Categories
-Top News India News Politics

No relief from HC for Kejriwal  

Judge Baweja allowed Kejriwal to meet his family members, including his wife, daughter, PA and advocates…reports Asian Lite News

A Delhi court on Thursday extended, till April 1, the ED custody of Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, holding that there were “sufficient reasons” while allowing him to meet his family members and lawyers.

CM Kejriwal, whose alleged role in the excise policy scam is being probed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED), was produced before Special Judge Kaweri Baweja of the Rouse Avenue Court on the expiry of his six-day ED remand on Thursday.

Judge Baweja, who is hearing the case, had sent him to ED custody on March 22.

On Thursday, the probe agency sought the Chief Minister’s custody for seven more days. However, after hearing the arguments, the court extended the AAP supremo’s ED remand by four days till April 1, observing that there appear to be “sufficient reasons” to permit his further custodial interrogation, particularly keeping in view the submissions of the ED.

The probe agency submitted that he is required to be confronted with the material collected and statements recorded so far in the course of the investigation.

The court directed the investigation officer to ensure that further interrogation and confrontation etc. of the accused is done without any delay.

Judge Baweja allowed Kejriwal to meet his family members, including his wife, daughter, PA and advocates.

Moreover, the court has directed the agency to conduct the interrogation at a place with CCTV coverage and for the preservation of the footage. The ED has also been asked to provide the requisite medication to Kejriwal and get him medically examined in accordance with the law during the period of his custody.

During the hearing on Thursday, the courtroom was packed with CM Kejriwal’s supporters. His wife Sunita Kejriwal and AAP leaders Gopal Rai, Atishi, and Saurabh Bharadwaj, among others, were also present in the courtroom.

Appearing for the ED, Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju submitted that Kejriwal needs to be confronted with some individuals connected to AAP who have been summoned from Goa. He also accused Kejriwal of not cooperating with the probe and giving evasive replies, adding that digital data needs to be checked for which the ED needs passwords.

“Kejriwal says he will ask his lawyers whether to give the passwords,” he said.

As the court also allowed Kejriwal to make personal submissions, he said the CBI has filed 31,000 pages while the ED has filed 25,000 pages in the case, but no one has been found guilty.

“My question is, why have I been arrested,” he asked. “I am not opposing the ED custody… It can keep me for as long as it wants, but this is a scam. My name was taken by four witnesses… Many people come to my residence, is that enough ground to arrest a sitting CM,” Kejriwal said.

He also claimed that people are being made approvers in the case and forced to change their statements.

On Kejriwal’s claim that Sarath Reddy gave over Rs 50 crore to the BJP, the ASG said that it had nothing to do with the liquor scam. “The BJP did not have the right to make the (excise) policy. We are not concerned with anyone paying any money to any person. That has nothing to do with the liquor scam,” he said.

He also claimed that the ED has materials to show that Kejriwal demanded Rs 100 crore in kickbacks.

The ED arrested Kejriwal on March 21 after questioning him for over two hours at his official residence in Delhi. On Wednesday, the Delhi High Court refused to grant any interim relief to Kejriwal, who contended that his arrest and the remand order passed by Judge Baweja were illegal and that he was entitled to be released from custody immediately, holding that the probe agency has to be granted an opportunity to file a reply.

The ED has termed Kejriwal the “kingpin and the key conspirator” of the alleged excise scam in collusion with other ministers of the Delhi government, AAP leaders, and other persons.

ALSO READ-India Summons US Diplomat Over Kejriwal Arrest Remarks

Categories
India News Kerala Tech Lite

Kerala HC set to use AI in generating case files

The IT initiative is headed by a three-member team of Judges A. Muhamed Mustaque, V. Raja Vijayaraghavan and Kauser Edappagath…reports Asian Lite News

The Kerala High Court is all set to launch an Artificial Intelligence (AI) system to generate case files based on voice recordings of litigants.

This facility is being developed in-house by the IT department of the court and this new innovation will be just one of the many path breaking initiatives of the IT team.

This new facility comes close on the heels after both the High Court and district courts employed ‘Anuvadini’, an AI tool developed by the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) of the Ministry of Education, to translate judgments of the High Court and district courts to Malayalam.

Using this tool, over 317 High Court judgments and over 5,136 district court judgments have already been translated from English to Malayalam and uploaded on the websites of the respective courts.

The IT initiative is headed by a three-member team of Judges A. Muhamed Mustaque, V. Raja Vijayaraghavan and Kauser Edappagath.

Another initiative on the anvil is a proposal to share translated versions of judgments with the Legal Service Authority for imparting legal education and awareness to various government departments and other stakeholders, including litigants.

ALSO READ-Kerala HC recommends inclusion of sex education in curriculum

Categories
-Top News London News UK News

HC bars Nirav Modi from moving Supreme Court

The bench of Justice Stuart Smith and Justice Robert Jay of the High Court said there are “no features of psychotic illness”…reports Asian Lite News

In a setback to fugitive diamantaire Nirav Modi, his plea to move the UK Supreme Court against his extradition to India on charges of fraud and money laundering was denied on Thursday.

Modi lost the bid to take his fight against extradition to India on charges of fraud and money laundering to the UK’s Supreme Court. “The appellant’s application for permission to appeal to the Supreme Court is refused,” Lord justice Stuart Smith said in his statement.

The diamantaire, who fled India in 2018 before details of his alleged involvement in large-scale fraud at the Punjab National Bank became public, has argued there is a high risk of suicide if he is extradited.

In November, Nirav Modi filed an application before the UK High Court for permission to appeal against his extradition to India in the UK Supreme Court. He lost the appeal on Thursday to take his fight against extradition to the UK Supreme Court.

Nirav Modi reportedly filed an application in the High Court in London, seeking permission to appeal against his extradition order, two weeks after a UK court dismissed his plea against extradition back to India.

On November 9, Nirav Modi lost his appeal against extradition to India with a United Kingdom court dismissing his plea. Earlier, the High Court of London (United Kingdom) dismissed the appeal of Nirav Modi, who is wanted in India to face money laundering and fraud cases.

The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) later welcomed the UK High Court’s decision to reject Nirav’s plea.

“India has been vigorously pursuing the extradition of economic fugitives so that they face justice in India. We welcome the decision of the UK High Court. We want to bring him to India as soon as possible,” said MEA spokesperson Arindam Bagchi during a press conference.

Nirav Modi, who is a prime accused in the Rs 13,500 crore PNB scam, had fled India. He lost his appeal after he had moved the High Court in London against extradition on mental health grounds.

The bench of Justice Stuart Smith and Justice Robert Jay of the High Court said there are “no features of psychotic illness”.

The court rejected Nirav Modi’s counsel’s claims that he will die by suicide due to severe depression and said “Nirav Modi neither is nor is very likely to be at the most severe end of the scale of depressive illness”.

“He has so far displayed no features of psychotic illness. Although he has exhibited persistent suicidal ideation, he has neither attempted suicide or deliberate self-harm nor disclosed plans to do so, except in the vaguest and general way,” the court said.

The High Court also noted the steps taken to render Barrack 12 safe and to ensure that there is effective constant monitoring to reduce both the risk of attempted suicide and the prospect of suicide being committed.

The court noted that the Government of India sought the appellant, Nirav Deepak Modi.

Nirav Modi last year had moved the UK High Court against District Judge Sam Goozee’s Westminster Magistrate Court ruling in favour of his extradition. He is presently behind bars at Wandsworth Prison in southeast London. (ANI)

ALSO READ-India submits reply in Nirav Modi’s extradition appeal

Categories
India News

Centre notifies appointment of 8 new HC judges, transfers six

In 2018, the top court’s collegium recommended Nargal, which was one of the oldest recommendations pending with the government. In 2021, the collegium reiterated Nargal’s elevation as a judge…reports Asian Lite News

The Centre on Wednesday appointed advocate Wasim Sadiq Nargal as an additional judge of the Jammu & Kashmir High Court, four years after his name was recommended by the Supreme Court Collegium.

According to notifications issued by the Law Ministry, seven judicial officers were elevated as judges of the Patna High Court. Also, four additional judges of the Kerala High Court were also elevated as judges of the same high court. Besides these appointments, the ministry also notified transfers of six judges.

The judicial officers elevated as judges of the Patna High Court are: Jitendra Kumar, Sunil Dutta, Alok Kumar Pandey, Shailendra Singh, Arun Kumar Jha, Chandra Prakash Singh, and Chandra Shekhar Jha.

The additional judges of the Kerala High Court elevated as judges are: Ziyad Rahman Alevakkatt Abdul Rahiman, Murali Purushothaman, Karunakaran Babu, and Kauser Edappagath.

In 2018, the top court’s collegium recommended Nargal, which was one of the oldest recommendations pending with the government. In 2021, the collegium reiterated Nargal’s elevation as a judge.

Justice Chitta Ranjan Dash of Orissa High Court has been transferred to the Calcutta High Court and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah of the Andhra Pradesh High Court has been transferred to the Patna High Court.

Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur of the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir, and Ladakh has been sent to the Bombay High Court, while Justice Subhasis Talaptra of the Tripura High Court has been transferred to the Orissa High Court.

Also, Justice Lanusungkum Jamir of the Manipur High Court has been sent to the Gauhati High Court. Besides these transfers, Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav of the Madhya Pradesh High Court has been transferred to the Delhi High Court.

ALSO READ-Indian Naval Air Squadron commissioned into Indian Navy

Categories
India News

Plea in SC against Karnataka HC order

The plea contended that the high court failed to note that the Karnataka Education Act, 1983, and the Rules made thereunder, do not provide for any mandatory uniform to be worn by students…reports Asian Lite News

A plea has been moved in the Supreme Court challenging the Karnataka High Court order on Tuesday dismissing all petitions seeking direction for permission to wear hijab in classrooms.

The plea, filed by two Muslim students, Manan and Niba Naaz, through advocate Anas Tanwir, said: “The Petitioners most humbly submit that the High Court has erred in creating a dichotomy of freedom of religion and freedom of conscience wherein the court has inferred that those who follow a religion cannot have the right to conscience.”

The plea contended that the high court failed to note that the Karnataka Education Act, 1983, and the Rules made thereunder, do not provide for any mandatory uniform to be worn by students.

“The High Court has failed to note that the right to wear a Hijab is protected as a part of the right to conscience under Article 25 of the Constitution. It is submitted that since the right to conscience is essentially an individual right, the ‘Essential Religious Practices Test’ ought not to have been applied by the Hon’ble High Court in this instant case,” it said.

“The High Court has failed to note that the Indian legal system explicitly recognises the wearing/carrying of religious symbols. It is pertinent to note that Section 129 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, exempts turban-wearing Sikhs from wearing a helmet,” it said, and also cited rules made by the Ministry of Civil Aviation, allowing Sikhs to carry kirpans on the aircraft.

The plea added that this “step-motherly behaviour” of government authorities has prevented students from practising their faith which has resulted in an unwanted law and order situation.

“However, the High Court in its impugned order had vehemently failed to apply its mind and was unable to understand the gravity of the situation as well as the core aspect of the Essential Religious Practices enshrined under Article 25 of the Constitution of India,” it said.

The high court, in its judgment, said “wearing of hijab is not an essential part of Islam. Prescription of uniform is constitutional and students can’t object to it”.

The bench headed by Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi said: “We are of the considered opinion that wearing a hijab by Muslim women does not form any essential form of practice in Islamic faith. The prescription of school uniforms is only a reasonable restriction and are constitutionally permissible which the students cannot object.”

ALSO READ-Congress to face repercussions also in Kerala

Categories
-Top News UK News

London HC rules in favour of PM in Priti Patel case

In November last year, Sir Alex found that Patel had not always treated civil servants with “consideration and respect”…reports Ashis Ray

The London High Court has ruled against a petition filed by a trade union of senior civil servants for a judicial review of British Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s decision to overrule an independent investigation, which found Priti Patel, the Indian origin Home Secretary in his cabinet, guilty of “bullying” (read as wanting things done against the rules), which is a sackable offence under the ministerial code.

The FDA Union filed the case against the fact that Johnson had gone against the conclusion reached by Sir Alex Allan, then his independent adviser on ministerial standards, to protect Patel.

The two-judge bench said: “The question for this court is whether the Prime Minister proceeded on the basis that conduct would fall within the description of bullying with paragraph 1.2 of the ministerial code if the person concerned was unaware of, or did not intend, the harm or offence caused.”

It added: “Reading the statement (made by Johnson at the time) as a whole, and in context, we do not consider that the Prime Minister misdirected himself in that way.”

In November last year, Sir Alex found that Patel had not always treated civil servants with “consideration and respect”.

He went on to say in his report to Johnson: “Her approach on occasions has amounted to behaviour that can be described as bullying in terms of the impact felt by the individuals. To that extent, her behaviour has been in breach of the ministerial code, even if unintentionally.”

The Prime Minister is the final arbiter on such complaints. His interpretation was that Patel was “unaware” of the disquiet she had caused. And that he had received an assurance from her that she was “sorry for inadvertently upsetting those with whom she was working”.

This, though, was not the first time that Patel had been accused of bullying and had forced the government to pay out cash compensation for the injury inflicted.

Sir Alex had resigned after Johnson did not take action on his inference.

The FDA stated: “The court has determined that the Prime Minister did not acquit the Home Secretary of bullying, and that he did not reject the findings of Sir Alex Allan that her conduct amounted to bullying.”

ALSO READ-Boris facing lawsuit for backing Priti Patel

Categories
Books India News Lite Blogs

HC vacates stay on Vijaypat Singhanias autobiography

The publisher said they are “delighted” with the Bombay High Court order “setting aside the injunction which had greatly aggrieved both Pan Macmillan India and our author Vijaypat Singhania”…reports Asian Lite News.

The Bombay High Court on Wednesday vacated the stay on the distribution of Vijaypat Singhanias autobiography “An Incomplete Life”, saying it had been erroneously passed by a single judge bench of the court.

The publisher, Pan Macmillan India, said it would immediately start reselling the book. This, however, could not be the end of the matter as the petitioner, Raymond Limited, has been granted leave to again approach the single judge for a fresh injunction.

A division bench comprising Justice Abhay Ahuja and Justice S.J. Kathawalla ruled that the injunction order of November 4 against the book was passed “under an erroneous impression that the district court at Thane has passed the order dated April 22, 2021 granting stay/interim order against the erstwhile publisher from publishing the book was to continue until the pendency of the appeal filed by Respondent No. 1 (Raymond Ltd)”.

“We do not want to say anything more in view of the following order: i. The Order of the Learned Single Judge dated 4th November, 2021 is set aside. ii. Parties are at liberty to move the Learned Single Judge sitting in vacation today or tomorrow and renew the Application afresh which will be decided on its own merits without being influenced by what is stated in this Order. iii. The above Appeal as well as Interim Application are accordingly disposed off,” the bench ruled.

The publisher said they are “delighted” with the Bombay High Court order “setting aside the injunction which had greatly aggrieved both Pan Macmillan India and our author Vijaypat Singhania”.

“Raymond Ltd has been granted liberty to approach the Single Judge for renewing the injunction, but we are confident that we will succeed before the Ld. Single Judge as well,” the publisher said.

ALSO READ-SC announces nine recommendations for elevation to top court

Categories
Lite Blogs

6-month separation period not valid if couple seeks divorce mutually: HC

Both of them had applied for divorce in the family court of Udaipur with mutual consent, but were given six months’ separation time…reports Asian Lite News.

The Rajasthan High Court in a significant decision has said that ‘if a husband and wife seek divorce with mutual consent, six month separation period will not be valid’.

The court was hearing a case on Thursday from Pratapgarh in which the Udaipur Family Court had fixed a six months separation period for divorce and had rejected application for instant divorce. The High Court in its order clearly said in the case that it was not appropriate to give six months’ time to the couple seeking divorce mutually.

In this case, an applicant Monika Sharma, a resident of Dhariyavad had filed a petition in the High Court stating that she is living separately from her husband, Rahul Sharma, resident of udaipur, since 2019.

Both of them had applied for divorce in the family court of Udaipur with mutual consent, but were given six months’ separation time.

“Both of us have been living separately since 2019. The appeal for hand-to-hand divorce was rejected by the family court,” said Monica in her application while her counsel told the court that the Supreme Court had earlier removed the requirement of six months’ separation in a case.

After hearing the arguments of both the sides, Justice Dinesh Mehta said that this court ends the statutory period of separation for six months. Also, it ordered the Family Court that it can issue a decree of divorce in the case following the complete statutory decor.

ALSO READ-Beware! Divorce can shorten lifespan