Adani News

Tag: Supreme Court

  • Ban on ‘The Kerala Story’: SC seeks response of TN, Bengal govts

    Ban on ‘The Kerala Story’: SC seeks response of TN, Bengal govts

    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday sought replies of the West Bengal and Tamil Nadu governments on a plea of the producers of ‘The Kerala Story’ challenging the ban in the two states.

    A bench of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha questioned the West Bengal government saying the film is being screened in the rest of the country without any problem and there appears to be no reason for the ban.”Movie is running in the rest of the country including in states having similar demographic composition and nothing has happened. This has nothing to do with the artistic value of the film. If people do not like the movie, they will not watch the movie,” the bench told senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for the West Bengal government.

    Singhvi said according to intelligence inputs, there may be a situation of law and order problem and peace among different communities may be breached. The bench also asked the Tamil Nadu government to specify measures taken to provide adequate security to theatres screening ‘The Kerala Story’.

    ”The state government cannot say that it will look the other way when theatres are attacked and chairs are being burnt,” the bench told advocate Amit Anand Tiwari, appearing for Tamil Nadu government, after he submitted that there is no ban on the film.

    Senior advocate Harish Salve, appearing for producers of the movie, said there is de facto ban in Tamil Nadu as theatres screening the movie are being threatened and they have dropped the screenings. ,”For West Bengal, we are seeking quashing of the ban order,” he said.

    ”We are issuing notices to both the states and they may file their response by Wednesday. We will take up the matter on Thursday,” the bench said. ,’The Kerala Story’, starring Adah Sharma, was released in cinemas on May 5. Directed by Sudipto Sen, the film claims women from Kerala were forced to convert to Islam and recruited by the terror group Islamic State(IS).

  • Shinde can expand the cabinet

    Shinde can expand the cabinet

    Mumbai (IANS) | With the Supreme Court verdict removing uncertainties over the state government, Chief Minister Eknath Shinde may soon take the cabinet reshuffle into his own hands. Party leaders gave this indication on Friday.

    This will be crucial ahead of the coming civic polls in 2024, followed by the Lok Sabha and state assembly polls.

    After toppling the Maha Vikas Aghadi government led by former CM Uddhav Thackeray, Shinde was sworn in as the chief minister on June 30, 2022, along with Deputy CM Devendra Fadnavis of the Bharatiya Janata Party, of the Shiv Sena.

    Earlier, Shinde-Fadnavis managed the show for about 40 days before inducting 18 ministers, all cabinet rank, on August 9, 2022.

    For nearly 10 months now, Shinde has been heading a 20-member team, with all ministers holding multiple portfolios in a 50:50 ratio between the two colleagues.

    This created resentment among leaders of both the Shiv Sena-BJP, as several senior leaders were dropped from the cabinet, besides pressure from over 10 independents and other smaller parties supporting the Shinde-Fadnavis government.

    The Maharashtra Legislative Assembly has a total of 288 members, so the maximum number of ministers in the government can be 43 against the current strength of 20.

    The government has also faced a lot of criticism for not having any woman as a minister, inadequate regional representation and other issues, which may be rectified in the upcoming reshuffle-cum-expansion.

    Apart from a correction on regional or caste imbalances, portfolios of some of the current ministers from both the parties are likely to be reshuffled based on their performance report cards of the last 10 months.

    Additionally, the posts of chairpersons of several government-run corporations and institutions, which have been lying vacant for almost a year, may also be filled after the cabinet exercise.

    According to indications, the expansion and reshuffle of the Council of Ministers may happen before the monsoon session of the state legislature, which is usually scheduled in July.

    –IANS

  • Shinde-Fadnavis described the Supreme Court’s decision as a ‘victory of truth’

    Shinde-Fadnavis described the Supreme Court’s decision as a ‘victory of truth’

    Mumbai (IANS) | Describing the Supreme Court verdict as a victory for truth, the ruling Shiv Sena-Bharatiya Janata Party alliance in Maharashtra on Thursday said it has put the court’s seal of approval on the state government and they have been vindicated. A relieved Chief Minister Eknath Shinde and a beaming Deputy Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis while talking to the media said that all those who predicted the downfall of the state government have been silenced by the Supreme Court verdict.

    We fully support the Supreme Court verdict… It was as expected, 11 months after former Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray’s Maha Vikas Aghadi government was toppled in June 2022, the two said. We are happy, our point has been upheld by the Supreme Court of the country.

    Shinde said that all these months the opposition was spreading rumors that the government was illegitimate and unconstitutional and would fall anytime, but all their predictions proved to be false.

    “Majority is important in a democracy and we have a majority… It is clear from the Supreme Court verdict that there is a constitution in the country and no one can go beyond that,” he said. It is clear that the government we have formed is within the ambit of the law.

    Taking a jibe at former chief minister Uddhav Thackeray’s resignation, Shinde said he (Thackeray) knows he has lost the majority and has no option but to quit.

    Shinde said that after resigning, Uddhav Thackeray tried to prove it as a principled stand, but we have preserved the ethics, and saved the Shiv Sena formed by the ideals of Balasaheb Thackeray, which he (Uddhav Thackeray) called the Congress. And mortgaged it to the Nationalist Congress Party.

    Referring to the disqualification of 16 MLAs, including himself, Shinde said that now the final decision on this would be taken by the Speaker (Rahul Narvekar) under the law.

    “Today, our government has got the Supreme Court’s nod as a government with absolute majority… We welcome the verdict,” Shinde said.

    Fadnavis termed it a victory of people and democracy and the Supreme Court has completely turned the tide against the MVA.

    Fadnavis said, the Supreme Court has made it clear that Uddhav Thackeray cannot be made CM again. The right of disqualification of 16 MLAs rests with the Speaker of the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly, who has to decide on it. SC has refused to interfere in it.

    He took a jibe at Thackeray saying that after realizing that he did not have a majority, he (Thackeray) resigned as chief minister and then took a higher moral ground.

    Fadnavis said in a sharp tone, “Those who broke ties with the BJP and joined hands with the Congress-NCP, have no right to teach morality to others.”

    Shiv Sena-BJP workers in Mumbai and other parts of the state celebrated, distributed sweets and congratulated each other after the much-awaited Supreme Court verdict was announced this afternoon.

    –IANS

  • How can I seek trust vote from traitors: Uddhav Thackeray

    How can I seek trust vote from traitors: Uddhav Thackeray

    Mumbai (IANS) | Soon after the Supreme Court’s verdict, former chief minister Uddhav Thackeray on Thursday asked how he could seek a vote of confidence from “traitors who betrayed us”. On the Supreme Court’s remark that if the then chief minister had not resigned, the court could have reinstated him, Thackeray said, “May be my decision was wrong, but how can I ask for the vote of confidence of the one who gave me cheated?

    However, the Supreme Court has made strong remarks on the manner in which his government was brought down, including the role of the Governor.

    Thackeray has also demanded that if there is any morality left in the current government of Chief Minister Eknath Shinde after the Supreme Court verdict, it should resign immediately, as I did.

    The Shiv Sena (UBT) president said they would now urge Speaker Rahul Narvekar to take up the matter of disqualification of the 16 MLAs, including Shinde, and take a decision on priority.

    –IANS

    cbt

  • Supreme Court disposes Puri Srimandir reforms case

    Supreme Court disposes Puri Srimandir reforms case

    New Delhi: Supreme Court today disposed all cases related to the Puri Srimandir (Jagannath Temple) reforms after five years and 26 sittings.

    One Mrinalini Padhi had moved the apex court seeking direction for better management of affairs at the Puri-based Jagannath Temple and opening up of the Ratna Bhandar (treasury). However, the apex court closed the case after the Shree Jagannath Temple Administration (SJTA) filed all affidavit sought by the court.

    “If anybody is of the opinion or view that any of the directions issued by this court are not complied with, application should be moved to the High Court, which should monitor the implementation of the directions,” the apex court said in its ruling before disposing of the petition.

    The court further said that anyone can move to High Court if he/she feels something wrong regarding the management of the temple.

    It is to be noted here that the National Monuments Authority (NMA) on May 4 granted NOC (non-objection certificate) for construction of Shree Jagannath public building in the regulated zone, informs Shree Jagannath Temple Administration (SJTA) chief administrator Rajnan Kumar Das.

    In a letter to the SJTA chief administrator, Mansha Bagai, the Under Secretary of NMA, said, “I am directed to refer to your letter No: C.A/11/2023/4412 O.L.L & C, DT dated 07.04.2023 on the subjected cited above, and to enclose herewith the recommendation of the National Monuments Authority given in its 389th meeting held on 25th April 2023, for grant of permission for construction of Public building (Shree Jagannath Temple Administration Office) at Plot No.323, 325,326,327, 328 of Khata No. 298/35 Plot 322 of Khata No. 307 and Plot No.321 of Khata No 332, Mouza-Puri Sahara, Chudanga Sahi, Unit-18, Tahasil-Puri, Dist-Puri: in the regulated area of the “Shree Jagannath Temple,” Odisha declared as monument of national importance under Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958.”

  • ‘You do not deserve any sympathy’: Supreme Court rejects bail plea of ex-CMD of Amrapali Group

    ‘You do not deserve any sympathy’: Supreme Court rejects bail plea of ex-CMD of Amrapali Group

    The Supreme Court has rejected the bail plea of former CMD of Amrapali Group of Companies Anil Kumar Sharma, saying he cheated hundreds of residence consumers and didn’t deserve any sympathy.

    A bench comprising Justices Ajay Rastogi and Bela M Trivedi refused to challenge discovery to the prosecuting company on the bail plea of Sharma, who has been in jail for over 4 years within the case.

    “You have cheated thousands of home buyers. You siphoned off their hard-earned money and their life savings. You do not deserve any sympathy,” the bench said on Thursday.

    The former CMD of the Actual Property group and different administrators of the agency had been arrested on the course of the highest courtroom after the forensic audit report revealed that a considerable amount of residence consumers’ cash was siphoned off by the administration.

    It stated the offense ran “very deep” and even the courtroom was dealing with difficulties in tackling the issue.

    “Yours is not a case of simple cheating. See the plight of thousands of home buyers. You cannot have our sympathy. You better enjoy being in jail. This court is very aware of what you did. You created the mess and we are not able to find a way out of it. A large number of home buyers are suffering,” the bench stated.

    Earlier, the highest courtroom had granted Sharma interim bail for a couple of weeks on medical grounds within the case.

    Sharma and others have been in jail after their arrest in 2018 for varied offences, together with that of dishonest, felony breach of trust and cash laundering and have spent almost 4 years in jail.

    They have been accused of siphoning residence consumers cash.

    The apex courtroom, in its July 23, 2019 verdict, had cracked down on errant builders for breaching the belief reposed by residence consumers and ordered the cancellation of registration of the Amrapali Group below actual property legislation RERA and ousted it from prime properties within the nationwide capital area (NCR) by nixing the land leases.

    The high courtroom had directed a probe by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) into alleged cash laundering by realtors, offering reduction to over 42,000 residence consumers of the Amrapali Group with the decision.

    Besides ED, the Economic Offenses Wing (EoW) of the Delhi Police and the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) have additionally been investigating various circumstances lodged in opposition to the previous officers of the actual property group.

    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has rejected the bail plea of former CMD of Amrapali Group of Companies Anil Kumar Sharma, saying he cheated hundreds of residential consumers and didn’t deserve any sympathy.

    A bench comprising Justices Ajay Rastogi and Bela M Trivedi refused to challenge discovery to the prosecuting company on the bail plea of Sharma, who has been in jail for over 4 years within the case.googletag.cmd.push(operate() googletag.show (‘div-gpt-ad-8052921-2’); );

    “You have cheated thousands of home buyers. You siphoned off their hard-earned money and their life savings. You do not deserve any sympathy,” the bench said on Thursday.

    The former CMD of the Actual Property group and different administrators of the agency had been arrested on the course of the highest courtroom after the forensic audit report revealed that a considerable amount of residence consumers’ cash was siphoned off by the administration.

    It stated the offense ran “very deep” and even the courtroom was dealing with difficulties in tackling the issue.

    “Yours is not a case of simple cheating. See the plight of thousands of home buyers. You cannot have our sympathy. You better enjoy being in jail. This court is very aware of what you did. You created the mess and we are not able to find a way out of it. A large number of home buyers are suffering,” the bench stated.

    Earlier, the highest courtroom had granted Sharma interim bail for a couple of weeks on medical grounds within the case.

    Sharma and others have been in jail after their arrest in 2018 for varied offences, together with that of dishonest, felony breach of trust and cash laundering and have spent almost 4 years in jail.

    They have been accused of siphoning residence consumers cash.

    The apex courtroom, in its July 23, 2019 verdict, had cracked down on errant builders for breaching the belief reposed by residence consumers and ordered the cancellation of registration of the Amrapali Group below actual property legislation RERA and ousted it from prime properties within the nationwide capital area (NCR) by nixing the land leases.

    The high courtroom had directed a probe by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) into alleged cash laundering by realtors, offering reduction to over 42,000 residence consumers of the Amrapali Group with the decision.

    Besides ED, the Economic Offenses Wing (EoW) of the Delhi Police and the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) have additionally been investigating various circumstances lodged in opposition to

  • Supreme Court dismisses Delhi Police’s plea against bail of three accused in 2020 riots

    Supreme Court dismisses Delhi Police’s plea against bail of three accused in 2020 riots

    New Delhi (IANS) | The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected the Delhi Police’s plea against the bail granted to three accused in the 2020 riots in the national capital, Devangana Kalita, Natasha Narwal and Asif Iqbal. In these communal riots in February 2020, 53 people were killed and more than 700 others were injured.
    In July 2021, the apex court had expressed its reluctance to consider cancellation of bail of these three. All three have been booked under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
    A bench headed by Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul told the central government’s counsel on Tuesday that there is a limit for seeking an adjournment. He said that the accused have been out on bail for two years and he does not see any reason to continue with the case.
    When the counsel for the Center urged the court to take up the matter again on Wednesday, Justice Kaul said that so many adjournments have been sought so far and nothing is left in the matter.
    Referring to the bail order passed by the High Court, the apex court said that it was a very detailed order on bail interpreting the provisions of the UAPA Act and in its opinion the only issue which had to be examined was whether the factual Whether bail should be given to the accused in the scenario or not.
    Justice Kaul clarified that while issuing notice in the matter, the court had said that the judgments would not be considered precedents.
    Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Delhi Police, said that there was a lot of personal consideration in the High Court’s decisions granting bail to the three student activists.
    Responding to this, Justice Kaul said that the court in its previous order had already held that the judgments would not be treated as precedents and no further order was required in this matter.
    The bench said that in the bail order the court has only to consider whether the person is to be released on bail or not and emphasized that the 2021 judgments by the Delhi High Court in the matter have to be taken as a precedent on the legal position. cannot be used as such.
    The apex court was hearing petitions by the Delhi Police against the High Court’s June 15, 2021 order granting bail to three accused in a major riot case.
    The court had made it clear that the decisions of the High Court would not be treated as a precedent and could not be cited by any party in any proceedings.

  • Thailand’s Supreme Court Upholds Death Sentence For Gold Robber Who Killed 3

    Thailand’s Supreme Court Upholds Death Sentence For Gold Robber Who Killed 3

    Thailand’s Supreme Court upheld a death sentence for an ex-elementary school principal convicted of killing three people, including a toddler, during an armed gold shop robbery in 2020 .

    The court ruled Wednesday that Prasitthichai Khaewkao did not deserve a reduction in his original sentence, calling the shooting in a shopping mall in Lopburi province “outrageously, ruthlessly inhuman” in a statement released Friday. Four people were injured in the attack and a salesclerk, a security guard and a 2-year-old boy were killed.

    Prasitthichai was found guilty in August 2020 and given a death sentence on charges including first-degree murder, killing in commission of another crime and illegally carrying a gun. The Appeal Court also upheld the death penalty in 2021.

    The Supreme Court said the defendant, as a teacher and a headmaster, should have behaved as a good role model for students, but instead committed a serious crime. Therefore, it said there was not enough grounds to grant his appeal for a sentence reduction.

    Security footage of the shooting was widely broadcast and sent a shockwave across the country. One video showed a man dressed in a black ski mask and camouflage trousers, with a backpack across his chest, carrying a pistol with a silencer as he entered the Robinson Lopburi mall. Another camera at the gold shop showed the man firing his pistol, and the toddler, who had been walking hand-in-hand with an adult, suddenly falling to the ground. The man grabbed a number of gold necklaces before fleeing.

    Speaking to reporters after his arrest, Prasitthichai denied that he deliberately shot the toddler and other victims. He said he opened fire to intimidate shoppers and security guards so he could flee easily.

    According to the data from the Department of Corrections, Thailand had 250 inmates on death row as of the end of February, of which 23 had their sentence upheld by the Supreme Court.

    Seven people have been executed since Thailand switched from using a firing squad to lethal injection in 2003. Thailand’s most recent execution was in 2018.

  • The issue of incest raised during the debate on gay marriage in the Supreme Court

    The issue of incest raised during the debate on gay marriage in the Supreme Court

    New Delhi (IANS) | The Center told the Supreme Court on Thursday that if the plea of petitioners for same-sex marriages is accepted, then tomorrow one can also demand that sex between relatives within the same family be allowed. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, told Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud told a five-judge bench headed by Justice Chandrachud that imagine if someone says that I am attracted to so-and-so who is in a relationship where sex is prohibited, then what will happen.

    Mehta said that adultery happens all over the world and sex between close relatives is prohibited everywhere in the world. What if someone says I’m attracted to my sister, we are consenting adults, and we want to be intimate in our privacy.

    And we assert our right to autonomy, our right to choose and our right to do something in the private domain, Mehta said. Based on the same logic.. can no one challenge it why this ban. Who are you to decide what my sexual orientation is..maybe it is far-fetched..we used to consider it (gay marriage) too far-fetched.

    The Chief Justice replied, that would be farfetched..you know Mr. Solicitor, sexual orientation, your autonomy as an individual can never exercise all aspects of marriage including entering into marriage, taboo relationships, grounds . Marriage can be dissolved, all these are subject to regulation by law so far be it for anyone to argue before us that I can commit an act of incest.. any court anytime..

    Mehta then asked about polygamy. The Chief Justice replied, polygamy comes under personal law.. Mehta said suppose someone says I want to do multiple marriages. The Bench – comprising Justice S.K. Kaul, S. Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli and P.S. Narasimha is – said, we all can agree that these are universal norms.. why did the state get involved when the state thought it was a universal norm..

    Mehta argued under the Hindu Marriage Act that if same-sex marriages were permitted under the Special Marriage Act (SMA), it could not be reconciled.

    Citing various sections of the SMA, Mehta argued that under the SMA a person remains attached to his religion even after marriage for various purposes including succession and inheritance.

    The Center is opposing petitions seeking legal sanction for same-sex marriages.

    –IANS

  • Karnataka government told the Supreme Court that the decision to abolish the Muslim quota was unconstitutional

    Karnataka government told the Supreme Court that the decision to abolish the Muslim quota was unconstitutional

    New Delhi (IANS) | The Karnataka government told the Supreme Court that it has taken a conscious decision not to continue reservation for the Muslim community on the basis of religion only, as it is unconstitutional and against Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. The state government informed that on March 27, the 4 per cent reservation provided to Muslims was scrapped and members of the community were allowed to take benefits of reservation under the EWS scheme.

    The government said that it should be noted that the benefits of reservation under Group I of the 2002 Reservation Order will continue to be provided to the backward groups of the Muslim community.

    The state government said that reservation based only on religion is contrary to the principles of social justice. Therefore, reservation cannot be given to any community only on the basis of religion.

    The state said that the provision of reservation on the basis of religion would be contrary to the concept of secularism.

    The government said that just because reservation on the basis of religion has been provided in the past is no ground to continue it forever.

    The State Government stated that there are socially and educationally backward sections of the society, who have been historically disadvantaged and discriminated against and cannot be clubbed with an entire religion, and asserted that the Mandal Commission had clearly Found that religion cannot be the sole basis of reservation.

    The affidavit states: No reservation has been given to the Muslim community on the basis of religion in the Central List. There are various communities of Muslim religion who are included in SEBC, they continue to have reservation in Karnataka as well.

    The state government said that on the basis of the 103rd amendment, the benefit of 10 percent reservation on the basis of economic criteria (EWS) can be availed by the Muslim community.

    The affidavit states that the inclusion of the Muslim community in the category of Other Backward Classes in 1979 was contrary to the recommendations of the First Backward Classes Commission headed by LG Havanur.

    In the case of Andhra Pradesh, the Supreme Court allowed reservation only for limited identifiable communities among Muslims and not for the entire religion.

    –IANS