Adani News

Tag: Supreme Court

  • UGC to move Supreme Court against appointment of Kerala CM’s secretary’s wife to Kannur University

    UGC to move Supreme Court against appointment of Kerala CM’s secretary’s wife to Kannur University

    Thiruvananthapuram (IANS). The UGC is all set to approach the Supreme Court against the Kerala High Court for upholding the appointment of Priya Varghese, wife of KK Ragesh, secretary to Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, as an associate professor at Kannur University.

    The division bench’s verdict came last month after it overturned the single judge’s decision. In this, the second place candidate was asked to re-examine the objection raised against the appointment.

    After receiving the favorable verdict, Varghese immediately filed a caveat petition in the Supreme Court. Now UGC has made it clear that it will approach the apex court.

    Last November, a single bench of Justice Devan Ramachandran ruled that Varghese lacked the qualifications prescribed by the UGC and his appointment should be re-examined. But last week, the bench set aside the judgment and approved his appointment.

    The CPI(M) leadership has criticized those opposing the appointment. Former CPI(M) Rajya Sabha member Ragesh hails from Kannur and is considered a close aide of Vijayan.

    The issue came to the fore last year when an RTI query revealed that Varghese got the maximum marks (32 out of 50) in the personal interview, while Jacob Scariah, the second-placed candidate, got 30 marks. Varghese’s research score was a mere 156, while the candidate who stood second secured 651 marks. But on the basis of personal interview Varghese was given first position.

  • Supreme Court Lists Gangsters Atiq, Ashraf Killings For Hearing on July 3

    Supreme Court Lists Gangsters Atiq, Ashraf Killings For Hearing on July 3

    New Delhi: The Supreme Court has listed for hearing on the opening day after the Summer vacation on July 3 a plea seeking an independent probe into the killing of gangster-turned-politician Atiq Ahmad and his brother Ashraf, who were shot dead in police custody by three men posing as journalists in Prayagraj in April.

    The case is listed before a bench of Justices S R Bhat and Aravind Kumar on a petition filed by advocate Vishal Tiwari, who has also sought an inquiry into the 183 police encounters that have taken place in Uttar Pradesh since 2017.

    Court sought answers to the killings that was telecast live

    While hearing the matter on April 28, the top court had questioned the Uttar Pradesh government why Atiq Ahmad and Ashraf, a former MLA, were paraded before media while being taken to a hospital for a medical checkup in police custody. The two were shot at point blank range and died instantaneously as the three assailants rained bullets.

    It had also asked the Uttar Pradesh government how the killers got the knowledge about the two being taken to hospital. The counsel appearing for Uttar Pradesh had told the top court the state government has constituted a three-member commission of inquiry to probe the incident that was shown live on national television.

    A special investigation team (SIT) of Uttar Pradesh police is also investigating the case, the counsel had said. The top court had directed the state government to submit a status report on the incident and its aftermath.

    Report on Dubey encounter

    “The affidavit shall also disclose the steps taken with respect to the incident which had occurred immediately prior to the one in question and also disclose the follow up steps pursuant to Justice Dr B S Chauhan’s Commission Report,” the apex court had said in its April 28 order, while referring to the killing of gangster Vikas Dubey in a police encounter. Dubey and his men had ambushed and killed eight policemen at his native Bikru village in Kanpur district in July 2020. He was arrested in Ujjain in Madhya Pradesh and was being brought back in UP police custody when he allegedly tried to escape and was shot dead. Doubts were raised about the genuineness of the police encounter.

    Former apex court judge Justice Chauhan headed the commission that probed the encounter killing of Vikas Dubey in 2020.

    Probe into 183 encounters since 2017

    In his plea, Tiwari has sought constitution of an independent expert committee to probe the killing of Atiq Ahmad and Ashraf. “Issue guidelines/directions to safeguard the rule of law by constituting an independent expert committee under the chairmanship of a former Supreme Court justice to inquire into the 183 encounters which had occurred since 2017 as stated by Uttar Pradesh Special Director General of Police (Law and Order) and also to inquire into the police custody murder of Atiq and Ashraf,” his petition said.

    Referring to Ahmad’s killing, the plea said, “Such actions by police are a severe threat to democracy and rule of law and lead to a police state.”

    Besides Tiwari’s petition, a separate plea has been filed in the top court by the sister of Atiq Ahmad and Ashraf seeking constitution of a commission of inquiry chaired by a retired apex court judge to go into their “custodial” and “extra judicial deaths”. In her petition, Aisha Noori, has also sought a comprehensive inquiry by an independent agency into the “campaign of encounter killings, arrests and harassment” targeting her family, allegedly being carried out by the Uttar Pradesh government.

    “The petitioner, who has lost her brothers and nephew in ‘state-sponsored killings’, is constrained to approach this court through the instant writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution, seeking a comprehensive inquiry by a committee headed by a retired judge of this court or in the alternative by an independent agency into a campaign of ‘extra-judicial’ killings carried out by the respondents,” Noori has said in her plea.

  • AAP to move SC against appointment of ex-HC judge Umesh Kumar as DERC chairman

    AAP to move SC against appointment of ex-HC judge Umesh Kumar as DERC chairman

    New Delhi: The AAP government will move the Supreme Court against the appointment of former Allahabad High Court judge Umesh Kumar as the Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission chairman, Power Minister Atishi said on Thursday.

    Addressing a press conference, she said the government had recommended the name of Justice (retd) Sangeet Lodha for the post on June 21.

    “However, it was sidelined and former Allahabad High Court judge Umesh Kumar was appointed as the DERC chairman by the BJP-led Centre. This has been done to trouble the elected government of Delhi. In the coming days, we will approach the Supreme Court against this illegal appointment,” Atishi said.

    The minister charged that the Centre’s move of appointing the Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission (DERC) chairperson against the elected government’s recommendation is “unconstitutional” and “vindictive conspiracy”.

    “The BJP is conspiring to shut down the free and 24×7 electricity supply in Delhi. They are exacting revenge from Delhiites for electing Arvind Kejriwal to power thrice,” she alleged.

    Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal will never let the Delhi government’s free electricity scheme shut down and the BJP’s “conspiracies” will fail, she asserted.

    Meanwhile, the Delhi BJP accused the Kejriwal government of behaving “childishly” over the issue.

    Atishi further said that ‘electricity’ is a transferred subject and the central government is bound to act as per the aid and advice of the elected state government on all matters under the power department.

    A statement issued by the lieutenant governor’s office on Wednesday night said Justice Kumar had been appointed the DERC chairman by President Droupadi Murmu.

    Kejriwal had in January recommended the name of retired high court judge Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava for appointment as the chairperson of the power regulator.

    The LG office statement, however, said the appointment of Kumar comes as Shrivastava expressed his inability to take charge due to “family commitments and requirements” through a communication on June 15.

    Atishi alleged that the BJP’s “discontent” stems from the fact that Kejriwal has “successfully delivered the cheapest electricity rates” in the country. Delhi currently boasts the lowest electricity tariffs compared to other states, she claimed.

    Commenting on the row, Delhi BJP spokesperson Praveen Shankar Kapoor said it is shocking to see the power minister trying to give “political colour and bad mouthing” the newly appointed DERC chairman and saying that the Centre is trying to break down the city’s power supply system with this appointment.

    “It is regrettable that on every administrative issue, the Arvind Kejriwal government behaves like a child who starts crying if his demanded toy is not given to him… the government is repeating its childish behaviour on DERC chairman’s appointment too,” he said.

    Hitting back, Atishi said, in contrast to Delhi, the BJP-ruled states impose “the highest power tariffs”, citing the electricity cost in Assam at Rs 8.2 per unit, Uttar Pradesh at Rs 6.5 per unit, Madhya Pradesh at Rs 6.74 per unit, and Maharashtra at Rs 10.38 per unit.

    She said prior to Kejriwal’s tenure, the electricity prices in the national capital experienced “unreasonable and frequent hikes”, burdening ordinary families, and since the Kejriwal government assumed office, the prices have remained stable.

    She also alleged that the BJP’s ulterior motive behind the late-night notification is to “destabilise the power sector in Delhi, dismantle the provision of free electricity, and impose exorbitant costs” on the people.

    This move is aimed at subjecting the residents to prolonged power cuts, similar to the experiences of those residing in neighbouring areas, the minister added.

  • Bengal Panchayat elections: Suvendu Adhikari filed a caveat in the Supreme Court

    Bengal Panchayat elections: Suvendu Adhikari filed a caveat in the Supreme Court

    Kolkata (IANS) | Anticipating the West Bengal government and the State Election Commission to challenge the Calcutta High Court order on the deployment of 82,000 central armed forces personnel in the Supreme Court, Leader of the Opposition in the state assembly Suvendu Adhikari on Thursday filed a caveat in the apex court. Did. Although there has been no official indication from the state government or the state election commission to approach the Supreme Court, state commissioner Rajeev Sinha was busy discussing with legal experts in his office till late Wednesday night.

    Meanwhile, a contempt of court petition against the State Election Commission is scheduled to be heard by a division bench of the Calcutta High Court on Thursday and a verdict is expected on the same day.

    On Wednesday, ordering the deployment of a minimum of 82,000 central armed forces for the rural civic body elections, Calcutta High Court Chief Justice T.S. Sivaganam’s bench said the number given by the court was on the lines of the deployment of central forces personnel in the 2013 rural civic body polls ensured by the then State Election Commission, Meera Pandey.

    The court has directed the State Election Commission to apply to the Union Home Ministry for 82,000 personnel within 24 hours. On Wednesday, the State Election Commission gave a requisition to the Union Home Ministry for deployment of only 22 companies or about 2,200 personnel of the Central Armed Forces.

    On Wednesday, the Bench criticized the State Election Commission in unprecedented terms and also questioned the impartiality of the Commission.

    Justice Sivaganam said, after so many developments, I am constrained to say that the impartiality of the State Election Commission remains in question. It is most unfortunate that a contempt of court petition has been filed against the State Election Commissioner. I request you to comply with the orders of the court.

    He also advised State Election Commissioner Rajeev Sinha that if he is unable to bear the pressure of his post, he should leave his chair.

    –IANS

  • Why Supreme Court stayed sedition case against YSR Congress rebel MP and news channels

    Why Supreme Court stayed sedition case against YSR Congress rebel MP and news channels

    Amaravati (IANS) | The sedition charge against a rebel MP of the ruling YSR Congress Party (YSRCP) in Andhra Pradesh is the best example of why the state registered the highest number of cases in the country under section 124A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in 2021. .

    According to the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), Andhra Pradesh tops the list of states with highest number of sedition cases in 2021.

    The southern state registered 29 sedition cases out of a total of 76 registered in the country during that year. Manipur and Nagaland were second with seven cases each.

    Andhra Pradesh is among the five states with the highest number of sedition cases between 2014 and 2021. The state recorded 32 cases during this period.

    NCRB data shows that only three cases of sedition were registered in the state from 2014 to 2018. No cases under section 124A of IPC were registered in the state in 2019 and 2020.

    The YSRCP government led by Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy has come under fire for leveling sedition charges against political opponents, critics and even media organisations.

    Leader of the Opposition and former Chief Minister N. Chandrababu Naidu says the sedition case is part of the Jagan government’s autocratic strategy to silence all dissenting voices in the state.

    The cases registered in 2021 include one against rebel MP Raghu Rama Krishna Raju of the ruling party for his remarks against Chief Minister Jagan Mohan Reddy. Two Telugu news channels were also booked for sedition for airing the MP’s views.

    The CID registered sections 124(A) (sedition), 153A (promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc.), 505 (causing public mischief) against Raju, a Lok Sabha member from Narasapuram. A case was registered under 120B (criminal conspiracy).

    According to the CID, there was information against Raju that he was involved in hate speeches against certain communities and promoting disaffection against the government.

    A preliminary inquiry was ordered by ADG CID PV Sunil Kumar IPS. It was found that Raju was involved in a systematic, planned effort to create tension between communities through his speeches and attacks on various government dignitaries in a manner that would cause harm. The CID had said, they have faith in the government they represent. There is also hate speech against communities and social groups, which was used in the conspiracy to promote social and public order disturbances.

    Raju was arrested from his residence in Hyderabad on May 14, 2021 and was transferred to the regional office of the CID in Guntur the same day.

    The MP who underwent heart bypass surgery approached the Supreme Court alleging that he was tortured in police custody.

    However, the state government had rejected the allegation of police torture and defended its action of registering an FIR against the MP.

    The State Government said, this is not a one-time slip or error of judgment, but the statement (by Raju) was made deliberately in furtherance of the design and conspiracy hatched by several persons including the petitioner to create unrest on the basis of caste and religion. People are divided and given. In doing so, Raju abused his authority and attempted to create enmity between different sections of citizens and incite discontent against the government.

    The affidavit further states that being a Member of Parliament does not confer any immunity on the petitioner. On the contrary, being an elected representative to the Lok Sabha, the petitioner has a high degree of responsibility.

    In his petition, Raju claimed that his right to criticize the government is part of his fundamental right to freedom of expression. But the state government argued that such authority cannot be extended to create a situation where public order is disturbed.

    The state government said the arrest was not a sudden reaction. The words and actions of the petitioner MP were manifesting in actual violence across the state. Then the state decided to register an FIR.

    The Supreme Court later granted bail to Raju, noting that his medical examination reports indicated that he may have been ill-treated in custody. The court had also asked him to cooperate in the investigation.

    The action against the MP came after he openly criticized the government’s handling of the COVID-19 crisis and also sought cancellation of the bail granted to Jagan Mohan Reddy in a corruption case.

    The MP alleged that a case has been registered against him in a spirit of revenge.

    Raju wonders how a sedition case can be filed against him for speaking out against the government’s misrule and corruption.

    He said that the Supreme Court has already said that the section related to sedition is useless and should be scrapped.

  • Supreme Court declines urgent hearing on plea challenging internet shutdown in Manipur

    Supreme Court declines urgent hearing on plea challenging internet shutdown in Manipur

    New Delhi (IANS) | The Supreme Court on Friday declined urgent hearing of a petition challenging the internet shutdown in violence-hit Manipur from May 3. A vacation bench of Justice Aniruddha Bose and Justice Rajesh Bindal said that the Manipur High Court was already hearing the matter, so there was no need for an urgent hearing. There is no need to duplicate the proceedings, the bench said. Advocate Shadan Farasat, representing the petitioners, insisted on urgent listing of the matter. The bench said that there is no hurry in this matter.

    The top court said, let it go before the regular bench.

    The petition has been filed by Chongtham Victor Singh, an advocate of the Manipur High Court, and Mayengbam James, a businessman, both residents of Manipur.

    The petition states that the internet shutdown has had an economic, humanitarian, social and psychological impact on the petitioners and their families. Argued that the petitioners have been unable to receive funds from banks, receive payments from customers, disburse salaries, or communicate through email or WhatsApp.

    According to the petition, the internet shutdown was a response to alleged incidents of violence during rallies organized by volunteers and youths protesting the demand for inclusion of the Meitei/Meitei community in the Scheduled Tribe category. It said these clashes escalated into widespread arson, violence and killings across the state, which justified the temporary and time-bound shutdown of the internet.

    The petition states, there is complete suspension of internet access across the state for more than 24 days, causing substantial damage to the rights of the petitioners and other residents.

    Additionally, they have been unable to send their children to school, access their bank accounts, receive or send payments, obtain essential supplies and medicines, and much more, bringing their lives and livelihoods to a standstill, they said.

    The petition has sought a direction to the respondent to restore internet access in Manipur.

    –IANS

  • Liquor scam accused withdraw plea challenging ED action

    Liquor scam accused withdraw plea challenging ED action

    Raipur. Chhattisgarh’s Rs 2000 crore liquor scam accused withdraw plea challenging ED action. The SC made a stern remark that the provisions of the PMLA Act have been upheld. Still the accused are challenging them for protection from arrest. This is an abuse of judicial process.

    Significantly, the ED has claimed corruption and money laundering of more than Rs 2,000 crore in liquor in the state. Anwar Dhebar has been arrested in this. The ED has claimed that a scam of Rs 2 thousand crore has taken place in the state from 2019 to 2022. It had the support of big leaders and officials of the state. Anwar Dhebar has been accused of selling raw liquor in government liquor shop and earning profit from it.

    Trilok Singh Dhillon is alleged to have voluntarily and knowingly allowed his bank accounts and firms to be used for large amounts of scam money. In this case the main beneficiary is ED has frozen FDs worth Rs 27.5 crore in the name of his firms involved in money laundering and also seized Rs 52 lakh in cash.

  • Delhi ordinance act of bad, poor, graceless loser: Advocate Abhishek Singhvi

    Delhi ordinance act of bad, poor, graceless loser: Advocate Abhishek Singhvi

    The ordinance can not change Supreme Court’s verdict and it is doubtful whether it will be passed in Parliament, advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi said.
    The ordinance that the government issued to overturn the Supreme Court verdict in which it lost power over the National Capital Territory to the Delhi government is an act of a ‘bad, poor and graceless loser’, advocate and Congress spokesperson Abhishek Manu Singhvi said. “Greater doubt whether Parliament as a whole will at all approve it,” Singhvi who represented the Delhi government in the years-long legal tussle commented.
    How can the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court be nullified by ordinance, Singhvi asked. “Basis of Constitution Bench was federalism; critical, unique, NCT status under 239AA not being a mere UT; autonomy of elected govt; CS to be accountable to elected govt…none can be changed by Ordinance,” the senior advocate asked.

  • Supreme Court stays West Bengal ban on screening of ‘The Kerala Story’

    Supreme Court stays West Bengal ban on screening of ‘The Kerala Story’

    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday stayed the ban imposed by the State of West Bengal on the screening of the controversial film ‘The Kerala Story’.

    The top court also recorded the statement made on behalf of Tamil Nadu that the state had not imposed a direct or indirect ban on the movie. It also directed the government to provide security to theatres and to moviegoers.

    “Law can’t be used to put a premium on public intolerance, otherwise all films will find themselves in this spot,” observed a bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice PS Narasimha, and Justice JB Pardiwala.

    “The film has been released everywhere in the country. You can’t make the fundamental right of free speech to be dependent on public display of emotion. Public display of emotion has to be controlled. if you don’t like it, don’t see it,” CJI told Senior Advocate Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for West Bengal Government.

    “You’re saying that ban on the film is on the basis of 13 people, you get any 13 people they’ll say ban any movie. Unless you’re showing them cartoons. Section 6 (of the West Bengal Cinema Regulation Act ) cannot be utilized to put a premium on pubic intolerance,”CJI Chandrachud remarked.

    During the hearing, the bench also questioned the claim made by the film that 32,000 women from Kerala have been deceitfully converted to Islam and recruited to ISIS. Senior advocate Harish Salve, appearing for the film producer, agreed to clarify in the disclaimer that “there is no authentic data available to back up the suggestion that the figure of conversions is 32,000 or any other established figure,” he said.

    He said that the disclaimer will be added by 5 PM on May 20. The disclaimer will clarify that the film represents a fictionalised version of the subject matter.

    The Court’s order came in a plea filed by makers of ‘The Kerala Story’- Sunshine Pictures Private Limited and Vipul Amrutlal Shah challenging the West Bengal government’s decision to ban the screening of the film.

    The bench also agreed to post the pleas challenging Kerala and Madras high courts’ order of refusing to stay the screening of the film post-summer vacations. While Kerala HC passed the order by laying emphasis on artistic freedom and said that there was a need to strike a balance, Madras HC had ruled that decision of the statutory body can be interfered with under Article 226 of the Constitution of India only if there is a procedural infraction.

    The bench also noted that none of the petitioners had watched the film and that the producers had added a disclaimer that the film was a fictionalised version of events. However, the High Court also recorded the submission of the producer that the teaser of the movie, which claimed that over 32,000 women from Kerala were recruited to ISIS, will be removed from their social media accounts.

    Defending its order issued under Section 6(1) of the West Bengal Cinemas (Regulation) Act on May 8 of banning the movie “The Kerala Story”, the Mamata Banerjee government has told the SC that the movie contains hate speech and is based on manipulated facts that can lead to communal disharmony and law and order issues in the State.

    Whereas, denying the allegations of the de facto ban in Tamil Nadu with regards to the movie ‘The Kerala Story ‘ and terming them as baseless, Tamil Nadu government had told SC that the movie was released in 19 multiplexes in Tamil Nadu on May 5 and there was no order banning the screening of the film.

  • Gyanvapi mosque: SC defers scientific survey of “Shivling”

    Gyanvapi mosque: SC defers scientific survey of “Shivling”

    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday deferred the “scientific survey”, including carbon dating, of a “Shivling” said to have been found at the Gyanvapi mosque complex in Varanasi during a videographic survey last year. A bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justices PS Narasimha and KV Viswanathan put on hold the carbon dating of the “Shivling” saying that the implementation of the directions contained in the Allahabad High Court’s order shall stand deferred till the next date of hearing.

    “Since the implications of the impugned order merit closet scrutiny, the implementation of the directions concerned in the order shall stand deferred till the next date,” said the bench in its order. The bench also issued notice to the Centre and Uttar Pradesh government on the appeal of the Gyanvapi mosque management committee against the High Court’s recent order for scientific investigation by ASI to determine the age of “Shivling”.

    Senior advocate Huzefa Ahmadi, appearing for the Gyanvapi mosque management committee, told the bench that the carbon dating and the survey will commence on Monday. Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta, appearing for the State of Uttar Pradesh, submitted that there should be no damage to the structure which one side claims a “Shivling” and the other calls a fountain.

    Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain, appearing for the Hindu petitioners in the case, said that experts of the ASI have already informed that no damage will be caused to the structure. During the survey, a structure — claimed to be a “Shivling” by the Hindu side and a “fountain” by the Muslim side — was found in the mosque premises on May 16 last year during a court-mandated survey of the mosque located next to the Kashi Vishwanath temple.

    The High Court on May 12 set aside the Varanasi District judge’s order which had rejected the application for a scientific survey and carbon dating of the “Shivling” on October 14, 2022. The High Court directed the Varanasi District judge to proceed, in accordance with the law, on the application by the Hindu worshippers for conducting a scientific probe of the “Shivling”.

    Petitioners Laxmi Devi and three others had filed a plea in the High Court, challenging the order lower court order.