Bahujan Samaj Party supremo&nbsp;Mayawati on Tuesday justified installations of her&nbsp;statues&nbsp;in Uttar Pradesh at the expense of crores of rupees saying "It was the will of the people".

Mayawati in&nbsp;an affidavit filed before the apex court in compliance with the last order asking her to reimburse&nbsp;the money justified her action.&nbsp;

She had spent crores on the installation of&nbsp;statutes of herself and party symbol 'elephants' at public places.

A bench presided by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi in February had said, "Pay all the money from your (Mayawati) pocket. Madam Mayawati has to reimburse the public exchequer all the amount spent on statues. This is our tentative view."

A&nbsp;petition was filed in 2009 by advocate Ravi Kant in the matter who had sought the top court's direction to restrain Mayawati from installing her and party symbol statues in public places at the cost of the state exchequer. The petition also demanded a CBI probe into the issue.

The plea also alleged hundreds of crores of public money had been spent to "falsely glorify" Mayawati.

The activity was carried out as a state policy, which was arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, it said, adding that the statues&nbsp;were installed at a cost of Rs 52.20 crore at public places by utilising state funds.

It also sought that the state government should be directed to remove the statues.

(With inputs from agencies)

Bahujan Samaj Party supremo Mayawati on Tuesday justified installations of her statues in Uttar Pradesh at the expense of crores of rupees saying "It was the will of the people".

Bahujan Samaj Party supremo Mayawati on Tuesday justified installations of her statues in Uttar Pradesh at the expense of crores of rupees saying "It was the will of the people". Mayawati in an affidavit filed before the apex court in compliance with the last order asking her to reimburse the money justified her action. She had spent crores on the installation of statutes of herself and party symbol 'elephants' at public places. A bench presided by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi in February had said, "Pay all the money from your (Mayawati) pocket. Madam Mayawati has to reimburse the public exchequer all the amount spent on statues. This is our tentative view." A petition was filed in 2009 by advocate Ravi Kant in the matter who had sought the top court's direction to restrain Mayawati from installing her and party symbol statues in public places at the cost of the state exchequer. The petition also demanded a CBI probe into the issue. The plea also alleged hundreds of crores of public money had been spent to "falsely glorify" Mayawati. The activity was carried out as a state policy, which was arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, it said, adding that the statues were installed at a cost of Rs 52.20 crore at public places by utilising state funds. It also sought that the state government should be directed to remove the statues. (With inputs from agencies)

Mayawati justifies installation of her statues in UP, says 'it was people's will'

India's Supreme Court on Tuesday quashed a <a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/avoiding-temptation-rbi-likely-to-cut-key-rate-by-just-25-basis-points-207455">Reserve Bank of India</a> circular on resolving bad debt, providing relief for some major corporate defaulters but throwing the country's still nascent bankruptcy regime into question.

The Supreme Court said the RBI's circular from Feb. 12 last year on how banks should handle defaulters was "ultra vires", essentially meaning the central bank acted beyond its powers.

The RBI circular had directed banks unable to agree upon a resolution plan with any defaulter within 180 days to drag the defaulter into a time-bound insolvency process.

"The impugned circular will have to be declared as ultra vires as a whole, and be declared to be of no effect in law," the court said in its judgement. "All actions taken under the said circular, including actions by which the Insolvency Code has been triggered must fall along with the said circular."

A spokesman for the RBI declined to comment, saying it had yet to analyse the court order.

Several companies challenged the circular in court arguing the time given by the central bank was insufficient to tackle bad debt. Some had even challenged the validity of the RBI's directive saying its "one-size-fits-all" did not account for external factors.

The ruling gives relief to several companies, especially power companies, who have defaulted on loans due to issues with coal and gas supplies or problems tied to state governments not honouring power purchase agreements.

It also provides a breather for companies in the sugar, shipping, infrastructure and textile sectors which were under pressure, said several bankers and lawyers.

"If the RBI wants to (now) take action they have to go case specific and then initiate action. But you can't do a generic across the board cookie-cutter approach," said Amit Kapur, of law firm J. Sagar Associates, which represented several power companies in the court. The RBI may now have to come up with a new circular, he said.

BACKWARD STEP

Some bankers, however, fear the ruling may result in more wrangling between banks and borrowers around soured loans and dent bankruptcy reforms.

Foreign investors have often complained about the tardy pace of bad debt resolution in India, which has held back billions of dollars of investment in the country.

Indian banks and financial institutions currently hold total bad debt of over 10 trillion rupees ($146 billion) and this has also affected their ability to lend and spur economic growth.

"This will once again mean we are back to the old days when banks and companies used to delay debt resolution, with each one trying to buy time," said one banker handling non-performing accounts at a state-run bank.

Lawyers and bankers also agree the ruling could delay an already slow debt resolution process and that it may hurt banks' earnings.

Global rating agency Moody's said the judgement was credit negative for Indian banks and warned it could further delay the resolution process of bad debt in India.

Tuesday's ruling also raises questions around the validity of a debt resolution plan at beleaguered carrier Jet Airways as bankers said that a part of the resolution process was based on processes laid out in the RBI's Feb. 12 circular that the court has now quashed in its entirety.

However, a partner at a top law firm in India told Reuters that Jet's debt resolution plan might not be derailed as lenders could have taken the decision even without the central bank's circular.

"It is only the punitive action or coercive action under the circular which will get affected by this," the lawyer said. "The banks could have contractually, restructured loans whether there was an RBI circular or not," he said.

India's Supreme Court on Tuesday quashed a Reserve Bank of India circular on resolving bad debt, providing relief for some major corporate defaulters but throwing the country's still nascent bankruptcy regime into question.

India's Supreme Court on Tuesday quashed a Reserve Bank of India circular on resolving bad debt, providing relief for some major corporate defaulters but throwing the country's still nascent bankruptcy regime into question. The Supreme Court said the RBI's circular from Feb. 12 last year on how banks should handle defaulters was "ultra vires", essentially meaning the central bank acted beyond its powers. The RBI circular had directed banks unable to agree upon a resolution plan with any defaulter within 180 days to drag the defaulter into a time-bound insolvency process. "The impugned circular will have to be declared as ultra vires as a whole, and be declared to be of no effect in law," the court said in its judgement. "All actions taken under the said circular, including actions by which the Insolvency Code has been triggered must fall along with the said circular." A spokesman for the RBI declined to comment, saying it had yet to analyse the court order. Several companies challenged the circular in court arguing the time given by the central bank was insufficient to tackle bad debt. Some had even challenged the validity of the RBI's directive saying its "one-size-fits-all" did not account for external factors. The ruling gives relief to several companies, especially power companies, who have defaulted on loans due to issues with coal and gas supplies or problems tied to state governments not honouring power purchase agreements. It also provides a breather for companies in the sugar, shipping, infrastructure and textile sectors which were under pressure, said several bankers and lawyers. "If the RBI wants to (now) take action they have to go case specific and then initiate action. But you can't do a generic across the board cookie-cutter approach," said Amit Kapur, of law firm J. Sagar Associates, which represented several power companies in the court. The RBI may now have to come up with a new circular, he said. BACKWARD STEP Some bankers, however, fear the ruling may result in more wrangling between banks and borrowers around soured loans and dent bankruptcy reforms. Foreign investors have often complained about the tardy pace of bad debt resolution in India, which has held back billions of dollars of investment in the country. Indian banks and financial institutions currently hold total bad debt of over 10 trillion rupees ($146 billion) and this has also affected their ability to lend and spur economic growth. "This will once again mean we are back to the old days when banks and companies used to delay debt resolution, with each one trying to buy time," said one banker handling non-performing accounts at a state-run bank. Lawyers and bankers also agree the ruling could delay an already slow debt resolution process and that it may hurt banks' earnings. Global rating agency Moody's said the judgement was credit negative for Indian banks and warned it could further delay the resolution process of bad debt in India. Tuesday's ruling also raises questions around the validity of a debt resolution plan at beleaguered carrier Jet Airways as bankers said that a part of the resolution process was based on processes laid out in the RBI's Feb. 12 circular that the court has now quashed in its entirety. However, a partner at a top law firm in India told Reuters that Jet's debt resolution plan might not be derailed as lenders could have taken the decision even without the central bank's circular. "It is only the punitive action or coercive action under the circular which will get affected by this," the lawyer said. "The banks could have contractually, restructured loans whether there was an RBI circular or not," he said.

Supreme Court quashes RBI directive on resolving bad debt

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/uk-parliament-remains-divided-on-brexit-options-207308">British Parliament remains divided on Brexit options</a>

All four alternative Brexit proposals considered Monday by the UK House of Commons went down to defeat, albeit by narrower margins than in last week's initial vote.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/asat-satellite-destruction-led-to-400-pieces-of-debris-endangering-iss-nasa-207311">ASAT satellite destruction led to 400 pieces of debris, endangering International Space Station: NASA</a>

The head of NASA on Monday branded India's destruction of one of its satellites a "terrible thing" that had created 400 pieces of orbital debris and led to new dangers for astronauts aboard the International Space Station.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/imran-khans-promise-of-naya-pakistan-a-distant-dream-as-pakistan-economy-struggles-207337">Imran Khan's promise of 'Naya Pakistan' a distant dream as economy struggles&nbsp;</a>

Imran Khan's promise of 'Naya Pakistan' seems to be a distant dream' with the country's economy in shambles

According to the latest numbers released by Pakistan Bureau of Statistics, inflation in Pakistan is at an all-time high at 9.41 per cent, up from the previous 8.21 per cent.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/second-woman-says-former-us-vice-president-biden-touched-her-inappropriately-207340">Second</a><a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/second-woman-says-former-us-vice-president-biden-touched-her-inappropriately-207340"> woman says former US vice president Joe Biden touched her inappropriately</a>

A Connecticut woman said former US Vice President Joe Biden touched her inappropriately and rubbed noses with her at a 2009 political fundraiser, becoming the second person in three days to accuse the former vice president of unwanted physical contact as he considers a White House run.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/top-venezuela-court-calls-to-strip-guaidos-immunity-207309">Top Venezuela court calls to strip opposition leader Guaido's immunity</a>

Venezuela's top court called on the ruling Constituent Assembly Monday to strip opposition leader Juan Guaido of parliamentary immunity.

The decision by the Supreme Court of Justice could open the way for President Nicolas Maduro's rival Guaido, recognized as interim president by more than 50 countries, to be prosecuted.

British Parliament remains divided on Brexit options All four alternative Brexit proposals considered Monday by the UK House of Commons went down to defeat, albeit by narrower margins than in last week's initial vote.

British Parliament remains divided on Brexit options All four alternative Brexit proposals considered Monday by the UK House of Commons went down to defeat, albeit by narrower margins than in last week's initial vote. ASAT satellite destruction led to 400 pieces of debris, endangering International Space Station: NASA The head of NASA on Monday branded India's destruction of one of its satellites a "terrible thing" that had created 400 pieces of orbital debris and led to new dangers for astronauts aboard the International Space Station. Imran Khan's promise of 'Naya Pakistan' a distant dream as economy struggles Imran Khan's promise of 'Naya Pakistan' seems to be a distant dream' with the country's economy in shambles According to the latest numbers released by Pakistan Bureau of Statistics, inflation in Pakistan is at an all-time high at 9.41 per cent, up from the previous 8.21 per cent. Second woman says former US vice president Joe Biden touched her inappropriately A Connecticut woman said former US Vice President Joe Biden touched her inappropriately and rubbed noses with her at a 2009 political fundraiser, becoming the second person in three days to accuse the former vice president of unwanted physical contact as he considers a White House run. Top Venezuela court calls to strip opposition leader Guaido's immunity Venezuela's top court called on the ruling Constituent Assembly Monday to strip opposition leader Juan Guaido of parliamentary immunity. The decision by the Supreme Court of Justice could open the way for President Nicolas Maduro's rival Guaido, recognized as interim president by more than 50 countries, to be prosecuted.

News brief: Big stories of the day

The Supreme Court Monday asked 21 opposition leaders to file within a week their reply on the Election Commission's affidavit on their plea regarding Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) slips in Lok Sabha polls.

The opposition leaders led by Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu had sought that VVPAT slips of at least 50 per cent of voting machines in each assembly constituency be checked randomly during Lok Sabha polls next month.

A bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi asked senior advocate A M Singhvi, appearing for Opposition leaders, to file the reply by next Monday. 
The poll panel had on Friday last sought dismissal of the petition.&nbsp;

In its affidavit, the EC had asserted in the apex court that the opposition leaders have been unable to raise any ground for altering the existing system of random counting of VVPAT slips from one polling booth per assembly segment, which was "found to be most suitable" after due studies and tests.&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

The Supreme Court Monday asked 21 opposition leaders to file within a week their reply on the Election Commission's affidavit on their plea regarding Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) slips in Lok Sabha polls.

The Supreme Court Monday asked 21 opposition leaders to file within a week their reply on the Election Commission's affidavit on their plea regarding Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) slips in Lok Sabha polls. The opposition leaders led by Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu had sought that VVPAT slips of at least 50 per cent of voting machines in each assembly constituency be checked randomly during Lok Sabha polls next month. A bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi asked senior advocate A M Singhvi, appearing for Opposition leaders, to file the reply by next Monday. The poll panel had on Friday last sought dismissal of the petition. In its affidavit, the EC had asserted in the apex court that the opposition leaders have been unable to raise any ground for altering the existing system of random counting of VVPAT slips from one polling booth per assembly segment, which was "found to be most suitable" after due studies and tests.

Counting of VVPAT slips: Supreme Court grants week's time to opposition leaders for filing reply on EC affidavit

The Supreme Court on Monday stayed the Election Commission's March 10 decision notifying Gujarat's Talala assembly constituency seat as vacant and declaring bypolls there along with the upcoming Lok Sabha elections.

A bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi also issued notice to the poll panel on a plea filed by former Congress MLA B D Barad, who had challenged his disqualification as an MLA and the subsequent EC's decision notifying the seat as vacant.

Barad has moved the apex court against the Gujarat High Court's March 27 verdict dismissing his petition against his disqualification as an MLA and also against the EC's decision notifying the bypolls there.

Barad was disqualified as an MLA by the assembly speaker on March 5 following his conviction in a case. 
&nbsp;

The Supreme Court on Monday stayed the Election Commission's March 10 decision notifying Gujarat's Talala assembly constituency seat as vacant and declaring bypolls there along with the upcoming Lok Sabha elections.

The Supreme Court on Monday stayed the Election Commission's March 10 decision notifying Gujarat's Talala assembly constituency seat as vacant and declaring bypolls there along with the upcoming Lok Sabha elections. A bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi also issued notice to the poll panel on a plea filed by former Congress MLA B D Barad, who had challenged his disqualification as an MLA and the subsequent EC's decision notifying the seat as vacant. Barad has moved the apex court against the Gujarat High Court's March 27 verdict dismissing his petition against his disqualification as an MLA and also against the EC's decision notifying the bypolls there. Barad was disqualified as an MLA by the assembly speaker on March 5 following his conviction in a case.

Supreme Court stays EC's decision notifying Talala assembly constituency seat as vacant, declaring bypolls

India's top court grants time to opposition parties on VVPAT verification case

The Supreme Court on Friday upheld the conviction and life imprisonment awarded to Saravana Bhavan restaurant chain owner P Rajagopal for murdering one of his employees in 2001.

The judgement was announced by a bench headed by Justice NV Ramana.

Rajagopal has been accused of murdering his worker Prince Santhakumar in 2001, as the latter married the lady whom businessman wanted to tie the knot with.

The accused was convicted and awarded life imprisonment by the Madras High Court. Later in 2009, the top court granted him bail on medical grounds.

Rajagopal has been given time till April 7 to surrender before the court.

The Supreme Court on Friday upheld the conviction and life imprisonment awarded to Saravana Bhavan restaurant chain owner P Rajagopal for murdering one of his employees in 2001.

The Supreme Court on Friday upheld the conviction and life imprisonment awarded to Saravana Bhavan restaurant chain owner P Rajagopal for murdering one of his employees in 2001. The judgement was announced by a bench headed by Justice NV Ramana. Rajagopal has been accused of murdering his worker Prince Santhakumar in 2001, as the latter married the lady whom businessman wanted to tie the knot with. The accused was convicted and awarded life imprisonment by the Madras High Court. Later in 2009, the top court granted him bail on medical grounds. Rajagopal has been given time till April 7 to surrender before the court.

Supreme Court upholds conviction, life imprisonment of Saravana Bhavan founder in murder case

The Supreme Court Tuesday termed as "very very serious" the revelations made by CBI in its status report relating to the recent interrogation of <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/chit-fund-scams-kolkata-police-chief-grilled-for-11-hours-in-second-round-of-questioning-196473">the then Kolkata Police Commissioner Rajeev Kumar</a> in connection with the Saradha chit fund scam case.

A bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi said it cannot "close its eyes" if some "very very serious facts" are disclosed to it and directed CBI to file an application seeking appropriate relief against Kumar, who had earlier headed the state SIT to probe the chit fund scam.

The bench, which also comprised Justices Deepak Gupta and Sanjiv Khanna, granted 10 days to the probe agency for filing the application. Kumar and others can respond to the plea seven days thereafter.

The top court refused to drop the contempt proceedings against the West Bengal DGP, the chief secretary and Kumar.

It was hearing the CBI's contempt application against various senior officials of the West Bengal government on the ground of non-cooperation in its probe and alleged tampering of evidence including call data records (CDRs) of key accused and Sardha group CMD Sudipta Sen and Debjani Mukherjee.

The court, which had earlier directed CBI Director to file an affidavit giving details about the alleged contempt committed by West Bengal cops and others in the case, perused the reply of the CBI chief and the fresh status report, pertaining to quizzing of Kumar.

"We have gone through your (CBI's) status report. There are something very very serious," the bench said.

The bench asked Attorney General K K Venugopal, representing CBI, to file an appropriate application as it cannot pass any order on the prayers as they were part of the sealed cover report to which the other side has no access.

"File an application or an affidavit, if you want to press for your reliefs. We cannot act unilaterally and the other side has to be heard," the bench said.

"We are not passing any order. File an application and give the other side an opportunity to reply," the bench said.

Senior advocate AM Singhvi, appearing for West Bengal officials, opposed the liberty being granted to CBI to file an application against Kumar.

"While considering the contempt matter, suppose some very very serious things come to our notice then, should we close our eyes to that," the bench said while asking CBI to file the fresh plea.&nbsp;

At the outset, Venugopal referred to the reply of the CBI Director and alleged that the West Bengal police has not been cooperating with the probe, providing incomplete and tampered with details to the probe agency.

He said the CDRs, provided by the state police, of the key accused to the CBI were matched with those provide by the mobile service providers and various discrepancies were found in them.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, also appearing for CBI, said that there has been serious breach of the apex court order asking state police to cooperate in the investigation.

Earlier, the court had asked the CBI Director to provide information in support of the allegations of tampering and destruction of CDRs by Kumar.

The apex court had said the allegations made by the CBI were serious enough and it was an "obligation" on part of the agency to disclose full details of the alleged contempt committed by the then police commissioner.&nbsp;

It had questioned CBI for the delay in moving the apex court when the agency allegedly noticed the tampering of electronic evidence in June 2018.

The probe agency came out with a contempt petition after the February 3 incident in which the CBI sleuths, who had gone to probe Kumar at his residence, were taken into custody and manhandled by the West Bengal Police.

Though the apex court had taken note of the February 3 incident in which the top cops of the state police allegedly sat with Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee on dharna, it was annoyed as to why the CBI did not bring to its notice the tampering of the CDRs when it happened in June 2018.&nbsp;

 
&nbsp;

The Supreme Court Tuesday termed as "very very serious" the revelations made by CBI in its status report relating to the recent interrogation of the then Kolkata Police Commissioner Rajeev Kumar in connection with the Saradha chit fund scam case.

The Supreme Court Tuesday termed as "very very serious" the revelations made by CBI in its status report relating to the recent interrogation of the then Kolkata Police Commissioner Rajeev Kumar in connection with the Saradha chit fund scam case. A bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi said it cannot "close its eyes" if some "very very serious facts" are disclosed to it and directed CBI to file an application seeking appropriate relief against Kumar, who had earlier headed the state SIT to probe the chit fund scam. The bench, which also comprised Justices Deepak Gupta and Sanjiv Khanna, granted 10 days to the probe agency for filing the application. Kumar and others can respond to the plea seven days thereafter. The top court refused to drop the contempt proceedings against the West Bengal DGP, the chief secretary and Kumar. It was hearing the CBI's contempt application against various senior officials of the West Bengal government on the ground of non-cooperation in its probe and alleged tampering of evidence including call data records (CDRs) of key accused and Sardha group CMD Sudipta Sen and Debjani Mukherjee. The court, which had earlier directed CBI Director to file an affidavit giving details about the alleged contempt committed by West Bengal cops and others in the case, perused the reply of the CBI chief and the fresh status report, pertaining to quizzing of Kumar. "We have gone through your (CBI's) status report. There are something very very serious," the bench said. The bench asked Attorney General K K Venugopal, representing CBI, to file an appropriate application as it cannot pass any order on the prayers as they were part of the sealed cover report to which the other side has no access. "File an application or an affidavit, if you want to press for your reliefs. We cannot act unilaterally and the other side has to be heard," the bench said. "We are not passing any order. File an application and give the other side an opportunity to reply," the bench said. Senior advocate AM Singhvi, appearing for West Bengal officials, opposed the liberty being granted to CBI to file an application against Kumar. "While considering the contempt matter, suppose some very very serious things come to our notice then, should we close our eyes to that," the bench said while asking CBI to file the fresh plea. At the outset, Venugopal referred to the reply of the CBI Director and alleged that the West Bengal police has not been cooperating with the probe, providing incomplete and tampered with details to the probe agency. He said the CDRs, provided by the state police, of the key accused to the CBI were matched with those provide by the mobile service providers and various discrepancies were found in them. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, also appearing for CBI, said that there has been serious breach of the apex court order asking state police to cooperate in the investigation. Earlier, the court had asked the CBI Director to provide information in support of the allegations of tampering and destruction of CDRs by Kumar. The apex court had said the allegations made by the CBI were serious enough and it was an "obligation" on part of the agency to disclose full details of the alleged contempt committed by the then police commissioner. It had questioned CBI for the delay in moving the apex court when the agency allegedly noticed the tampering of electronic evidence in June 2018. The probe agency came out with a contempt petition after the February 3 incident in which the CBI sleuths, who had gone to probe Kumar at his residence, were taken into custody and manhandled by the West Bengal Police. Though the apex court had taken note of the February 3 incident in which the top cops of the state police allegedly sat with Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee on dharna, it was annoyed as to why the CBI did not bring to its notice the tampering of the CDRs when it happened in June 2018.

Saradha chit fund scam case: 'Very very serious' revelations made by CBI in status report, says Supreme Court

The Supreme Court Wednesday said there is a valid “strong viewpoint” that post-retirement appointment of judges in tribunals is a “scar” on the “independence of the judiciary”.&nbsp;

A five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, which is hearing as many as 18 petitions relating to challenges to the laws governing quasi-judicial tribunals, said that retired High Court judges are usually unwilling to man these panels as there was an inordinate delay in appointments.

“There is a viewpoint that post-retirement appointment is itself a scar on judicial independence of the judiciary. How do you handle that,” the bench said, adding, “This is a valid and strong point”. Dealing with the issue of tribunalisation of the judiciary, the bench, which also included Justices N V Ramana, D Y Chandrachud, Deepak Gupta and Sanjiv Khanna, said that it has been done to lessen the burden of the high courts and the situation of vacancies there was very grim.

The top court ruled the huge vacancies in high courts and said even the high court collegiums are not recommending the names for the appointments. “Let us not blame the government for every problem,” it said.

“Look at the state of our high courts in terms of the number of judges. The whole idea of transferring the jurisdiction (to tribunals) was to lighten the burden,” it said. It said the total sanctioned post of judges in high courts are 1,089.

“How many are actually holding office. 397 is the number of vacancies. 264 are yet to be even recommended by high courts. When will they come? When will they be processed? When will the appointments be made? And by that time, how many more judges will have retired,” the bench quipped. It said that with this truncated strength, the high courts cannot take up more work.

“In some high courts, writ petitions are listed four weeks after filing. Here, in the Supreme Court, the matter comes up after four days and there is still mentioned,” it said. In one of the high courts, a bail application takes four weeks to be heard, it said, adding that the government has been setting up National Company Law Tribunals everywhere, but there are no presiding officers and members to man them.

The Supreme Court Wednesday said there is a valid “strong viewpoint” that post-retirement appointment of judges in tribunals is a “scar” on the “independence of the judiciary”.

The Supreme Court Wednesday said there is a valid “strong viewpoint” that post-retirement appointment of judges in tribunals is a “scar” on the “independence of the judiciary”. A five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, which is hearing as many as 18 petitions relating to challenges to the laws governing quasi-judicial tribunals, said that retired High Court judges are usually unwilling to man these panels as there was an inordinate delay in appointments. “There is a viewpoint that post-retirement appointment is itself a scar on judicial independence of the judiciary. How do you handle that,” the bench said, adding, “This is a valid and strong point”. Dealing with the issue of tribunalisation of the judiciary, the bench, which also included Justices N V Ramana, D Y Chandrachud, Deepak Gupta and Sanjiv Khanna, said that it has been done to lessen the burden of the high courts and the situation of vacancies there was very grim. The top court ruled the huge vacancies in high courts and said even the high court collegiums are not recommending the names for the appointments. “Let us not blame the government for every problem,” it said. “Look at the state of our high courts in terms of the number of judges. The whole idea of transferring the jurisdiction (to tribunals) was to lighten the burden,” it said. It said the total sanctioned post of judges in high courts are 1,089. “How many are actually holding office. 397 is the number of vacancies. 264 are yet to be even recommended by high courts. When will they come? When will they be processed? When will the appointments be made? And by that time, how many more judges will have retired,” the bench quipped. It said that with this truncated strength, the high courts cannot take up more work. “In some high courts, writ petitions are listed four weeks after filing. Here, in the Supreme Court, the matter comes up after four days and there is still mentioned,” it said. In one of the high courts, a bail application takes four weeks to be heard, it said, adding that the government has been setting up National Company Law Tribunals everywhere, but there are no presiding officers and members to man them.

What Supreme Court thinks about post-retirement appointment of judges at tribunals

Myanmar's Supreme Court on Tuesday was scheduled to hear the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/myanmar-reuters-journalists-lose-appeal-against-7-year-sentence-189568">appeal of two Reuters journalists</a> Wa Lone, 32 and Kyaw Soe Oo, 28.

The two reporters were arrested in December 2017, while investigating a massacre of Rohingya Muslim civilians involving Myanmar soldiers.

Last year in September, a judge found them guilty under the Official Secrets Act and sentenced them to seven years in prison.

They were convicted for breaking a colonial-era official secrets law, in a case that has raised questions about Myanmar's progress towards democracy.

Myanmar's high court in Yangon rejected an earlier appeal in January.

Their convictions were heavily criticised by press freedom advocates and Western diplomats, putting additional pressure on Myanmar leader Aung San Suu Kyi.

(With inputs from Reuters)

Myanmar's Supreme Court on Tuesday was scheduled to hear the appeal of two Reuters journalists Wa Lone, 32 and Kyaw Soe Oo, 28. The two reporters were arrested in December 2017, while investigating a massacre of Rohingya Muslim civilians involving Myanmar soldiers.

Myanmar's Supreme Court on Tuesday was scheduled to hear the appeal of two Reuters journalists Wa Lone, 32 and Kyaw Soe Oo, 28. The two reporters were arrested in December 2017, while investigating a massacre of Rohingya Muslim civilians involving Myanmar soldiers. Last year in September, a judge found them guilty under the Official Secrets Act and sentenced them to seven years in prison. They were convicted for breaking a colonial-era official secrets law, in a case that has raised questions about Myanmar's progress towards democracy. Myanmar's high court in Yangon rejected an earlier appeal in January. Their convictions were heavily criticised by press freedom advocates and Western diplomats, putting additional pressure on Myanmar leader Aung San Suu Kyi. (With inputs from Reuters)

Myanmar's Supreme Court to hear jailed Reuters reporters' appeal

The Supreme Court Tuesday termed as “very, very serious” the revelations made by CBI in its fresh status report relating to the recent interrogation of the then Kolkata Police Commissioner Rajeev Kumar in connection with the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/saradha-chit-fund-probe-sc-directs-cbi-to-file-affidavit-detailing-contempt-by-bengal-cops-200083">Saradha chit fund case</a>.

A bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi said it cannot “close its eyes” if some “very, very serious facts” are disclosed to it and directed CBI to file an application seeking appropriate relief against Kumar, who had earlier headed the state SIT on the chit fund case.

The bench, which also comprised Justices Deepak Gupta and Sanjiv Khanna, granted 10 days to the probe agency for filing the application.

Kumar and others can respond to the plea seven days thereafter.

Supreme Court said that as the CBI’s status report was filed in a sealed cover, it cannot pass any order at the moment without hearing the other side.

The apex court was hearing the CBI’ contempt application against various senior officials of the West Bengal government including state’s DGP and then Kolkata police chief on the ground of non-cooperation in its probe and alleged destruction of evidence.

The Supreme Court Tuesday termed as “very, very serious” the revelations made by CBI in its fresh status report relating to the recent interrogation of the then Kolkata Police Commissioner Rajeev Kumar in connection with the Saradha chit fund case.

The Supreme Court Tuesday termed as “very, very serious” the revelations made by CBI in its fresh status report relating to the recent interrogation of the then Kolkata Police Commissioner Rajeev Kumar in connection with the Saradha chit fund case. A bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi said it cannot “close its eyes” if some “very, very serious facts” are disclosed to it and directed CBI to file an application seeking appropriate relief against Kumar, who had earlier headed the state SIT on the chit fund case. The bench, which also comprised Justices Deepak Gupta and Sanjiv Khanna, granted 10 days to the probe agency for filing the application. Kumar and others can respond to the plea seven days thereafter. Supreme Court said that as the CBI’s status report was filed in a sealed cover, it cannot pass any order at the moment without hearing the other side. The apex court was hearing the CBI’ contempt application against various senior officials of the West Bengal government including state’s DGP and then Kolkata police chief on the ground of non-cooperation in its probe and alleged destruction of evidence.

Saradha chit fund case: Supreme Court says can’t close eyes to ‘very, very serious’ facts in CBI status report

Supreme Court rejected a PIL Monday challenging the bus fare of Rs 49 to go to the temple in Sabarimala in Kerala.&nbsp;

A bench of the apex court, headed by Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi said, "Sorry, we can't decide here what should be the bus fare? Are we now going to decide the bus fare?"

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Supreme Court rejected a PIL challenging the bus fare of Rs 49 to go to the temple in Sabarimala in Kerala. A bench of the apex court, headed by CJI Ranjan Gogoi said,"Sorry, we can't decide here what should be the bus fare?Are we now going to decide the bus fare?"
— ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1110055246854676481?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 25, 2019</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>

Meanwhile, the Supreme court also refused to entertain a plea filed by a former DGP of Uttar Pradesh seeking a direction to the Election Commission of India <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/supreme-court-dismisses-plea-seeking-ban-on-roadshows-bike-rallies-during-polls-205462">to ban roadshows</a> and bike rallies during polls.

Supreme Court rejected a PIL Monday challenging the bus fare of Rs 49 to go to the temple in Sabarimala in Kerala. A bench of the apex court, headed by Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi said, "Sorry, we can't decide here what should be the bus fare?

Supreme Court rejected a PIL Monday challenging the bus fare of Rs 49 to go to the temple in Sabarimala in Kerala. A bench of the apex court, headed by Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi said, "Sorry, we can't decide here what should be the bus fare? Are we now going to decide the bus fare?" Supreme Court rejected a PIL challenging the bus fare of Rs 49 to go to the temple in Sabarimala in Kerala. A bench of the apex court, headed by CJI Ranjan Gogoi said,"Sorry, we can't decide here what should be the bus fare?Are we now going to decide the bus fare?" — ANI (@ANI) March 25, 2019 × Meanwhile, the Supreme court also refused to entertain a plea filed by a former DGP of Uttar Pradesh seeking a direction to the Election Commission of India to ban roadshows and bike rallies during polls.

'Are we now to decide bus fare?' asks Supreme Court

The Supreme Court Monday refused to entertain a plea filed by a former DGP of Uttar Pradesh seeking a direction to the Election Commission of India to ban roadshows and bike rallies during polls.

"We are not inclined to entertain this," a bench comprising Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justice Deepak Gupta told advocate Virag Gupta, who was appearing for petitioners Vikram Singh and Shaivika Agrawal.

Singh, a former Director General of Police of Uttar Pradesh, said in his petition that the roadshows and bike rallies violate EC's instructions and cause damage to the environment.

The Supreme Court Monday refused to entertain a plea filed by a former DGP of Uttar Pradesh seeking a direction to the Election Commission of India to ban roadshows and bike rallies during polls.

The Supreme Court Monday refused to entertain a plea filed by a former DGP of Uttar Pradesh seeking a direction to the Election Commission of India to ban roadshows and bike rallies during polls. "We are not inclined to entertain this," a bench comprising Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justice Deepak Gupta told advocate Virag Gupta, who was appearing for petitioners Vikram Singh and Shaivika Agrawal. Singh, a former Director General of Police of Uttar Pradesh, said in his petition that the roadshows and bike rallies violate EC's instructions and cause damage to the environment.

Supreme Court dismisses plea seeking ban on roadshows, bike rallies during polls

The Supreme Court Monday dismissed a plea challenging the constitutional validity of an ordinance which makes the practice of instant <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/cabinet-nod-to-ordinance-on-triple-talaq-arun-jaitley-198369">'triple talaq'</a> a punishable offence.

A bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi dismissed a plea of a Kerala-based outfit and said it will not like to interfere.

The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Ordinance was first notified on September 19 last year, hours after the Union Cabinet had cleared it.

Instant 'triple talaq', also known as 'talaq-e-biddat', is an instant divorce whereby a Muslim man can legally divorce his wife by pronouncing 'talaq' three times in one go.

The ordinance making the practice of instant 'triple talaq' a punishable offence was issued for the third time in less than a year on February 21.

The Supreme Court Monday dismissed a plea challenging the constitutional validity of an ordinance which makes the practice of instant 'triple talaq' a punishable offence.

The Supreme Court Monday dismissed a plea challenging the constitutional validity of an ordinance which makes the practice of instant 'triple talaq' a punishable offence. A bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi dismissed a plea of a Kerala-based outfit and said it will not like to interfere. The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Ordinance was first notified on September 19 last year, hours after the Union Cabinet had cleared it. Instant 'triple talaq', also known as 'talaq-e-biddat', is an instant divorce whereby a Muslim man can legally divorce his wife by pronouncing 'talaq' three times in one go. The ordinance making the practice of instant 'triple talaq' a punishable offence was issued for the third time in less than a year on February 21.

Supreme Court dismisses plea challenging constitutional validity of 'triple talaq' ordinance

The Supreme Court Monday referred to another bench a fresh plea seeking a direction to authorities not to evict any forest dweller in Chhattisgarh and to set up an SIT to look into the alleged illegal acquisition of tribals’ land. A bench comprising Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justice Deepak Gupta sent the plea filed by Chhattisgarh-based Tarika Tarangini Larka to a bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra, which is already seized of a similar plea relating to eviction of alleged illegal forest dwellers.

“List this matter before the bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra,” the bench said, adding that in any case, the February 13 order, directing 21 states to evict 11.8 lakh illegal forest dwellers, has already been stayed by the bench concerned. Lawyer M L Sharma, appearing for Larka, submitted that the issues raised in the PIL were of larger interest for forest dwellers and hence, the notice be issued.

The apex court had on March 5 taken cognisance of another plea filed by Larka, seeking a direction to the Centre not to allot possession of any forest land belonging to tribals to anyone other than ‘adivasi’ residing in that particular area. The top court, while dealing with other similar pending petition, had on February 28 stayed its February 13 order directing 21 states to evict 11.8 lakh illegal forest dwellers whose claims over the forest land have been rejected by authorities.

In the fresh petition, filed through lawyer M L Sharma, Larka has alleged that authorities in Tamnar of Chhattisgarh’s Raigarh district have “forcibly” grabbed a large area of tribal land and handed it to outsiders and now are trying to oust ‘adivasi’ from the area. “For this, they adopted simple strategy declaring forest dweller as non-adivasi to grab their land in the forest and village by rejecting their claim upon land,” the plea has said. It has sought restoration of land acquired by the government from tribals in Chhattisgarh for mining and other purposes and to provide them value of mined minerals.

The petition has also sought setting up of a special investigation team (SIT) comprising retired judges of the apex court to look into the alleged illegal acquisition of land belonging to tribals throughout the country. Besides, it has sought a direction to the CBI to register an FIR under the provisions of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe Act to investigate the matters brought to light by the SIT and to file their report before the apex court.

The Supreme Court Monday referred to another bench a fresh plea seeking a direction to authorities not to evict any forest dweller in Chhattisgarh and to set up an SIT to look into the alleged illegal acquisition of tribals’ land.

The Supreme Court Monday referred to another bench a fresh plea seeking a direction to authorities not to evict any forest dweller in Chhattisgarh and to set up an SIT to look into the alleged illegal acquisition of tribals’ land. A bench comprising Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justice Deepak Gupta sent the plea filed by Chhattisgarh-based Tarika Tarangini Larka to a bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra, which is already seized of a similar plea relating to eviction of alleged illegal forest dwellers. “List this matter before the bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra,” the bench said, adding that in any case, the February 13 order, directing 21 states to evict 11.8 lakh illegal forest dwellers, has already been stayed by the bench concerned. Lawyer M L Sharma, appearing for Larka, submitted that the issues raised in the PIL were of larger interest for forest dwellers and hence, the notice be issued. The apex court had on March 5 taken cognisance of another plea filed by Larka, seeking a direction to the Centre not to allot possession of any forest land belonging to tribals to anyone other than ‘adivasi’ residing in that particular area. The top court, while dealing with other similar pending petition, had on February 28 stayed its February 13 order directing 21 states to evict 11.8 lakh illegal forest dwellers whose claims over the forest land have been rejected by authorities. In the fresh petition, filed through lawyer M L Sharma, Larka has alleged that authorities in Tamnar of Chhattisgarh’s Raigarh district have “forcibly” grabbed a large area of tribal land and handed it to outsiders and now are trying to oust ‘adivasi’ from the area. “For this, they adopted simple strategy declaring forest dweller as non-adivasi to grab their land in the forest and village by rejecting their claim upon land,” the plea has said. It has sought restoration of land acquired by the government from tribals in Chhattisgarh for mining and other purposes and to provide them value of mined minerals. The petition has also sought setting up of a special investigation team (SIT) comprising retired judges of the apex court to look into the alleged illegal acquisition of land belonging to tribals throughout the country. Besides, it has sought a direction to the CBI to register an FIR under the provisions of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe Act to investigate the matters brought to light by the SIT and to file their report before the apex court.

Supreme Court refers to other bench plea against eviction of forest dwelling tribals in Chhattisgarh

The <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/supreme-court-dismisses-plea-seeking-ban-on-roadshows-bike-rallies-during-polls-205462">Supreme Court Monday</a> issued a notice to CBI on a plea seeking direction to the probe agency that it place the investigation report in the disproportionate assets case against SP leader Mulayam Singh Yadav and his sons Akhilesh and Prateek.

A bench comprising Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justice Deepak Gupta asked the CBI to file its response in two weeks on the status of the investigation against the Samajwadi Party patriarch and his sons.

The bench was hearing a plea filed by Congress leader Vishwanath Chaturvedi seeking a direction to the probe agency to apprise the court of the status of the investigation.

Chaturvedi in 2005 filed the PIL in the top court seeking directions to CBI to take appropriate action to prosecute Yadav, Akhilesh and his wife Dimple and Prateek under the Prevention of Corruption Act for allegedly acquiring assets more than the known sources of their income by misusing their powers.

The apex court in its verdict of March 1, 2007 directed CBI "to enquire into allegations" and find out as to whether the plea with regard to disproportionate assets of the SP leaders was "correct or not".

In 2012, the court dismissed the review petitions of Yadav and his sons against its verdict and directed CBI to go ahead with the probe against them in the disproportionate assets case.

It allowed the review plea of Dimple and directed CBI to drop the inquiry against her saying that she was not holding any public office.

The court had modified its March 1, 2007 order and asked CBI to file the status report before the court and not the government.

Chaturvedi, in his fresh plea, said: "Despite the yawning gap between the complaint made/court's directions and the pendency of filing of a regular Case in this matter, an unusually long period as already escaped without any action being taken on the matter for 11 long years."

The matter is still pending with CBI for registration of a regular case.

Till date, no FIR has been registered against the Yadavs and it has not only caused "some irremediable and irrecoverable damaged to the whole case, but also raised serious questions of credibility and integrity of our investigating agencies", the plea had said.

The CBI is duty bound to register a regular case as mandated by the provisions of law and also report the FIR to the jurisdictional magistrate as mandatory and provided by procedure law, it said.

Referring to the CBI's earlier status report, the fresh plea said it indicated that disproportionate assets were possessed not only by Yadav, Akhilesh and Prateek but also by Dimple.

On the basis of Income Tax Returns and reliable documents of the Yadav family members, the disproportionate assets were calculated at Rs 2.63 crore, it said.

The Supreme Court Monday issued a notice to CBI on a plea seeking direction to the probe agency that it place the investigation report in the disproportionate assets case against SP leader Mulayam Singh Yadav and his sons Akhilesh and Prateek.

The Supreme Court Monday issued a notice to CBI on a plea seeking direction to the probe agency that it place the investigation report in the disproportionate assets case against SP leader Mulayam Singh Yadav and his sons Akhilesh and Prateek. A bench comprising Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justice Deepak Gupta asked the CBI to file its response in two weeks on the status of the investigation against the Samajwadi Party patriarch and his sons. The bench was hearing a plea filed by Congress leader Vishwanath Chaturvedi seeking a direction to the probe agency to apprise the court of the status of the investigation. Chaturvedi in 2005 filed the PIL in the top court seeking directions to CBI to take appropriate action to prosecute Yadav, Akhilesh and his wife Dimple and Prateek under the Prevention of Corruption Act for allegedly acquiring assets more than the known sources of their income by misusing their powers. The apex court in its verdict of March 1, 2007 directed CBI "to enquire into allegations" and find out as to whether the plea with regard to disproportionate assets of the SP leaders was "correct or not". In 2012, the court dismissed the review petitions of Yadav and his sons against its verdict and directed CBI to go ahead with the probe against them in the disproportionate assets case. It allowed the review plea of Dimple and directed CBI to drop the inquiry against her saying that she was not holding any public office. The court had modified its March 1, 2007 order and asked CBI to file the status report before the court and not the government. Chaturvedi, in his fresh plea, said: "Despite the yawning gap between the complaint made/court's directions and the pendency of filing of a regular Case in this matter, an unusually long period as already escaped without any action being taken on the matter for 11 long years." The matter is still pending with CBI for registration of a regular case. Till date, no FIR has been registered against the Yadavs and it has not only caused "some irremediable and irrecoverable damaged to the whole case, but also raised serious questions of credibility and integrity of our investigating agencies", the plea had said. The CBI is duty bound to register a regular case as mandated by the provisions of law and also report the FIR to the jurisdictional magistrate as mandatory and provided by procedure law, it said. Referring to the CBI's earlier status report, the fresh plea said it indicated that disproportionate assets were possessed not only by Yadav, Akhilesh and Prateek but also by Dimple. On the basis of Income Tax Returns and reliable documents of the Yadav family members, the disproportionate assets were calculated at Rs 2.63 crore, it said.

Supreme Court notice to CBI in disproportionate assets case against former UP CMs Mulayam, Akhilesh

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/shooting-at-several-locations-in-hollands-utrecht-city-counter-terrorism-agency-204108">Shooting at several locations in Holland's Utrecht city: Counter-terrorism agency</a>

Head of Dutch counter-terrorism agency said that shooting was taking place at "several" locations at Utrecht city in Holland, Reuters reported after a gunman opened fire at a tram on Monday morning.

Police quickly moved in to cordon off the area even as a government spokesman said one person was killed in the attack.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/regional-tensions-to-be-discussed-during-talks-with-pakistan-foreign-minister-qureshi-china-204052">Regional tensions to be discussed during talks with Pakistan foreign minister Qureshi: China</a>

China said on Monday that tensions between India and Pakistan following the Pulwama terrorist attack would figure in the first strategic dialogue between foreign minister Wang Yi and his Pakistani counterpart Shah Mehmood Qureshi on Tuesday.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/indonesia-summons-australian-foreign-minister-over-senators-remark-204048">Indonesia summons Australian foreign minister over Senator's remark</a>

Indonesia summoned Canberra's ambassador Monday after an Australian senator blamed last week's mosque attacks by a white supremacist in New Zealand on immigration.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/pm-modi-pays-tribute-to-manohar-parrikar-in-goa-204051">PM Modi pays tribute to Manohar Parrikar in Goa</a>

Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Monday paid tribute to Goa chief minister Manohar Parrikar, who died of pancreatic cancer on Sunday.

After arriving in the coastal state, Modi reached the Kala Academy in Panaji where he paid his last respect to the 63-year-old senior leader. He met Parrikar's family members and offered his condolences to them.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/acid-attack-uncivilised-heartless-crime-does-not-deserve-any-clemency-supreme-court-204079">Acid attack 'uncivilised &amp; heartless crime', does not deserve any clemency: Supreme Court</a>

The Supreme Court has said that acid attack is an "uncivilised and heartless crime" which does not deserve any clemency.

The apex court observed this while asking two convicts, who have already undergone five-year jail for throwing acid on a 19-year-old girl in 2004, to pay Rs 1.5 lakh each as additional compensation to the victim.

Shooting at several locations in Holland's Utrecht city: Counter-terrorism agency Head of Dutch counter-terrorism agency said that shooting was taking place at "several" locations at Utrecht city in Holland, Reuters reported after a gunman opened fire at a tram on Monday morning.

Shooting at several locations in Holland's Utrecht city: Counter-terrorism agency Head of Dutch counter-terrorism agency said that shooting was taking place at "several" locations at Utrecht city in Holland, Reuters reported after a gunman opened fire at a tram on Monday morning. Police quickly moved in to cordon off the area even as a government spokesman said one person was killed in the attack. Regional tensions to be discussed during talks with Pakistan foreign minister Qureshi: China China said on Monday that tensions between India and Pakistan following the Pulwama terrorist attack would figure in the first strategic dialogue between foreign minister Wang Yi and his Pakistani counterpart Shah Mehmood Qureshi on Tuesday. Indonesia summons Australian foreign minister over Senator's remark Indonesia summoned Canberra's ambassador Monday after an Australian senator blamed last week's mosque attacks by a white supremacist in New Zealand on immigration. PM Modi pays tribute to Manohar Parrikar in Goa Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Monday paid tribute to Goa chief minister Manohar Parrikar, who died of pancreatic cancer on Sunday. After arriving in the coastal state, Modi reached the Kala Academy in Panaji where he paid his last respect to the 63-year-old senior leader. He met Parrikar's family members and offered his condolences to them. Acid attack 'uncivilised & heartless crime', does not deserve any clemency: Supreme Court The Supreme Court has said that acid attack is an "uncivilised and heartless crime" which does not deserve any clemency. The apex court observed this while asking two convicts, who have already undergone five-year jail for throwing acid on a 19-year-old girl in 2004, to pay Rs 1.5 lakh each as additional compensation to the victim.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/1984-anti-sikh-riots-case-cbi-seeks-dismissal-of-sajjan-kumars-plea-in-supreme-court-203486">The Supreme Court</a> has said that acid attack is an "uncivilised and heartless crime" which does not deserve any clemency.

The apex court observed this while asking two convicts, who have already undergone five-year jail for throwing acid on a 19-year-old girl in 2004, to pay Rs 1.5 lakh each as additional compensation to the victim.

The top court also asked the Himachal Pradesh government to pay compensation to acid attack survivor under the Victim Compensation Scheme.

"Indeed, it cannot be ruled out that in the present case the victim had suffered an uncivilised and heartless crime committed by the respondents (two convicts) and there is no room for leniency which can be conceived," a bench of Justices A M Khanwilkar and Ajay Rastogi said.

The bench further said, "A crime of this nature does not deserve any kind of clemency. This court cannot be oblivious of the situation that the victim must have suffered emotional distress which cannot be compensated either by sentencing the accused or by grant of any compensation."

The court delivered its verdict on an appeal filed by the state challenging the March 24, 2008 judgement of the Himachal Pradesh High Court which had reduced the 10-year jail term awarded to both the men by a trial court to five years.

According to the victim, she was on her way to college on July 12, 2004, when the two men came on a two-wheeler and threw acid on her and fled the spot.

She had suffered 16 per cent burn injury in the incident.

The police had filed charge sheet against both the accused and the trial court convicted and sentenced them to 10 years jail term along with a fine of Rs 5,000 each.

Later, the convicts approached the high court against the lower court's verdict.

The high court reduced their sentence to five years and increased the fine to Rs 25,000 each.

The apex court, in its verdict, noted that the girl had suffered 16 per cent burn injury "which was caused due to acid attack on the darkest day of her life".

The top court was informed that both the convicts had undergone the sentence and deposited the fine as per the high court's judgement and they were released from jail on December 9 last year.

The bench, which said the high court's verdict convicting both the persons needed no interference, asked them to pay additional compensation of Rs 1.5 lakh each to the victim.

It also asked the state to pay compensation to the girl under the victim&nbsp;compensation scheme and deposit the same before the trial court within three months. P

The Supreme Court has said that acid attack is an "uncivilised and heartless crime" which does not deserve any clemency. The apex court observed this while asking two convicts, who have already undergone five-year jail for throwing acid on a 19-year-old girl in 2004, to pay Rs 1.

The Supreme Court has said that acid attack is an "uncivilised and heartless crime" which does not deserve any clemency. The apex court observed this while asking two convicts, who have already undergone five-year jail for throwing acid on a 19-year-old girl in 2004, to pay Rs 1.5 lakh each as additional compensation to the victim. The top court also asked the Himachal Pradesh government to pay compensation to acid attack survivor under the Victim Compensation Scheme. "Indeed, it cannot be ruled out that in the present case the victim had suffered an uncivilised and heartless crime committed by the respondents (two convicts) and there is no room for leniency which can be conceived," a bench of Justices A M Khanwilkar and Ajay Rastogi said. The bench further said, "A crime of this nature does not deserve any kind of clemency. This court cannot be oblivious of the situation that the victim must have suffered emotional distress which cannot be compensated either by sentencing the accused or by grant of any compensation." The court delivered its verdict on an appeal filed by the state challenging the March 24, 2008 judgement of the Himachal Pradesh High Court which had reduced the 10-year jail term awarded to both the men by a trial court to five years. According to the victim, she was on her way to college on July 12, 2004, when the two men came on a two-wheeler and threw acid on her and fled the spot. She had suffered 16 per cent burn injury in the incident. The police had filed charge sheet against both the accused and the trial court convicted and sentenced them to 10 years jail term along with a fine of Rs 5,000 each. Later, the convicts approached the high court against the lower court's verdict. The high court reduced their sentence to five years and increased the fine to Rs 25,000 each. The apex court, in its verdict, noted that the girl had suffered 16 per cent burn injury "which was caused due to acid attack on the darkest day of her life". The top court was informed that both the convicts had undergone the sentence and deposited the fine as per the high court's judgement and they were released from jail on December 9 last year. The bench, which said the high court's verdict convicting both the persons needed no interference, asked them to pay additional compensation of Rs 1.5 lakh each to the victim. It also asked the state to pay compensation to the girl under the victim compensation scheme and deposit the same before the trial court within three months. P

Acid attack 'uncivilised & heartless crime', does not deserve any clemency: Supreme Court

Banned Indian cricketer S Sreesanth will get an opportunity to be heard by BCCI's disciplinary committee on the quantum of punishment, the Supreme Court said on Friday.&nbsp;

The apex court noted that BCCI's disciplinary committee may reconsider quantum of punishment to be given to S Sreesanth within 3 months, news agency ANI reported.&nbsp;

In January, Sreesanth - who was earlier arrested in connection with the 2013 spot-fixing scandal - claimed in the Supreme Court that he had made the confession about his involvement in the alleged crime as <a href="https://www.wionews.com/sports/confessed-to-crime-as-delhi-police-threatened-to-implicate-my-family-sreesanth-to-supreme-court-193984">Delhi Police had threatened that his family members would be implicated and tortured</a>.&nbsp;

Taking into account his submissions made through his lawyer, the apex court questioned him why he had not immediately brought it to the notice of the BCCI that he was being approached for alleged spot-fixing during the Indian Premier League (IPL) in 2013, news agency PTI reported.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
A bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Justice Ashok Bhushan, asked the BCCI to decide afresh on the point of quantum of punishment given to S Sreesanth <a href="https://t.co/tYPkyXTX59">https://t.co/tYPkyXTX59</a>
— ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1106422971118354432?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 15, 2019</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>

The apex court observed that the conduct of Sreesanth, facing a life ban, in the entire episode was "not good".

Sreesanth, who was discharged by a trial court in 2015 in a criminal case related to alleged spot-fixing, told a bench of Justices Ashok Bhushan and K M Joseph that life ban imposed on him by the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) was harsh and there was no evidence to substantiate the claim that he indulged in any illegality.

"The police had threatened me that my family members would be tortured and implicated unless I confess," senior advocate Salman Khurshid, appearing for Sreesanth, told the court.

The 35-year-old cricketer has challenged in the apex court the decision of a division bench of the Kerala High Court which restored the ban imposed on him, PTI reported.&nbsp;

The senior counsel said Sreesanth had failed to inform the board about him being approached for spot-fixing but even if he did not do this, the maximum ban that could be imposed upon him was five years.

As many as 36 accused in the spot-fixing case, including Sreesanth, Chavan and Chandila, were discharged by a trial court here in July 2015. The BCCI had, however, refused to alter its disciplinary decision of life ban on Sreesanth even after the trial court's verdict.

A single-judge bench of the Kerala High Court had lifted the life ban imposed on Sreesanth by the BCCI and had set aside all proceedings against him initiated by the board.

Later, a division bench of the high court had restored the ban on a petition filed by the BCCI against the single-judge bench's order.

(With inputs from PTI)&nbsp;

Banned Indian cricketer S Sreesanth will get an opportunity to be heard by BCCI's disciplinary committee on the quantum of punishment, the Supreme Court said on Friday.

Banned Indian cricketer S Sreesanth will get an opportunity to be heard by BCCI's disciplinary committee on the quantum of punishment, the Supreme Court said on Friday. The apex court noted that BCCI's disciplinary committee may reconsider quantum of punishment to be given to S Sreesanth within 3 months, news agency ANI reported. In January, Sreesanth - who was earlier arrested in connection with the 2013 spot-fixing scandal - claimed in the Supreme Court that he had made the confession about his involvement in the alleged crime as Delhi Police had threatened that his family members would be implicated and tortured. Taking into account his submissions made through his lawyer, the apex court questioned him why he had not immediately brought it to the notice of the BCCI that he was being approached for alleged spot-fixing during the Indian Premier League (IPL) in 2013, news agency PTI reported. A bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Justice Ashok Bhushan, asked the BCCI to decide afresh on the point of quantum of punishment given to S Sreesanth https://t.co/tYPkyXTX59 — ANI (@ANI) March 15, 2019 × The apex court observed that the conduct of Sreesanth, facing a life ban, in the entire episode was "not good". Sreesanth, who was discharged by a trial court in 2015 in a criminal case related to alleged spot-fixing, told a bench of Justices Ashok Bhushan and K M Joseph that life ban imposed on him by the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) was harsh and there was no evidence to substantiate the claim that he indulged in any illegality. "The police had threatened me that my family members would be tortured and implicated unless I confess," senior advocate Salman Khurshid, appearing for Sreesanth, told the court. The 35-year-old cricketer has challenged in the apex court the decision of a division bench of the Kerala High Court which restored the ban imposed on him, PTI reported. The senior counsel said Sreesanth had failed to inform the board about him being approached for spot-fixing but even if he did not do this, the maximum ban that could be imposed upon him was five years. As many as 36 accused in the spot-fixing case, including Sreesanth, Chavan and Chandila, were discharged by a trial court here in July 2015. The BCCI had, however, refused to alter its disciplinary decision of life ban on Sreesanth even after the trial court's verdict. A single-judge bench of the Kerala High Court had lifted the life ban imposed on Sreesanth by the BCCI and had set aside all proceedings against him initiated by the board. Later, a division bench of the high court had restored the ban on a petition filed by the BCCI against the single-judge bench's order. (With inputs from PTI)

Supreme Court asks BCCI to reconsider life ban on S Sreesanth, consider his plea within 3 months

I am not against BCCI, just appealing to give me opportunity: S Sreesanth

The CBI Friday told the Supreme Court that former Congress leader Sajjan Kumar's plea challenging the life term awarded to him by the Delhi High Court in a 1984 anti-Sikh riots case should be dismissed.

The probe agency in its reply on Sajjan Kumar's plea seeking bail said he has a "large political clout" and is capable of "influencing or terrorising" witnesses in the case pending against him.

It told the apex court said that fair trial in the pending case would not be possible if Kumar is granted bail.

The CBI said that Kumar's "political clout clouded fair and speedy investigation and derailed justice for the victims" of the 1984 anti-Sikh riots.

A bench of Justice S A Bobde and Justice S A Nazeer posted the matter for further hearing on March 25.

The case in which Kumar was convicted and sentenced relates to the killing of five Sikhs in Delhi Cantonment's Raj Nagar Part-I area of southwest Delhi on November 1 and 2, 1984, and burning down of a Gurudwara in Raj Nagar Part-II.

Anti-Sikh riots had broken out after the assassination of then prime minister Indira Gandhi on October 31, 1984, by her two Sikh bodyguards.&nbsp;

The top court had earlier admitted the appeal of Kumar for hearing and had also issued a notice to the CBI on his bail plea seeking its response within four weeks.

It had also allowed the former Congress leader to file a "lengthy list of dates" and "additional facts and grounds" in favour of his appeal.

The 73-year-old Kumar had surrendered before a trial court here on December 31, 2018, to serve the sentence in pursuance of the high court's December 17 judgment awarding him life imprisonment for the "remainder of his natural life".

After his conviction in the case, Kumar had resigned from the Congress party.

The high court had convicted and sentenced Kumar to spend the remainder of his life in jail for the offences of criminal conspiracy and abetment in the commission of crimes of murder, promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of communal harmony and defiling and destruction of a Gurdwara.

It had also upheld the conviction and varying sentences awarded by a trial court to five others - former Congress councillor Balwan Khokhar, retired naval officer Captain Bhagmal, Girdhari Lal and ex-MLAs Mahender Yadav and Kishan Khokhar.

In its judgment, the high court had noted that over 2,700 Sikhs were killed in the national capital during the 1984 riots which was indeed a "carnage of unbelievable proportions".

It had said the riots were a "crime against humanity" perpetrated by those who enjoyed "political patronage" and aided by an "indifferent" law enforcement agency.

The high court had set aside the trial court's 2010 verdict which had acquitted Kumar in the case.&nbsp;

The CBI Friday told the Supreme Court that former Congress leader Sajjan Kumar's plea challenging the life term awarded to him by the Delhi High Court in a 1984 anti-Sikh riots case should be dismissed.

The CBI Friday told the Supreme Court that former Congress leader Sajjan Kumar's plea challenging the life term awarded to him by the Delhi High Court in a 1984 anti-Sikh riots case should be dismissed. The probe agency in its reply on Sajjan Kumar's plea seeking bail said he has a "large political clout" and is capable of "influencing or terrorising" witnesses in the case pending against him. It told the apex court said that fair trial in the pending case would not be possible if Kumar is granted bail. The CBI said that Kumar's "political clout clouded fair and speedy investigation and derailed justice for the victims" of the 1984 anti-Sikh riots. A bench of Justice S A Bobde and Justice S A Nazeer posted the matter for further hearing on March 25. The case in which Kumar was convicted and sentenced relates to the killing of five Sikhs in Delhi Cantonment's Raj Nagar Part-I area of southwest Delhi on November 1 and 2, 1984, and burning down of a Gurudwara in Raj Nagar Part-II. Anti-Sikh riots had broken out after the assassination of then prime minister Indira Gandhi on October 31, 1984, by her two Sikh bodyguards. The top court had earlier admitted the appeal of Kumar for hearing and had also issued a notice to the CBI on his bail plea seeking its response within four weeks. It had also allowed the former Congress leader to file a "lengthy list of dates" and "additional facts and grounds" in favour of his appeal. The 73-year-old Kumar had surrendered before a trial court here on December 31, 2018, to serve the sentence in pursuance of the high court's December 17 judgment awarding him life imprisonment for the "remainder of his natural life". After his conviction in the case, Kumar had resigned from the Congress party. The high court had convicted and sentenced Kumar to spend the remainder of his life in jail for the offences of criminal conspiracy and abetment in the commission of crimes of murder, promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of communal harmony and defiling and destruction of a Gurdwara. It had also upheld the conviction and varying sentences awarded by a trial court to five others - former Congress councillor Balwan Khokhar, retired naval officer Captain Bhagmal, Girdhari Lal and ex-MLAs Mahender Yadav and Kishan Khokhar. In its judgment, the high court had noted that over 2,700 Sikhs were killed in the national capital during the 1984 riots which was indeed a "carnage of unbelievable proportions". It had said the riots were a "crime against humanity" perpetrated by those who enjoyed "political patronage" and aided by an "indifferent" law enforcement agency. The high court had set aside the trial court's 2010 verdict which had acquitted Kumar in the case.

1984 anti-Sikh riots case: CBI seeks dismissal of Sajjan Kumar's plea in Supreme Court 

The Supreme Court Thursday asked former Ranbaxy promoters Malvinder Singh and Shivinder Singh to apprise it how they propose to comply with the Rs 3500 crore arbitral award passed against them by a Singapore tribunal.

A bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Googi asked the Singh brothers, who were present in the court, to consult their financial and legal advisors and give a concrete plan on how they will comply with the tribunal's order.

"It is not about individual honour but it doesn't look good for the country's honour. You were the flag bearers of the pharmacare industry and it doesn't look good that you are appearing in court," the bench also comprising Justices Deepak Gupta and Sanjiv Khanna said.

The bench asked the Singh brothers to appear before it on March 28 and submit the plan, saying "hopefully it will be the last time you are appearing in the court".

The apex court was hearing the plea of Japanese firm Daiichi Sankyo which is seeking to recover Rs 3,500 crore, awarded to it by a Singapore tribunal in its case against Malvinder and Shivinder Singh.

The Supreme Court Thursday asked former Ranbaxy promoters Malvinder Singh and Shivinder Singh to apprise it how they propose to comply with the Rs 3500 crore arbitral award passed against them by a Singapore tribunal.

The Supreme Court Thursday asked former Ranbaxy promoters Malvinder Singh and Shivinder Singh to apprise it how they propose to comply with the Rs 3500 crore arbitral award passed against them by a Singapore tribunal. A bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Googi asked the Singh brothers, who were present in the court, to consult their financial and legal advisors and give a concrete plan on how they will comply with the tribunal's order. "It is not about individual honour but it doesn't look good for the country's honour. You were the flag bearers of the pharmacare industry and it doesn't look good that you are appearing in court," the bench also comprising Justices Deepak Gupta and Sanjiv Khanna said. The bench asked the Singh brothers to appear before it on March 28 and submit the plan, saying "hopefully it will be the last time you are appearing in the court". The apex court was hearing the plea of Japanese firm Daiichi Sankyo which is seeking to recover Rs 3,500 crore, awarded to it by a Singapore tribunal in its case against Malvinder and Shivinder Singh.

SC asks ex-Ranbaxy promoters to apprise how they'll comply with Rs 3500 cr arbitral award

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/rafale-review-petition-security-of-state-supersedes-everything-government-tells-supreme-court-203317">Rafale review petition: 'Security of state supersedes everything,' government tells Supreme Court</a>

Attorney General KK Venugopal told the Supreme Court Thursday that the "security of state supersedes everything". The court is hearing a review petition of its earlier judgement in the Rafale case which had said the deal did not need to be investigated for corruption.&nbsp;

The review petition has been filed by former union ministers Arun Shourie and Yashwant Sinha, and the lawyer Prashant Bhushan.&nbsp;

 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/eu-leader-donald-tusk-backs-long-delay-if-britain-rethinks-brexit-203291">EU's Donald Tusk backs 'long' delay if Britain 'rethinks' Brexit</a>

EU leader Donald Tusk said Thursday that European capitals could approve a long delay to Brexit, in a last-ditch push to persuade Prime Minister Theresa May to change her negotiating red lines. &nbsp;&nbsp;

During consultations ahead of next week's EU summit, Tusk said he "will appeal to the EU27 to be open to a long extension if the UK finds it necessary to rethink its Brexit strategy and build consensus around it."

 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/sp-bsp-will-have-joint-rallies-in-uttar-pradesh-says-akhilesh-203316">Lok Sabha polls: SP &amp; BSP will hold joint rallies in Uttar Pradesh, says Akhilesh</a>

In Uttar Pradesh, the SP and BSP will hold joint election rallies during the ensuing Lok Sabha polls, former chief minister Akhilesh Yadav said here on Thursday.&nbsp;

'We have planned joint rallies in Uttar Pradesh,' he told ANI in reply to a question about what transpired in his meeting with BSP president Mayawati on Wednesday.&nbsp;

 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/wing-commander-abhinandans-debiefing-complete-he-will-now-go-on-sick-leave-iaf-sources-203327">Wing Commander Abhinandan's debriefing complete, he will now go on sick leave: IAF sources</a>

Wing Commander Abhinandan Varathaman's debriefing is now complete, Indian Air Force sources said on Thursday.&nbsp;

The news agency ANI quoted the sources as saying Abhinandan will now go on sick leave for a few weeks on the advice of doctors at the army's Research and Referral Hospital in Delhi.&nbsp;

 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/over-100-malaysian-schools-shut-after-toxic-waste-dump-203324">Over 100 Malaysian schools shut after </a><a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/over-100-malaysian-schools-shut-after-toxic-waste-dump-203324">toxic</a><a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/over-100-malaysian-schools-shut-after-toxic-waste-dump-203324"> waste dump</a>

Over 100 schools in Malaysia have been closed after the dumping of toxic waste into a river caused hundreds of people to fall ill, including many children, authorities said.

A lorry is believed to have dumped the waste in southern Johor state last week, sending hazardous fumes across a wide area and causing those affected to display symptoms of poisoning such as nausea and vomiting.

Rafale review petition: 'Security of state supersedes everything,' government tells Supreme Court Attorney General KK Venugopal told the Supreme Court Thursday that the "security of state supersedes everything".

Rafale review petition: 'Security of state supersedes everything,' government tells Supreme Court Attorney General KK Venugopal told the Supreme Court Thursday that the "security of state supersedes everything". The court is hearing a review petition of its earlier judgement in the Rafale case which had said the deal did not need to be investigated for corruption. The review petition has been filed by former union ministers Arun Shourie and Yashwant Sinha, and the lawyer Prashant Bhushan. EU's Donald Tusk backs 'long' delay if Britain 'rethinks' Brexit EU leader Donald Tusk said Thursday that European capitals could approve a long delay to Brexit, in a last-ditch push to persuade Prime Minister Theresa May to change her negotiating red lines. During consultations ahead of next week's EU summit, Tusk said he "will appeal to the EU27 to be open to a long extension if the UK finds it necessary to rethink its Brexit strategy and build consensus around it." Lok Sabha polls: SP & BSP will hold joint rallies in Uttar Pradesh, says Akhilesh In Uttar Pradesh, the SP and BSP will hold joint election rallies during the ensuing Lok Sabha polls, former chief minister Akhilesh Yadav said here on Thursday. 'We have planned joint rallies in Uttar Pradesh,' he told ANI in reply to a question about what transpired in his meeting with BSP president Mayawati on Wednesday. Wing Commander Abhinandan's debriefing complete, he will now go on sick leave: IAF sources Wing Commander Abhinandan Varathaman's debriefing is now complete, Indian Air Force sources said on Thursday. The news agency ANI quoted the sources as saying Abhinandan will now go on sick leave for a few weeks on the advice of doctors at the army's Research and Referral Hospital in Delhi. Over 100 Malaysian schools shut after toxic waste dump Over 100 schools in Malaysia have been closed after the dumping of toxic waste into a river caused hundreds of people to fall ill, including many children, authorities said. A lorry is believed to have dumped the waste in southern Johor state last week, sending hazardous fumes across a wide area and causing those affected to display symptoms of poisoning such as nausea and vomiting.

Attorney General KK Venugopal told the Supreme Court Thursday that the "security of state supersedes everything". The court is hearing a review petition of its earlier judgement in <a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions/rafale-is-a-dud-bomb-now-184041">the Rafale case</a> which had said the deal did not need to be investigated for corruption.&nbsp;

The review petition has been filed by former union ministers Arun Shourie and Yashwant Sinha, and the lawyer Prashant Bhushan.&nbsp;

Their petition includes documents which the government says were <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/supreme-court-asks-government-what-it-did-after-it-says-rafale-documents-were-stolen-201562">stolen from the Defence Ministry</a>. On Thursday, Venugopal told the court that it should direct the removal of the "leaked pages" from the review petition since the government was claiming privilege over the documents.&nbsp;

"What privilege do you (attorney general) claim? They have already produced them (the documents) in court," the court said.&nbsp;

"They have produced it after stealing it," Venugopal replied.&nbsp;

"State documents can't be published without explicit permission," he added.&nbsp;

The Supreme Court then said to Venugopal that the RTI Act can override even the Official Secrets Act since Section 22 and Section 24 of the RTI Act says "even intelligence and security establishments bound to give information about corruption and human rights violations".&nbsp;

To which Venugopal replied: "Security of state supersedes everything."&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
SC while referring to RTI Act has overriding effect on Official Secrets Act as per Section 22 and Section 24 RTI Act says 'even intelligence &amp;security establishments bound to give info about corruption&amp; human rights violations.' AG: Security of state supersedes everything <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Rafale?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Rafale</a> <a href="https://t.co/pUWyW0IevX">https://t.co/pUWyW0IevX</a>
— ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1106131088156618753?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 14, 2019</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>

The court on Thursday reserves its order on the Centre claiming privilege over the allegedly leaked documents.&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

Attorney General KK Venugopal told the Supreme Court Thursday that the "security of state supersedes everything". The court is hearing a review petition of its earlier judgement in the Rafale case which had said the deal did not need to be investigated for corruption.

Attorney General KK Venugopal told the Supreme Court Thursday that the "security of state supersedes everything". The court is hearing a review petition of its earlier judgement in the Rafale case which had said the deal did not need to be investigated for corruption. The review petition has been filed by former union ministers Arun Shourie and Yashwant Sinha, and the lawyer Prashant Bhushan. Their petition includes documents which the government says were stolen from the Defence Ministry. On Thursday, Venugopal told the court that it should direct the removal of the "leaked pages" from the review petition since the government was claiming privilege over the documents. "What privilege do you (attorney general) claim? They have already produced them (the documents) in court," the court said. "They have produced it after stealing it," Venugopal replied. "State documents can't be published without explicit permission," he added. The Supreme Court then said to Venugopal that the RTI Act can override even the Official Secrets Act since Section 22 and Section 24 of the RTI Act says "even intelligence and security establishments bound to give information about corruption and human rights violations". To which Venugopal replied: "Security of state supersedes everything." SC while referring to RTI Act has overriding effect on Official Secrets Act as per Section 22 and Section 24 RTI Act says 'even intelligence &security establishments bound to give info about corruption& human rights violations.' AG: Security of state supersedes everything #Rafale https://t.co/pUWyW0IevX — ANI (@ANI) March 14, 2019 × The court on Thursday reserves its order on the Centre claiming privilege over the allegedly leaked documents.

Rafale review petition: 'Security of state supersedes everything,' government tells Supreme Court

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/jk-terrorists-shoot-dead-gardener-who-used-to-work-with-the-army-in-pulwama-203102">J&amp;K: Suspected terrorists shoot </a><a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/jk-terrorists-shoot-dead-gardener-who-used-to-work-with-the-army-in-pulwama-203102">dead</a><a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/jk-terrorists-shoot-dead-gardener-who-used-to-work-with-the-army-in-pulwama-203102"> man who had enrolled with the army</a>

Suspected terrorists have shot dead a 25-year-old man in Jammu and Kashmir's Pulwama. The man was identified as Ashiq Ahmad.&nbsp;

Ashiq was shot and critically wounded in Pulwama's Pingleena village. He was rushed to hospital where doctors declared him dead on arrival.&nbsp;

Initial reports had suggested Ashiq used to work as a gardener with the Indian Army but that he resigned his job a few months ago.&nbsp;

The army however said Ashiq had enrolled with them on January 15, 2018 but that he deserted eight months later.&nbsp;

 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/rafale-case-government-tells-sc-accessing-of-internal-secret-deliberations-jeopardised-national-security-203114">Rafale case: Petitioners' documents jeopardised national security, </a><a class="gr-progress" href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/rafale-case-government-tells-sc-accessing-of-internal-secret-deliberations-jeopardised-national-security-203114">government</a><a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/rafale-case-government-tells-sc-accessing-of-internal-secret-deliberations-jeopardised-national-security-203114"> tells Supreme Court</a>

The government on Wednesday filed a fresh affidavit in the Supreme Court in the Rafale case, saying that “unauthorisedly-accessed” documents related to “internal secret deliberations” had been presented in a “selective” manner to mislead the top court and amounted to jeopardising national security.

 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/india-all-boeing-737-max-planes-now-grounded-government-warns-tomorrow-will-be-real-challenging-day-203110">India: All Boeing 737 Max planes now grounded, government warns tomorrow will be 'real challenging day'</a>

All Boeing 737 Max planes flying in the country have now been grounded. The ban came into effect at 4 pm on Wednesday after two recent crashes of the aircraft, one in Ethiopia this Sunday and one in October last year in Indonesia.&nbsp;

"As of now, all flights of Boeing 737 Max have been grounded," Pradeep Singh Kharola, secretary of the Ministry of Civil Aviation, said on Wednesday. &nbsp;

Kharola added that the flights were grounded "before the deadline of 4 pm", but he also warned that tomorrow will be "a real challenging day".&nbsp;

 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/british-mps-to-vote-today-on-whether-they-want-no-deal-brexit-203112">British MPs to vote today on whether they want no-deal Brexit</a>

British MPs will vote Wednesday on whether they want to avert a potentially chaotic "no-deal" exit from the EU, as business leaders warned the country was "staring down the precipice" after parliament rejected a divorce agreement.

Parliament is expected to vote against leaving the bloc without a deal — although it remains the default option unless an alternative can be secured by the fast-approaching March 29 Brexit date.&nbsp;

 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/kartarpur-corridor-talks-india-hopes-for-meaningful-talks-may-raise-khalistani-propaganda-with-pakistan-203092">Kartarpur corridor: India hopes for 'meaningful' talks with Pakistan, may raise Khalistan propaganda</a>

India and Pakistan will hold talks on Thursday to decide the modalities of the Kartarpur corridor. The corridor was agreed upon by both countries in November 2018.&nbsp;

The talks will be held on March 14 on the Indian side of the Wagah-Attari border.&nbsp;

 
&nbsp;

J&K: Suspected terrorists shoot dead man who had enrolled with the army Suspected terrorists have shot dead a 25-year-old man in Jammu and Kashmir's Pulwama. The man was identified as Ashiq Ahmad.

J&K: Suspected terrorists shoot dead man who had enrolled with the army Suspected terrorists have shot dead a 25-year-old man in Jammu and Kashmir's Pulwama. The man was identified as Ashiq Ahmad. Ashiq was shot and critically wounded in Pulwama's Pingleena village. He was rushed to hospital where doctors declared him dead on arrival. Initial reports had suggested Ashiq used to work as a gardener with the Indian Army but that he resigned his job a few months ago. The army however said Ashiq had enrolled with them on January 15, 2018 but that he deserted eight months later. Rafale case: Petitioners' documents jeopardised national security, government tells Supreme Court The government on Wednesday filed a fresh affidavit in the Supreme Court in the Rafale case, saying that “unauthorisedly-accessed” documents related to “internal secret deliberations” had been presented in a “selective” manner to mislead the top court and amounted to jeopardising national security. India: All Boeing 737 Max planes now grounded, government warns tomorrow will be 'real challenging day' All Boeing 737 Max planes flying in the country have now been grounded. The ban came into effect at 4 pm on Wednesday after two recent crashes of the aircraft, one in Ethiopia this Sunday and one in October last year in Indonesia. "As of now, all flights of Boeing 737 Max have been grounded," Pradeep Singh Kharola, secretary of the Ministry of Civil Aviation, said on Wednesday. Kharola added that the flights were grounded "before the deadline of 4 pm", but he also warned that tomorrow will be "a real challenging day". British MPs to vote today on whether they want no-deal Brexit British MPs will vote Wednesday on whether they want to avert a potentially chaotic "no-deal" exit from the EU, as business leaders warned the country was "staring down the precipice" after parliament rejected a divorce agreement. Parliament is expected to vote against leaving the bloc without a deal — although it remains the default option unless an alternative can be secured by the fast-approaching March 29 Brexit date. Kartarpur corridor: India hopes for 'meaningful' talks with Pakistan, may raise Khalistan propaganda India and Pakistan will hold talks on Thursday to decide the modalities of the Kartarpur corridor. The corridor was agreed upon by both countries in November 2018. The talks will be held on March 14 on the Indian side of the Wagah-Attari border.

The Centre on Tuesday submitted an affidavit in the Supreme Court to defend its decision to give 10 per cent reservation in jobs and education for the economically weaker section (EWS) of the general category.

In the affidavit, the Centre said that the Constitution Amendment that gives 10% reservation has not violated the basic structure of the Constitution or Supreme Court ruling of 1992 which had put 50 per cent cap on the reservation.

The top court will hear on March 28 whether pleas challenging the Constitution Amendment giving 10 per cent reservation in jobs and education to the economically weak should be referred to a Constitution bench.

Senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, appearing for one of the petitioners, had told a bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi on Monday that the issue involves the basic structure of the Constitution and should be heard by the five-judge Constitution bench.

The bench, also comprising Justices Deepak Gupta and Sanjiv Khanna, said it would hear arguments on March 28 whether the matter should be referred to a Constitution bench.

Earlier, the apex court had refused to stay the implementation of 10 per cent reservation given to the EWS in the general category in jobs and education.

The court was hearing pleas by NGOs and others.

One of the petitions, filed by Tehseen Poonawala, has challenged the 103rd Constitution amendment saying it was against the basic structure of Constitution, which does not allow for any reservation based on economic criteria.

The 50 per cent ceiling limit cannot be breached, the plea said.

Youth for Equality has also sought the quashing of the Bill, stating that it violated the "equality code of the Constitution" as a reservation on economic grounds cannot be restricted to the general category.

By way of the present amendment, the exclusion of the OBCs and the SCs/STs from the scope of the economic reservation essentially implies that only those who are poor from the general category would avail the benefits of the quotas, the organisation has contended.&nbsp;

The Centre on Tuesday submitted an affidavit in the Supreme Court to defend its decision to give 10 per cent reservation in jobs and education for the economically weaker section (EWS) of the general category.

The Centre on Tuesday submitted an affidavit in the Supreme Court to defend its decision to give 10 per cent reservation in jobs and education for the economically weaker section (EWS) of the general category. In the affidavit, the Centre said that the Constitution Amendment that gives 10% reservation has not violated the basic structure of the Constitution or Supreme Court ruling of 1992 which had put 50 per cent cap on the reservation. The top court will hear on March 28 whether pleas challenging the Constitution Amendment giving 10 per cent reservation in jobs and education to the economically weak should be referred to a Constitution bench. Senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, appearing for one of the petitioners, had told a bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi on Monday that the issue involves the basic structure of the Constitution and should be heard by the five-judge Constitution bench. The bench, also comprising Justices Deepak Gupta and Sanjiv Khanna, said it would hear arguments on March 28 whether the matter should be referred to a Constitution bench. Earlier, the apex court had refused to stay the implementation of 10 per cent reservation given to the EWS in the general category in jobs and education. The court was hearing pleas by NGOs and others. One of the petitions, filed by Tehseen Poonawala, has challenged the 103rd Constitution amendment saying it was against the basic structure of Constitution, which does not allow for any reservation based on economic criteria. The 50 per cent ceiling limit cannot be breached, the plea said. Youth for Equality has also sought the quashing of the Bill, stating that it violated the "equality code of the Constitution" as a reservation on economic grounds cannot be restricted to the general category. By way of the present amendment, the exclusion of the OBCs and the SCs/STs from the scope of the economic reservation essentially implies that only those who are poor from the general category would avail the benefits of the quotas, the organisation has contended.

10% quota to economically weak does not violate basic Constitution structure: Centre to Supreme Court

Sri Lanka's main Tamil party TNA and Marxist party JVP on Monday held a rare meeting here and decided to work together towards abolishing the executive presidency in the country.

The Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) and the Tamil National Alliance (TNA), which represented diagonally opposed political stands, came together during the political crisis in the island nation when President Maithripala Sirisena sacked Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe.

The TNA and JVP put up a broad front to force Sirisena backtrack through court action. The Supreme Court's intervention made Sirisena to reinstate Wickremesinghe as the prime minister.

The meeting between the two parties on Monday came as part of JVP's consultations on the need to abolish presidency.&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;

The two parties held a discussion on the 20th Amendment to the Constitution which aimed at abolishing the executive presidency.

JVP leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake told the media they discussed mustering support for the 20th amendment to the Constitution in Parliament and working in tandem on matters of mutual interest.&nbsp;

He said the JVP discussed with the TNA about a model to get all communities involved in governance.

He said the decision on the implementation of the proposed 20th amendment must be vested with the people.&nbsp;

"Those who attempt to defeat the amendment in Parliament are the ones who are afraid of the people,"&nbsp;Dissanayake said.

TNA leader R Sampanthan said they discussed how the two parties could work together for the country and the people. He said they briefed the JVP on matters recently discussed with the President and the Prime Minister on the devolution of power.&nbsp;

Both parties said their coming together was to preserve the island's Constitution and it was not an action in personal favour of Wickremesinghe.

"We have decided to work with the JVP for the betterment of the country. If we need to bring the main political parties onto the right track, the TNA and the JVP must work in unison in this regard," the veteran TNA leader said.&nbsp;

"We are open to working with the TNA based on equal participation," Dissanayake said.

The JVP in 2004 branded the TNA a proxy party of the LTTE who ran a bloody separatist campaign to carve out a separate Tamil homeland in the north and east regions of the country.

Dissanayake said the TNA was supportive of the idea to abolish the presidential system of government through the JVP's move to introduce an amendment to the Constitution.&nbsp;

The 20A seeks to abolish the executive presidency, the main feature in the existing 1978 Constitution.&nbsp;

The nationalist opposition led by the former President Mahinda Rajapaksa accuses the government of relying on the TNA's support for its survival.

Sri Lanka's main Tamil party TNA and Marxist party JVP on Monday held a rare meeting here and decided to work together towards abolishing the executive presidency in the country.

Sri Lanka's main Tamil party TNA and Marxist party JVP on Monday held a rare meeting here and decided to work together towards abolishing the executive presidency in the country. The Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) and the Tamil National Alliance (TNA), which represented diagonally opposed political stands, came together during the political crisis in the island nation when President Maithripala Sirisena sacked Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe. The TNA and JVP put up a broad front to force Sirisena backtrack through court action. The Supreme Court's intervention made Sirisena to reinstate Wickremesinghe as the prime minister. The meeting between the two parties on Monday came as part of JVP's consultations on the need to abolish presidency. The two parties held a discussion on the 20th Amendment to the Constitution which aimed at abolishing the executive presidency. JVP leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake told the media they discussed mustering support for the 20th amendment to the Constitution in Parliament and working in tandem on matters of mutual interest. He said the JVP discussed with the TNA about a model to get all communities involved in governance. He said the decision on the implementation of the proposed 20th amendment must be vested with the people. "Those who attempt to defeat the amendment in Parliament are the ones who are afraid of the people," Dissanayake said. TNA leader R Sampanthan said they discussed how the two parties could work together for the country and the people. He said they briefed the JVP on matters recently discussed with the President and the Prime Minister on the devolution of power. Both parties said their coming together was to preserve the island's Constitution and it was not an action in personal favour of Wickremesinghe. "We have decided to work with the JVP for the betterment of the country. If we need to bring the main political parties onto the right track, the TNA and the JVP must work in unison in this regard," the veteran TNA leader said. "We are open to working with the TNA based on equal participation," Dissanayake said. The JVP in 2004 branded the TNA a proxy party of the LTTE who ran a bloody separatist campaign to carve out a separate Tamil homeland in the north and east regions of the country. Dissanayake said the TNA was supportive of the idea to abolish the presidential system of government through the JVP's move to introduce an amendment to the Constitution. The 20A seeks to abolish the executive presidency, the main feature in the existing 1978 Constitution. The nationalist opposition led by the former President Mahinda Rajapaksa accuses the government of relying on the TNA's support for its survival.

Sri Lanka's Tamil party TNA, JVP pledge to work together to abolish executive presidency

The Supreme Court on Monday said it is not in favour of passing an order at this stage to refer the issue of 10 per cent quota for economically weaker sections across all classes to a Constitution bench.

A bench, headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, said it will hear the plea on March 28 and will consider whether the matter is required to be referred to a Constitution bench.

The bench, also comprising Justices Deepak Gupta and Sanjiv Khanna, asked senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, who was appearing for the petitioner, to file a short note of the points which they have raised in their application.&nbsp;

The apex court had earlier refused to stay the Centre's decision to grant 10 per cent quota in jobs and admissions to poor candidates in the general category.

However, the court had agreed to examine the validity of the law and issued a notice to the Centre on the plea filed by businessman and Congress supporter Tehseen Poonawalla.

Dhavan, appearing for Poonawalla, had told the bench that his only grievance at this stage was that this quota should not breach the ceiling of 50 per cent as mandated by the apex court.

The top court had earlier issued a notice to the Centre on similar petitions and ordered tagging of the fresh plea of Poonawalla with pending ones. 
Petitions have been filed by parties, including 'Janhit Abhiyan' and NGO 'Youth For Equality', challenging the Centre's decision.

The petition, filed by Youth For Equality through its president Kaushal Kant Mishra, has sought the quashing of the Constitution (103 Amendment) Act, 2019, saying economic criterion cannot be the sole basis for reservation.

It said the bill violates the basic feature of the Constitution as a reservation on economic grounds cannot be limited to the general category and the overall 50 per cent ceiling limit cannot be breached.

In the present form, the upper limit of quota goes up to 60 per cent which violates the decisions of the apex court, the plea claimed.

Referring to the nine-judge bench decision of the apex court in the landmark 1992 Indira Sawhney case, the petition said the latest amendment completely violated the Constitutional norm that economic criterion cannot be the only basis of reservation.

It also said the amendments fail to consider that articles 14 and 16 form the basic feature of equality and that they have been violated with the doing away of the restraints that were imposed on the reservation policy, that is the 50 per cent ceiling limit and the exclusion of economic status as a sole criterion.

The plea filed by businessman Poonawalla had sought quashing of the Constitution (103 Amendment) Bill, 2019, saying that backwardness for the purpose of reservation cannot be defined by "economic status alone".

The top court had earlier refused to stay the Modi government's decision to grant the reservation but agreed to examine the validity of the constitutional amendment which paved the way for this quota.

In a poll year, the Modi government has come out with the constitutional amendment bill giving quota benefits to the poor among general category candidates.

The Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha cleared the bill on January 8 and 9 respectively and has been signed by President Ram Nath Kovind.&nbsp; 
The quota will be over and above the existing 50 per cent reservation to SCs, STs and Other Backward Classes (OBCs).

The Supreme Court on Monday said it is not in favour of passing an order at this stage to refer the issue of 10 per cent quota for economically weaker sections across all classes to a Constitution bench.

The Supreme Court on Monday said it is not in favour of passing an order at this stage to refer the issue of 10 per cent quota for economically weaker sections across all classes to a Constitution bench. A bench, headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, said it will hear the plea on March 28 and will consider whether the matter is required to be referred to a Constitution bench. The bench, also comprising Justices Deepak Gupta and Sanjiv Khanna, asked senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, who was appearing for the petitioner, to file a short note of the points which they have raised in their application. The apex court had earlier refused to stay the Centre's decision to grant 10 per cent quota in jobs and admissions to poor candidates in the general category. However, the court had agreed to examine the validity of the law and issued a notice to the Centre on the plea filed by businessman and Congress supporter Tehseen Poonawalla. Dhavan, appearing for Poonawalla, had told the bench that his only grievance at this stage was that this quota should not breach the ceiling of 50 per cent as mandated by the apex court. The top court had earlier issued a notice to the Centre on similar petitions and ordered tagging of the fresh plea of Poonawalla with pending ones. Petitions have been filed by parties, including 'Janhit Abhiyan' and NGO 'Youth For Equality', challenging the Centre's decision. The petition, filed by Youth For Equality through its president Kaushal Kant Mishra, has sought the quashing of the Constitution (103 Amendment) Act, 2019, saying economic criterion cannot be the sole basis for reservation. It said the bill violates the basic feature of the Constitution as a reservation on economic grounds cannot be limited to the general category and the overall 50 per cent ceiling limit cannot be breached. In the present form, the upper limit of quota goes up to 60 per cent which violates the decisions of the apex court, the plea claimed. Referring to the nine-judge bench decision of the apex court in the landmark 1992 Indira Sawhney case, the petition said the latest amendment completely violated the Constitutional norm that economic criterion cannot be the only basis of reservation. It also said the amendments fail to consider that articles 14 and 16 form the basic feature of equality and that they have been violated with the doing away of the restraints that were imposed on the reservation policy, that is the 50 per cent ceiling limit and the exclusion of economic status as a sole criterion. The plea filed by businessman Poonawalla had sought quashing of the Constitution (103 Amendment) Bill, 2019, saying that backwardness for the purpose of reservation cannot be defined by "economic status alone". The top court had earlier refused to stay the Modi government's decision to grant the reservation but agreed to examine the validity of the constitutional amendment which paved the way for this quota. In a poll year, the Modi government has come out with the constitutional amendment bill giving quota benefits to the poor among general category candidates. The Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha cleared the bill on January 8 and 9 respectively and has been signed by President Ram Nath Kovind. The quota will be over and above the existing 50 per cent reservation to SCs, STs and Other Backward Classes (OBCs).

Supreme Court not in favour of passing order at this stage to refer 10% quota issue to Constitution bench

Supreme Court orders mediation in Ayodhya case

Ayodhya Case: Supreme Court orders mediation

The hearing in the Supreme Court during lawyer Prashant Bhushan's application seeking recusal of Justice Arun Mishra from adjudicating contempt plea filed against him by the Attorney General saw some heated arguments on Thursday.

The case was being heard by a bench comprising Justice Arun Mishra and Navin Sinha. Senior lawyer Dushyant Dave, appearing for Prashant Bhushan, referred to some earlier orders passed by Justice Mishra, including the one in which the apex court had made observations about lawyers going to the media on sub-judice cases, and said this has given rise to an apprehension in Bhushan's mind.

"Judges think independently. It is a matter of common knowledge that in some matters, some judges may have strict views while other judges will have different views. This is the beauty of this institution," Justice Sinha observed.

Dave said apprehension has to be seen from the mind of litigants and not from the mind of judges. "Please hear our application (seeking recusal). There are reasons in it."

To this, the bench told Dave, "Sorry, we are not with you. We should not express any opinion on this kind of application. If you want, we can pass reasoned order and then it will reflect many things. We are telling you."

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, which has also filed a separate contempt plea against Bhushan, referred to earlier orders passed by the apex court and said seeking recusal of judges has become a "pattern".

He said earlier also attempts were made to have two out of three judges recuse from hearing the pleas seeking probe into the death of special CBI judge B H Loya, who was hearing the high-profile Sohrabuddin Sheikh fake encounter case.

Senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, appearing for some social activists who have sought to intervene in the case, said Mehta has no locus to argue in the matter as the Centre's contempt plea against Bhushan was not maintainable.

"He (Mehta) appears in court, stands up and argues without being a party in the case," Dhavan said.

"Mr Dhavan, please maintain cool," the bench said. To this, the senior lawyer replied, "I am cool, My Lord. My biggest advantage is, I don't have blood pressure."

"Please check your blood pressure anyway", Justice Mishra commented.

During the hearing, Bhushan admitted in the court that he had made a "genuine mistake" by tweeting that the government had perhaps submitted in the apex court fabricated documents of the high-powered selection panel on appointment of interim CBI director.

Advocate Dave expressed the inclination on behalf of his client to withdraw an application seeking recusal of Justice Arun Mishra from hearing the contempt plea filed by Attorney General K K Venugopal against the activist lawyer.

When the bench said the application be withdrawn with an unconditional apology, Dave said he will tender the same on behalf of Bhushan.

However, when the bench sought Bhushan's own view, he said he was not inclined to tender an unconditional apology as the application filed by him was bona fide.

Taking note of his statement, the bench said in its order, "We make it clear that there is no reason for recusal and we will deal with it." The bench has posted the matter for further hearing on April 3.

The hearing in the Supreme Court during lawyer Prashant Bhushan's application seeking recusal of Justice Arun Mishra from adjudicating contempt plea filed against him by the Attorney General saw some heated arguments on Thursday.

The hearing in the Supreme Court during lawyer Prashant Bhushan's application seeking recusal of Justice Arun Mishra from adjudicating contempt plea filed against him by the Attorney General saw some heated arguments on Thursday. The case was being heard by a bench comprising Justice Arun Mishra and Navin Sinha. Senior lawyer Dushyant Dave, appearing for Prashant Bhushan, referred to some earlier orders passed by Justice Mishra, including the one in which the apex court had made observations about lawyers going to the media on sub-judice cases, and said this has given rise to an apprehension in Bhushan's mind. "Judges think independently. It is a matter of common knowledge that in some matters, some judges may have strict views while other judges will have different views. This is the beauty of this institution," Justice Sinha observed. Dave said apprehension has to be seen from the mind of litigants and not from the mind of judges. "Please hear our application (seeking recusal). There are reasons in it." To this, the bench told Dave, "Sorry, we are not with you. We should not express any opinion on this kind of application. If you want, we can pass reasoned order and then it will reflect many things. We are telling you." Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, which has also filed a separate contempt plea against Bhushan, referred to earlier orders passed by the apex court and said seeking recusal of judges has become a "pattern". He said earlier also attempts were made to have two out of three judges recuse from hearing the pleas seeking probe into the death of special CBI judge B H Loya, who was hearing the high-profile Sohrabuddin Sheikh fake encounter case. Senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, appearing for some social activists who have sought to intervene in the case, said Mehta has no locus to argue in the matter as the Centre's contempt plea against Bhushan was not maintainable. "He (Mehta) appears in court, stands up and argues without being a party in the case," Dhavan said. "Mr Dhavan, please maintain cool," the bench said. To this, the senior lawyer replied, "I am cool, My Lord. My biggest advantage is, I don't have blood pressure." "Please check your blood pressure anyway", Justice Mishra commented. During the hearing, Bhushan admitted in the court that he had made a "genuine mistake" by tweeting that the government had perhaps submitted in the apex court fabricated documents of the high-powered selection panel on appointment of interim CBI director. Advocate Dave expressed the inclination on behalf of his client to withdraw an application seeking recusal of Justice Arun Mishra from hearing the contempt plea filed by Attorney General K K Venugopal against the activist lawyer. When the bench said the application be withdrawn with an unconditional apology, Dave said he will tender the same on behalf of Bhushan. However, when the bench sought Bhushan's own view, he said he was not inclined to tender an unconditional apology as the application filed by him was bona fide. Taking note of his statement, the bench said in its order, "We make it clear that there is no reason for recusal and we will deal with it." The bench has posted the matter for further hearing on April 3.

'I am cool', says lawyer in courtroom exchange during Prashant Bhushan case hearing

supreme-court

Supreme Court, News on Supreme Court, stories on Supreme Court, articles on Supreme Court, Supreme Court stories at Wion, Supreme Court news, Supreme Court latest news

supreme court

Mayawati justifies installation of her statues in UP, says 'it was people's will'

Supreme Court quashes RBI directive on resolving bad debt

News brief: Big stories of the day

Counting of VVPAT slips: Supreme Court grants week's time to opposition leaders for filing reply on EC affidavit

Supreme Court stays EC's decision notifying Talala assembly constituency seat as vacant, declaring bypolls

India's top court grants time to opposition parties on VVPAT verification case

Supreme Court upholds conviction, life imprisonment of Saravana Bhavan founder in murder case

Saradha chit fund scam case: 'Very very serious' revelations made by CBI in status report, says Supreme Court

What Supreme Court thinks about post-retirement appointment of judges at tribunals

Myanmar's Supreme Court to hear jailed Reuters reporters' appeal

Saradha chit fund case: Supreme Court says can’t close eyes to ‘very, very serious’ facts in CBI status report

'Are we now to decide bus fare?' asks Supreme Court

Supreme Court dismisses plea seeking ban on roadshows, bike rallies during polls

Supreme Court dismisses plea challenging constitutional validity of 'triple talaq' ordinance

Supreme Court refers to other bench plea against eviction of forest dwelling tribals in Chhattisgarh

Supreme Court notice to CBI in disproportionate assets case against former UP CMs Mulayam, Akhilesh

News brief: Big stories of the day

Acid attack 'uncivilised & heartless crime', does not deserve any clemency: Supreme Court

Supreme Court asks BCCI to reconsider life ban on S Sreesanth, consider his plea within 3 months

I am not against BCCI, just appealing to give me opportunity: S Sreesanth

1984 anti-Sikh riots case: CBI seeks dismissal of Sajjan Kumar's plea in Supreme Court

SC asks ex-Ranbaxy promoters to apprise how they'll comply with Rs 3500 cr arbitral award

News brief: Big stories of the day

Rafale review petition: 'Security of state supersedes everything,' government tells Supreme Court

News brief: Big stories of the day

10% quota to economically weak does not violate basic Constitution structure: Centre to Supreme Court