- Final Year Exams 2020: SC grants UGC time to file reply to Maharashtra, Delhi affidavits; next hearing on Aug 14
The Supreme Court on Monday granted time to the UGC to respond to the affidavits filed by Maharashtra and Delhi governments, in which they submitted they will not conduct the final term exams at state universities as per the circular.
Last week, a bench headed by Justice Ashok Bhushan had asked Maharashtra and Delhi governments to place on record decision of state disaster management committee. The court had also asked the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) to clear its stand.
The affidavit was filed on a batch of pleas challenging UGC's July 6 circular and seeking cancellation of final term examination in the wake of COVID-19 pandemic
SC begins hearing the plea challenging UGC guidelines: Highlights
* Supreme Court grants time to SG Mehta to file response to Affidavits filed by Maharashtra and Delhi. SG to also state if DM Act overrides notification by UGC. SC to hear the case on August 14.
* SG Mehta seeks time to file a reply to the affidavits filed by Delhi and Maharashtra govt cancelling the exams, says SG can file reply by tomorrow.
* Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appearing for University Grants Commission says it is the only body that can prescribe rules for conferring a degree, states cannot change rules and it is not in the interest of students to not have exams.
* Maharashtra government has informed the Supreme Court that the State Disaster Management Authority on July 13 had resolved to not conduct examinations in the state amid the COVID-19 pandemic.
* Delhi Government had informed the court that it would not hold final year exams in state Universities.
* However, UGC has not budged from its initial stand and stated that exams needed to conducted by September 30.
Earlier, the top court had sought UGC's response on the petition challenging its July 6 circular asking all universities to complete the final term examinations before September 30.
Many students from different universities across the country, urged that the exams should be cancelled and the results of such students should be calculated on the basis of their internal assessment or past performance.
As per the UGC, universities were approached to inform the status of the conduct of examinations and responses received from 818 universities (121 deemed universities, 291 private universities, 51 central universities, and 355 state universities)
Out of the 818 universities, 603 have either conducted the examination or are planning to conduct. Meanwhile, 209 others have already conducted examination (on-line/off-line), 394 are planning to conduct examination (on-line/off-line/blended mode) in August or September.
The commission has also said that for 35 universities, of which 27 are private, seven state-run, and one deemed university, the first batch is yet to become eligible for the final exams.
- Cheque Bounce Accused kept in Jail for a Week despite grant of Bail, DG Prisons apologises before HC
On Thursday, the High Court of Delhi directed the Delhi State Legal Services Authority (DSLSA) to conduct specialised module training for jail superintendents, deputy superintendents & assistant superintendents with a focus on their duties & obligations & rights of prisoners. The direction came after a prisoner was illegally detained in jail even after being granted bail.
A bench of Justices Hima Kohli & Subramonium Prasad said the training was necessary so that such incidents do not happen again. The HC was hearing a petition by a prisoner who was detained for 10 days even after being granted bail.
The person was granted bail by the trial court on May 18 in a cheque bounce case but was released only on June 25. The jail authorities had earlier told the court that the petitioner was not able to secure the sureties required to be submitted along with the bail bond. It said that the accused could give the sureties only on June 15 & hence the delay in releasing him.
On the last date of hearing, the court had pulled up Tihar authorities for their failure to release the man. It had asked the jail authorities to furnish the data of prisoners released during the past three years.
On Thursday, a status report was filed by Lawyer Rahul Mehra, standing counsel of the Govt of Delhi & Lawyer Chaitanya Gosain on behalf of the director general (prisons) Sandeep Goel tendering “an unconditional apology for the inappropriate explanation given by the superintendent, Central Jail-I, Tihar jail, for unlawfully detaining the petitioner between June 20 to June 25.
The report further submitted that at least 1.5 lakh prisoners have been released during the past three years & the direction of the court to compile the data relating to such prisoners would be a stupendous exercise & need a lot of time.
Goel, who was present during the video conferencing hearing, apologised to the court. He submitted that in order to prevent any such mistake in future, the prison (headquarters) has constituted a committee to randomly inspect jails concerning detention of prisoners & their release.
The status report said that “Further, a circular has been issued informing all concerned that no person must be detained without any valid reason & that the official concerned will be held responsible in case of a lapse".
He assured the court that after a lot of introspection, it has been decided that course correction is warranted within the department. He said that 14 law officers are also being appointed on a contractual basis soon & they will be available in each of the jails t advise & guide officials & prisoners.
Following this, the Court said officers posted in the jails would attend online workshops arranged by DSLSA, tailor-made for making them aware of the rights of prisoners & their duties with respect to inmates. The matter would be now heard on Sept 14.
- 'Politically motivated activism': Ex-Judges, CEC counter pro-Prashant Bhushan lobby
Trouble for prominent lawyer Prashant Bhushan seems to be far from over. After 131 "prominent personalities" urged the Supreme Court to withdraw its contempt notice against Bhushan, a group of 174 eminent citizens have countered it, including 2 former High Court Chief Justices, in a letter to President Ram Nath Kovind.
In a no holds barred attack on the first letter in support of Bhushan, the 174 people including former Rajasthan Chief Justice Anil Deo Singh, former Foreign Secretary Amar Sinha and former Chief Election Commissioner N. Gopalaswami termed the ones vouching for Bhushan, as an "odd group of persons".
Bhushan is being tried for contempt in the Supreme Court.
"It is a matter of concern that one odd group of persons, claiming themselves to be distinguished public men of the past, has been observed to repeatedly avail of every opportunity to put Indian democracy and its sacred institutions like Parliament, Election Commission of India, and now the Supreme Court of India, in poor light before the whole world. They end up issuing ill-considered statements, and writing misconceived communications to various authorities to attract media attention," wrote the anti-Bhushan group, in a damning counter.
This was a reference to the previous group of 131 citizens which included former Supreme Court judge Justice Madan Lokur and Swaraj India President Yogendra Yadav, expressing solidarity with Prashant Bhushan. Their statement, arguing for Bhushan read, "The initiation of contempt proceedings against Mr Bhushan, who had articulated some of these concerns in his tweets, appears to be an attempt at stifling such criticism, not just by Mr Bhushan, but by all stakeholders in the Indian democratic and constitutional set-up."
But on Friday, in their letter to the President, the 174 others retorted, saying, "Freedom of speech is another foundation of democracy, but the freedom to speak can certainly not be misconstrued as a freedom to make a hate speech, subversive speech with the intent to shred national integrity, a diatribe undermining national sovereignty, or carrying out tirades to demolish the sacred institutions of Indian democracy."
The counter group argued that the contempt case is "exclusively" between Prashant Bhushan and the apex court. But the group consisting of the likes of Yogendra Yadav, has "interfered with the administration of justice," they said.
They even raked up Bhushan's previous call for a "referendum" in Kashmir, blaming it on "gaping loopholes in the system". Calling it "interference in the garb of politically motivated activism", the 174 signatories say they reject the pro-Bhushan group's "unprincipled posturing".
"We concerned citizens, hereby disapprove of this group in its acts of routinely producing a negative public narrative replete with disrespect to Indian democratic institutions," wrote the group of 174.
This elaborate list consists of 2 former High Court Chief Justices, 15 former High Court judges, 4 former Chief Secretaries, a former CEC, a former DG of the CISF and 12 former DGPs. It also consists of 4 former ambassadors and former Chief Commissioners of Income Tax, each. Shakti Sinha, who has been the Director of Nehru Memorial, also signed on this strongly worded petition to the President.
The Supreme Court issued a contempt notice to Prashant Bhushan earlier on July 22, for a couple of his tweets in which Bhushan had written about the "role of the Supreme Court" in the alleged "destruction" of democracy during the last 6 years.
- DU Law Student writes to CJ of Patna HC highlighting closing down of essential services such as health & medical establishments in Containment Zone
A letter has been addressed to Chief Justice Sanjay Karol of Patna High Court by Saurav Narayan, an LL.B Student at Law centre 1, Faculty of Law, University of Delhi, expressing lament over the decision of administrative Authority in Vaishali District, Bihar, regarding closing down essential services including health facilities and medical establishments in the Containment Zone.
"This act is violative of Article 21 which guarantees protection of life and personal liberty and states, “No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.”
The letter stated further that the order appears to be in discrepancy and violation of the guidelines of expressly issued by MHA vide notification dated 29.07.2020 for unlock 3 permitting medical and essential services in the containment zones and the similar order of Home Deptt, Govt. of Bihar continuing the medical establishments to remain functional in containment zones.
"Although, Govt. of Bihar follows the statement – “The First Wealth is Health” but the local administration seemingly does not reflect this in their actions".
The management of hospitals for essential services is in very sorry state of affairs particularly in Bihar where one Allopathic Doctor serves 43,788 people as compared to ideal one doctor for 1000 people (WHO report).
"....it is shocking and outrageous that the administration issues such a guideline closing down shops dealing in essential services, including medical shops, in containment zones. Who would be responsible if any person dies due to absence or lack of medication, is a question which the concerned administration must answer."
It is thus humbly pleaded, requested and prayed that the orders be taken back and medical establishments with proper and increased care be made available to the citizens for mere living has become a privilege in these testing times.
- SC allows Lawyers' Chamber Blocks to open for longer hours
The Apex Court has allowed lawyers' chamber blocks in the Court's premises to open for longer hours.
The premises of lawyers' chamber blocks will now remain open from 09:30 am to 05:00 pm from Monday to Friday, except holidays.
A circular of the Apex Court dated Aug 7 read, "Taking into account requests received in that regard, & in partial modification of terms of circular dated May 21, 2020, the Competent Authority has been pleased to revise the timings for the opening of Lawyers' Chamber Blocks in the Supreme Court premises from 09:30 am to 05:00 pm (Monday to Friday, except holidays) instead of 10 am to 4 pm (Monday to Friday, except holidays)."
The circular further reads, "Other terms of the said circular shall remain the same. All concerned are requested to co-operate in this regard".
Wanted To Stay Updated & Gain Knowledge. Join Our What'sApp Group Here.
- PIL seeking CBI probe into wanted Criminal's Encounter by UP Police in Supreme Court
A PIL has been filed before the Apex Court in connection with the encounter of wanted criminal Rakesh Pandey in Lucknow seeking an investigation by the CBI in the matter for fair, independent & impartial investigation.
The public interest litigation filed by Advocate Vishal Tiwari seeks a direction that the FIR should be registered for the offences under section 302 (Murder), 201 (Destruction of Evidence), 120-B (Criminal Conspiracy) & other sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) against the police officials who conducted the encounter.
The petitioner also sought a direction, from the Supreme Court, to constitute a 3-member enquiry commission to enquire & investigate the case in which the members shall be the Ex-Judges of HC's & the commission shall be headed by the former Judges of the Top Court.
The Uttar Pradesh Special Task Force (STF) gunned down Rakesh Pandey, an accused in the 2005 murder case of BJP leader Krishnanand Rai, in an encounter near Sarojini Nagar Police Station in Lucknow, said Inspector General of Police (STF) Amitabh Yash on Sunday.
A resident of UP's Mau district, Pandey alias Hanuman Pandey carried a bounty of Rs 1 lakh. He was a wanted criminal and accused of many heinous crimes.
Rai, who was murdered on Nov 29, 2005, along with 6 other persons, was a sitting MLA from the Mohammadabad constituency.
The investigation of the case was transferred from UP Police to the CBI. In 2013, the Apex Court transferred the case from Ghazipur to Delhi after Rai's wife Alka Rai filed a plea in the court.
In Oct 2019, Alka Rai had approached the High Court of Delhi challenging the acquittal of gangster-turned-politician Mukhtar Ansari & others in the case.
The CBI court while acquitting all the accused observed that it was a gruesome case involving the murder of seven persons. The eyewitnesses & other material witnesses had turned hostile during the trial.
- Coaching Classes are not eligible for GST exemption, rules AAR
Coaching classes don't get any exemption from Goods & Service Tax (GST), this position was reiterated by a ruling given by the Andhra Pradesh bench of the Authority for Advance Rulings (AAR). A similar stand has been taken earlier, including by the Maharashtra bench of the AAR.
Entry No 66 of the relevant notifications provides an exemption to educational services, if these are provided by an educational institution, subject to certain conditions. These are: the service provided is related to education, the education is provided as a part of a curriculum & the education is provided for obtaining a qualification recognised by any law for the time being in force.
The applicant, Master Minds, was offering a variety of coaching courses (regular, crash courses, revision exam courses) with different fee structures & curriculum options to aspirants (students) of chartered accountancy & cost accountancy streams.
The AAR bench noted that such coaching is not mandatory to be conferred an Inter or Final certificate by the Institute of Chartered Accountants & the Institute of Cost Accountants, both of which are statutory bodies.
The coaching class wasn't issuing any coaching completion certificate or any study certificate, in respect of the chartered accountancy & cost accountancy courses.
Master Minds wasn't accredited or affiliated to, or recognised, or authorised by these 2 professional Institutions for imparting coaching or training. These professional institutions were themselves offering coaching & training to the aspirants through their regional councils or branches or certain accredited bodies, in accordance with the prescribed curriculum.
Given the above, the AAR held that the coaching class wasn't eligible for the exemption provided by the GST notification. The coaching class will have to levy & collect GST at 18 per cent. Likewise, charges collected for providing accommodation & catering services to its students would not get the benefit of any GST exemption.
- SC rejects Advocate Prashant Bhushan’s regret, to go proceed with 2009 Contempt Case
The Supreme Court on Monday said it will go ahead with the contempt of court proceedings against senior lawyer Prashant Bhushan in the 2009 case over his interview to Tehelka magazine alleging that half of past 16 chief justices of India were corrupt.
Refusing to accept the ‘regret’ offered by Bhushan in a written statement to the top court, a three-judge bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra posted the matter for hearing on August 17.
“Whether calling judges corrupt per se amounts to contempt needs to be heard,” the bench said.
On August 4, the Supreme Court had held an in-camera proceeding in the case and reserved it’s order. A statement was given by Bhushan as well as Tarun Tejpal, the former editor of Tehelka magazine.
The bench said that there is a thin line between free speech and contempt. The judges said they seek to balance the right to free speech on one hand and the need to protect the dignity of the judiciary as an institution.
Bhushan said that his allegation on corruption did not refer to financial corruption but lack of propriety and if his statement hurt judges or their families he regrets his statement.
Tejpal had offered an apology.
The top court had issued contempt notice to Bhushan and Tejpal in November 2009 for allegedly casting aspersions on some sitting and former top court judges in an interview to Tehelka.
On July 22, the same bench had issued suo motu notice to Bhushan for his remarks and two alleged derogatory tweets against the judiciary, observing his statements prima facie “brought the administration of justice in disrepute”.
In his reply to the court’s notice, Bhushan said the expression of opinion, “however outspoken, disagreeable or unpalatable to some”, cannot constitute contempt of court.
- Legal Notice served on 'Times Now' for calling Lawyers 'Goons'
Supreme Court Lawyer Gagan Gandhi served notice on “Times Now” on Saturday for calling lawyers “Goons”.
The timesnownews.com has published an article dated 04/11/2019 titled as “Protesting Lawyers turn goons in Delhi, assault policeman at Saket Court Complex” which can be accessed at https://www.timesnownews.com/india/article/protesting-lawyers-turn-goons-in-delhi-assault-policeman-at-saket-court-complex/511337# and also telecasted by the principal correspondent Sh Priyank Tripathi.
As per the advocate, the news broadcasted by the channel is speculative, uncorroborated and is an attack on the reputation of “lawyers” who are officers of Court. It is his submission that lawyers played significant role in the freedom movement followed by drafting of the Constitution and are custodians of law. Majority of law makers in the country have had been practicing advocate(s).
According to Mr. Gandhi the article and news coverage has caused damage to the reputation of the entire fraternity whose image has been lowered in the eyes of their client(s), friends, relatives and colleagues.
The article and news coverage are in violation of Section 5 of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 since it is defamatory, false and amounts to contempt of court, casts aspersion on the integrity of Judiciary and maligns all the lawyers.
The Notice seeks to make sure that the news channel retracts its statements regarding the whole matter and issue an unconditional apology for vexatious allegation.
This is second such notice to any news channel after Bar Council of Delhi (BCD) sent legal notice to news channel “Aaj Tak” for causing disrepute to the legal profession and damaging the reputation of the members of the profession in programme titled “Sare Jahan Se Sacha”
The Advocate has also sought liquidated damages of One Crore to be deposited to the Advocates Welfare Fund for the loss of reputation and good will.
This comes at a time when the legal profession is facing lot of challenges due to Covid-19 pandemic.
- Man’s Wallet lost in Train found by Police after 14 years
A man, who lost his wallet containing Rs 900 in a local train here in 2006, was in for a pleasant surprise when the police informed him that they have found it after 14 years & returned him part of the amount.
On Sunday, a Government Railway Police (GRP) official said that Hemant Padalkar had lost his wallet while travelling in a Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Terminus-Panvel local train in 2006.
In April this year, he received a call from GRP, Vashi, informing that his wallet was found.
However, he couldn't then go to collect his wallet because of the COVID-19 enforced lockdown.
After the easing of restrictions, Padalkar, a resident of Panvel in neighbouring Navi Mumbai township, recently went to the GRP office at Vashi where he was given part of the money that was in the wallet.
Padalkar told the news agency that “My wallet at that time contained Rs 900, including a Rs 500 note which was later demonetised (in 2016). The Vashi GRP returned Rs 300 to me. They deducted Rs 100 for stamp paper work & said the remaining Rs 500 would be returned after exchanging the scrapped currency note with a new one".
He said when he went to the GRP office, there were many who had come to collect their stolen money, amounting into several thousands in demonetised currency, & wondered how they would get it back.
Padalkar said he was happy to get his money back.
A GRP official said those who stole Padalkar’s wallet were arrested sometime back.
He added that “We recovered Padalkar’s wallet containing Rs 900 from the accused. We handed over Rs 300 to Padalkar & the remaining Rs 500 would be returned to him after the currency note is exchanged with a new one".
- After ABVP complaint, FIR registered against Assam Professor over Facebook Joke on Ram
A little before midnight on August 5, Anindya Sen, an assistant professor of English at Assam University in Silchar posted a joke on Facebook. The day marked the occasion of the bhoomi pujan of the Ram temple at Ayodhya. By August 8, an FIR had been registered against Sen, based on a complaint filed by an ABVP functionary.
Rohit Chanda, the ABVP leader who lodged the complaint against Sen for ‘denigrating Hindu god Ram’ and ‘hurting religious sentiments’ had, last year, been one of the original complainants against physics lecturer Souradeep Sengupta, over a Facebook by the latter. Sengupta had received bail after having been jailed for three days over the complaint that alleged that he had abused “Sanatan Dharma as a whole.”
A portion of the FIR against Sen, dated August 8, states, “In this pandemic situation when the whole nation celebrated the Bhoomi Pujan peacefully, we think by making such remarks, a professor who has a decent number of followers among university and as well as in the society is trying to incite communal disturbance and provoking society for religious riot (sic).“
Chanda asked the Silchar Sadar Police Thana to take “strict action for such hate-mongering.”
Sen has not taken down the post yet. The comment section is flooded with abuse and vicious trolling.
One Facebook user warned him “that the cyber cell department will arrest him.”
A meme with the photo of Nepal Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli was also directed at Sen. The connection was ostensibly Ram, considering that Oli too had made references to Ram in a speech recently.
“I wrote that joke. And I posted it on Facebook. There were no unparliamentary words or any abusive language involved,” said Sen.
“It is meant to show how Ram abandoned his wife. There are so many texts in different languages and even Ramayana was written in different languages across different regions. There have been many criticisms of Ram for abandoning his wife. However, the abuses have spilled over to my Facebook Messenger service. My family is worried about my safety,” said Sen, who has been working at Assam University for nine years.
When asked if he has received support from higher officials of the university, he said, “Someone has offered me support but that was only on a personal basis and not an official one.”
Sen said he is saddened that online posts invoke such a reaction.
A Barak Valley-based online news portal Barak Bulletin reported on August 8 that the copy of the FIR – filed under sections 295 A, 294 and 501 – against Sen also mentions that ‘he continuously posts such abusive posts defaming Hindu dharma and also abuses constitutional posts like Prime Minister and Home Minister of the country.’
- 'Final Year Exams 2020 stands cancelled in all Delhi State's Universities due to Digital Divide', AAP Govt tells Supreme Court
Delhi government has cancelled all the semester exams including final semester exams in Delhi’s state universities. In the reply to a petition challenging UGC guidelines mandating the conduct of final year exams, the Delhi government has informed the Supreme Court of their decision over the conduct of the exams.
Delhi Chief Minister, Arvind Kejriwal has directed all the Delhi State Universities to cancel all written online and offline semester examinations including final year exams. The decision to not conduct exams was taken on July 11 itself. Moreover, universities were asked to find alternative measures to promote students of intermediary semesters and grant degrees to students of final semesters in the same notice.
The affidavit filed by the state government states that the decision that was taken by the Deputy Chief Minister/ Higher and Technical Education Minister of the National Capital Territory of Delhi that all online-offline exams of universities under the state including final year exams would be cancelled in the wake of rising COVID-19 cases, as per Bar and Bench report.
However, in the affidavit, it was also mentioned that Vice –Chancellors of certain universities were in favour of conducting the final year exams to the least.
The state universities under the Delhi government include the National Law University, NLU, Delhi Technological University, DTU, Ambedkar University, AU, Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, Netaji Subhas University of Technology, NSUT, Indira Gandhi Delhi Technical University for Women, IGDTUW and Delhi Pharmaceutical Science and Research University, DPSRU.
Meanwhile, Delhi University would begin the online open book exams for final year students from today, August 10, 2020, onwards. After much resistance and a court case, the varsity was given the permission to carry on with its plan to conduct online OBE examinations from today under strict guidelines. The varsity has now released the guidelines for candidates who will be appearing for the exams.
- Bail to key accused denied by Special Court in Kerala Gold Smuggling Case
Observing that there is prima facie evidence that Swapna Suresh was involved in the smuggling of gold in Kerala, a special NIA court in Kochi on Monday dismisses her bail petition on the basis of the evidence and case diary.
The court also accepted the submissions of the National Investigation Agency (NIA) that the smuggling of gold will impact the economic stability of the nation.
"Bail petition dismissed on the basis of the case diary and evidence. There is prima facie evidence that Swapna Suresh was involved in gold smuggling," the court held.
"It is prima facie clear that the crime was committed under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. There is also evidence that Swapna Suresh interfered on the release of cargo. Terrorist activities also include gold smuggling," it observed.
The court noted that that there is evidence in the case diary that gold was smuggled several times in diplomatic baggage and that the accused knew that this was a threat to the economic security of the country.
"The charges which the NIA imposed will remain the same Section-43D (5) of UAPA shall remain in force," it noted.
The matter, which pertains to the smuggling of gold in the state through diplomatic channels, had come to light after 30 kg gold worth ₹ 14.82 crores, smuggled in a consignment camouflaged as diplomatic baggage, was busted by customs in Thiruvananthapuram.
0 Comments