27 June, 2009

Govt mulls repeal of law against homosexuality

Home ministry, which had been so far against change in section 377 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) which bans homosexuality, now appears to be in favour of repealing of the law.
As against his predecessor Shivraj Patil's view, home minister P Chidambaram is learnt to have expressed his views on repealing of section 377.
Officials believe since law minister too has now a lenient view, the government stand before high court will now change - provided the health ministry too expresses the need to change the law or repeal it altogether in favour of homosexual relationship.
Home minister Chidambaram, who is in favour of repealing of section 377, has called a meeting of health minister Ghulam Nabi Azad, law minister V Moily and home ministers of all states for consultation.
With Chidambaram and Moily on board, it seems the gay right activists may now break their biggest hurdle. Home ministry is now waiting for formal nod from health and law minister.
Earlier, it was the home ministry which opposed it in the high court, arguing that homosexuality is not accepted by Indian society and repealing of the law would open the floodgates of delinquent behaviour.
Home ministry had however argued that homosexuals are vulnerable to HIV-AIDS, hence the discrimination against them should end.
Home ministry is now waiting whether the new health minister G N Azad too favours his ministry's earlier stand.
With Chidambaram and Moily being on board, the ball is now in Azad's court. Final decision will be taken after taking consent of all in the proposed meeting.
Source:- The Times of India 27 Jun 2009
For any query:- legalbuddy@gmail.com

21 June, 2009

Woman fined $1.92m for 24 song downloads

Minneapolis (Minnesota): A US jury has ordered a 32-year-old woman to pay nearly $2 million in damages for illegally downloading 24 songs over the internet in a high-profile digital piracy case.
Jammie Thomas-Rasset, a single mother of four from the Minnesota town of Brainerd, was found liable of violating music copyrights for using the Kazaa peer-to-peer file-sharing network to download the songs. The jury took just under five hours on Thursday to reach its verdict.
It ordered Thomas-Rasset to pay $1.92 million — or $80,000 per song — to six record companies: Capitol Records, Sony BMG Music, Arista Records, Interscope Records, Warner Bros. Records and UMG Recordings. In his closing arguments on Thursday, attorney Timothy Reynolds said Thomas-Rasset had made copyrighted music available to “millions on the internet” through Kazaa. “She infringed my clients’ copyrights and then she tried to cover it up,” Reynolds said.
Thomas-Rasset had been convicted previously, in October 2007, and ordered to pay $220,000 in damages but the judge who presided over that trial threw out the verdict calling it “wholly disproportionate” and “oppressive.” The case was filed by the Recording Industry Association of America, which has brought suit against thousands of people for illegally downloading and sharing music.

Source:- Source:- The Times of India 20 June 2009 P. 20 Delhi
For any query:- legalbuddy@gmail.com

House secy-gen better paid than SC judge?

Rs 30k Perk Would Have Put Secretariat Heads Above All SC Judges, HC CJs, 3 Service Chiefs & Cabinet Secy
If a relatively small disparity in the Servicescivilian pay structure had the soldiers up in arms last year, then Parliament managers nearly did enough to wreak havoc across the top echelons of governance.
As national focus veered towards the shrill poll campaign this February, the Parliament honchos tried to push a special monthly allowance of Rs 30,000 for the secretaries-general of Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha. It would have put the two secretariat heads above all judges of Supreme Court, chief justices of high courts, three Service chiefs and the cabinet secretary.
The controversial proposal was dropped only after Pawan Bansal, minister of state for finance in UPA-1, in a conscientious intervention, wrote a series of letters objecting to the move, warning that it would send the salary balance across constitutional offices haywire. Bansal, by a quirk of fate, is now the parliamentary affairs minister. While PDT Achary, SG, Lok Sabha, and VK Agnihotri, SG, Rajya Sabha, were both on the parliamentary pay committee, headed by C Kuppusami, which examined the proposal, it was LS secretariat which serviced the committee.
The controversy finally ended in late April, but not before raising the serious issue of letting an institution decide its pay structure. The parliamentary pay committee sought a special allowance of Rs 30,000 for the SGs besides seeking other hikes for Parliament staff, triggering a chain of events. A harried Bansal, jolted by fine details of the pay proposal, wrote to Kuppusami that it be rejected.
“It will disturb the pay structure at the top level in government and other constitutional bodies.... The emoluments of SGs will be more than that of the judges of the Supreme Court, chief justices of the high courts, the three Service chiefs and the cabinet secretary.” To buttress his point, Bansal said the world cannot be convinced that duties of the two SGs “are more arduous than other above-mentioned functionaries”. The proposal finally had to be dropped.
When contacted by TOI, Achary denied there was any such proposal but added, “I can’t speak on the committee’s proceedings which are confidential.” He said, “What was being dubbed as a confrontation was airing of opinions which is normal in any committee.”
The glamorisation of SG’s post emerged a flashpoint in the panel mandated to suggest pay hike for Parliament staff in view of the 6th Pay Commission. In a bid to justify the extraordinary Rs 30,000 allowance, the draft report explained the role of SG, “He should be the one who has proven capabilities to manage the House...”
A miffed Bansal protested to Kuppusami that the report erroneously suggests that SG manages the House, “while actually, it is the Speaker who does so”, he wrote, seeking that the report, adopted in his absence, be recalled. The offensive clause was later modified.
The confrontation only turned bitter. So much so, that Bansal and Vyalar Ravi, then parliamentary affairs minister, refused to sign the report in protest against the haste shown — Bansal’s request for postponement of a meeting on February 25 was denied and the report was adopted in his absence.
It led to a chain reaction. RS chairman Hamid Ansari did not accept the report for Upper House because it was not signed by two panel members. He sent it back. The report was finally reported as adopted on April 15.
Source:- The Times of India 21 June 2009 P. 16 Delhi
For any query:- legalbuddy@gmail.com

Dowry case: Two Andhra judges held

Hyderabad: A father and son, both judges, found themselves on the other side of the law on Friday. The entire family, including the elder judge’s wife, has been arrested in a dowry harassment case.
While the father, T Narasimha Rao, is additional district judge and special judge for SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities Act) cases in Mahbubnagar, the son, T Kiran Kumar, is a junior civil judge at Raidurgam in Anantapur district.
The Central Crime Station (CCS) acted on a complaint lodged by the daughter-in-law, Shashikala (28), accusing her husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law Narayanamma of harassing her for dowry since her marriage on February 17, 2005. The couple has a three-year-old son.
Shashikala, who is from Madhuranagar in Secunderabad, had alleged in her complaint lodged on August 8, 2008, that despite a dowry of Rs 5.5 lakh and gold over 150 gm, her husband’s family kept demanding more and wanted a house in Madhuranagar to be transferred in their name.
She also accused them of bribing cops to arrest and torture her brother. The CCS is also investigating charges of dowry harassment against three more persons — V Jyotsana Devi, B Bharati and B Ellappa.
Source:- The Times of India 21 June 2009 P. 9 Delhi

Court vacation is no excuse to delay RTI query: CIC

Every June, litigants might well be resigned to their cases invariably getting delayed due to a monthlong vacation in the Delhi High Court, but India’s top information watchdog has taken a dim view of this colonial tradition.
The Central Information Commission (CIC) has said there is no law that allows courts to give up their obligation under the Right to Information Act even if on vacation. CIC’s disapproval came on HC’s failure to furnish an RTI response to an applicant on the ground that staff is lean owing to vacations.
‘‘The Commission finds it difficult to accept that any public authority can claim vacation from RTI for one month which is not provided for in law,’’ information commissioner Shailesh Gandhi noted in a recent decision.
CIC was hearing an RTI appeal filed by Rakesh Agarwal, whose application before HC in January this year had sought a copy of ‘Delhi Petty Offences Rules’ and bio-data coupled with other details of special metropolitan magistrates posted by HC to main traffic courts in the capital.
While a copy of the rules was supplied by P S Chaggar, HC’s public information officer, he refused to disclose information on the second part concerning magistrates. Invoking rule 5 (B) of Delhi High Court (RTI) Rules, the PIO maintained this would cause ‘‘unwarranted invasion of privacy of the magistrates.’’ This made Agarwal move CIC in appeal because the first appellate authority within HC didn’t respond to his first appeal.
In CIC, Chaggar also relied upon the confidentiality clause of the parent RTI Act 2005 to argue that information like residential addresses of the magistrates couldn’t be disclosed as it is personal information.
Agarwal then agreed before CIC to scale down his demand and limit it to file notings and correspondence based on which appointment of magistrates was done by High Court. The commission then asked Chaggar to prepare its reply and furnish it to Agarwal, only to be told by the PIO that since court is on vacation during June, there is skeletal staff present in concerned branches from where information has to be collated.
Though CIC made its unhappiness known, it relented by extending the deadline for supplying information to Agarwal till July 15.
Source:- The Times of India 21 June 2009 P. 6 Delhi
For any query:- legalbuddy@gmail.com

Brothers Of Dead Businessman Use RTI Act And Court To Wake Cops Up

It took eight months, three RTI applications and a petition in a metropolitan magistrate’s court for two brothers to seek ‘‘justice’’ for their youngest brother who the Narela police had claimed was among the first ‘victims’ of the economic downturn. Now, joint commissioner (northern range) Karnail Singh has promised to investigate the case thoroughly.
‘‘Based on the forensic evidence and medical reports before us, we will investigate whether it was a case of homicide or suicide,’’ said Atul Katiyar, DCP (Outer).
It had been reported on October 26 last year that 44-yearold Ashish Pal Khatri had allegedly committed suicide by shooting himself with his ‘pistol’ after shutting himself up in his bedroom. Ashish owned many properties at Narela, including a farmhouse. He also owned plots at Sonepat and was in the process of constructing a luxury hotel at Vrindavan in Mathura district of UP.
‘‘We were not satisfied with the police investigations from the very beginning. My brother was never under any economic stress. Neither did he ever carry a firearm with him. I was convinced it was a coldblooded murder,’’ said Mahavir Singh Khatri (53), a property developer and brother of the deceased. Thus began the struggle of Mahavir and Ranvir Kumar Khatri (60), eldest of the three siblings, to ‘‘account for the truth’’.
Said Anand Bharadwaj, advocate, who was helping the brothers: ‘‘The incident was reported on the morning of October 26 — according to police records — through an unknown number though Ashish’s close family members were present in the house. According to FIR number 474/08, lodged at the Narela police station, the police were informed of a ‘murder’ at Ashish’s Narela residence around 8.40 am. Incidentally, the post-mortem report indicated that the incident took place between 3.30 am and 4.30 am in the morning. The investigators never questioned why it took so long for the incident to be reported.’’
Curiously, the Narela police registered a case under the Arms Act against the deceased. As investigating officer Ved Prakash put it: ‘‘It was an illegal weapon that we recovered from Khatri. Naturally a case was registered against the deceased.’’ The family though is sceptical. ‘‘We have never heard of a case against the deceased.’’
Mahavir then lodged an RTI seeking details of the investigations. He was shocked when the reply came on February 23 this year. ‘‘The reply stated that FIR number 872/08 has been lodged and that the charges include a case of cheating under IPC section 420 (A copy of it is with Times City). Of course, after we filed another RTI application seeking to know the last FIR lodged at Narela police station each year between 2002 and 2009, DCP (outer) Atul Katiyar sent a written message to them on June 15 saying that the earlier document had an inadvertent mistake and the original FIR number was 874/08 (A copy of this is with Times City too),’’ said Mahavir.
With little cooperation from the police, the brothers moved the MM’s court in Rohini. ‘‘This was after the BJRM Hospital sent us the post-mortem report in response to a third RTI that we filed with them. The doctors stated that he was shot from a distance and that a rifle, instead of a pistol, was used for the crime,’’ added Mahavir.
The court then directed DCP (Outer) to submit a reply on the investigations into the case. In his written reply, the DCP said: ‘‘The doctor opined about the cause of death that all injuries are ante-mortem in nature, caused by a firearm which is rifled (sic). Ammunition is discharged from firearm from a distant range...Therefore, as per suggestion of autopsy surgeon, ballistic expert V K Anand, senior scientific officer, FSL, Rohini, has been requested to re-examine the case.’’ (A copy of this reply is with Times City).
On Saturday, when Times City contacted Katiyar, he said that both ballistic and medical board reports are awaited. ‘‘A three-member medical board has been constituted. The two reports (medical and ballistic) together will be crucial for the investigations,’’ he said.

Source:- The Times of India 21 June 2009 P. 6 Delhi
For any query:- legalbuddy@gmail.com

16 June, 2009

Keeping Domestic Service without verification is illegal-Court

In cases where minor girls are employed as domestic helps, the police should also book the placement agencies rather than directly booking the employers, a trial court has observed. Cautioning the people who hire minor girls as domestic helps, the court said that such employment without age and police verification could invite penal actions.
Additional district and sessions judge Kamini Lau also said the family members of such minors and the placement agencies who put them into such jobs are also liable to be punished under the law.
"Putting up minor girl for employment without age and police verification is not only improper but also illegal and entails penal consequences. Not only family members of the minor and the placement agencies who put up such minors for employment are liable for penal action but even persons who hire and employ such minors do so at their own risk and are liable to be hauled up,'' the court said.
The court's observations came while hearing an anticipatory bail plea of one K D Singh and his wife Harshit Bedi, both retired government employees, who were accused of employing a minor as domestic help and ill-treating her. The couple had come to the court seeking bail on the grounds that they had hired the girl through a placement agency, which claimed the age of the domestic help to be 18 years. Taking a serious view of the records indicating the age of the girl as 15 years, the court pulled up the investigating officer and questioned her whether she has taken action against the placement agency.
"The owner of the placement agency who had sent the girl to the residence of the applicants is the main accused and is reported to be absconding,'' it said. The investigating officer, on her part, assured the court that the departments concerned would be informed in due course so that appropriate action, including cancellation of licence, could be taken against it.
The court also granted the couple bail on personal bond of Rs 20,000 each with the condition that they would appear before the investigating officer on June 17. A case was registered against the accused couple following a complaint made with Prasad Nagar police station on May 12 that they had employed a minor girl as domestic help and ill-treated her.
Source:-The Times of India 16 June 2009 P. 3 Delhi
For any query:- legalbuddy@gmail.com

11 June, 2009

‘Do not lie to the court’ -A advice from Supreme Court to junior advocates

“Do not lie to the court” — this advice from the Supreme Court to a junior advocate invited suppressed smirks from a small crowd of lawyers and litigants present before a vacation Bench on Wednesday.
What followed from a Bench comprising Justice B Sudershan Reddy and Aftab Alam made a lot of sense as it was an expression of deep anguish over the manner in which lawyers resort to falsehood and suppression of facts causing immense harm to the trust judges once reposed in them.
To deliver speedy justice, given the spiralling litigation and huge pendency of cases, judges have to rely on statements made by lawyers about their cases, the Bench said, adding that if judges had to read each and every word in case files, disposal would take years.
“What will happen if the judges become wary of lawyers’ statements made across the Bar. In the apex court, we trust the advocates for they and the judges are equal partners in administration of justice. How can we carry on with the job if we start distrusting the lawyers,” the Bench said.
It made no attempt to hide its deep hurt to find a writ petition filed by an advocate suppressing the fact that his client’s earlier petition was dismissed by a three-judge Bench of the apex court and his petition seeking review of the dismissal order was pending.

Source:- The Times of India 11 June 2009 P.12 Delhi
For any query:- deepakmiglani@hotmail.com

Abusing & assaulting teachers angers court

DUSU Prez Gets Bail, Told To Condemn Rioting
Delhi University Students Union (DUSU) president Nupur Sharma was on Wednesday granted anticipatory bail by a trial court in a case of rioting and criminal assault on the condition that she condemns the incident of violence on the campus.
Expressing concern over the trend of hurling abuses at teachers and assaulting the University staff by student leaders, additional sessions judge (ASJ) Surinder S Rathi said, ‘‘Hurling abuses and assaulting their teachers in the name of raising demands for students is a sign of deterioration of values and disregard of democratic process.’’
‘‘Student leaders in general and office-bearers in DUSU in particular are expected to behave in a responsible and a prudent manner, more particularly while interacting with their teachers,’’ the court said.
It asked the DUSU president to give it in writing to dean students’ welfare that the students’ body does not approve of such criminal assaults and destruction of University property. ‘‘The growing tendency among the students community in taking pride in behaving in a slanderous and derogatory manner with teachers in highly deplorable and cannot be tolerated,’’ the court said.
It allowed the bail plea of Sharma, who, along with the 15 other students, secretary and joint secretary of DUSU, was accused of assaulting the university staff and teachers on June 4 during their agitation to press some demands.
Directing the DUSU president to furnish a personal and a surety bond of Rs 15,000 each for the bail, the court also asked the station house officer to file a compliance report of its order within 5 days.
The court was critical of the students leaders resorting to violent activities to press their demands. ‘‘Student leaders like the applicant who are chosen by thousand of students through a democratic process are supposed to behave and act in a responsible and democratic manner,’’ it said.
ASJ Rathi favoured bringing in corrective measures whenever such kind of incidents come into light. ‘‘Such tendency needs to be corrected and mended whenever and wherever it comes to the fore, lest it spreads among other student populace and spoils the academic environment. Destruction of property in general and that belonging to Delhi University in particular cannot be tolerated in any manner,’’ the court said.

Source:- The Times of India 11 June 2009 P.6 Delhi
For any query:- deepakmiglani@hotmail.com

10 June, 2009

New Bill For Fixed Tenures, More Professionalism

Babus to be insulated from netas
The end of the transferposting raj is in sight. Bureaucrats are set to get a new deal from the new government with the Centre readying a legislation that will not only assure babus of fixed-tenure postings but also protect them from political interference in their day-to-day functioning.
Besides, all bureaucratic appointments, transfers and postings will be subject to parliamentary scrutiny. As a consequence, IAS and IPS officers in the country will no longer be at the mercy of the whimsical transfer regime that operates currently.
However, along with these comforts will come added responsibility. The government plans to bring in a new public service code that will lay down a strict performance evaluation regime for promotions and postings of babus.
All these provisions are expected to be part of the Civil Services Bill, 2009, a draft of which is being finetuned. It’s expected to be an improved version of the Public Service Bill, 2007 which could not see the light of day in the previous UPA government.
These provisions, officials indicated, will first be applicable for IAS and IPS officers and may later be extended to all services that come under the all India service category, including the Indian Forest Service.
The Bill, which incorporated various suggestions of the second Administrative Reforms Commission, envisages setting up of a new Central Public Service Authority which will not only professionally manage civil services but also serve the interests of babus and citizens alike through checks and balances.
Mega Makeover
Civil Services Bill moots fixed tenure of 3 years per posting for all IAS and IPS officers
A new agency, Central Public Services Authority, to be set up to work as a watchdog against political interference in the bureaucracy. It will also keep a watch on performance of babus
Postings to be strictly on basis of performance evaluated on a number of tasks assigned to bureaucrats over the years
All appointments, transfers and posting to be subject to parliamentary scrutiny Leader of opposition in Lok Sabha to have say in appointment of cabinet secretary. Similar role for the leader of opposition in state assemblies
New Bill to focus on performance
New Delhi: If the Civil Services Bill becomes an Act in its present form, all bureaucrats will get a minimum fixed tenure of three years. An official said if any bureaucrat is transferred before three years, he or she will have to be compensated for the inconvenience and harassment caused due to such a move.
Regarding top-level appointments in states, the draft states that the chief secretary and director general of police of the state will be selected out of a panel of suitable candidates to be drawn up by a committee comprising the chief minister, leader of opposition and home minister. Currently, the chief minister alone decides such appointments.
Similarly, the leader of opposition will also have a say in the appointment of the cabinet secretary at the Centre. The CS will be selected from a panel by a committee comprising the prime minister, the leader of opposition and the home minister.
The official said: ‘‘If the government deviates from these norms while appointing bureaucrats, it will have to inform Parliament about the reasons for doing so. The new rules also give enough importance to performance parameters of officers considered for top posts.’’
The new Bill will put in place a different kind of performance evaluation system. Unlike the current practice of annual confidential reports (ACRs) which take a panoramic view of a civil servant’s work, the new performance management system will evaluate babus on their job-specific achievements and the number of tasks that they perform as a team leader in a particular department.
These system will be managed by the CPSA which will work under a chairman whose rank will be equivalent to that of the chief election commissioner. The chairman will be appointed for five years by a committee comprising the PM, a Supreme Court judge, a Union home minister and the leader of opposition in the Lok Sabha. The cabinet secretary will act as convener of the committee.
The CPSA will aid and advise the central government in all matters concerning the orgnization, control, operation and management of public services and public servants. The authority will also be the custodian of the public service code for babus.

Source :- The Times of India 9 June 2009 P 1 Delhi
For any query:- legalbuddy@gmail.com

Should executive have role in hiring judges?

Contributed by Dhananjay Mahapatra

The foul smell of corruption is increasingly enveloping the temples of justice, popularly referred to as courts. Almost everyone is aware of the level of corruption in the lower stream of justice. But, the screamers about instances of corruption in the higher judiciary appear to have forced the government and the CJI to look afresh for an effective antidote.
The common refrain is that there is something virulently wrong with the present process of selection of judges for the higher judiciary — the high courts and the Supreme Court. For long, the Executive had this grouse that India was the only country where judges appoint their peers through a secretive method called consultation among the judges forming part of the Collegium headed by the Chief Justice of India.
Recently, on February 27, a day after the last session of the 14th Lok Sabha, renowned lawyer, parliamentarian and then Speaker Somnath Chatterjee articulated the grievance most succinctly — “I still believe that India is unique in three things — a television operated by Parliament, judges appoint judges and MPs fix their own salaries.” A few days earlier, he was more direct: “India is the only country where judges appoint themselves. It is not a good system.”
At that time, the entire political apparatus was virtually bracing up for the Lok Sabha elections and it appeared that Somnathda’s terse words were lost in the poll cacophony. But, it does not appear so. His words actually had a lasting impression on those who matter in the new UPA government.
A thinking is gaining ground among the top echelons of the ruling coalition political leaders that the system of “Judges appointing Judges” has to undergo a change and the Executive must have a definitive say in it rather than performing the role of a mere postman — sending to the President the names recommended by the Collegium headed by CJI for appointment as judges.
What could be the shape of the ‘say’ that the Executive wants to have in the appointment of judges is not precise, but it is definitely tired of playing the role of a postman. The UK experience could be a guiding light.
Before the setting up of the independent Judicial Appointment Committee (JAC) in 2006, the judges were chosen by the a senior member of the Executive through a process that was not only secretive but was roundly criticised as “a tap on the shoulder” method.
The new mechanism for selecting high court judges was to bring an end to the secretive process of picking judges, which the ‘Guardian’ newspaper found responsible for producing a higher judiciary that was almost exclusively white and male (of the 108 HC judges, only 10 were women).
However, initial experience showed that JAC was virtually “old wine in a new bottle”. The ‘Guardian’ in January 2008 wrote a critical piece on the JAC’s method of appointment. It said: “Those appointed since last September are remarkably similar to those selected under the old process. All 10 are white male barristers.”
So, if the UPA government wants, in the wake of disturbing reports about corruption in the judiciary, to effect a systemic change in the process for appointment of judges, then it should put its proposal in open for a debate among the legal fraternity and parliamentarians.
The grievance may be well founded, for in no other country do the judges appoint themselves. But, the solution should not be worse off. To strike a balance, would it be acceptable to both the Judiciary and the Executive to have equal say in the appointment of judges?
Source :- The Times of India 8 June 2009 P 10 Delhi
For any query:- legalbuddy@gmail.com

First ruling in which trial court has asked police to register an FIR against a bride and five members of her family for giving dowry

In perhaps the first such ruling ever, a trial court in the capital has asked police to register an FIR against a bride and five members of her family for giving dowry.
There was trouble between Sunil and Latika (names changed) just a year after they got married in 2004. Latika left her husband’s house on August 4, 2005 and filed a dowry harassment case with the antidowry cell against Sunil and his family.
She claimed that her family had spent more than Rs 10 lakh on the wedding, gave Rs 2 lakh in cash for a car and another Rs 1.15 lakh as dowry. A case was registered against Sunil and his family under Section 498(A), 406 and 34 of the IPC.
But Sunil also went to court, seeking to register an FIR against Latika and her family for fulfilling his dowry demands. In his petition filed in August 2008, Sunil asked that an FIR be registered under Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, which punishes giving dowry with up to five years in prison and a fine of at least Rs 15,000 or the value of the dowry, whichever is more.
Metropolitan Magistrate Neeraj Gaur observed that giving dowry was a cognisable offence and directed the station house officer (SHO) of Model Town police station to register an FIR. The court also asked the SHO to start investigating the case against Latika and her family.
Source :- The Times of India 7 June 2009 P 1 Delhi
For any query:- legalbuddy@gmail.com

Does Raju prefer jail to bail?

No Plea For Relief From HC; Buzz Is That He’s Cooling His Heels To Avoid Creditors

Strange as it may seem, the speculation doing the rounds in informed circles is that Ramalinga Raju doesn’t want bail. He would rather continue to cool his heels in jail. The speculation has arisen from the fact that Raju’s lawyers haven’t approached the Andhra high court for bail so far. Though his bail application has been rejected five times by the metropolitan court, in high profile cases like that of Raju, it is only the HC that gives relief. It is surprising that Raju’s men haven’t knocked the door of the HC, a police officer told TOI.
The case for a bail for Raju has become relatively stronger than before because a chargesheet in his case has already been filed by the CBI. Although the CBI has indicated that the investigations aren’t fully over and that it may file a supplementary chargesheet, legal circles assert that once the main chargesheet has been filed, a case for bail is strengthened.
A CBI team wants to go abroad to look into possible diversion of funds from Satyam or its affiliates in various countries. The entire exercise will take a lot of time considering that many countries in North America and the Continent have to be visited. This doesn’t imply that Raju will have to remain in jail till all the investigations are finished, a lawyer said.
TOI asked Raju’s lawyer S Bharat Kumar the reason for his client not approaching the HC for bail. He said: ‘‘The bail has been rejected so many times in the lower court. Two other accused in the case — Price Waterhouse auditors S Gopalakrishnan and Talluri Srinivas — had approached the HC but their bail pleas too were rejected.’’
Lawyers said there was no bar to the number of times that an accused can approach a court for bail. Usually, the courts rule that they would not grant bail till material conditions in the case don’t change. They point out that the material conditions in the Raju case have changed since a chargesheet has been filed. ‘‘A bail is often a chance matter. If you are serious you have to be at it, arguing your case well. But be sure in a case like that of Raju, the magistrate’s court will never give a bail,’’ a senior criminal lawyer in the HC said. Raju has been in police and judicial custody since January 9.
The story doing the rounds is that Raju doesn’t want to leave jail because this will bring him in direct touch with many from whom he borrowed huge sums of money. In the months and week before his confession, Raju borrowed huge money to save himself. The moment he leaves jail the people from whom he borrowed money will be at his throat. To save himself from this position, Raju would rather suffer imprisonment than be confronted by them, a corporate source tracking the Raju saga told TOI.
The fact that the real estate market is still to pick up will make Raju vulnerable. Once the land prices escalate, Raju would be able to liquidate some of the holdings in the name of his 325 privately-held companies and pay off the lenders, the source added. Till then the heat at Chanchalguda jail in Hyderabad is less than that outside in the city. Raju’s lawyer Bharat Kumar said: ‘‘All sorts of theories can be floated. But this doesn’t make it true.’’
Source :- The Times of India 7 June 2009 P 14 Delhi
For any query:- legalbuddy@gmail.com

07 June, 2009

A charitable hospital will be an industry under Industrial Dispute Act

Contributed by Deepak Miglani Advocate
According to Industrial Disputes Act, “Industry means any business, trade, undertaking, manufacture or calling or employers and includes any calling service, employment, handicraft or industrial occupation or avocation of workmen”. Even a charitable hospital, run by the management providing medical services to women and children, will be an ‘industry’ under the Industrial Disputes Act in view of judgement of the Supreme Court extending the definition on systematic activity of the establishment-it may be religious or charitable.

02 June, 2009

Dress code doesn’t pass muster with court staffers in district courts of delhi

An attempt to give a makeover to court staff working at the district courts by providing them with uniforms for the first time has hit a wall as the employees have refused to wear it. The reason — the uniform is causing them allergies and rashes.
Besides ill fitting, the staff have complained about summer uniforms not being made of cotton and the colour of the shirt not being white.
Alleging that ‘‘sub-standard’’ cloth has been used, many have decided to surrender their uniforms.
‘‘Some of the staff have returned the uniforms to the administration along with complaint letters,’’ said the president of the court staff union.
The fitting problem has come up even after measurements for all employees were taken individually. All the five district courts have about 2,500 court staff. A committee was set up by the Delhi High Court last year to look into the possibility of having a uniform for them. The uniform comprises one pair of dark-gray pants and a light-gray shirt. For winter, a blazer has also been included.
While the plan was quickly executed in the HC, it took a while for it to come to the district courts. Unlike their HC counterparts, the district courts’ staff complain that they did not get what they were told.
‘‘The cloth is horrible and it does not absorb any sweat. It’s difficult to wear,’’ said a sessions court recordkeeper.
‘‘We were never involved in the implementation of uniforms. The committee must have given the tender to some local company, which has cheated us,’’ said a court union member on condition of anonymity.
So far, the court administration at Tis Hazari alone has received more than 50 written complaints. The court staff union is now planning to take up the matter with the judge who is incharge of the uniforms on Monday.
Source:- The Times of India 1 June 2009 P.5 Delhi
For any query:- legalbuddy@gmail.com

FIR against police officers for raid without search warrant

A trial court has ordered filing of an FIR against some Delhi Police officers, who allegedly raided and seized articles from a house without a valid search warrant.
Ordering the registration of an FIR against the three officers for committing theft and trespassing, MM Sonu Agnihotri said, ‘‘I am of the opinion that on the basis of admitted facts, offence of theft and house trespass seems to have been committed by Pankaj Sharma, SHO of PS Khajoori Khas, ASI Rajender Singh and Inspector Vijay Bhushan.’’
The court asked DCP (northeast Delhi) to probe the role of the policemen and add names of other officers as the accused who had accompanied in the alleged raid conducted at the house of complainant Rita on March 2, 2009.
‘‘Entering into a house where the complainant is residing without obtaining search warrants to seize article, which is allegedly case property, shows the intention on the part of respondents (police officials) to disregard the law of land,’’ the court said.
Asking the DCP concerned to file a compliance report within a week, it said the police officials attempted to ‘‘bypass’’ the court. The court’s order came on the plea of Rita accusing that the police illegally raided her house at Karawal Nagar following an FIR that she and her family were not the real owners of the house.
The policemen had allegedly barged into the house of Rita on March 2 this year, and seized various household articles following a complaint of one Ashok Kumar that the house belonged to him and that the complainant was the trespasser. Later, it was proved in forensic examinations that Ashok Kumar had forged documents to lodge an FIR against the complainant and her family.
Source:- The Times of India 1 June 2009 P.5 Delhi
For any query:- legalbuddy@gmail.com