “All violators will be ticketed and fined.” Putting restrictions on perhaps the most fundamental act of human charity, feeding the hungry, may seem harsh. But many places do it. According to a 2019 report from the National Homelessness Law Center, at least 17 cities across the U.S. either ban giving out food in public areas or require permits for it, some with onerous conditions attached. Tristia Bauman, a senior attorney at the law center, said that by singling out homeless people, Newark’s ordinance could violate the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause and also impinge food donors’ First Amendment rights, since courts have found that food sharing is a form of protected speech. “This discriminatory restriction seems based on animus toward people experiencing homelessness, rather than a legitimate government interest,” Bauman said in an email. A few miles away in New York City, the Coalition for the Homeless serves about 1,000 hot meals seven nights a week in 25 pop-up locations. While the city technically requires a $70-a-year permit to serve food “at a fixed location for a temporary period of time,” the group has never been asked for a distribution permit, said David Giffen, the coalition’s executive director, adding “nor do we think we should be.” “In terms of going to the streets and handing out meals, people are just hungry, and we have to feed them,” Giffen said. “This can’t be buried in bureaucratic morasses. We have to be able to respond to a need. These are life-or-death issues.” Newark officials offered various reasons for the crackdown, saying the city needed to ensure that food being given out was safe, and that distributing food in public places actually encouraged street homelessness. The city wants those who wish to donate food to bring it to shelters and soup kitchens instead. But the shifting ground also reflects a struggle over marquee public space. Restrictions on food handouts have been pushed by a business-improvement group in the Ironbound neighborhood, which includes Peter Francisco Park, a well-trodden 1-acre triangle where weekends bring a steady stream of food donors and often end with the park filled with litter. The Ironbound, like much of Newark’s downtown, is undergoing a wave of redevelopment. Seth Grossman, executive director of the Ironbound Business Improvement District, said groups that brought food sometimes did not clean up trash left behind. “It’s always important to be a good neighbor, and what constitutes a good neighbor is a person who is safe, clean and considerate of each other,” he said. Newark’s move to limit food handouts, which the city has periodically discussed for at least five years, also comes as the state of New Jersey and New Jersey Transit are gearing up for a $190 million makeover of Newark Penn Station, an 85-year-old neoclassical behemoth where one morning this month a dozen men were slumped across long benches in the grand, high-ceilinged waiting room. Like cities across the country, Newark—New Jersey’s biggest city, with a population of 311,000 — has seen homelessness worsen during the pandemic. The nonprofit that the city contracts with to do homeless outreach, Bridges, has tallied 1,366 people who have spent an unsheltered night so far this year. The equivalent figure in New York City, which has nearly 30 times as many residents as Newark, would be about 37,000 unsheltered people, far higher than any estimate of New York’s street-homeless population. Under Baraka, the city has taken steps to reduce homelessness. He created an office of homeless services last year and appointed a former Bridges official, Sakinah Hoyte, to be the city’s homelessness czar. This year, the city opened a housing facility called Hope Village, made from converted shipping containers, which is designed to help transition people who live in and around the train station into permanent housing. The city is converting a former schoolhouse into another shelter and housing-services center. It was in the context of these new programs that Hoyte sent out a “public feeding letter” on Nov. 19 announcing an outright ban on giving food to homeless people in public areas. “Feeding people in parks doesn’t encourage any sort of transitioning folks into housing,” Hoyte said in an interview. “It keeps people living on sidewalks and sleeping outside.” She said the city welcomed relief groups offering homeless people emergency supplies like warm clothes and helping connect them to social services, but that public feeding should not be part of the picture. To City Relief’s chief program officer, Josiah Haken, this approach seemed backward: Offering people food where they are, he said, is often the first step to getting them off the street. “The meal is really important,” he said. “It’s what helps us build trust, and we leverage that trust to help people move forward. The simple truth is that there aren’t enough resources in Newark for the people that are in the street.” Besides, he said, no one decides to live in the street or a train station, rather than in an apartment, because of the convenience of a nearby free meal. The day after Hoyte spoke to the Times, the city had changed course and said it would require permits instead. Haken said City Relief would abide by the city’s permit process. Inside the train station this month, several men who live there said they had sometimes seen the New Jersey Transit police telling groups that came in with food donations to distribute the food outside. “I saw them stop people from coming in here the other day,” said Eugene Bradley, 41. “It’s stupid, inconsiderate and pointless.” But Vincent Jiles, 57, who has lived in the station for three years, said he understood that New Jersey Transit was trying to run a train station, not a shelter. “This is a place of business,” he said. “You’ve got a lot of movement through here, and by distributing food, it can interrupt the businesses.” Sometimes when people bring in food, he said, “People go a little crazy, and then it can make a big mess.”

Feed the hungry? You’ll need a permit for that. 

The <a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/nepal-urges-climbers-trekkers-to-halt-activities-as-rainfall-continues-250461">Nepal</a> government has proposed changes to its permit process for climbers on <a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/record-chasing-nepali-climber-wants-to-inspire-next-generation-256549">Mount Everest</a> following the deaths of eleven climbers this year. The proposals, and associated criticisms, include:

- Climbers must submit proof of having scaled at least one 6,500m peak in Nepal. Critics argue limiting the provision to Nepal makes no sense.

- Climbers must produce a certificate of good health. Critics say it is easy to forge such certificates or find a compliant doctor.

- Guides must have three years of experience organising high-altitude climbs. Critics say so many Sherpas can claim such experience that virtually all outfitters will qualify.

The Nepal government has proposed changes to its permit process for climbers on Mount Everest following the deaths of eleven climbers this year. The proposals, and associated criticisms, include: - Climbers must submit proof of having scaled at least one 6,500m peak in Nepal.

The Nepal government has proposed changes to its permit process for climbers on Mount Everest following the deaths of eleven climbers this year. The proposals, and associated criticisms, include: - Climbers must submit proof of having scaled at least one 6,500m peak in Nepal. Critics argue limiting the provision to Nepal makes no sense. - Climbers must produce a certificate of good health. Critics say it is easy to forge such certificates or find a compliant doctor. - Guides must have three years of experience organising high-altitude climbs. Critics say so many Sherpas can claim such experience that virtually all outfitters will qualify.

Nepal proposes climbing permit changes for Mount Everest

Junior Trump hunts endangered mountain sheep "Argali" in Mongolia. Mountain sheep known for his massive horns.

Junior Trump hunts endangered sheep in Mongolia

Former Union minister P Chidambaram's wife Nalini Chidambaram on Friday filed an appeal in the Madras High Court challenging its order dismissing her petition against Enforcement Directorate summons asking her to appear as a witness in its money laundering probe in the Saradha chit fund scam. 
 
When the appeal by Nalini Chidambaram, a senior advocate, against the April 24 order of a single judge bench came up, vacation bench, comprising Justice V Bharathidasan and Justice N Seshasayee, said it would hear the matter tomorrow if time permits. 
 
The matter pertains to the September 7, 2016, summons issued by the Enforcement Directorate directing Nalini Chidambaram to appear in person as a witness in the chit fund scam case over an alleged payment of a legal fee of&nbspRs&nbsp1 crore to her by the Saradha group for her appearances in court and the Company Law Board over a television channel purchase deal. 
 
Challenging the summons, she had moved the high court claiming protection from such appearance under section 160 of Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), as per which women and children cannot be summoned outside their place of residence for any inquiry. 
 
Justice SM Subramaniam had dismissed her plea, holding that exemptions such as 160 CrPC were not mandatory and subject to facts and circumstances of a case.

<iframe frameborder="0" height="1" id="google_ads_iframe_/1068322/NDTV_News_ROS_Native_Outstream_0" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0" name="google_ads_iframe_/1068322/NDTV_News_ROS_Native_Outstream_0" scrolling="no" title="3rd party ad content" width="1"></iframe>He had also directed the Enforcement Directorate or ED to issue fresh summons, following which the agency had on April 30 issued the summons asking Nalini Chidambaram to appear before it on May 7. 
 
In her appeal, Nalini Chidambaram alleged that it was an extremely dangerous trend whereby a premier investigating agency of the country has virtually unleashed a reign of terror by knowingly and deliberately subverting the process of law for wholly "malafide, extraneous and vexatious" considerations. 
 
"If this trend of summoning and calling advocates who have been engaged by their clients for rendering professional services is not nipped in the bud, it may lead to disastrous consequences," she said. 
 
A designated senior advocate need not file any 'vakalatnama' before any court under the Advocates Act or the Bar Council of India Rules and the appearance would be only on instructions of an advocate on record, Nalini Chidambaram said. 
 
"It is an undisputed position that the information transmitted between a client and a lawyer in the course of that relationship and in confidence is privileged under law," she said, adding that even the professional fee invoices are sacrosanct and privileged. 
 
She further said summoning a senior advocate in connection with the amounts received as professional fees would throw into jeopardy the entire profession of law and subject to risk of acceptance of professional's engagements by counsel to represent parties in such cases. 
 
Submitting that she had acted only under professional capacity, Nalini Chidambaram alleged the reason behind issuing summons was only to create a situation in which she would be forced to withdraw from the proceedings. 
 
She contended that the single judge had erred in classifying different categories of women falling under proviso 160 of CrPc and said his order was nothing but judicial overreach. 
 
The appellant further said the single judge had not referred to a Supreme Court order, cited by her, which clearly held that the provisions of CrPC will apply if there were provisions under the PMLA which are inconsistent with the criminal procedure code. 
 
This was "gross breach" of judicial discipline since under Article 141 of the Constitution, the law declared by the Supreme Court was binding on all courts, she submitted.

Nalini Chidambaram further said the single judge should not have issued directions to the ED to issue fresh summons while deciding the validity of the earlier summons.

The direction in the nature of mandamus was totally misconceived, she claimed and sought to set aside the order.

When the appeal by Nalini Chidambaram, a senior advocate, against the April 24 order of a single judge bench came up, vacation bench, comprising Justice V Bharathidasan and Justice N Seshasayee, said it would hear the matter tomorrow if time permits

Former Union minister P Chidambaram's wife Nalini Chidambaram on Friday filed an appeal in the Madras High Court challenging its order dismissing her petition against Enforcement Directorate summons asking her to appear as a witness in its money laundering probe in the Saradha chit fund scam. When the appeal by Nalini Chidambaram, a senior advocate, against the April 24 order of a single judge bench came up, vacation bench, comprising Justice V Bharathidasan and Justice N Seshasayee, said it would hear the matter tomorrow if time permits. The matter pertains to the September 7, 2016, summons issued by the Enforcement Directorate directing Nalini Chidambaram to appear in person as a witness in the chit fund scam case over an alleged payment of a legal fee of&nbspRs&nbsp1 crore to her by the Saradha group for her appearances in court and the Company Law Board over a television channel purchase deal. Challenging the summons, she had moved the high court claiming protection from such appearance under section 160 of Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), as per which women and children cannot be summoned outside their place of residence for any inquiry. Justice SM Subramaniam had dismissed her plea, holding that exemptions such as 160 CrPC were not mandatory and subject to facts and circumstances of a case. He had also directed the Enforcement Directorate or ED to issue fresh summons, following which the agency had on April 30 issued the summons asking Nalini Chidambaram to appear before it on May 7. In her appeal, Nalini Chidambaram alleged that it was an extremely dangerous trend whereby a premier investigating agency of the country has virtually unleashed a reign of terror by knowingly and deliberately subverting the process of law for wholly "malafide, extraneous and vexatious" considerations. "If this trend of summoning and calling advocates who have been engaged by their clients for rendering professional services is not nipped in the bud, it may lead to disastrous consequences," she said. A designated senior advocate need not file any 'vakalatnama' before any court under the Advocates Act or the Bar Council of India Rules and the appearance would be only on instructions of an advocate on record, Nalini Chidambaram said. "It is an undisputed position that the information transmitted between a client and a lawyer in the course of that relationship and in confidence is privileged under law," she said, adding that even the professional fee invoices are sacrosanct and privileged. She further said summoning a senior advocate in connection with the amounts received as professional fees would throw into jeopardy the entire profession of law and subject to risk of acceptance of professional's engagements by counsel to represent parties in such cases. Submitting that she had acted only under professional capacity, Nalini Chidambaram alleged the reason behind issuing summons was only to create a situation in which she would be forced to withdraw from the proceedings. She contended that the single judge had erred in classifying different categories of women falling under proviso 160 of CrPc and said his order was nothing but judicial overreach. The appellant further said the single judge had not referred to a Supreme Court order, cited by her, which clearly held that the provisions of CrPC will apply if there were provisions under the PMLA which are inconsistent with the criminal procedure code. This was "gross breach" of judicial discipline since under Article 141 of the Constitution, the law declared by the Supreme Court was binding on all courts, she submitted. Nalini Chidambaram further said the single judge should not have issued directions to the ED to issue fresh summons while deciding the validity of the earlier summons. The direction in the nature of mandamus was totally misconceived, she claimed and sought to set aside the order.

Nalini Chidambaram files appeal against order dismissing her petition

permit

Permit, News on Permit, stories on Permit, articles on Permit, Permit stories at Wion, Permit news, Permit latest news