DALIY LEGAL NEWS 14/13.09.2008

The art of legal compliance
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/Analysis/The_art_of_legal_compliance/articleshow/3483370.cms
Sensitising corporates to the need to adhere to compliance be it environmental, legal and financial, human resources, labour or others continues to be a challenge, but Chess Management Services has played an important role in making this happen in India since it started eight years ago. A lawyer from Cambridge, Karti P Chidambaram incorporated Chess Management Services in 1998 and made it operational in 2000 with 20 lawyers . These lawyers were researching for almost two years on the content and potential for the service before getting it off the ground. “We spent Rs 50-60 lakh on research to recognise the niche area of legal compliance management (LCM). These services were not being provided by any other consultancy. We found the potential for the service to be tremendous because of corporate governance concepts that were fast becoming essential for sound management strategy. This was one of the main reasons that made me and my cousin start a management consultancy service,” says Chidambaram. However, it was a big challenge to convince the industry that it must get ready for the next level of governance and control. The company had to educate the industry that regulatory compliances were going to be driven by the markets rather than regulators themselves. “The other challenge we faced was to convince lawyers, used to conventional legal litigation practice, to take up LCM as an alternative,” he says. The firm had to educate them to look at lawyers as being not mere professionals but as holistic service providers to corporate houses where their contribution would be in every sphere of corporate activity. In 2001, Chess got its first few clients - Apollo Hospitals and the Aditya Birla Group. “It took two hours to convince the clients about the utility of the service. Even till date, new client acquisition is a long drawn process,” adds Chidambaram. Chess Management’s services include LCM risk analysis, system analysis and training in compliance management systems. It also offers a flexible web-based platform, which has all the compliance requirements applicable to a company. Within those, legal compliance is mapped through various functionaries within the organisation for the management to monitor the compliance status of the company and to assess risk arising thus. Chess also has expertise in cross border transactions in the areas of joint ventures, foreign collaborations, technology transfer, mergers and acquisitions as well as assists clients in establishing wholly owned subsidiaries/ branch offices/liaison offices in India. It also offers legal due diligence services and explores merger compatibility, or feasibility of proposed acquisition. Contractual risk analysis is another innovative and critical service provided by the firm. In 2004, the firm made its international foray into Indonesia and subsequently into Kazakhstan and Algeria. It currently has projects from companies in Malaysia, the UK and the US. “In the next few years we will be present in the UK and the US as they have recognised the need and potential of our services and are relying on us to enable scientific management of legal compliance,” he says. The company is looking at revenues of Rs 5 crore by March 2009 with plans to increase the number of employees from 53 to 500 in the same time. “If we need to increase our revenue by ten times we need to look at investments and our key thrust areas are technology, training manpower, strategy and goals, business promotion, marketing and standardisation,” he explains.
15 Sep, 2008, 0213 hrs IST,Monica Behura, ET Bureau
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com

Khairlanji killings: Eight convicted, 3 acquitted
http://sify.com/news/fullstory.php?id=14758325
Bhandara (Maharashtra): A trial court on Monday convicted eight of the 11 accused on charges of killing four members of a Dalit family in Khairlanji village of Bhandara district. Three people were acquitted after the court deduced that the killings were not the result of caste atrocity.
A mob of about 50 villagers attacked the house of Bhaiyyalal Bhotmange, a Dalit farmer, on the evening of September 29, 2006 and lynched four members of his family, including his wife Surekha, daughter Priyanka and two sons Dilip and Roshan.
Delivering the judgement at a packed sessions court here, the first ad-hoc sessions judge S S Dass held Gopal Sakru Binjewar, Sakru Mahagu Binjewar, Shatrughan Issam Dhande, Vishwanath Hagru Dhande, Ramu Mangru Dhande, Jagdish Ratan Mandlekar, Prabhakar Jaswant Mandlekar and Shishupal Dhande guilty.
He acquitted Mahipal Antu Dhande, Dharampal Vishwanath Dhande and Purushottam Bisan Titarmare.
The judge said he would announce the quantum of punishment for the eight guilty on September 20.
The brutal killings, initially treated as gory fallout of a village feud but later seen as a blatant case of atrocity against a Dalit family by other Hindus, had led to widespread public outcry and invited nationwide media attention.
The immediate provocation for the savage mob attack was said to be the evidence given by Surekha and Priyanka against 15 of the villagers in a case of their kin Siddharth Gajbhiye being beaten up.
With the case fast turning into a volatile political issue, the state government transferred its investigations from the local police to the state Criminal Investigation Department (CID) and then to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
In a damage control exercise following violent protests in many parts of the state, the government also suspended four police officers and three medical officers for dereliction of duty besides offering Bhaiyyalal Rs1.2 million as compensation, a house and employment.
After taking charge of investigations, the CBI filed a chargesheet against 11 of 46 accused in the court of Dass on December 27, 2006, but had a tough time getting clinching evidence since there were virtually no witnesses to the killings apart from Bhaiyyalal.
Bhaiyyalal had slipped out of the house at the sight of the mob and after watching the assault for some time from behind a distant wall, fled to a neighbouring village.
After the framing of charges on March 2, 2007, the trial court recorded the evidence and statements of 36 out of 74 witnesses (originally listed in the case) between May 3, 2007 and March 31, 2008. It heard arguments from both sides from July 21 to August 21, 2008 and September 1, and announced September 15 as the date for pronouncement of verdict.
While the state government appointed noted lawyer Ujjwal Nikam as special public prosecutor and Ijaz Khan represented the CBI, advocates M P Bedarkar, Neeraj Khandewale and Sudip Jaiswal held the brief for the accused.
Anticipating trouble following the pronouncement of the judgement irrespective of the way it went, the police had planned elaborate security measures on judgement day not only in and around the Bhandara sessions court but also in the entire district including Khairlanji and other sensitive areas.
Following the outbreak of violence and arson in the state two months after the massacre, police top brass and Deputy Chief Minister R R Patil had suspected the hand of Maoists in it. The police did not rule out recurrence of trouble from similar quarters in the aftermath of the judgement and as such, did not want to take chances, a top official said, explaining Monday's elaborate security arrangements.
Monday, 15 September , 2008, 13:46
http://sify.com

Today SC will hear plea regarding OBC reservation http://www.indlawnews.com/Newsdisplay.aspx?dc39abb2-3409-4030-9fe1-f6994101eaeb
Today Supreme Court will consider an application seeking clarification of its judgement dated April 10 upholding the constitutional validity of the Centre’s notification providing 27 per cent reservation to OBCs in admission to centrally-run educational institutions of advanced studies, such as IIMs, IITs and post-graduate medical sciences courses.A five-judge Constitution bench of the apex court, headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan and including Justices Arijit Pasayat, C K Thakker, R V Raveendran and Dalveer Bhandari, would take up the matter at 1400 hrs.The applicant has prayed to the court to clarify whether graduates were entitled to the benefits of 27 per cent reservation for OBCs or not.The application for clarification was filed when Calcutta High Court had restrained graduates from seeking admission in IIMs and post-graduate medical science courses on the ground that a majority of three judges held that a graduate belonged to the creamy layer and hence, was not entitled to the benefits of 27 per cent quota for OBCs.The apex court had stayed the operation of the High Court order permitting graduates among OBCs to take the benefit of 27 per cent reservation.A three-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan, had made it clear verbally that graduates from OBC category were fully entitled to take the benefit of 27 per cent quota policy.Justices Pasayat and Thakker, in their common judgement, had suggested that the creamy layer among OBCs should start from graduation. Justice Bhandari, in his separate judgement, had held that a person who has become graduate should be considered forward and not backward and hence, should not be allowed to take the benefit of quota policy of the government.The Constitution bench, while upholding the 27 per cent quota policy for OBCs, was unanimous on the exclusion of the creamy layer.The apex court had also made it clear that as far as SCs and STs were concerned, 22.5 per cent reservation for them would continue and the upper limit for reservation would be 50 per cent as fixed by the nine-judge bench in Mandal Commission case judgement in 1992.The petition against Calcutta High Court order dated May 14 was filed by the Union government which also prayed for transfer of petitions pending in the Calcutta and Bombay High Courts to the Supreme Court. UNI
9/15/2008
www.indlawnews.com

Humour in court
http://www.expressbuzz.com/edition/story.aspx?artid=IVrYPVQAOD4=&Title=Humour+in+court&SectionID=7GUA38txp3s=&MainSectionID=ngGbWGz5Z14=&SectionName=zkvyRoWGpmWSxZV2TGM5XQ==&SEO=
BANGALORE: Chief Justice P D Dinakaran is known for his good sense of humour. So, his court room often looks lively. One public interest litigation (PIL) had come before him last week challenging the hike in KSRTC bus fare.
The PIL, at first, irked the CJ and he took the advocate to task. The CJ told the advocate that he would dismiss the petition with heavy cost. While dictating the dismissal of the petition, the CJ told the advocate that he would impose a fine of Rs 25,000 to be deposited with the Legal Services Authority.
However, the CJ was ready for bargain with the advocate regarding the amount of fine. The CJ said he would reduce the amount to Rs 20,000.
He was further merciful and said he would reduce it to Rs 10,000. Finally, the CJ asked the advocate how much fine could be imposed. The anxious advocate pleaded that he would pay Rs 1,000. The CJ laughed and said: ‘’The petition could have been dismissed without imposing any fine. Anyway, advocate had agreed to pay the fine.’’
Express New Service
15 Sep 2008 09:49:00 AM IST
www.expressbuzz.com

Providing medical aid to poor is the challenge before us: CJI
http://www.zeenews.com/articles.asp?aid=469134&sid=NAT
Bhopal, Sept 14: Ensuring access to medical facilities for all sections of the society, specially poorer sections and those in rural areas, is a paramount challenge before the country, Chief Justice of India (CJI) KG Balakrishnan said here on Sunday. "Without doubt, considerations of availability and access to medical facilities are the paramount challenge in our country. While private sector investment in establishing full-fledged hospitals has to be encouraged, there must be adequate safeguards to ensure that the same hospitals benefit the poorer sections and those in rural areas," Balakrishnan said. The Chief Justice was addressing the concluding session of two-day seminar, 'Human Right to Health,' organised by Madhya Pradesh Human Rights Commission on the occasion of MPHRC Foundation Day. "The concern with an increasingly privatised healthcare sector is that it may cater largely to urban patients with high purchasing power. In this respect, administrative and legal interventions may be required to ensure proper access to existing facilities," Balakrishnan said. "An integrated approach to advancing public health recognizes its relationship with policies for economic development and addressing social inequalities. Medical professionals should also take on the responsibility of catering to the needs of the weaker and underprivileged sections," he said. Balakrishnan said, "the right to health cannot be conceived of as a traditional right enforceable against the state. Instead, it has to be formulated and acknowledged as a positive right at a global level-one which all of us have an interest in protecting and advancing," he said. Bureau Report
www.zeenews.com

UK trusts laypersons
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Opinion/Sunday_Specials/Special_Report/UK_trusts_laypersons/articleshow/3480813.cms
Usha Prashar isn't just one more member of the great Indian diaspora. The function she performs in Britain would be considered sacrilegious in India. Though she is neither a judge nor even a lawyer, Prashar is the chairman of the judicial appointments commission (JAC), which selects candidates for judicial office. While this responsibility is entrusted in India only to senior judges, Prashar has been specially drafted into the process because British law requires the JAC chairman to be a lay person. Though India inherited its legal system from the British Raj, the two countries could not have been more different in their attitude to the judiciary even as both swear by its independence. In India, the judges have, after a 1993 judgment by the Supreme Court, made themselves a self-perpetuating oligarchy as they assumed "primacy" in judicial appointments. On the issue of accountability, the Supreme Court first ruled in 1991 that no criminal case could be registered against a judge without the CJI's approval. And then, in 1997, it put in place what is purely an "in-house procedure of inquiry" to deal with complaints against members of the higher judiciary. In contrast, Britain has demystified the judiciary to such an extent that even the scrutiny of judicial conduct has been handed over to a lay person. The one who is currently the "judicial appointments and conduct ombudsman" is a retired naval officer, John Brigstocke, whose legal experience is limited to departmental inquiries. Yet, he now has statutory powers to investigate complaints about appointment of judges and matters involving judicial discipline. Thanks to such transparency, Britain has been able to stave off the kind of predicament that India finds itself in because of Justice Soumitra Sen's refusal to resign from the Calcutta High Court. Given the elaborate safeguards, there is no way somebody like Sen could have been cleared for appointment, even after a litigant had filed a case before the same court accusing him of misappropriating money as a receiver in an earlier case. If a collegium of judges could select Sen in 2003 despite a question mark over his integrity, it shows that the privilege of secrecy conferred on the judiciary is being misused, much to the detriment of the public interest. India could do with more lessons from Britain on the rule of law.
14 Sep 2008, 0302 hrs IST
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com

EQUAL SCALES
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1080914/jsp/opinion/story_9829241.jsp
It is a matter of glass houses. The Chief Justice of India, K.G. Balakrishnan, has written to the prime minister requesting his “intervention to initiate” the impeachment process in Parliament against Soumitra Sen, a judge in the Calcutta High Court. The allegation against Mr Sen is that he deposited money he was in charge of as receiver in a 1993 case in his personal account, retained it after becoming a high court judge in 2003, and returned it only after a court order in 2006. The three-judge committee inquiring into the allegation reportedly found the charge to be just, and Mr Sen was asked to resign or take voluntary retirement. Since he has refused, the CJI has written to the prime minister, indicating how the charge of misappropriation “(at least temporary)” has been established and also mentioning that the “breach of trust” implied in appropriating court funds for personal gain cannot be recompensed by the return of funds under the court’s orders.
Judges must be perceived to be incorruptible; their dignity, moral force and the people’s trust in the judicial process depend on that. Impeachment is rare, because appointment as judge presupposes personal and professional integrity. This occasion is historic in a way, because there has been only one other case of impeachment under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968. The machinery for impeachment is very heavy too. Neither the judiciary nor the government is empowered to begin the process. The notice for it must be signed by either 100 members of the Lok Sabha or 50 of the Rajya Sabha. Then two-thirds of the present and voting members must call for impeachment.
There is a fitting dignity and gravity in the procedure for the impeachment of a judge. It is regrettable when it has to be put in motion, but it is also a mark of accountability among those who are empowered to make others accountable. It is particularly significant in a culture that prizes reverence and accepts lack of transparency as normal. Yet, this perceived lack of transparency has been occasionally questioned too. The fact that the CJI has permitted the Central Bureau of Investigation to take over the inquiry into the delivery of cash to a judge in the Punjab and Haryana High Court is a kind of answer to such worries. Moreover, all judges have been asked to declare their assets, although the higher judiciary had not been in favour of this earlier. The system of internal checks and balances of the judicial system is meant to preserve the independence of the judiciary. Its separation from the executive and the legislature has to be marked out, as also its freedom from political pressure. The balance of power among these three arms of democracy is delicate. To maintain it, transparency and accountability are useful principles to follow.
Sunday , September 14 , 2008
www.telegraphindia.com

Medicos for law on stem cell therapy
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Chennai/Medicos_for_law_on_stem_cell_therapy_/articleshow/3481357.cms
CHENNAI: Can patients be charged for a therapy that is still under research? Can they be forced to make payments even though they have seen no result with the therapy? Is stem cell therapy more hype than hope? In an interaction with Dr Alok Srivatsava, head of department of haematology, students of Stanley Medical College raised several issues in an attempt to bring stem cell therapy out of the shadows. The deeper they got into the discussion , the more convinced they got about the need for legislation to regulate stem cell therapy.
The guidelines for research and stem cell therapy by the Department of Biotechnology and Indian Council of Medical Research and the draft policy of the International Council for Stem Cell Research were discussed in detail. Stem cells are special cells found in the human body that can regenerate into a diverse range of cell types. "There is no scientific proof that stem cell therapy can cure any disease , except some blood-related ones. Though trials for most of the other streams are at various stages, hospitals charge exorbitant fees for stem cell therapy without assured results ," Dr Srivatsava said. Medicos said emails of patients complaining of hospitals over promised results through stem cell therapy have been in circulation. Some hospitals have been promising cure for paraplegia, cancer and other diseases. "While some anaesthetists tell us how difficult it is to inject at the right spot in the spine after several years of practice, some hospitals have only MBBS doctors injecting cells into spines. How can this happen?" said one MBBS students . His post-graduate colleague added: "Patients are told that this stem cell therapy would have no side effects. But can these cells have the potential to turn cancerous after sometime?" To many such questions, Srivatsava had just had one answer: "We will have to deal with it carefully to avoid the worst surprises science can throw up," he said. Head of surgical gastroenterology Dr Surendran said the department would soon start research on stem cells.
14 Sep 2008, 0730 hrs IST,TNN
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com

The Untouchables
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Opinion/Sunday_Specials/Special_Report/The_Untouchables/articleshow/3480803.cms
It is the first time ever that a Chief Justice of India has granted permission to an investigating agency to register a criminal case against members of the higher judiciary. It happened last week when Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan allowed the CBI to examine two judges of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, Nirmaljit Kaur and Nirmal Yadav, in connection with what has come to be known as the cash-for-judge scam. In the process, Justice Balakrishnan earned the distinction of becoming the first CJI to exercise the power conferred on his office 17 years ago by an apex court verdict in the Justice K Veeraswami case. The rationale behind this special safeguard was to "protect a judge from frivolous prosecution and unnecessary harassment". The 1991 Veeraswami verdict directed that "no criminal case shall be registered under Section 154 CrPC against a judge or chief justice of the high court or judge of the Supreme Court unless the Chief Justice of India is consulted in the matter ... If the Chief Justice is of the opinion that it is not a fit case for proceeding under the Act, the case shall not be registered." On the face of it, this ruling, which confirmed that judges came under the ambit of the anti-corruption law, should have paved the way for the prosecution of recalcitrant ones. If Balakrishnan's permission to question Justices Kaur and Yadav has turned out to be unprecedented, it shows that successive CJIs, including himself, have belied the general expectation that they could be trusted to be objective in exercising their authority. So much so, that rather than being a safeguard to protect the independence of the judiciary, the self-assumed power of sanction became a cover for impunity. One glaring example of inaction from the recent past relates to Justice Jagdish Bhalla who was not only shielded but also promoted as a high court chief justice despite an application for permission to register an FIR against him. The application, filed by the committee on judicial accountability consisting of eminent Supreme Court lawyers, cited a report from the Uttar Pradesh revenue department stating that a land mafia embroiled in litigation had sold Justice Bhalla's wife a 7,200 sq metre plot in Noida for no more than Rs 5 lakh. At the time, the market value of the plot was Rs 7 crore. Such documentary evidence did not, however, stop the Supreme Court collegium from making an abortive attempt in 2006 to promote Bhalla as chief justice of the Kerala High Court. Since President Kalam threw a spanner in the works, the collegium waited for him to retire before making a fresh recommendation to promote Bhalla, this time as chief justice of the Himachal Pradesh High Court. If the cash-for-judge scam has bucked the trend of denying sanction for investigation, it is perhaps because of the sheer drama that was involved in law officer Sanjeev Bansal sending Rs 15 lakh - in hard cash - to Justice Kaur's official bungalow. The case spiralled out of control and became very public as Justice Kaur immediately called the Chandigarh police and handed the money over. What added a comical touch was Bansal's claim that Justice Kaur had been mistaken for Justice Yadav as they shared a similar first name. It helped little that Bansal told the police that he had been asked by an absconding Delhi hotelier, Ravinder Singh, to send the cash to Justice Yadav in connection with a property deal. Whoever it was meant for, the sleaze money seems to have pushed Justice Balakrishnan to grant permission within a week of CBI's plea to question both judges figuring in the Chandigarh transaction. In the absence of any such cash recovery, the UP police failed to get similar permission from the CJI for a contemporaneous but even larger case. This is the Ghaziabad provident fund scam, involving 34 judges all the way from the Supreme Court to subordinate courts. The scam, involving misappropriation of Rs 23 crore from the PF of Class III and Class IV employees, hinges on the confessional statement of a Ghaziabad court official, Ashutosh Asthana. He claims that he used that money to buy expensive gifts for judges. When the UP police asked for permission to question the judges named by Asthana, all that they got from Justice Balakrishnan was clearance to send questionnaires. This, despite the fact that the Ghaziabad scam complies with the Veeraswami verdict's precondition - that the investigation of a judge can only be permitted when a prima facie case is made out against him. Besides Asthana's confessional statement, the police were equipped with documentary evidence in the form of vouchers and delivery receipts. In a further concession to the judges figuring in the Ghaziabad scam, the CJI directed the police to attach the evidence to the questionnaires they send. In the pre-trial stage of investigation, the police are normally entitled to subject the accused to oral interrogation without disclosing the evidence they have already collected. While the outcome of such a heavily fettered investigation is not yet known, there was a cheering development in the Ghaziabad case last week. With the UP police conceding they were finding it hard to cope with the sensitive task of investigating local judges, the Supreme Court leaned on the state government to consider handing the case over to the CBI. The Mayawati administration promptly obliged and an agency that is better equipped to deal with the wider ramifications is now set to take over the case. In a week that saw major developments in the judicial corruption cases from Chandigarh and Ghaziabad, there was an equally significant piece of news about a third case. In a letter to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, the CJI asked for the impeachment of Calcutta High Court judge Soumitra Sen on the basis of his indictment by an in-house procedure of inquiry. Law minister H R Bhardwaj announced that the impeachment process would soon be initiated in Parliament. This is yet again a first, though the in-house procedure to probe allegations of judicial corruption has existed since 1997. Never before has a judge been impeached or even sought to be impeached following inquiry by a committee comprising three judges from different high courts, two of whom must be chief justices. Curiously, this is also the first time that the in-house procedure has indicted a judge on the very issue on which he had been given a clean chit by a high court. Last year, a two-member bench of the Calcutta High Court expunged the strictures passed by a single judge who had held Justice Sen guilty of misappropriating the sale proceeds of certain goods. These had been given to him for safekeeping when Justice Sen had been the receiver in a high-stakes case in his former avatar as a lawyer. Though Justice Balakrishnan's letter to the PM mentions Sen's eventual exoneration by his own high court, it is silent on how the in-house inquiry came to a different conclusion. Justice Sen's case also exposes the link between judicial misconduct and a flawed system of appointments. It became more secretive after 1993 when the judiciary appropriated the selection process. When Sen was appointed to the high court in December 2003, he was already facing proceedings in the same court on the charge of misappropriation. Which is why it is strange that the chief justice of the Calcutta High Court still thought it fit to recommend his appointment. Having read the CJI's recommendation to impeach Sen, Manmohan Singh hit the nail on the head when he said last week that the spate of corruption allegations against judges calls for "introspection" on judicial appointments. Their Lordships would do well to read the writing on the wall. manoj.mitta@timesgroup.com
14 Sep 2008, 0255 hrs IST, Manoj Mitta
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com

Patna High Court sets aside results of 184 BAS officials
http://bihartimes.com/newsbihar/2008/Sep/newsbihar13Sep5.html
Patna, (Bihar Times): Mr Justice S K Katriar of the Patna High Court on Friday set aside the result of 184 candidates selected for appointment as the deputy collectors through the First Limited Examination 2003 conducted by the Bihar Public Service Commission (BPSC). The court also asked the state government to make fresh requisition within two months. Large-scale irregularities were detected in the whole examination process.Justice Katriar praised efforts of the state vigilance department and its ADG, Neelmani, for holding a thorough investigation into the irregularities. The 48-page verdict was given on a bunch of writ petitions of unsuccessful candidates, Sunil Kumar Sinha and others.It also set aside the advertisement issued for the Limited Competitive Examination for not following the reservation policy appropriately. The writ petitions was filed in 2005.
During the hearing of the petitions Justice Katriar had ordered a vigilance probe into the selection process following reports of irregularities.
ADG Neelmani in course of three years of hearing of the writ petitions,submitted progress reports of the investigation before the court from time to time with Justice Katriar monitoring the vigilance investigation. The 97 accused include former BPSC chairman Ram Singhasan Singh, nine public servants, including BPSC officials and staff, and successful candidates. Twenty nine of the accused, including Singh were arrested.
http://bihartimes.com

Lack of accountability has corrupted the judiciary, says AHRC
http://brpbhaskar.blogspot.com/2008/09/lack-of-accountability-has-corrupted.html
The following is a statement issued by the Asian Human Rights Commission, Hong Kong: By recommending the impeachment of a High Court judge, the Chief Justice of India has revived a dead debate concerning the Indian judiciary. On August 2, 2008 in a letter addressed to the Prime Minister, the Chief Justice recommended the impeachment of judge Soumitra Sen of Calcutta High Court.Judge Sen is accused of having been involved in financial misappropriation before he was appointed as a judge. It is reported that in 1984 while judge Sen was practising as a lawyer he was appointed as the receiver in a dispute concerning the Steel Authority of India. It is alleged that in the capacity of the receiver he misappropriated a sum of INR 2,500,000 [USD 59523], which judge Sen reportedly paid back on orders from the court. Later, he was appointed a judge at the Calcutta High Court in 2003.A judge accused of corruption facing impeachment, a process by which a sitting judge could be removed from service in India, is nothing special. A corrupt public servant is not worthy of continuing in service and is least desirable to serve as a judge in a court of law, a public office that demands scrupulous impartiality and untainted personality. Anyone accused of a crime must be prosecuted and the crime investigated into. The fact that the accused is a judge must not provide the person with any immunity.Judge Sen being the first person recommended for impeachment by a Chief Justice of India does not mean that the judiciary is immune from corruption and other vicious practices. There are similar allegations against some judges in India. But not a single judicial officer was impeached so far. The only exception was the case of judge V. Ramaswami who faced impeachment in 1991, an attempt that failed due to the absence of a political consensus. It is expected that history will not be repeated. If it is repeated it would be a shame upon the Indian judiciary and its accountability.The accountability of judges, particularly in the context of increasing allegations of malpractices resorted to by judges is a grave concern in India. As of now there is no open process for the selection, promotion and if required the dismissal of High Court or Supreme Court judges in the country. The entire process is retained within the whims of the Supreme Court. All attempts so far to enforce accountability on the judiciary were vetoed by the judiciary itself. There is also the absence of a political consensus over this issue.Whenever concerns were raised by the public regarding the integrity of judges, either the judges in question were reportedly subjected to an internal enquiry or those who raised concern were persecuted by the judiciary. The enquiry report concerning the allegation involving three judges of the Karnataka High Court is yet to be made available in the public domain. The enquiry that exonerated the three judges in question was completed in 2003. The accusation against Justice Y. K. Sabharwal that his sons were deriving illegal profit from their real-estate business making use of their father's job as a judge faced contempt of court action from the Delhi High Court. The court refused the defendants the possibility to take 'truth' as a legal defense. Concerns regarding the lack of accountability of the judiciary have been expressed also by judges. Justice J. S. Verma a former Chief Justice of India has said "here is no point in saying that there is no corruption in the judiciary. No one is going to say it, much less accept it. One cannot go on sweeping it under the carpet and not expect it to show up. It is showing up now."The accountability quotient of the Indian judiciary as of now is dependent upon convention and traditions. What is expected and believed to be done is an internal enquiry, shrouded in mystery. So far none of these enquiries have seen the light of day or brought to the public domain. The recommendation to impeach judge Sen, the first of its kind in the past 62 years, in the above context is an exception. It is reported that the Chief Justice made the recommendation based on the findings of yet another internal enquiry. The findings against judge Sen in the internal enquiry are not yet made public.In a country where the content of a First Information Report (FIR) in a crime is a public document, it appears that the criminals among the judges receive special treatment. Indian law however does not provide any scope for discrimination in status between criminals.What if the Chief Justice after the internal enquiry did not recommend an impeachment? It is heard that if an internal enquiry reveals corruption or other forms of malpractice by a judge the Chief Justice would then request the concerned judge to resign or to stay away from deciding cases. This situation poses a series of questions.First of all, the very fact that a lawyer like Sen was appointed as a judge inspite of suspicions regarding his character illuminates the defects in the appointing procedure of judicial officers. What would happen if a judge attempted to be 'disciplined' within the system, outside the view of the general public whom the officer is supposed to serve, refuses to accept the request of the Chief Justice to resign or abstain from court work? Will such a judge continue to receive his salary paid from the taxpayers' money? Will the officer be allowed to continue using the facilities provided to him from the public exchequer? What would happen to the decisions the officer has made as a judge by then? Will they be reviewed on the grounds that the presiding officer was corrupt? If a litigant has suffered damages by a decision made by the corrupt judge, will the litigant be compensated by the defaulting judge? Will the judge still be promoted if his seniority in service so requires, as it happened in judge Ramaswamy's case? Even in cases like that of judge Sen, what if the Indian Parliament fails to impeach him? The Chief Justice will have to allow him to continue as a judge and he will continue receiving all his service benefits till he retires and after retirement as his pension. Or, can it be assumed that the Chief Justice will lobby the parliamentarians, of which an estimated 40 percent are documented criminals, to ensure that the judge recommended for impeachment will be finally impeached? What if a corrupt judge facing impeachment also lobbies?Most of these questions are issues haunting the Indian judiciary. Justice Verma also said that in a court of 20 judges two by default are corrupt. This means that in the absence of any open accountability mechanisms within the Indian judiciary the litigant as of now faces a 10 percent chance for a case to be decided by an officer who is unfit to be a judge. It implies that the justice quotient of the Indian judiciary is only 90 percent. Accountability of the judiciary is fundamental to its independence. Indian judiciary cannot be an exception.# # # About AHRC: The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation monitoring and lobbying human rights issues in Asia. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984.
14 September, 2008
Posted by B.R.P.Bhaskar at 9:26 AM
http://brpbhaskar.blogspot.com

Civic body tells HC: It has discretionary power
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Mumbai/Civic_body_tells_HC_It_has_discretionary_power/articleshow/3478165.cms
MUMBAI: Outside the Bombay high court, a stray dog wagged his tail as he sensed a dog lover pass by. Inside the majestic heritage premises, three judges were involved in hearing intense legal arguments on whether the civic authorities could be permitted to kill the strays. The vexed issue has been dogging the courts for years but on Friday when BMC's special counsel K K Singhvi interpreted the law, it got one judge vexed even more. Singhvi said the BMC was not bound by the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act. He emphasised that the civic administration had the powers and discretion to "destroy' ' a stray dog under a section of the BMC Act if it creates "nuisance'' , is rabid or bites someone. The BMC Act essentially says the BMC "may' ' kill a dog if it is causing nuisance and "shall' ' kill if it is rabid. Singhvi stressed that Section 11 of the Prevention of Cruelty Act (PCA) exempts the BMC from the Act if the civic authorities "destroy the dog in a lethal chamber'' . He said the BMC Act will prevail over the PCA. Besides, he added that an earlier time-bound landmark judgment in which the BMC had consented not to kill strays for five years. The period is now over, and hence the civic body should be allowed to exercise its powers. "It's an astounding argument,'' said Justice S Radhakrishnan, clearly not in agreement as he and Justices Dilip Bhosale and V K Tahilramani heard the arguments on Friday. The HC was hearing a reference made by a judge while sitting at the Goa bench to decide whether stray dogs can be put to sleep or only sterilised. Subodh Kantak, advocate general of Goa, said the solution was in "the Animal Birth Control law which permitted killing a stray only on three grounds: if a dog was rabid, if it was terminally ill which also included the scope of a violent dog and if the dog itself was mortally wounded'' . Earlier, Norma Alvares, an animal activist from Goa while admitting that there was not an absolute prohibition on killing a stray, the only time it could be killed was when it was rabid.
She frowned on the prospect of killing strays and said that since rules were framed under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act which prevented killing of strays, the rules would prevail and it was only in certain extreme circumstances that dogs should be allowed to be killed.
In all other cases, only sterilisation should be permitted. She said dog pounds were one answer to multiplying strays.
(oireporter@timesgroup .com
13 Sep 2008, 0453 hrs IST,TNN
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com

Blank roster stares at HC judge in Goa
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Mumbai/Blank_roster_stares_at_HC_judge_in_Goa_/articleshow/3478167.cms
MUMBAI: The Bombay high court has 60 sitting judges but one of them has a blank roster before him. Justice Santosh Bora, appointed as an additional high court judge less than five months ago, has not been presiding over matters for about two weeks now. In a rare move, the Chief Justice of HC has thought it fit to temporarily not assign him judicial work, on grounds of his allegedly impaired critical faculties. The 52-year-old Justice Bora, who hails from Aurangabad , was appointed an HC judge along with seven others this April. He was a lawyer till then with almost 30 years of practice. At first posted in Mumbai, he was then moved to the Aurangabad bench of the high court. On August 11, he was moved to the Goa bench. Subodh Kantak, advocate-general of Goa, told TOI on Friday that Justice Bora was not sitting in court for the last week or more. There are four judges assigned to the Goa bench, the three others are Justices S C Dharmadhikari , R C Chavan and permanent judge N A Britto. Justice Bora, it is learnt, has had kidney failures and a kidney transplant from his sister. Earlier, he also had a bypass surgery but after his appointment as a high court judge, a few traits in his behaviour came to light and became a cause of concern to both, the judiciary and his family. The HC registrar-general , Mridula Bhatkar, is on leave and can't be contacted. Her office staff said she would be back on Monday. The last time judges were not given work in the Bombay HC was in the late 1980s when lawyers protested against four judges and resolved not to appear before them. (s.deshpande@timesgroup .com )
13 Sep 2008, 0451 hrs IST, Swati Deshpande ,TNN
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com

HC reserves order on Capt plea
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Chandigarh/HC_reserves_order_on_Capt_plea_/articleshow/3478496.cms
CHANDIGARH: Relief still looked distant for Capt Amarinder Singh, the besieged Congress leader, as day two of the hearing on the former chief minister's plea, challenging his expulsion by the state assembly, ended on a note of animated suspense as the high court here on Friday reserved its order and offered no interim succour to him. The moot point, debated for nearly three hours before justices Adarsh Kumar Goel and Ajay Tewari, was the "extent of jurisdiction of the state legislature in acting against something apparently falling in the executive's domain" . The order is expected to settle important and unprecedented questions of constitutional law. Picking up the threads from where he left on Thursday, Amarinder's counsel Uday Lalit hammered on the point that the primary objections against the assembly action were transgression of jurisdiction by the august house as the land-exemption issue was already subjudice and the fact that the former CM's action in his executive capacity had nothing to do with the house as such. "Amarinder's actions were purely executive in nature and he took them as a chief minister and not as an individual . One can question these actions but these have nothing to do with the house," the counsel asserted, saying that brute majority was used to expel him. At this, the judges intervened to say that legislature represented people , was comptetent to discuss problems of people and could express concern over something happening even "outside the house" . Even Amarinder's counsel admitted that it was difficult to have a "water-tight" definition of functions of legislature. Upping the ante on special committee's report holding Capt guilty of corruption and abuse of power, Lalit emphasized that neither the committee nor the house had the jurisdiction to render such a finding of guilt, in complete violation of tenets of natural justice. He also raised a vital point that the land exemption was granted during the tenure of the 12th Vidhan Sabha, which had even discussed the issue. Subsequently, following its dissolution the matter died a "natural death" and the present state assembly had no locus standi to revive the matter. The reasoning drew a prompt query by justice Goel that if the counsel was suggesting that any action taken during previous assembly's tenure, no matter how grave, was beyond the reach of the present one. Also, what would be the situation in which the action was taken during the last assembly but the issue got crystalized in the current one.
13 Sep 2008, 0653 hrs IST, Vishal Sharma,TNN
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com

Pay for land at market price: HC
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Bangalore/Pay_for_land_at_market_price_HC_/articleshow/3478434.cms
BANGALORE: The high court on Friday directed the government to pay "enhanced compensation" at market rates to landowners, mostly farmers, at Kattugollahalli, Thirumalenahalli and Jyothipura villages in Bangalore South. Land in these areas was acquired by the DRDO to set up an electronic warfare range. The division Bench headed by Justice V Gopalagowda directed the government to pay Rs 7.7 lakh per acre following notices on March and May 1993. For acquisitions made after June 2, 1995, the government should pay Rs 8.4 lakh per acre, the division Bench said. Landowners and the special land acquisition officer had challenged a March 2003 order of a referral court, which awarded Rs 3.15 to Rs 3.45 lakh per acre. The land in question was classified by the government as dry agricultural land and had fixed Rs 60,000 per acre. which was not the market price.
( toiblr.reporter@timesgroup .com )
13 Sep 2008, 0617 hrs IST,TNN
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com

Bribe charges against Siemens; HC halts tender process
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Hyderabad/Bribe_charges_against_Siemens_HC_halts_tender_process/articleshow/3478212.cms
HYDERABAD: Amid allegations that German major Siemens was having a secret slush fund to pay bribes in order to secure lucrative contracts, Justice B Seshasayana Reddy of the AP High Court on Friday issued an order restraining the AP Health and Medical Housing and Infrastructure Development Corporation and Sri Venkateswara Institute of Medical Sciences (Svims), Tirupati, from buying PET scanner worth Rs 10.5 crore for its hospital at Tirupati. Responding to a petition filed by M/s Wipro GE Health Care Pvt Ltd, which stood as a strong bidder till the last minute in the tender process, the judge ordered the authorities not to finalise the tender process till further orders and posted the matter to four weeks. Meanwhile, the state government and the Union ministry of health and family welfare, along with Svims have been asked to file their replies. Putting forward the case of Wipro GE Health Care, its counsel Challa Kodanda Ram told the court that their technology was superior and costs only Rs 7.5 crore and the authorities have unfairly disqualified them at the eleventh hour by incorporating certain provisions in the tender process to help Siemens for extraneous reasons and vested interests. By giving the same contract to Siemens, the authorities are preparing to cause a loss of Rs 3 crore to the state's exchequer, he alleged. One of the last minute amendments to the tender process is that the supplier company should supply the scanner whose patient bed weight capacity should be more than 180 kg. Earlier, it was stipulated as 180 kg or more. The counsel for GE argued that there is no rationale behind this clause as there will not be much difference between 180 kg and more than 180 kg.
13 Sep 2008, 0451 hrs IST,TNN
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com

Uphaar tragedy: Justice Bhat of Delhi HC to hear appeal daily
http://www.ptinews.com/pti/ptisite.nsf/0/85C51390EA2072CD652574C30045A1AE?OpenDocument
New Delhi, Sep 13 (PTI) Justice S Ravinder Bhat of the Delhi High Court will hear the Uphaar cinema tragedy appeals on a day-to-day basis from Monday, a Chief Justice's decision in the wake of Supreme Court's recent order for shifting the matter to an "appropriate" court.Till Friday, the matter related to the appeals filed by convicts, including theatre owners Sushil and Gopal Ansals, was with Justice H R Malhotra, who has held 40 hearings since February this year.Justice Malhotra sent the case file back to the court of Chief Justice Ajit Prakash Shah on Friday to mark the case to another Bench.He was hearing the final arguments on the appeals on every Wednesday and Friday. So far, the defence has begun the argument for convict Sushil Ansal and is yet to complete the argument.The apex court, in its September 10 order while cancelling the bail of Ansal brothers and four others, had asked the High Court Chief Justice to constitute an "appropriate" bench for the appeal proceedings.The trial court on November, 20, 2007 had convicted Ansal brothers along with three others under Section 304-A IPC (causing death due to rash and negligent act) and had sentenced them to two years imprisonment.Seven others including Ajit Chowdhary and Nirmal Chopra, managers of the theatre, were convicted under Section 304 IPC (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) and sentenced to seven years imprisonment.Others convicted under section 304 IPC were -- Radha Krishan Sharma, Manmohan Unniyal (cinema's gatekeeper), Brij Mohan Satija, A K Gera and Bir Singh (all DVB officials). The High Court on January 4 had granted bail to the Ansal brothers and two other accused. PTI
www.ptinews.com

Judges in dock, justice under fire
http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?newsid=1189764
Concern is growing over the spurt in corruption in the judiciary
NEW DELHI: “Catch ‘em young” is the unanimous opinion of legal experts and former judges who are concerned with rising corruption in the judiciary, a fact so far dismissed with ‘every institution has some black sheep’.
“One in every five judicial officers is corrupt.” Lok Sabha speaker Somnath Chatterjee recent statement was only echoing public perception. Recent scandals — cash-by-courier in Punjab and Haryana high court, PF scam involving 34 judges of Ghaziabad district court, and most importantly, chief justice of India KG Balakrishnan’s recommendation to prime minister Manmohan Singh to impeach Soumitra Sen, a Calcutta high court judge, has reinforced the belief that the rot runs deep.
But the CJI’s recommendation to the PM and the approval given to the CBI to interrogate two lady judges of Punjab and Haryana high court, is sending the impression that the top echelons of the judiciary mean business.
However, former chief justice of India, JS Verma, who has been vocal over falling standards in the justice dispensation system, takes the recent developments with a bagful of salt. “Let’s see if the executive (government) takes action on the CJI’s recommendation”, he says adding “in fact judges who are vulnerable to considerations suit the government too”. As CJI, he sent a letter to the PM on April 7, 2005, with recommendations for removing a judge “but no action was taken”.
“It is imperative that a body of judges be set up to examine allegations made by aggrieved persons against certain judges and only when it finds a prima facie case made out against an errant judge that the mechanism to punish him should come in motion,” he feels.
The judiciary’s job is to examine the professional conduct of an incumbent but it is for the executive to determine his antecedents, he said.
A lawyer himself and former Union law minister Arun Jaitley under whose term justice Sen was elevated to the Calcutta HC in 2003, says the government’s role is limited, adding the CJI recommends the names of incumbents.
Former chief justice PN Bhagwati feels appointments should be made transparent. As a CJI, he had passed a judgment directing the government to set up a National Judicial Council, but no action has been taken so far. Noted constitutional expert Fali Nariman opines judicial corruption could be tackled by setting up the office of the ‘Judicial Ombudsman’.
Noted lawyer Indira Jaising wants total transparency in the appointment of judges and says the names being considered for the high judicial posts must be made public. She believes the “catch ‘em young” proposition has to be applied in all sincerity.
As Chatterjee, a constitutional expert himself, said, “Our judicial system calls for a thorough overhauling, else people will lose faith in it.”Rakesh Bhatnagar
Saturday, September 13, 2008
b_rakesh@dnaindia.net
www.dnaindia.com

HC annuls BPSC proposals
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Cities/Patna/HC_annuls_BPSC_proposals/articleshow/3478325.cms
PATNA: The Patna High Court on Friday set aside recommendations of the Bihar Public Service Commission (BPSC) made on the basis of a limited competitive examination conducted for state government employees for their appointment as Bihar Administrative Service (BAS) officials. Huge irregularities had been detected in the whole examination process in a vigilance investigation. Setting aside the recommendations, a single bench presided over by Justice S K Katriar praised efforts of the state vigilance department and its ADG, Neelmani, for holding a thorough investigation into the irregularities. The 48-page verdict was given on a set of writ petitions of unsuccessful candidates, Sunil Kumar Sinha and others. The court also set aside the advertisement issued for the limited competitive examination for not following the reservation policy appropriately. The writ petitions challenging the BPSC recommendations had been filed in 2005. During the hearing of the petitions, Justice Katriar had ordered a vigilance probe into the selection process following reports of irregularities. Neelmani had, in course of three years of hearing of the writ petitions, submitted progress reports of the investigation before the court from time to time with Justice Katriar monitoring the vigilance investigation. The vigilance department had chargesheeted 97 accused who included former BPSC chairman Ram Singhasan Singh, nine public servants, including BPSC officials and staff, and successful candidates. Vigilance sleuths had arrested 29 accused, including Singh.
13 Sep 2008, 0537 hrs IST,TNN
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com

Protests defy CM writ at Writers’
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1080913/jsp/calcutta/story_9828335.jsp
Employees campaigning for higher allowances turned Writers’ Buildings into a cauldron of protest for the second consecutive day, flouting almost every rule that Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee has introduced to instil office decorum.
Around 500 employees owing allegiance to 10 anti-Left unions assembled during the tiffin break, starting 1.30pm, and shouted slogans for an hour in defiance of a circular that had laid down the dos and don’ts for all “informal” staff meetings at Writers’.
“We will continue our agitation unless our demands are met. We will not seek permission to hold meetings and demonstrations because it is our right,” said Shyamal Mitra, the convenor of the Mahakaran Sangram Committee that is leading the protest.
That should sound familiar to the chief minister, whose recent remark against bandhs had invited a stern reminder from the CPM politburo that every citizen had the “right to strike”.
Chief secretary Amit Kiran Deb had issued a circular on Wednesday, specifying that employees could meet informally in small numbers during the tiffin break but not shout slogans or cause any kind of disturbance. It also reminded government staff that working hours were from 10am to 5.30pm with a 30-minute break in between.
Some officers of the finance department had been allegedly assaulted by a group of employees on Tuesday, prompting finance minister Asim Dasgupta to say that the work culture in government offices needed to be improved with strict measures.
On Thursday, over 400 employees shouted slogans and also clashed with police. They heckled deputy commissioner (central) Damayanti Sen when she ordered the police to prevent them from entering the restricted zone.
The police were restrained on Friday, but the protesters weren’t. Leaders of unions affiliated to the Trinamul Congress and Intuc said they wouldn’t rest until the government paid dearness allowance and bonus to employees on a par with central government staff.
Home secretary Ashok Mohan Chakrabarti talked tough, too. “The government has taken Thursday’s incident seriously. An FIR has been lodged against some people at Hare Street police station. Showcause notices have been slapped on some employees.”
But the protesters said they weren’t worried about being placed under suspension. “We are not worried about any action. Our demands are legitimate,” Mitra said.
Although the protest ended at 2.30pm, very little work got done after that. “I had gone to the PWD department but nobody was there. A peon asked me to come on Monday, saying the office staff were busy at a demonstration,” said Anup Sarkar, who had come to Writers’ Buildings from Basirhat.
Chakrabarti confirmed that work was “severely” affected. “That explains the necessity of the circular,” he said.
Earlier in the day, police commissioner Gautam Mohan Chakrabarti and the deputy commissioner (central) met the chief minister to discuss the unrest. “I have submitted a report to the chief minister and the home secretary on the incident. We have identified some of the employees and the investigation is on. Action will be taken once we get the final report,” the police chief said.
An official of the home department said many employees had joined the agitation simply to spite the government for issuing the circular. “Some employees come to office after 11am and leave early. They were livid on seeing the circular.”
A STAFF REPORTER Saturday , September 13 , 2008
www.telegraphindia.com

Court orders road link repair
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1080913/jsp/jharkhand/story_9828140.jsp
Ranchi, Sept. 12: Jharkhand High Court today directed the Ranchi Regional Development Authority (RRDA) and the railway authorities to ensure that the road connecting Birsa Chowk to Kathar Kocha in the city is repaired and made motorable.
The division bench frowned at the officials concerned for failing to maintain the century-old road. They were surprised that the important road has been left uncared for by the concerned authorities.
The bench comprising Chief Justice Gyan Sudha Mishra and justice D.K. Sinha ordered the Ranchi Regional Development Authority and the railways to construct the road.
Since the money to expand and repair the road has already been sanctioned by the government, RRDA should make good use of it and complete the work within a reasonable time, the court observed. The state has already sanctioned Rs 12.84 lakh for this purpose.
The matter had come forward after a public interest litigation (PIL) was filed by one Baidyanath Prasad of Birsa Chowk. Prasad, in his PIL, stated that the condition of the century-old road was pathetic and officials showed little interest to repair the same.
Residents of the area took the opportunity to take the issue to the local representatives and government officials but to no avail.
Railways said it never objected to the construction of the road on its land. But they paid little heed to repair or improve its condition, said Prasad. The road is important as it connects Birsa Chowk to the bypass road and is the only link to Durwa when the Heavy Engineering Corporation gates are closed during Assembly sessions.
The road is full of potholes all over and big ditches too, which make motoring on this stretch impossible, Prasad stated in his petition. The petitioner further informed the division bench that this 1km stretch experiences huge traffic inflow during bandh.
The high court while passing its verdict said since people using the road have now earned a right of easement over it, the authorities should do well to improve the road.
OUR CORRESPONDENT Saturday , September 13 , 2008
www.telegraphindia.com

The law can tell lies
http://www.expressbuzz.com/edition/story.aspx?artid=Wi/kNHZUiEo=&Title=The+law+can+tell+lies&SectionID=f4OberbKin4=&MainSectionID=fyV9T2jIa4A=&SectionName=n5rce3HBdMPVeH7FlL5aBQ==&SEO=PIL
The only way you know what homophobia really means, is to be gay” a law-school classmate once told me. He had just been publicly put down in a constitutional law class for asking about gay rights, where the professor had just discussed the equality clause of the Constitution, which guarantees “equal protection of the laws” to all citizens. For reasons he didn’t disclose, the professor felt gay people didn’t deserve this protection. For a while we wondered why. Blind bigotry aside, we like to imagine we’re rational thinking beings, and there had to be a reason, even if those reasons barely mask prejudice. We got the ‘reasons’ from different places. A Supreme Court judge tells us that homosexuality and rape are products of a perverted mind. Newspapers reported that a rise in homosexuality was leading to more cases of child sexual abuse. In opposition to a PIL challenging the constitutionality of Section 377, a party filed documents arguing that allowing homosexuality would mean that adultery, child marriage, sex with minors would become permissible. He argued that “Homosexuals live unhealthy lifestyles, and have historically accounted for the bulk of syphilis, gonorrhea, Hepatitis B, the “gay bowl syndrome”, tuberculosis and cytomegalovirus.” So, we now have our “reasons” for denying homosexuals equal protection of the laws.
It should give us comfort that there are others who are beyond the law’s protection, worthy companions to gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender persons in their outlawry. All you need is to change the characters and tweak the plot. There are slum dwellers, for example. The law regularly uproots families and children from their homes and destroys their belongings. Forget that people live, laugh and love in these slums. The “reasons”: slums are havens for dirt and disease, where ‘criminal elements’ often take refuge, and make our otherwise pretty cities terribly ugly. Then let’s pick, ‘terrorists’. An email is sent threatening to overthrow the State? Let’s arrest a random bunch of bearded men wearing skull caps, coincidentally all of whom are Muslim, throw in SIMI’s name and satisfy the law’s bloodlust. They read Urdu and can say Jihad? They must be terrorists! There’s a bomb blast? Hey, let’s double the tragedy by arresting innocents who we somehow know are terrorists because, as former Home Minister Advani tells us, they ‘look Pakistani’.
Perhaps, the law is more about the stories it tells, than it is about facts. It gives us characters like ‘the terrorist’ to loathe and the ‘innocent child’ to love. It tells us who the ‘bad’ husband is and what a ‘good woman’ looks like. Slum dwellers, terrorists, and homosexuals are the villains of the story whose presence foretells the collapse of family and society, the destruction of the city and the erosion of the rule of law. The tragedy of the legal novel is, however, that it signals the imposition of violence upon others: A judge articulates her understanding of a story, and as a result, somebody loses his freedom, his property, his children, even his life. On September 18, the Delhi High Court will hear final arguments in a case challenging Section 377. It presents the queer community in India with an opportunity to tell the law a story of loving a person of the same gender, of how a woman became a man. The law will be told that gay men are not paedophiles and that they have as many or as few diseases as other men. The law will be told of the violence of its words: of how 148 years of Section 377 has allowed police officials and members of the public to rape, torture, and harass gay men and hijras, and of lesbian lovers who commit suicide rather than be forced into marriage. All to press the point that there is no ‘reason’ for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender persons to be beyond the law’s protection. Hopefully, the day will come when the High Court will agree and on that day, we should remember where we came from, spare a thought for our erstwhile outlaw companions, and be suspicious of the stories that the law tells us about them. And to remember our compassion and empathy for those who continue to be written out of the law’s protection and remain at the receiving end of its violence.
Mayur Suresh
13 Sep 2008 12:47:00 AM IST
Mayur Suresh is a lawyer and activist at the Alternative Law Forum, Bangalore. He can be contacted at
mayur@altlawforum.org
www.expressbuzz.com

Notice to TN on change of New Year day
http://sify.com/news/fullstory.php?id=14757341
Chennai: The Madras High Court on Friday ordered to issue notice to the Tamil Nadu government on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL), challenging the state government's decision to celebrate the first day of Tamil month 'Thai' as the Tamil New Year Day.
Admitting the PIL filed by 'Traffic' Ramasamy, a social worker, a Bench comprising Chief Justice A K Ganguly and Justice F M Ibrahim Kalifulla, directed the chief secretary and public secretary to file counter within two weeks.
About seven months ago, the Madras High Court imposed an exemplary cost of Rs 10,000 on the social worker for filing a "air headed" PIL, questioning the state government's decision to observe the first day of Tamil month 'Thai' as the Tamil New Year Day.
Yesterday, the same person filed a similar petition again, stating that the Supreme Court had not only waived the cost, but also permitted him to file the matter afresh before the High Court.
Claiming that for about 2,000 years, the Tamil month of 'Chithirai' (in April) was being observed as the first month of Tamil calendar, the petitioner said changing the New Year Day did not fall under the constitutional duty of the government.
The petitioner contended that the earlier round of litigation in the High Court failed due to lack of public interest. The government lacked the jurisdiction and competence to change the New Year Day, he added.
Friday, 12 September , 2008, 17:50
http://sify.com

Orissa: PIL filed on Rushikulya Mahanadi Link project
http://mynews.in/fullstory.aspx?storyid=9973
Bhubaneswar: Ramachandra Panda, ex-deputy speaker of Orissa legislative assembly and president of ''Rushikulya Banchaoo Manch' has filed a Public Interest Litigation on early implementation of Rushikulya Mahanadi Link project.

A PUBLIC Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed by one Ramachandra Panda, ex-deputy speaker of Orissa legislative assembly and president of ’Rushikulya Banchaoo Manch’, in the Orissa High Court on early implementation of Rushikulya Mahanadi Link project. The state and Union government as well as the national water development agency are made parties.

The honourable court directed to all concerned parties on July 14 to file their affidavit before the hearing. Panda has mentioned in his petition that over the last three decades, rainfall in Ganjam district has been erratic - less than state’s average.

While hardly 21 per cent of the cultivable land is irrigated in Khariff and less than six per cent in Rabi. Besides, 75 per cent of the district population that is living in Rushikulya basin and its distributaries as well as the live-stock is dependant on Rushikulya river for domestic and irrigation need, which in fact is the life line of the district.

Due to climatic change and untimely rainfall, the river bed remained dry from January to June, making wells dysfunctional in several areas. So the cultivation becomes non-viable resulting in migration of farm labour.

All major towns of Ganjam district namely Berhampur, Chhatrapur, Gopalpur, Aska etc get drinking water from deep bore wells located on the river basin, which are experiencing water scarcity due to less supply on account of fall in ground water level.

Berhampur city alone is hardly receiving 70 per cent of water of what it needs during summer. Thus Rushikulya, being the lifeline of the district is unable to meet rising water need for domestic and irrigation needs while no new industry is coming up to meet this water scarcity. With this background, Panda after consultation with PK Mishra, a retired chief engineer of water resource department of Orissa - had submitted a memorandum to the government of Orissa and eventually assured Orissa assembly to take up the project on war-footing.
(Dipti Ranjan Kanungo)
© 2008 mynews.in
Publication Date 13/9/2008 10:54:23 AM(IST
http://mynews.in